I think that you're missing the point. I'm not vouching for it's historic accuracy, I'm noting that it was a proposed solution to a seeming problem. This is a recurring theme for textual religions. You're positioning for some doomed argument over the articles of your faith..but, as ever, all that concerns me is the actual history of the actual book that you both believe..generally..to be magic.

It took a few centuries for it to come together as we know it now, with all of the usual slapstick arguments and stepping on rakes along the way - and that's entirely understandable. Eventually, they get their shit together and disseminated the now-standard and produced foundational text of their government everywhere they took their government - just as you'll find alot of us copy in us gov offices. It's not really sensible to talk about magic book as a great work of literature without acknowledging it's actual history - wholly aside from what muslims generally believe. Anyone can babble about a god. The work of turning that into a comprehensive and singular authority which dictates culture and becomes a focal point of global history....that's the lift.

(December 11, 2020 at 2:18 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(December 11, 2020 at 12:28 pm)WinterHold Wrote: I enlarged the text for you.

This is refering to something else, WinterHold. The prophet did choose companions to write down the Qur'an whenever it was revealed to him. But the writings were scattered on all kinds of supports. It's impossible for you to establish the authenticity of the Qur'an based on these writings. On the other hand, we have many many Muslims, including children, who could recite the Qur'an verbatim. The perfect match between recitations is what proved -and still proves- the authenticity of the Qur'an, not these scattered writings. The real collection of the Qur'an started after the Battle of Yamama.

Oral transmission is the main advantage of Islam over christian texts, Christians have no authentic sayings of Jesus, no chain of narators ending with Jesus exists anywhere. So they have no way to defend the written book that exists today. And it's common knowledge today that the so called Q source is lost.

There is another strong proof why the hadiths are a must:

19:59 : But they were succeeded by generations who neglected prayer and followed their lusts and so will soon face the evil consequence

As you can see, even neglecting prayers - let alone not prayng at all- is condemned in Islam with strong words. As I told you before, there is no way to figure out how to pray, in detail, from the Qur'an.

What Muhammad's companions did was observing Muhammad pray then do and say the exact same things. Muhammad's sayings and moves in prayer are not in the Qur'an.

He prayed five times a day, this is not in the Qur'an. In particular, the noon prayer is not in the Qur'an anywhere, but everyone saw Muhammad regularly perform it.

Now comes the real problem with your understanding of hadiths : Do you think you understand the Qur'an better than Muhammad's companions, most of them highly proficient in Classical Arabic, and also astute military leaders ? ? Do you think you understand Muhammad's teachings better than the people who lived with him ? better than his own wife Aisha ? -because she reported many many hadiths too.

No. This refers to your exact question.

---

The title of this topic was "[Quranic Reflection]: moon absorbed by the sun in the Quran: far future."
But the sabotaging of Klorophyl and his supporters turned it to a topic about prayers.

Way to go.
Please stick to the context. For other contexts; open separate topics.

Awesome, back to Xenu and his dc8s.

(December 11, 2020 at 3:15 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I think that you're missing the point.  I'm not vouching for it's historic accuracy, I'm noting that it was a proposed solution to a seeming problem.  This is a recurring theme for textual religions.  You're positioning for some doomed argument over the articles of your faith..but, as ever, all that concerns me is the actual history of the actual book that you both believe..generally..to be magic. 

And your position on the matter is what, exactly ? Do you think Uthman collected a corrupt Qur'an 20 years after Muhammad died ? Are you against any preservation argument from oral transmission to begin with ?

(December 11, 2020 at 3:24 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Awesome, back to Xenu and his dc8s.

The OP please. Focus on that

Right, thematically islamic science fiction.

(December 11, 2020 at 3:34 pm)WinterHold Wrote:

(December 11, 2020 at 3:24 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Awesome, back to Xenu and his dc8s.

The OP please. Focus on that

WinterHold, I am not against the OP. But you're not respecting a logical hierarchy : your audience is atheist, they don't believe in God, let alone an interpretation of a religious text. Any discussion on the latter is futile if one doesn't acknowledge the existence of a just God who wouldn't let his creatures without guidance.

Trolling is not allowed. Troll behavior includes, but is not limited to repeatedly:

Klorophyl is trolling and disrupting the flow of the topic.
How is this allowed now?

---

(December 11, 2020 at 3:37 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(December 11, 2020 at 3:34 pm)WinterHold Wrote: The OP please. Focus on that

WinterHold, I am not against the OP. But you're not respecting a logical hierarchy : your audience is atheist, they don't believe in God, let alone an interpretation of a religious text. Any discussion on the latter is futile if one doesn't acknowledge the existence of a just God who wouldn't let his creatures without guidance.

I hope the management deals with your trolling

---

(December 11, 2020 at 3:37 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(December 11, 2020 at 3:34 pm)WinterHold Wrote: The OP please. Focus on that

WinterHold, I am not against the OP. But you're not respecting a logical hierarchy : your audience is atheist, they don't believe in God, let alone an interpretation of a religious text. Any discussion on the latter is futile if one doesn't acknowledge the existence of a just God who wouldn't let his creatures without guidance.

For any personal problems with me, send me a PM, but don't disrupt the flow of the OP because that is forbidden under rule 8.

(December 11, 2020 at 3:32 pm)Klorophyll Wrote:

(December 11, 2020 at 3:15 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I think that you're missing the point.  I'm not vouching for it's historic accuracy, I'm noting that it was a proposed solution to a seeming problem.  This is a recurring theme for textual religions.  You're positioning for some doomed argument over the articles of your faith..but, as ever, all that concerns me is the actual history of the actual book that you both believe..generally..to be magic. 

And your position on the matter is what, exactly ? Do you think Uthman collected a corrupt Qur'an 20 years after Muhammad died ? Are you against any preservation argument from oral transmission to begin with ?

My position on whether magic book is magic?  Obviously, it's not.  It's a book, and it was made by people and disseminated by people in the interests of people.  

There's no such thing, aside from the necessities of your belief in fairies, as a "corrupt" magic book.  They lay out the foundational claims of a given culture.  The means of transmission for those claims is not a problem for their contents or the truth value of their contents.  Oral tradition works pretty well, but a state has a keen interest in something more permanent and uniform, particularly if that state is engaged in aggressive territorial expansion.

(December 11, 2020 at 3:44 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote:

(December 11, 2020 at 3:32 pm)Klorophyll Wrote: And your position on the matter is what, exactly ? Do you think Uthman collected a corrupt Qur'an 20 years after Muhammad died ? Are you against any preservation argument from oral transmission to begin with ?

My position on whether magic book is magic?  Obviously, it's not.  It's a book, and it was made by people and disseminated by people in the interests of people.  

There's no such thing, aside from the necessities of your belief in fairies, as a "corrupt" magic book.  They lay out the foundational claims of a given culture.  The means of transmission for those claims is not a problem for their contents or the truth value of their contents.  Oral tradition works pretty well, but a state has a keen interest in something more permanent and uniform, particularly if that state is engaged in aggressive territorial expansion.

Another break of rule 8.

Please stop this trolling campaign against my post. The topic's OP is clear and obvious; so discuss that.
For discussion about Islam or the Quran as a book; open a separate topic.