Did Jesus Christ Claim Divinity?

[snakelegs]

probably unlikely because it was largely an oral culture so many people had it memorized.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Any chance bits of it got broken/buried lost in the hundred years or so then?

Nope. Like snakelegs said, it was an oral culture. Many people had the Qur'an memorized, even as each verse was revealed. If it was lost, you wouldn't have people from all different places reciting the same thing for the past 1400 and so years.

 

[YusufNoor]

I think it was the third Caliph who assembled it

but am not sure:blind:

Peace be upon those who follow the guidance,

it was the 1st Kaliph Abu Bakr As Siddiq, RadiAllahu Anhu, who, following a suggestion of Umar ibn Al Kittaab Ar Farooq, RadiAllahu Anhu, ordered the collection of the Qur'an into a book form. it took some convincing too!
Zaid ibn Thaabit, RadiAllahu Anhu, a personal recorder for the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhe Wa Salaam, was given the task.

and answering Barney,

I thought it was written down on sheep bones and the like as the revelations came up?

EXACTLY, which is one of the reasons that Abu Bakr, RadiAllahu Anhu, had to be convinced by Umar, RadiAllahu Anhu. Abu Bakr, RadiAllahu Anhu, was EXTREMELY hesitant to to something that the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhe Wa Salaam, hadn't requested to be done! to make Zaid's, RadiAllahu Anhu, task an ordeal, he had to assemble written Ayats and Surahs that were written in the presence of the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhe Wa Salaam, THAT was the hard part! there were plenty of Hafiz around but locating EVERY SINGLE VERSE written in the presence of the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhe Wa Salaam, was the hard part!

the 3rd Kaliph, Uthman ibn Affan, RadiAllahu Anhu, simply ordered the vowel points put on in order to limit the pronunciation to that which was already approved by the Messenger of Allah, Salla Allahu Alayhe Wa Salaam.

originally posted by the apostate tetsujin:

Surely god knew the precise moment when Muhammad would die and would leave enough time for him to finalize the message, compile it, have it read out to him in it's totality for it's approval. Then maybe he would have a few more days just to make sure enough copies were made.

why? the Sahaabah, RadiAllahu Anhum, were more than qualified for the task of assembling the Qur'an.

more from our illustrious apostate tetsujin:

The Qu'ran is taken to be a revelation to all mankind. Truly, there are ethical problems that mankind faces today that we do not have a prescription for in the holy book. Do you think it is out of date?

ah, is that why you have left the deen? you simply aren't aware of all that the Qur'an has to offer. that's a shame, consider listening to this brilliant Shaykh, Mufti Ismail Menk:

http://www.muftimenk.co.za/Downloads.html

and finally from our little apostate tetsujin:

So you mean to say that the prophet's lifetime was not enough to reveal everything, or that god could not have forseen his death? So either muhammad's life was long enough simply for the revelation (if you assume it was complete) and not it's propogation, or long enough only for the propogation of a core message and it was possible that there would be further revelations.

This is what you seem to be saying.

foolish little boy, let's look at what you've written, shall we:

So you mean to say that the prophet's lifetime was not enough to reveal everything

it was EXACTLY long enough! no more, no less!

or that god could not have forseen his death?

He did, see above!

So either muhammad's life was long enough simply for the revelation (if you assume it was complete) and not it's propogation,

the entire Message was revealed during Muhammad ibn Abdullah's Salla Allahu Alayhe Wa Salaam, life and left for others to continue the propagation.

or long enough only for the propogation of a core message and it was possible that there would be further revelations.

Surah 5:3 in part:

This day have those who disbelieve despaired of your religion, so fear them not, and fear Me. This day have I perfected for you your religion and completed My favor on you and chosen for you Islam as a religion; but whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

no further relevations, excepting those clarifying Riba came after that.

This is what you seem to be saying.

you did not write what he wrote...

and back to barney:

Any chance bits of it got broken/buried lost in the hundred years or so then?

the Qur'an, including the later vowel marks were finished in the time that Sahabah were still alive, in fact, iirc, Uthman was Hafz.

 

[Armand]

As Salam Alaykum, How do you know that akhi?
- Al Habeshi

Wa alaykum as salam,

By Injeel I mean the revelation Isa (as) received from God. The gospels might have been partly authored by the apostles of Isa (as), but they are not wahi (revelation). The NT is not a corrupt version of the Injeel; the Injeel is a separate text aside from the gospels.

Perhaps Isa's sahaaba recorded extra copies of the book but we have no trace of these anywhere. It is possible that parts of this text are scattered as verses or passages throughout the NT, but this is not known.

 

[arabianprincess]

well i actually watched dr zakir nak n he explain the whole thing..

heres the video.. i think everyone knows this one ..

but i ll post it here.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRqvHG5IuyY salamz

 

[Umar001]

Bismillah, Salam Alaykum,
And Salah wa Salam be upon Muhammad.

I think it was the third Caliph who assembled it

but am not sure:blind:

The third caliph, who was a companion of Muhammad, living at a time when many other companions were alive, did order a decree with regards to the Qur'an. What is fascinating is that this was about 19 years after Muhammad, and as stated many of his companions and others were alive.

Now, if we for the sake of arguement say Uthman did what he wanted, then we should realise that at worst, we would have the Qur'an according to close followers of Muhammad, who individually, some were praised by Muhammad, some of them given tidings of Paradise by him. At worst this is the case scenario.

Any chance bits of it got broken/buried lost in the hundred years or so then?

The strength of the Muslims by the time of the death of the Prophet Muhammad, in my opinion, was a major factor in securing the Qur'an. The persecution which plagued Christians in the early days, may have played a part in some of the earlier documents being lost. Whilst in Islam, this factor was non-existant.

Another consideration is that, even up until now, one is required to study under a teacher, even learning from a book is discouraged in normal islamic fields, let alone in Qur'anic Recitation, where one is required to read to teachers and refer back to them. If you refer to the book by Azami, you will find that teachers were sent out. Also look at the concept of Ijaza.

This is crucial, for, a teacher would have learned the Qur'an, memorized it, would know what was inside it. If the pages ended up missing, he would know, and thus the students would come to know, and this carried on.

And Allah knows best.

Wa alaykum as salam,

By Injeel I mean the revelation Isa (as) received from God. The gospels might have been partly authored by the apostles of Isa (as), but they are not wahi (revelation). The NT is not a corrupt version of the Injeel; the Injeel is a separate text aside from the gospels.

Perhaps Isa's sahaaba recorded extra copies of the book but we have no trace of these anywhere. It is possible that parts of this text are scattered as verses or passages throughout the NT, but this is not known.

I don't disagree with you, I guess we agree, we cannot be sure if anything was written that was all, it is possible, until we find evidence, that Jesus, peace be upon him's, companions wrote the Injeel and that we just have not recieved it through history.

And Allah knows best.

Edit: Anyhow, aint this supposed to be about Jesus' divintiy?

 

[barney]

probably unlikely because it was largely an oral culture so many people had it memorized.

Oral tradition is the single most unreliable way of recording something after translating it into random code.

 

[Umar001]

Oral tradition is the single most unreliable way of recording something after translating it into random code.

What are the characteristics of Oral Tradition?

 

[barney]

Memorising something and passing it on to people so they can repeat it verbatum.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Lol, are you confused or something? What else do you think they did? Why do you think we recite the Qur'an, especially in Ramadhan?

 

[Umar001]

Memorising something and passing it on to people so they can repeat it verbatum.

And what do you base your view that Oral Tradition is the 'single most unreliable way of recording something after translating it into random code.'

 

[barney]

And what do you base your view that Oral Tradition is the 'single most unreliable way of recording something after translating it into random code.'

With Random code, you will take unintelligible symbols and attempt to repeat them in an order to make sense.

With Oral tradition, you take Intelligable language and attempt to repeat it in order for another human to repeat it with no mistakes.

Which is impossible.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Excuse me? So your saying Arabic isnt a good language? I beg to differ. Alhamdulillah for the language of the Qur'an, cause no one could mess with it. And if you screw up anywhere or try to change it, you'll have people ready to fix you. So i dont see the problem. That's called preservation.

 

[Umar001]

With Random code, you will take unintelligible symbols and attempt to repeat them in an order to make sense.

With Oral tradition, you take Intelligable language and attempt to repeat it in order for another human to repeat it with no mistakes.

Which is impossible.

I was reffering simply to the Oral Tradition, the mention of random Code was only added since you compared Oral Tradition to being the worst, apart from the random Code.

As for Oral tradition, you haven't answered, I asked, what do you base your view that Oral Tradition is the 'single most unreliable way of recording something after translating it into random code.'

You have given me your view again, i.e. that it is impossible, that is not what I am asking, I am asking, how do you know it is impossible, i.e. what have you based that view on.

 

[barney]

Arabic is no doubt a fine language.

It is however as "messable" with as any other.
Simply put, if you tell a thousand people one thing, then there is a cahnce that a percentage will get it wrong.
And in practice, this chinese whispers can result in horrific inaccuracies.

The only way in which Oral Tradition could be accurate, is if God himself made a special case that it would be so. And that perspective is unarguable.

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Lol it shows how little you know. If there were inaccuracies of the Arabic of the Qur'an, you wouldnt have recitors of different countries reciting the same thing for over 1400 years. The Qur'an is a special case. Have u seen it with any other religion, as good as it is with the Qur'an? If anyone makes a mistake in reciting, there will always be people to correct the mistake, as I just mentioned to you.

 

[Umar001]

It is however as "messable" with as any other.
Simply put, if you tell a thousand people one thing, then there is a cahnce that a percentage will get it wrong.
And in practice, this chinese whispers can result in horrific inaccuracies.

So that's why you base that Oral Tradition in this case would not work?

 

[Armand]

Salam,

Anyone heard of that story where this man set out to find a sign or proof that the Muslims' Qur'an was preserved? This was a long time ago though. He took the Bible, made some changes in it, and returned it to the Christian people to see if they would detect the error. They didn't. He took the Torah and did the same thing with it and returned it to the Jews, but they didn't detect anything either. Finally he took the Qur'an and made a few changes, and then returned it to the Muslims, whereupon they immediately noticed the mistake.

(Note these were layman Muslims, Jews and Christians, not scholars)

 

[Umar001]

Salam,

Anyone heard of that story where this man set out to find a sign or proof that the Muslims' Qur'an was preserved? This was a long time ago though. He took the Bible, made some changes in it, and returned it to the Christian people to see if they would detect the error. They didn't. He took the Torah and did the same thing with it and returned it to the Jews, but they didn't detect anything either. Finally he took the Qur'an and made a few changes, and then returned it to the Muslims, whereupon they immediately noticed the mistake.

(Note these were layman Muslims, Jews and Christians, not scholars)

Wa Alaykum Salam,

I have heard a similar story, though from what I remember it was learned people, if I remember right, this individual was selling copies and the people bought them off of him, except the Muslims who noticed the changes he had made, this prompted him to join Islam. I forget where I got this from though, it was a random story, in a lecture or something.

 

[Umar001]

Arabic is no doubt a fine language.

It is however as "messable" with as any other.
Simply put, if you tell a thousand people one thing, then there is a cahnce that a percentage will get it wrong.
And in practice, this chinese whispers can result in horrific inaccuracies.

The only way in which Oral Tradition could be accurate, is if God himself made a special case that it would be so. And that perspective is unarguable.

So that's why you base that Oral Tradition in this case would not work?

So that's why you base that Oral Tradition in this case would not work? Wouldn't one have to look at the particular case at hand, what paralel case of Oral Tradition has there been to the Islamic one?