Religion

[SultanOrder]

What is it's validity when the greatest proof of it has left this world. Here me out.

Religions are started by Great men, who have been chosen, they carry out their mission and then they die. Now, at the time of it's birth the validity of is self proven by the messenger himself, he is the proof of it, a fact in it of it's self. When this person dies, then the proof of it leaves with it. Now, they have left behind men, scripture etc. Those become the rational proofs of that religion, if they get lost then there is no more proof. As we get further from the beginning of the religion, the further we get away from these proofs, the more distorted it becomes, the more schisms there are, and the further the people invariably go away from this truth. At a certain point down the line, things become so muddled and the proofs so far from the origins that it looses its authenticity that it clung to. Therefore, the religion in itself becomes wholly different and there by looses it's legitimacy. What is left then, why do people still cling to every sect and schism? Trust, you must have trust that what you have received is the unaltered version, of the many versions that are there. So what do people base this trust? On facts, proofs, logic, or people? It is the latter, they trust the people they inherit it from, not based on of its self.

People lie though, and can be wrong. So then,

If you trust people,

and People are fallible

then what you trust them in can be fallible

So if you trust the religion of people, and people are fallible, then that religion is also fallible.

[mcali]

What is it's validity when the greatest proof of it has left this world. Here me out.

Religions are started by Great men, who have been chosen, they carry out their mission and then they die. Now, at the time of it's birth the validity of is self proven by the messenger himself, he is the proof of it, a fact in it of it's self. When this person dies, then the proof of it leaves with it. Now, they have left behind men, scripture etc. Those become the rational proofs of that religion, if they get lost then there is no more proof. As we get further from the beginning of the religion, the further we get away from these proofs, the more distorted it becomes, the more schisms there are, and the further the people invariably go away from this truth. At a certain point down the line, things become so muddled and the proofs so far from the origins that it looses its authenticity that it clung to. Therefore, the religion in itself becomes wholly different and there by looses it's legitimacy. What is left then, why do people still cling to every sect and schism? Trust, you must have trust that what you have received is the unaltered version, of the many versions that are there. So what do people base this trust? On facts, proofs, logic, or people? It is the latter, they trust the people they inherit it from, not based on of its self.

People lie though, and can be wrong. So then,

If you trust people,

and People are fallible

then what you trust them in can be fallible

So if you trust the religion of people, and people are fallible, then that religion is also fallible.

kafr

just kidding but I dont understand is there a question you are asking or is this just a statment

[Shirib]

Falsehood cannot approach it from before it or from behind it; [it is] a revelation from a [Lord who is] Wise and Praiseworthy. Quran 41:42

The Quran cannot be changed, it is the same as it was when Muhammad saw, received therefore we have the same message as Muhammad. Now our duty is to study the Quran and make sure we understand it.

Yes man is falliable, but Allah is not, and the Quran is not from Muhammad saw, but from Allah.

[FAH1223]

The Nabi left but the book revealed to him and the rest of mankind is in fact unaltered. The sects and schisms were foretold in the tradition as a signs of the final days.

Your whole statement/premise seems to be abandoning any divine influence i.e. God as if some guys in the desert just came out of nowhere and wrote some book because they knew poetry.

Of course you trust architects of ahadith and guardians of scripture as they were trained and devoted their lives to it. Logically, you follow those who specialize in an area of expertise. The compilation of the Qur'an is set in stone and even was started in the life of the Prophet... contrary to many orientalists that thought it was the product of either being crazy, being a poet, stealing ideas from Jews/Christians or some other lunacy. The Qur'an came because of the corruption of man to other holy scripture and Allah swore in his book that he would safeguard it. Hasn't been changed.

[union]

Muslim people believe the Qu’ran to be the word of God unchanged and unchangeable. A book which no falsehood can approach from the front nor the back, a merciful revelation from the sovereign of heaven to guide his creation to the path of righteousness and piety. A book unique in its style, most eloquent in its speech, clear in its expressions of the lawful and unlawful, conclusive in its proofs and protected from addition and omission. With that said, any textual scholarship of the Qu’ran which disagrees with progressive Muslim teachings is inherently incorrect.

[Somaliman50]

Allah subhana wattacaalaa has preserved the quran and it is the single most authentic book on this earth, followed by sahih bukhari.
The ahaadeeth is based upon saheeh narrations and for a hadeeth to be saheeh it is based upon strict conditions, you should study musdalah alhadeeth and look into this.

[Shirib]

Muslim people believe the Qu’ran to be the word of God unchanged and unchangeable. A book which no falsehood can approach from the front nor the back, a merciful revelation from the sovereign of heaven to guide his creation to the path of righteousness and piety. A book unique in its style, most eloquent in its speech, clear in its expressions of the lawful and unlawful, conclusive in its proofs and protected from addition and omission. With that said, any textual scholarship of the Qu’ran which disagrees with progressive Muslim teachings is inherently incorrect.

we're still gonna cut limbs

[Nanees]

why is it so impossible that a pure and real belief has been distorted over time by the insecurity of men? why do you have to reach the conclusion that the belief itself was born from insecurity?

[SultanOrder]

So as I understand it, the proof is in the pudding as they say? The book makes an assertion of itself? It's proofs is contextual, self-legitimizing?

Say for example, I make a claim, and follow up this claim with a book. I then make the justification of this claim within this book, and I make this book authentic by making another claim in it and of it. hmmm

The proof is no doubt in the pudding, for you have to first be of it to accept the proof of it.

[grandpakhalif]

Union do you agree that the ones who interpret the Quran the best were those who were on the ground with the Prophet whilst it was being revealed. Do you also agree that because they had first hand experience under the guiding hand of the Prophet are the most fit and capable to interpret this Quran.

A yes or no answer would suffice.

[SultanOrder]

Union by far is the most interesting case. As I understood from his post, the book is inherently wrong. It is wrong based on the standards, customs, ideals of the people who look into it. If it is wrong for one time, then it is wrong for all time. Union if one statement can be wrong, then all the statements of it can be wrong. That is just logic.

[Shirib]

PO,

to make it short and sweet, its all about faith.

If you have faith, none can take it away from you and if you don't have faith none can give it to you.

U gotta believe my brotha

[SultanOrder]

here it is more clearly for you Union

If the books makes a statement that it can have no wrong statements

Then that book makes an invalid statement

Then all it's statement could be invalid and therefore disregarded.

[Based]

Muslim people believe the Qu’ran to be the word of God unchanged and unchangeable. A book which no falsehood can approach from the front nor the back, a merciful revelation from the sovereign of heaven to guide his creation to the path of righteousness and piety. A book unique in its style, most eloquent in its speech, clear in its expressions of the lawful and unlawful, conclusive in its proofs and protected from addition and omission. With that said, any textual scholarship of the Qu’ran which disagrees with progressive Muslim teachings is inherently incorrect.

I think the key word here is "believe". While Muslims wholeheartedly believe in the purity of their scriptures, others may not. Every belief system claims to be upon the truth, and every belief system claims to be the only route to salvation. I think what PO is trying to say is that it's easy to see the flaws in the logic of other belief systems, but we tend to temporarily suspend reason when it comes to our own. If we're being honest, every religion basically claims that what this book says is right because this book says it's right

lol @ your last sentence btw.

[Somalian_Boqor]