Posts Tagged ‘criticism’

Is Quran self-explanatory?

October 28, 2016
 10/28/2016
Yes. It needs nothing to explain its contents and the meaning. Following peculiarities of Quran may be noted, please:
1. Quran is self-explanatory, it explains its meaning in the context verses, some verses preceding and some verses following of the verse in question, to make itself clear Quran explains the subjects in different verses of Quran in different styles. Its diction also becomes clear if one sees all the words of the word-roots used in Quran. Quran doesn’t need anything else in the exterior.
2. Quran corrects the history, rather history correcting it. Sure, the verses of Quran were revealed on a particular occasion, so all of it was practically required by the humans but the verses were arranged as per the guidance provided to Muhammad by G-d as to where they should find their placed while memorizing the Quran/Recitation and in the scripture that was written immediately by the appointed scribes.
3. Quran does make a constructive, objective and normative/principled criticism of the other Word Revealed, the people who believed in them and their tenets and as such corrects the narratives of Torah and other revealed scriptures of all religions of the world in some with names and others in generic formations.
4. Quran does include in it lasting teachings given to the past prophets that has similarity with Quran and also gives teachings that are not found in the past prophets and it is reasonable.
5. Quran confirms the truthfulness of the founders of other religions and binds Quran’s followers to accept them truthful and makes it one of the basic articles of faith of Islam. This way Quran elevates other revealed religions.
Please
Regards

Parts of the Quran that relate to Christianity/Judaism are more of a commentary on existing religious traditions than a copy of them

September 12, 2015
Post #331

Paarsurrey wrote:

I agree with your approach, and it is very fair.
It is more of a critical review of the books of Judaism/Christianity , their concepts and creeds with references as was customary at that time.
Regards

Discussion forum <www.religiousforums.com>Thread:” Koran dated to before Muhamad birth”.

Please click the post # above to view, to comment and or join discussion on the topic.

Christopher Hitchens had poor knowledge of Quran

March 28, 2013

Hitchens wrote:

Hitchens Book “God is not great”

1. In some cases—most notably the Christian—one revelation is apparently not sufficient, and needs to be reinforced by successive apparitions, with the promise of a further but ultimate one to come. In other cases, the opposite difficulty occurs and the divine instruction is delivered, only once, and for the final time, to an obscure personage whose lightest word then becomes law.—Page-97: Chapter-7: Hitchens Book “God is not great”

2. The syncretic tendencies of monotheism, and the common ancestry of the tales, mean in effect that a rebuttal to one is a rebuttal to all.

Page-98: Chapter-7: Hitchens Book “God is not great”

Paarsurrey comments:

Hitchens knowledge of religion is based on Bible; not on Quran, hence he hides behinds his own words “most notably the Christian” and then makes an unfounded and poor generalization in the second sentence given above.
Hitchens, as is evident, never read Quran intently, hence he did not quote from Quran, not even a single verse to substantiate his viewpoint.

Quran is the first and the foremost source of guidance of all Muslims, whatever their denomination. Had Hitchens been an honest research scholar with some scientific method of research he must have based his criticism of Islam primarily on Quran but that is not the case; he relied on the traditional source called Hadith which never existed in the time of Muhammad. Hadith was collected 200/250 years after Muhammad.

Hence, whatever is written in Hadith; Muhammad/Quran/Islam are not responsible for it. Criticism of Hitchens of Islam/Quran/Muhammad is therefore irrelevant and is of shallow significance.

Those who collected Hadith they had a clear principle in mind that Hadith should accepted if it is not against Quran or in other words, it is not validated by Quran. Due to the time lag after Muhammad, Hadith is engrossed in denominational feuds; hence if at all it quoted it should be done with caution; else it should be rejected. Quran absolutely rules the teachings of Muhammad/Islam and there is no other contestant to it.

If one wants to cut a tree; one should cut it from root or just uproot it from the earth that holds it firmly; if one tears some leaves from a tree and then claims; “lo! I have uprooted the tree” and in evidence he shows the torn leaves, the claim is not worthy of attention.

The skeptics who claim to follow reason should not follow a denominational line just because it suits their philosophy; this would be a biased approach on their part.

The Americans who are in search of God; they should reject this shallow research of Christopher Hitchens, in my opinion.