(Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
You agree quran describes creation of adam from moulded clay and mud. You also agree quran states adam was the first human created - therefore story of adam IS the Qurans story of human creation. Your pedantry in refusing to admit this fact then is baffling and illogical.
If you "dont know which part is false and which is true", how can you be sure you are following it all the right way round?
The EE contains a great deal of what is stated in quran, including the precursors of rudimentary embryology that quran goes on about. Other Sumerian scripture also demonstrates various other quranic stories have copied from sumerians and their successors, the babylonians. In terms of science, its clear the quran copies many ancient greek works.
How can man change a divine revalation, surely a normal man doesnt have the power to get away with this?
Besides who do you think it was that physically wrote down the words of the quran on paper for you read, and the hadiths? Is it not men ? SO how can you be sure that these are not interferred with of the original revalation as you put, but are so sure that the EE and related ancient scriptures were not in their original revealed state in the first place? Seems illogical
Even though it was said to be revelaed in Quraysh, islamic scholars accpet there are 7 or even 10 differnet versions even today, no? That could not have come about without human intervention in writing of the quran. Although you call it simply "That person is pronouncing the words incorrectly" - the facts are the differences are mar more marked and significant hence why differences in meanings in verses such as
That God and his apostle dissolve obligations with the pagans
That God dissolves obligations with the pagans and the apostle. "
We also know in various record there were well over 70 compilers of the original qurans (s) who couldnt have all produced the exact same version of the quran (which we know they didnt - hnece why uthman demanding there be a single version used and al others destroyed).
And the sanaa Yemeini version that has discovered to be the oldest existing partial version of the quran was shown to have difference to the standard uthmanic quran mulims use to today.
in terms of which hadith you queried -
Sahih Bukhari. Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510, the story about Muslim soldiers arguing about different versions of the Qur’an reads as follows:
"Hudhaifa was afraid of the different recitations of the Qur'an, so he asked 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Qur’an as Jews and the Christians did before."
showing there were different qurans going around post mohammed. How do you know the version you have right now is the 100% correct one. As far as we know there was only one version of the Enma Elish ever, so that in itself lends more to its credibilty than the altered stories in the quran.
I think you are going round in circles - fine, what is it you
understand by the abrogation under taken on the quran?
Again, who wrote the hadith, was it not the scholars and caliphs themselves? Who commissed the writing of the version of the quran you currently read - was it not he first caliph?