Satanic verses

[WinterHold]

I believe in every single word.
I'm not repeating it for 10 years if I didn't believe in it.

People stick themselves into routines for lifetimes without ever having believed a word of it.  

"Some people"; I'm not one of them.
[quote pid='2113075' dateline='1660764164']

Actually, I have no doubts now, all doubting ended with knowing that:

Now?  So...to at least some extent, you have been bullshitting us for ten years for your own benefit as a consequence of trying to reinforce belief that you had at some point in past wavered with?

[/quote]
Sometimes I got my theories refuted honestly, my faith was shaken, yet to believe that I was a narcissist who needed to drop the ego. Little by little I learned how to admit I was wrong, then found out that the only right evidence is that coming from a clear verse only.
Others would get drunk on their theories and start killing innocents over it. I didn't do that.
I learned a lot in these 10 years. You never learn without doubting. But listen to the logic when it is said.

So I am fully honest.

Did you actually read that link you dropped earlier?  Did you somehow miss that wikipedia does have exactly what you claimed it did not?  How would someone be able to accept that your earlier insistence that..should some x get some thing wrong, you would abandon it......was genuine....in the light of your actually doubling down on things shown to have been wrong?

Temet nosce, my friend.

There is no English article !! here's a screenshot:


You only have:

Turckik
Urdo

[The Grand Nudger]

"Some people"; I'm not one of them.

 Ten years of examples just on these boards powerfully argues to the contrary.  It's okay..brother, it's not a judgement, it's an observation.

Sometimes I got my theories refuted honestly, my faith was shaken, yet to believe that I was a narcissist who needed to drop the ego. Little by little I learned how to admit I was wrong, then found out that the only right evidence is that coming from a clear verse only.
Others would get drunk on their theories and start killing innocents over it. I didn't do that.
I learned a lot in these 10 years. You never learn without doubting. But listen to the logic when it is said.

Did you learn how to admit you were wrong.....though?  This thread powerfully argues to the contrary.  Still...I'd be interested to know what thing shook your faith.   Examples?

There is no English article !! here's a screenshot:

Stop it, there is, and I'm not going to dignify this bullshit.

Have you considered the possibility that you have actually weakened your own faith in an attempt to strengthen it?

[Pat Mustard]

To make sure:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33631745

You know, if the qu'ran is as unchanging as muslims say and as clearly defined in origin as the author alleges, why don't muslim authorities allow anybody but a select few, extremely doctrinaire, imams to view and study the oldest versions of the book. The earliest available to general scholarship are from the mid ninth century whereas we know of versions from the end of the seventh.

That would suggest that the qu'ran was heavily revised over 150 years.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

To make sure:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33631745

I’m certain that you either didn’t read that article or didn’t understand it. It points out that there were different versions of the Quran that were eventually codified in to a single, unified text. This was done by a committee (sound familiar at all?).

Further, the article points out that, while the overall message of the Quran is unitary, the nature of Arabic script makes it possible to read (and interpret) the same verse in different - but equally legitimate - ways. This frequently leads to disagreements between Islamic scholars as to what a particular verse means (sound familiar at all?).

In the final analysis, your Book - as far as compilation, editing, and interpretation go - isn’t materially different than the two Testaments.

Boru

[R00tKiT]

It is part of the Koran

It isn't. The satanic verses are fabricated.

Al-Albani is a major figure in hadith scholarship, he wrote an entire book debunking the authenticity the gharaniq event.

https://www.worldcat.org/title/nasb-al-m...c/50036491

I couldn't find the book in English online, maybe there isn't any.

And while this tradition is now widely rejected by Muslims, the majority of the tradition is actually recorded in explicit detail in some of Islamic books like the Tafsir and Sira, as well as fragments in the Quran.

All kinds of made up events are recorded in some of these books. The Satanic verses incident is nothing special.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It is part of the Koran

It isn't. The satanic verses are fabricated.

Al-Albani is a major figure in hadith scholarship, he wrote an entire book debunking the authenticity the gharaniq event.

https://www.worldcat.org/title/nasb-al-m...c/50036491

I couldn't find the book in English online, maybe there isn't any.

And while this tradition is now widely rejected by Muslims, the majority of the tradition is actually recorded in explicit detail in some of Islamic books like the Tafsir and Sira, as well as fragments in the Quran.

All kinds of made up events are recorded in some of these books. The Satanic verses incident is nothing special.

I’m perfectly happy to agree that the satanic verses are fabricated. Makes them fit rather neatly with all the other verses.

Boru

[R00tKiT]

In the final analysis, your Book - as far as compilation, editing, and interpretation go - isn’t materially different than the two Testaments.

[arewethereyet]

In the final analysis, your Book - as far as compilation, editing, and interpretation go - isn’t materially different than the two Testaments.

It is laughable that you think your magic book is any more 'real' than any of the other magic books.

[R00tKiT]

It is laughable that you think your magic book is any more 'real' than any of the other magic books.

That's not the point, it's not about their truth value. Come on, the Qur'an is simply more recent than the Bible, we know more about the Islamic prophet and his companions than about Jesus and his disciples. Bible scholars try to work their way back to the original texts, they explicitly acknowledge that the contents were altered over time. and needless to say, no bible scholar can say the bible we have today is jesus's sayings.

Comparing that with the Qur'an is just laughable, the qur'an is primarily passed down orally -not in written form- through generations of millions of people. We have manuscripts of the qur'an dating back to the 7th century (the Islamic prophet died circa 632)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Pari...opolitanus

[The Grand Nudger]

-and contemporary western atheism is more recent than islam, but you don't appear to think that fact is instructive in that regard.

I agree that there's more credible historical evidence for big mo than for jesus - but thats not a tough hurdle to clear..and I would suggest that it might hint at the folly of borrowing his religion to unify an arabic audience....but I digress.