the koran

@philokalia said
I am curious if there is anything to the plagiarism claim or if you are just suggesting that the recounting of some of the Bible stories is plagiarism.

The bible is hardly original is it!

@wolfgang59 said
The bible is hardly original is it!

I am aware of the claims that the other myths about the Great Flood are predecessors of the Bible,, and I am aware of claims that even the story of Joseph is meant to mirror an Egyptian fable (although this far less persuasive) which was likewise a common near Eastern trope...

... And I am aware of the Mithra parallels...

But I am not convinced.

It should not be hard to understand that similar Flood stories were found in cultures around the world.

Eight people were saved in the ark of Noah. They had descendents. The story that they passed on was transmitted down through subsequent descendents.

The passers on of the ancient story often modified it to meet colloquial needs of their various cultures. So similar yet different accounts have been located which we may notice predate the writing of Genesis.

I think, to know what really happened we have to receive the testimony of the Bible. There is the line leading up to and continuing from the event to show what happened AND its relevance to all human history.

"Hey, Gilgamash talks of a flood before Moses wrote of it. This proves Moses was a copycat."

Not necessarily at all. It could mean Moses wrote what was circulated oral tradition for many centuries. Knowing what really happened he wrote in obedience to God the record of what happened.

What Genesis reveals is the before the flood God the Creator allowed human beings to live only by their conscience to see for themselves if this would work. The eventual result was widespread and universal iniquity, violence, decadence, murder, deep occultic mischief, and the need that that the whole society be destroyed for a restart.

The restart included human government rather than divinely sanctioned anarchy.

Dr. David Wood on Five Reasons why the Quran cannot be the word of God.

YouTube

1.) Morally convenient revelation having self serving purpose for Muhammed - with four examples concerning his indulgence in sexual lust.

2.) Failed arguments for why it is the word of God. ie. cannot be imitated - a logically invalid "proof".

3.) False claims that only human writings have discrepancy.
IF from God, it says, no discrepancy as the Koran.
Ie. The Koran does explicitly say God made the earth flat. ie. The sun was found to set in a spring of murky water.
Ie. Shooting stars are arrows shot against demons

4.) A contradictory of a dilemma in how the Koran recommends the Torah and the Gospel. Its pronouncements about the Bible end up causing the Koran to be self refuting.

5.) Theological incoherence

As I listened to this video I compared some of the logic of the speaker to see if the same observations could be said about the Bible.

I am still in the process of fairly evaluating should that objection be raised. I don't mind it being raised by anyone who FIRST Listens to the video in its entirety and has more than superficial familiarity with the Bible.

@sonship said
As I listened to this video I compared some of the logic of the speaker to see if the same observations could be said about the Bible.

The one person's vision-based writing of the Book of Revelation and Muhammed's one person vision-based writing share the same credibility-incredibility level. There is no credible reason to believe either was the result of "divine" intervention.

Edit: actually, the same can be said for whatever Paul wrote ~ where one is expected to believe that he somehow met Jesus after Jesus was dead and later sat down and wrote a big chunk of the Bible.

@FMF

The one person's vision-based writing of the Book of Revelation and Muhammed's one person vision-based writing share the same credibility-incredibility level. There is no credible reason to believe either was the result of "divine" intervention.

Revelation by itself would make no sense. Revelation as the culmination of centuries of writings connected and associated together from 40 different diverse authors, I think is more unusual and striking.

The Koran is the product of one man over 30 years. Revelation is the climax to a book of 40 authors spanning 1600 years.

Edit: actually, the same can be said for whatever Paul wrote ~ where one is expected to believe that he somehow met Jesus after Jesus was dead and later sat down and wrote a big chunk of the Bible.

Paul did not question that what he received possibly came from demons. Muhammed did.

Paul did not want to commit suicide for what he experienced.
Muhammed did.

Paul did not update his supposed messages from God so he could indulge more girlfriends and ripe off others of their wives.

Muhammed's prohecies from Allah sometimes have the obvious flavor of self serving excuses for the prophet to indulge in his fleshly appetites.

While I could never say Christianity did not have its violence. Paul was not out cutting throats and raiding villages. Muhammed and his army were not something you would want to tangle with if you didn't want to be conquered.

You may say supposed Christians behaved terribly in subsequent years. And I would have to agree.

But Muhammed and his band behaved badly from the inception of the religion.

You cannot compare Muhammed with Jesus Christ.
You cannot realistically compare Muhammed and his army with Paul and his co-working apostles and evangelists.

You may compare the degraded factors of Islam and the Christianity. And sometimes Christiandom may have been worse.

But violence is more intrinsic to the Koran than violence is to the New Testament.

Jesus said "My kingdom is not of this world. And if it was my servants would fight." [paraphrased]

Muhammed's kingdom is all about fighting in this world. And heaven is so described as obviously fleshly and indulgence to man's lust as to be embaressing.

The bad actors of Islam are acting in accordance to what they are taught by their prophet.

The bad actors in the history of Christianity are doing so in spite of and against the teaching of their supposed Master Jesus.

@sonship said
Paul did not question that what he received possibly came from demons. Muhammed did.

Paul did not want to commit suicide for what he experienced.
Muhammed did.

Paul did not update his supposed messages from God so he could indulge more girlfriends and ripe off others of their wives.

Muhammed's prohecies from Allah sometimes have the obvious flavor of self servi ...[text shortened]... ry of Christianity are doing so in spite of and against the teaching of their supposed Master Jesus.

The religions being different doesn't prove anything. You should just stick with Christianity.

@sonship said
The Koran is the product of one man over 30 years. Revelation is the climax to a book of 40 authors spanning 1600 years.

One could argue that The Koran is the climax of 1,000s of years of Abrahamic scripture and worship stretching back to Genesis. And one could argue - quite rightly - that Revelation was the product of one man supposedly having a dream/vision and then technocrats fiddling and fussing over it for hundreds of years. I think there is no credible reason to believe either was the result of "divine" intervention.

@sonship said
Muhammed's kingdom is all about fighting in this world. And heaven is so described as obviously fleshly and indulgence to man's lust as to be embaressing.

Well if we are both wrong, and Islam is the true revelation of the creator god after all, then your embarrassment and objection to fighting are moot,

“Feed the hungry and visit a sick person, and free the captive, if he be unjustly confined. Assist any person oppressed whether Muslim or non-Muslim.”

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

At least I am doing the courtesy of reading the Quran.

Lots of skeptics come here to argue against the Bible and are scared to crack open its cover to peek inside.

And I am doing some fair comparison. David Wood pointed out that the Quran taught that shooting stars were missiles shot by Allah against demons.

I said, "Now let's be fair here. The book of Revelation says that the stars were seen falling from the sky as figs being shaken off of a fig tree by the wind."

Wanting to be objective and fair, I asked myself what was the difference.

And I saw when He opened the sixth seal, and there was a great earthquake, and the sun became black as sackcloth made of hair, and the whole moon became as blood.

And the stars of heaven fell to the earth as a fig tree casts its unripe figs when shaken by a great wind." (Rev. 6:12,13)

Everyone should know that Alpha Centauri (the nearest "star" besides the sun) is probably not going to fall to the earth as a fig blown off of a fig tree.

Here is the difference:

John is describing what what he saw LOOKED LIKE.
Any point of light in the night sky 2000 years ago would have been described as a star.

If John in his vision observed a massive shower of meteorites or even the falling to earth of thousands of pieces of space debri from man-made objects, he could reasonably compare it to stars falling to the ground.

"That's what it looked like to me"

The Quran's remark about a shooting star is a little different. It is giving an explanation of what that shooting star IS.

Quran chapter 37:6-10

37:6-10

We have indeed decked the lower heaven with beauty (in) the stars, (For beauty) and for guard against all obstinate rebellious evil spirits, (So) they should not strain their ears in the direction of the Exalted Assembly but be cast away from every side, Repulsed, for they are under a perpetual penalty, Except such as snatch away something by stealth, and they are pursued by a flaming fire, of piercing brightness.

67:5

And we have, (from of old), adorned the lowest heaven with Lamps, and We have made such (Lamps) (as) missiles to drive away the Evil Ones, and have prepared for them the Penalty of the Blazing Fire.

72:8-9

(Demons are speaking)
'And we pried into the secrets of heaven; but we found it filled with stern guards and flaming fires. 'We used, indeed, to sit there in (hidden) stations, to (steal) a hearing; but any who listen now will find a flaming fire watching him in ambush.

Copied from http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2009/03/scientific-flaws-in-quran-shooting.html

Islam's Quran is believed to teach that stars (the shooting ones - meteorites) are missiles shot by Allah against evil spirits.

I think there is reasonably a difference in the Revelation saying "This is what the stars moving in mass looked like - as unripe figs blown off a tree falling to the ground"

AND a teachnical definition of what those shooting stars actually are:

"These moving stars are the arrows as missiles being shot at demons by Allah."

Do you think this comparison is fair to make ?
Do you think I am being unfairly biased in favor of the Christian New Testament ?

@sonship

What are some of the positive things you have read so far in the Koran that have surprised/impressed you?

I have spoken previously (as an atheist) about finding the words attributed to Jesus in the Gospels as profound and beautiful. Can you extend the same courtesy to Muhammad?

@Ghost-of-a-Duke

There are many ethical statements in the Quran that I have read so far.