"First Edition" Quran

StephenC wrote: What would an authenicated "first edition" Quran be worth?

I can tell you know, it is/will be priceless, it is an antiquity of this world's history. 

What would it be worth if it was different than the currently used version of the Quran?

Currently used version? what version would that be ?

If an authenicated "first edition" of the Quran was found to differ significantly on specific issues then the currently used version, which should be destroyed (if any)?

"Currently used version" is matched with what you call "first edition" not the other way around. Any so called current edition that is not matched with the original/first copy will most likely be destroyed.

Oh and you need to match it with the arabic language not english

If you truly want to get technical then the first edition would be the oral edition before print edition. 

I will try it simpler.

The oldest complete Qur'an was written approximately two hundred years after the death of Muhammad.  NO known Quran was written during Muhammad's lifetime.  If a newer version of the written Quran was found (or has been found) and it differs from the current version, it would be (or has been) destroyed.

I find it strange that such an important Islamic written text as a "first edition" would not have been preserved.  Lesser books of older ages have been preserved.

I hope that makes my point clearer.  If not, just ignore this post.

StephenC wrote: I will try it simpler. The oldest complete Qur'an was written approximately two hundred years after the death of Muhammad.

I believe you need to get your facts right, in another thread you say 100 years, now in this its 200 years ??

NO known Quran was written during Muhammad's lifetime.

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

If a newer version of the written Quran was found (or has been found) and it differs from the current version, it would be (or has been) destroyed.

There is no new version of the qu'ran, there is only an original/earliest surviving book AND that is not mentioning the one that God holds  but i won't go there and confuse you more  will stick with earthly materials. (yes I am finding this ridiculous).

Stephen it is stated that anyone tries to produce any new qur'ans IT WILL be matched to the oldest surviving written qu'ran which is exactly as is when in oral transmission from Muhammad. This is how if any tries to make another it will be found out to be false and that will be destroyed. 

I find it strange that such an important Islamic written text as a "first edition" would not have been preserved.  Lesser books of older ages have been preserved.

re-read my above post again.

It has been preserved, that is what i am saying to you. the qu'ran of today is the same as what you call "first edition" - the oldest surviving qu'ran. There are no other editions/versions - translations in other languages yes but that is all.

StephenC wrote: The version that everyone is currently using.  I admit it could be the only version.

LOL!

Are you serious ??

No wonder Andulas is having a hard time.

Stephen I think you need to take a break and ponder on the stuff you have already.  because i can see you heading for a fall.

I mean no offence but i just think you need to take one thing at a time. 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.

You believe in hell and the devil, I don't with either. I don't believe scriptures are from God, I can share what i believe in but i won't tell others that they have to or must believe in it, and that is what you are doing, telling others to believe otherwise thinking that you know better - how can you do that if you no little about islam and its history ? (quoting one source is not enough) This is your mistake and this is why Andulas has been on your back!   

I mean no offence just giving some advice.  

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!