I can confidently say that nothing I've posted here constitutes screaming.
A fanatic is an unreasonable, emotionally unstable person who has usually been brainwashed. I had no super-religious parents, siblings, friends, or mentors who told me what to think. I studied my faith on my own from the beginning and have never been unreasonable about these beliefs that I came to reasonably.
As a "trained empirical scientist," I'm sure you noticed that the wording of the article was made intentionally vague when the nature of the so-called aberrations was being discussed. That's because the only differences are mistakes in numbering and minor diacritical and lexical errors, not entirely new volumes of text or anything of Dead Sea Scrolls proportions. Westerners act as if the issue of Qur'anic purity has never been raised in Muslims circles; the truth is that each of the reports alleging the existence of "missing" portions has a weak isnad. This was confirmed and the issue was settled long ago. Now, neo-orientalists are attempting to undermine established historical truths with specious narratives from Christian theologians and other unreliable sources which, for some reason, they are instantly willing to accept as authoritative.
that is correct, i did notice that the errors were considered trivial but did indicate that the "word-for-word" claims are weakened by what they found.
for instance, i know that the rabbis will burn a torah that has the least little one of those kind of errors --- even a stray ink smudge will get a mezuzah destroyed.
the article you linked to was really more like an online textbook than a magazine article. without going back to see what they were, i remember two questions that i asked. can you zero in on where those questions will be answered or did i just get myself into a self study course in islamic law?
The article is an excerpt from a book I have that contains general information about the history and basic teachings of the religion... I suppose it could be considered a textbook of sorts. I meant to link to a specific section, but that doesn't appear to be possible. This section and perhaps the two that follow it are relevant to our discussion:
Standardisation of the Quran:
Thus Abu Bakr ordered a standard copy to be prepared from the manuscripts written in the presence of the Prophet, following the order of chapters which was followed by the reciters under the directions of the Prophet, and 'Uthman ordered copies to be made from this standard copy. If there was any variation from that standard copy, it went no further than this that where the Quraish wrote a word in one way and Zaid wrote it in another way, Uthman's order was to write it in the manner of the Quraish. This was because Zaid was a Madinite while his colleagues were Quraish.
As to what these differences were, some light is thrown on the point by Tirmidhi, one of the collectors of traditions, making the following addition to this report: "And they differed on that occasion as to tabut and tabuh. The Quraish members said that it was tabut and Zaid said that it was tabuh. The difference was reported to 'Uthman and he directed them to write it tabut, adding that the Quran was revealed in the dialect of the Quraish." It would be seen from this that these differences of reading or writing were very insignificant, but as the Companions of the prophet believed every word and letter of the Quran to be the revealed word of God, they gave importance even to a slight difference in writing and referred it to the Caliph. It may be added here that Zaid was chiefly called upon by the Prophet at Madinah to write down the Quranic revelations, and the word tabut occurs in a Madinah chapter (2:248). Zaid had written it tabuh as the Madinites did, but as the Quraish wrote it tabut, 'Uthman restored the Quraishite form. This incident further shows that Hafsah's copy contained the manuscripts written in the presence of the Prophet. These two reports furnish conclusive proof that if there was any difference between 'Uthman's standard copy and the collection made by Abu Bakr, it was a difference only as to the mode of writing certain words. In short, there was no change of words, no change of verses and no change in the order of chapters.
looks like we have achieved focus, my ishmaelite cousin.
you are certainly no fanatic, and i am feeling that you prostrate yourself before your god at least three times daily.
i look forward to reading your answers to the outrageous interpretations some of the judeo-christian fanatics are giving to specific passages from your holy book as i deliver them into the protection you and i can give this discussion with the help of the holy father
i stress discussion AND NOT debate. i am what i am --- you are what you are --- i respect and revere the oneness that makes us the same yet different --- which puts us on a point of contention i am experiencing.
in my self, i know the Lord YHVH and the Lord Allah to be the same individual using different names with different people.
what say you?
i say "god is good. god is great. thank you god for paying the freight!"
Baruch Ha Shem! Alla-huh Akbar! Aho Mitakuye Oyasin!
(Lakota: Let it be so for all my relations!)
(isn't free access wonderful? not thirty years ago, we would have been paying by the minute to meet this way online. the next time i go do some online bill paying i intend to become a supporting member of this board. well worth the investment to keep this zoo free.)
the rabbi who made me bar mitzvah, taught that we are all one people and that the racial and cultural strife that we experience in this era is the end result of god's punishing the arrogance of people over the tower of babel. he taught us that to heal this bad karma on all people, we have to realize that the differences in our religions and ways of life evolved because of the scattering of the people and confounding of the tongues and the differing resources available to the different cultures scattered about the globe. recognizing that, we need to embrace each other's traditions, ceremonies and documents in peace, love and joy AND NOT fear, loathing, death and destruction if we people , as a SPECIES are ever to regain grace.
in this particular coagulation of brain farts, the theme is one of fanatic hebrew-christians attacking the whole of islam and in fact it's most holy document as being THE fuel firing arab terrorism against israel and its allies.
the various sects of jews and christians have always been adept at making the bible say as god's truth, whatever truth it was they were selling. it appears that some think they can play the same game with the Qu'ran
(is there something wrong in spelling that "koran"?)
the christians have a long and bloody history of killing each other over conflicting interpretations. during the crusades, there were more christians left dead at the hands of other christians all along the routes to the holy land. in the holy land, they killed more christians than muslims.
there is even one account of a group of arab christians who were slaughtered when they came running out to greet the crusaders who they thought had come to liberate them from moslem rule. \
looks like an arab, dresses like an arab, must be an arab. kill it before it multiplies. sound familiar?
sadly, i think human society has actually devolved further in its moral value structures and ethical actions than during the middle ages.
in america, sects of orthodox jews have often fought with each other in the streets on holy days because of disagreements in interpretation of torah.
prepare to receive and speak to the passages that are being posted as proof texts supporting the endemic islamophobia at usmb. i promise they'll be delivered in a readable form without the original poster's vitriol attached.
