"First Edition" Quran

StephenC,

You are just repeating the same thing over and over again. You have already got enough warnings. You jump from topic to topic without listening to responses. You raise a question, and when you receive a response, you ignore that and jump to another question, and create another thread. So many threads you created without having any willingness to engage in interfaith discussion, and still keep blaming Islam for all your problems without any evidence.

Angel wrote:

"To learn anothers beliefs/religion you need to put aside your own beliefs otherwise you will not be objective enough. Fair enough you don't believe certain things but you cannot say that so and so cannot believe in something because you see something as wrong according to you. "

First I am taken to task because I do NOT state my beliefs, then I am taken to task because I did state my beliefs.  Now you imply that my beliefs keep me from being objective.

Ok, please explain to me how my beliefs have anything what so ever to do with the fact that the Quran was compiled by a committee who (according to www.islamicity.com) decided what went into it and what did not go into it.  And the "first edition" copy of this (and all those written after it until the 8th century) was destroyed?

Angel responded: "That is because it was in oral transmission, re-read fatima's post about this in the other thread 'I came back to islam'."

But www.islamicity.com History of Islam states:

"With great difficulty, the task was carried out and the first complete manuscript compiled from "bits of parchment, thin white stones - ostracae - leafless palm branches, and the memories of men." Later, during the time of 'Uthman, the third caliph, a final, authorized text was prepared and completed in 651, and this has remained the text in use ever since."

So at least parts of the Quran was written down (on parchment) prior to the "final" (if there is only one would the better word be "only" instead of "final" be more appropriate?) "authorized" text (again that appears to indicate unauthorized text!)

On another side, did the committee do a rough draft first (what happened to it).

Also Uthman "Realizing that the original message from God might be inadvertently distorted by textual variants, he appointed a committee to collect the canonical verses and destroy the variant recensions. The result was the text that is accepted to this day throughout the Muslim world." www.islamicity.com History of Islam

So would it be contrary to this paragraph to deduce that between the death of Muhammad and Uthman's committee's work, there were "textual variants" and "variant recensions" or is www.islamicity.com posting anti-islamic material?

ejdavid wrote: Andalus etc The modern Koran includes diacritcal marks and other artifacts of modern Arabic that did not exist in The Proffet's time. I know of only one Koran in existance from antiquity, and that one is controversially housed out of sight in, I believe, Yemen. I do not know if it had diacritical marks etc or not. However, any Koran that includes modern Arabic artifacts is, by definition, a translation of the original.

Thank you for posting an established fact that certain people apparently can not accept!