Many muslims consider the Bible (which consist of Old Testament and New Testament writings) is unlike the Qur’an, they are not God’s direct speech, but are just like the Hadiths that is the Bible were written-collected by men, and are based on the sayings-teachings of the prophets. Just as the Hadiths are with the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
Muslims also do not consider those who transmitted or collected the sayings-teachings were inspired by God. They were all human and prone to errors and mistakes. The Muslim Scholars took a great care to make sure that the collection of the sayings by those men were authentic teachings of the Prophet himself.
Even so Muslim scholars then develop a methodology to authenticate the collection most important is
The collection must contain who actually collected the saying-teachings, and who passed them on, and who actually made the original statement that was passed on. It is called the chain of transmission or the Isnād إسناد : a complete line of transmission.
Muslim scholars even go as far as checking the biography of the transmitter names, where they lived, when they were born, when they died and go further whether a person in the chain, could have been known as untruthful.
From this method the scholars then classify different types of Hadiths
Requirments for a Sound (Saheeh) Hadiths:
- Each reporter should be known as pious and trustworthy people
- He/She should be known to be truthful in his narration, to understand what he narrates
- He should have met the person he narrates from
- He/she should know how a different expression can alter the meaning
- He should know how to report the Hadiths verbatim not just its meaning
Hasan Hadiths:
- Its source is known
- Its reporters are unambiguous
Da’eef Hadiths:
- A Hadiths that fails to meet the status of Hasan
- Could be a break in its chain
- One of the narrators has bad character such as: lying, excessive mistakes, opposition to a more reliable narration, involvement in innovation, or ambiguity surrounding his person
Mawdu’ Hadiths:
- The text goes against the established fundamental norms of the Qur’an and the Prophet’s sayings.
- It reporters include a known liar.
- They are also known by their discrepancies related to time and historical events.
Here is more elaborate example on How did Muslim scholars sift through the masses of Prophetic reports to single out the authentic ones
In the case of the Bible writings, we literally do not know who was passing the stories and whether they’re reliable people even worse we don not know the original source because many of them are anonymous writings or pseudepigraphica (Gr: ψευδής, pseudes, “false” and ἐπιγραφή, epigraphē, “name” ). For example all 13 of the letters attributed to Paul are pseudepigraphical. In another example like the book of Isaiah, modern critics have rejected the idea of prophet Isaiah’s authorship but rather anonymous scribes of men.
All this problems stem from the facts that the Bible has no proper documentation regarding its sources and chain of transmissions like in the collection of the hadiths. We can not be certain who were the authors nor there biographies of the transmitters.
This leave us in great doubts whether the Bible contain the actual teachings of God.
Blogging Theology 
Thanks brother. This is true and it is enlightenment.
I keep saying everyday, the Bible is not a properly documented document. If the writers of the Bible especially the NT can write a lot of chapters of their gospels why on earth would they not properly document it or what would prevent them from properly documenting it? i.e. with full names-first and last names, their place of birth or the place they came from, their relationship with Jesus, whether their document is eye witness or inspired or both, when they wrote the NT or their gospel, where they wrote their gospels, which language etc. Just like the chain of narrations of the hadith will say much details about the individuals involved in the hadiths.
The gospel writers will leave all these important details and put poor Ken Temple trying hard to find those details by getting a little from what somebody has written about disciples as fisherman, tax collector and it is in the middle of the story some one has written and cannot be considered as authenticated by the author of the gospel but by some unknown writer of the gospel.
Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have a collection of studies I did with a hadith scholar, and a NTTC scholar comparing the hadith literature with the NT literature. One of the areas we covered was judging authenticity based on valid and well reputed sources. I used some of this information, albeit very partially in my debate with Steven Martins. In that debate, I focused more on how the Patristic traditions stood up to isnad criticism. The results rendered almost all of the early Patristic traditions about NT authorship to be fabricated or unreliable at the least.
Do remind me to finish copy-editing the studies. We will be publishing them sometime in the future.
Regards,
LikeLiked by 3 people
This is amazing, to my knowledge you are the first one who has ever attempted to do this. JazakAllah Khair
LikeLike
This is a fabulous post Eric and I cannot wait for Ijaz’s research to some out.
I’ve actually been thinking about this for some time on and off when considering the 4 Gospels in the NT. These thoughts came back to me recently as I was reading about Matthew’s ‘prophecies’. That man would be classified as a liar – he was making prophecies up – thus nothing would be accepted from him (no Gospel of Matthew!) if we were to use the standard of Hadith criticism. Likewise for John, who even Christians claim changed stories for ‘theological reasons’ – that’s what you call a polite way of saying he too was dishonest – thus nothing from John would be accepted either (no more Gospel of John).
Christians talk about their manuscripts being their witnesses yet those who produced the manuscripts included at least some liars, such as the scribes who inserted the last part of Mark and the chunk in the Gospel of John (chapter 7 through to 8, I can’t recall the verse numbers). But not only this, we know scribes changed the NT on a smaller scale for reasons of sexism and anti-semitism too – again pointing to the dishonesty of these people. So how can Christians claim the manuscripts they have is their chain of narration when they don’t even know who the scribe was and whether the person was honest/dishonest.
On top of that they are still looking for manuscripts thus could find something meaning they have to reject another part of their Bible as a possible forgery (as per the two famous forgeries already mentioned).
In short,it’s a mess. They are building their whole faith on conjecture. It’s really sad. Christians PLEASE think about this.
PS A few years ago I came across that term pseudepigrapha and it was dressed up as something innocent, i.e. folk in those times always wrote books in the name of others. I just accepted it without much critical thought back then. Recently Bart Ehrman blew the lid on this ‘innocent’ practice. Think about it, if somebody is unknowingly writing one’s ideas and beliefs in somebody else’s name – somebody who is of more repute and popular – then that’s a dishonest way to get your written material and idea to gain traction as the person has falsely imputed those ideas/beliefs onto the other person.
Here’s an example:
“The trinity is a lie and it was made up by somebody after Jesus p” Pope Francis
“The idea of the incarnation was only thought of as Christians began preaching to the pagans who were stooped in traditions of men-god so some Christian decided to make up a belief about a man-god concerning Jesus p” The Forgotten Trinity by James White
Of course I just made those quotes up. However, if Christians are consistent they would have no problem with people making quotes (and even books) up and attributing them to others as they accept this idea of writing in the name of somebody else (pseudepigrapha).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Brothers Ijaz, Eric, Yahya, I love you guys for the sake of Allah keep up the good work. May Allah bless Brother Ijaz with health and cure him. Ameen,Ameen….Ameen!
LikeLiked by 2 people
.
LikeLike
Why are you applying Islamic standards on the Bible? Coran is not chronologically arranged like the Bible, can I reject your book based on that? The thing you are forgetting is the Bible is INSPIRED word of God not verbatim. It is Human yet Divine.
LikeLike
Mr Nerd, the thing you are forgetting is that the Bible does not claim to be INSPIRED.
LikeLike
Johny the Nerd
You said;
Why are you applying Islamic standards on the Bible? Coran is not chronologically arranged like the Bible, can I reject your book based on that? The thing you are forgetting is the Bible is INSPIRED word of God not verbatim. It is Human yet Divine.
I say;
Was the Bible an eye witness or inspired? Some Christians here said the NT is an eye witness. If it is an eye witness, why do you say it is inspired? An eye witness only says what he witness but not inspired by anyone.
////////////////////////////////////////////////////
in·spired
/inˈspī(ə)rd/
adjective
adjective: inspired
1. of extraordinary quality, as if arising from some external creative impulse.
“they had to thank the goalie for some inspired saves”
•(of a person) exhibiting a creative impulse in the activity specified.
“she was an inspired gardener”
synonyms: outstanding , wonderful , marvelous , excellent , magnificent , fine , exceptional , first-class, first-rate , virtuoso , supreme , superlative , brilliant ; More
innovative , ingenious , imaginative , original ;
informal tremendous , superb , super , ace , wicked , awesome , out of this world
“toe-tapping melodies and inspired lyrics”
antonyms: dull , poor
2. (of air or another substance) that is breathed in.
“inspired air must be humidified”
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I cannot be an eye witness of something that I know and inspired by someone, because if I based my eye witness on some external inspiration, I will fall on lies and will not be true to my eye witness but add some ones inspiration.
The writers of the NT could have simply stated to us that their document is inspired, eye witness or both. They never even put their important personal details like their first and last names, their places of birth, the city they came from, when and where they wrote their gospels, which language, date etc. to authenticate and verify their document as people before them(the NT writers) and after them will do to make sure their documents can be traced to where it said it is from and the truth verified.
We do not have any authentication and verifications of the writers of NT and it makes it from a dubious origin. You are claiming the NT is inspired but the writers of NT did not say it is inspired, so it seems dubious that it is inspired.
Thanks
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yahya said, I made those quotes up. You have a habit of making things up just like you did with Sam when he called certain Muslims a cancer you made it look like as if he is saying every Muslim is a cancer to the society. Intellect thanks for the meaning of inspired I didn’t know lol.
LikeLike
@Johny, this is a really interesting post and an opportunity to learn and share knowledge on an important matter. Please don’t detract from this. As for making things up about Sam, I posted the entire clip on YT – I cannot make audio of somebody else up – trust me I did not do an audio version of pseudepigrapha 🙂
Let’s have some respect for the post and get back to the discussion.
Peace
LikeLike
thanks a million Ijaz… I usually wondered why Muslim apologists don’t go that line!
LikeLike
The isnad system is highly unreliable, as seen by the hundreds of thousands of fabricated Hadith. Even today the Shia and Sunni use different accounts and hadith scholars are still trying to identify those Hadith that are sahih.
Furthermore, one can only use the science of Hadith for authentication of Hadith if one first assumes and accepts the authenticating criteria itself, which is only found in historical documents. In other words, it is based on circular reasoning.
This is quite different to the ancient history standards of western scholarship applied to the Bible
LikeLike
Mark,
Islamic scholars have been very cognisant of the problem of fabricated hadith from the very beginning which is why such a rigorous methodology was devised to identify, classify, and weed out forgeries.
As Eric helpfully describes the process – Requirements for a Sound (Saheeh) Hadiths:
Each reporter should be known as pious and trustworthy people
He/She should be known to be truthful in his narration, to understand what he narrates
He should have met the person he narrates from
He/she should know how a different expression can alter the meaning
He should know how to report the Hadiths verbatim not just its meaning
I do not see how this involves ‘circular reasoning’.
LikeLike
Mark,
So far we are talking about method to provide guaranty for the accuracy of a tradition attributed to prophet Muhammad, not about written historical sources. This method can open to criticism but most importantly is it is there.
In general muslims do not take position on the wholesale rejection anything attributed to prophet Muhammad. But while the hadiths were prima facie compelling for Muslim scholars , they devise rigorous chains of transmission for any hadiths literature in circulation for them becoming a certain law or teaching. it was necessary to go beyond simple attributions of Prophetic authority. The issue of authenticity was always primarily important, often it arose only when opinions clashed, when competing parties employing the Prophet’s normative legacy as a proof text challenged the reliability of one another’s evidence..
Islamic scholars emphasized the need for a common measure of authenticity from early time and have rigorously scrutinized many of hadith collection such Sunni corpus such as the sahih (authentic) Bukhari and Muslim. The method to prove the reliability of a hadith hinged on the quality of the collections based on Isnad criticism. It is such a daunting a scale and yet with such internal consistency that it ranks among mankind’s greatest intellectual accomplishments. When it comes to biblical text we don’t have this tradition..
LikeLike
Hi Paul.
To demonstrate an example, can you please tell me how an Islamic scholar would determine whether a person was pious and trustworthy?
LikeLike
Take for example a famous hadith :
Sahih Bukhari Book: 1, Hadith: 1
Narrated ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab:
حَدَّثَنَا الْحُمَيْدِيُّ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الزُّبَيْرِ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا سُفْيَانُ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا يَحْيَى بْنُ سَعِيدٍ الأَنْصَارِيُّ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ التَّيْمِيُّ، أَنَّهُ سَمِعَ عَلْقَمَةَ بْنَ وَقَّاصٍ اللَّيْثِيَّ، يَقُولُ سَمِعْتُ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقُولُ “ إِنَّمَا الأَعْمَالُ بِالنِّيَّاتِ، وَإِنَّمَا لِكُلِّ امْرِئٍ مَا نَوَى، فَمَنْ كَانَتْ هِجْرَتُهُ إِلَى دُنْيَا يُصِيبُهَا أَوْ إِلَى امْرَأَةٍ يَنْكِحُهَا فَهِجْرَتُهُ إِلَى مَا هَاجَرَ إِلَيْهِ ”.
I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, “The reward of deeds depends upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended. So whoever emigrated for worldly benefits or for a woman to marry, his emigration was for what he emigrated for.”
Isnad:
‘Abdullah bin al-Zubair bin ‘Isa ——» Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah ——» Yahya bin Sa’id al-Ansari ——» Muhammad bin Ibrahim bin al-Harith ——» ‘Alqama bin Waqqas ——» ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab
عبد الله بن الزبير بن عيسى الحميدي
30418-‘Abdullah bin al-Zubair bin ‘Isa (10)
Abu Bakr [Thiqah Thiqah] ( م د ت س فق )
[d. 219 AH or after]
Makkah
Quraish,B.Asad,al-Makki
سفيان بن عيينة
20005-Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah (8)
Abu Muhammad [Thiqah Thiqah] ( ع )
[107 AH – 196 AH]
Kufa/Makkah
al-Hilali, Client, Imam, Hafiz, Kufi, Makki
يحيى بن سعيد الأنصاري
11062-Yahya bin Sa’id al-Ansari (5)
Abu Sa’id [Thiqah] ( ع )
[<70 AH – 144 AH or after]
Medina
Ansar, Khazraj,B.Malik B.al-Najjar,Judge,al-Madni, Imam
محمد بن إبراهيم بن الحارث
11213-Muhammad bin Ibrahim bin al-Harith (4)
Abu ‘Abdullah [Thiqah] ( ع )
[d. 120 AH]
Medina
Quraish,B.Taym,al-Madni
علقمة بن وقاص
11042-‘Alqama bin Waqqas (2)
[Thiqah Thiqah] ( ع )
[<10 AH – ~ 70-75 AH]
Medina
al-Laithi,B.Kinana, Madni
عمر بن الخطاب بن نفيل
3-‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (0)
Abu Hafs, al-Farooq ( ع )
[41 BH/582 CE – 23 AH/645 CE]
Makkah/Medina
Quraish, B.’Adi, Emigrant, Badr, Uhud, Khandaq, Scribe, Promised Paradise
For each for the narrator we have the following information:
Scholar: 30418 – ‘Abdullah bin al-Zubair bin ‘Isa [Abu Bakr] 3rd Century AH [10th generation]
Full Name: ‘Abdullah bin al-Zubair bin ‘Isa al-Humaydi
Death Date/Place: 219 AH or after ()[ Natural ]
Places of Stay: Makkah
Area of Interest: Narrator[Grade:Thiqah Thiqah] [ م د ت س فق – ثقة حافظ ]
Teachers/
Narrated From: Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah, Ibrahim bin Sa’d bin Ibrahim, Imam Shafi’ee, al-Walid bin Muslim al-Quraishi, Waki’ bin al-Jarrah, Marwan bin Mua’wiya al-Fazari, ‘Abdul ‘Aziz bin Abi Hazim, ‘Abdul ‘Aziz bin Muhammad al-Daruradi, Bashr bin Bakr al-Tunisi, Several Others
Students/
Narrated By: al-Bukhari, روى له مسلم, Abu Da’ud, Imam Tirmidhi, Imam Nasa’i, ابن ماجة في التفسير بواسطة سلمة بن شبيب, Muhammad bin Yonus al-Nsa’iy, Harun bin ‘Abdullah al-Hamal, Muhammad bin Yahya bin Faris al-Dhahli, عبيد الله بن فضالة النسائي, Muhammad bin Ahmed al-Quraishi, Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abdul Rahim, Ahmed bin al-Azhar bin Mny’, Abu Zara’ al-Razi, Abu Hatim al-Razi, أبو بكر محمد بن إدريس, راق الحميدي, يعقوب بن شيبة, Y’aqub bin Sufyan, محمد بن سنجر, Yusuf bin Musa bin Rashid al-Qatan, إسماعيل سمويه, بشر بن موسى, Muhammad bin Yonus al-Kadaymi
Tags : Quraish, B.Asad, al-Makki
Analysis: [] [Family Tree 2] [Teachers Timeline] [ Students Timeline] [Teachers & Students Timeline] [Teacher/Student Tree] [] [Teacher List] [Student List]
Brief Biography:
References:
Thiqat[Vol:8] , Tarikh-ul Kabir[Vol:5] , Tabaqat[Vol:5] , Siyar A’lam[10/616-621] , Tahdheeb al-Tahdheeb[Vol:5] , Taqrib al-Tahdheeb[303]
Narrations:
(Unconfirmed) Sahih Bukhari: 73 Sahih Muslim: 4 Jami’ al-Tirmidhi: 2
And down to more specific bigraphical information on this narration which I dont have access to.
I hope that can give you a glimpse on how rigorous this method can be in determining the authenticity of the hadith, it contain informatiion on the narrator , the hadith scholar then can determine if the person can be considered trustworthy or not.
I took this information available in the internet such as hadith database
LikeLike
Eric bin Kisam
You said;
I hope that can give you a glimpse on how rigorous this method can be in determining the authenticity of the hadith, it contain informatiion on the narrator , the hadith scholar then can determine if the person can be considered trustworthy or not.
I took this information available in the internet such as hadith database
I say;
Thanks brother Eric for the example of the chain of narrators of Hadiths that provides important details of the narrators like their Full Names, Where they came from, the cities they stayed, their date of birth, when and where they gave their narrations, etc. and it makes everything verifiable.
If the NT as an important document for mankind had this mandatory information of the writers like their Full Names, Where they came from, the cities they stayed, their date of birth, when and where they gave their narrations, etc. then we can verify the authenticity, accuracy and the origin of the Gospels but unfortunately this simple message that could have been provided by the gospel writers after writing chapters upon chapters was not there in the NT.
Thanks.
LikeLike
The Quran is not God’s direct speech either. Modern day information available to all of us now has finally caught up with many lies that Islamic apologists and Dawah guys used to tell people. In a recent video, Hamza Tzortis finally acknowledges that the Quran has no scientific miracles. That is even the title of the video.
He seems to be really struggling in that video, it’s a little painful to watch at times.
The Quran is prone to errors and mistakes just as the Bible is. But as a Muslim with cognitive bias you probably can’t or don’t want to see that.
LikeLike
General
Before this video, there were so many videos proving the Quran has scientific miracle in them. A Muslim will select the videos claiming Quran has scientific miracle, and a critic of Islam will select your video. An independent person will select one of them.
The question here, is the authentication, verification, and the origin of the Bible and Hadith only but the Quran has categorically, clearly and unequivocally provided its origin is from Allah in so many places and there is no question about that.
The miracles of a religion or its scriptures is just like religion itself and no matter the truth, a critic will not accept it and will always find som.ething wrong with it and there is back and forth with the miracles in the Quran and the Bible and the acceptance is the discretion of the believer.
The Quran asks Muslims to use their brain and or intellect to ponder who God is but not to rely solely on miracle.
In Islam it is both miracle and intellect for our belief, but not miracle alone or intellect alone but both. My intellect or any Muslim intellect will believe any person is a being or he/she i.e. Human being, Divine being, angelic being, demonic being, satanic being etc.
No person is not a being and any person is a being with consciousness and or being a substance and or has weight and occupy space.
So when the Bible said Yahweh(God) is One, Only and Alone, it clearly means Yahweh(He) is the only being or person as God and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are not God and must not be worshiped.
One can accept or reject any miracle and I do not care but worshiping 3 beings/persons like the Rastafarian Trinities or any Trinity is wrong.
Thanks
LikeLike
“Before this video, there were so many videos proving the Quran has scientific miracle in them. A Muslim will select the videos claiming Quran has scientific miracle, and a critic of Islam will select your video. An independent person will select one of them.”
I know you haven’t actually watched the video yet because if you did you’d know that this video comes from Muslims themselves. This video was created by Mission Dawah who are part of iERA, i.e it is a Muslim video. Therefore it is not a critic of Islam, rather an acknowledgement by Muslims themselves that you cannot keep believing that the Quran has scientific miracles.
I didn’t quite get the end of your message but if you’re assuming I’m Christian then you’re wrong. I just want to see fairness in analyzing scriptures. If you’re going to say the Bible has errors and mistakes, then acknowledge the ones in your scriptures too.
And I disagree with your 2nd paragraph, the Quran isn’t all that clear.
LikeLike
General
You said;
Therefore it is not a critic of Islam, rather an acknowledgement by Muslims themselves that you cannot keep believing that the Quran has scientific miracles.
I say;
The Quran said, Muslims must use their intellect, so I believed the videos that said Quran has scientific miracle but I do not believe in this one you provided to us. Just like Christians Trinitarians have their intellect and scripture telling them that God died but God did not die.
Thanks.
LikeLike
Once again you still have not actually watched it yet lol. Hamza Tzortis is the speaker in that video and admits that the Quran has no scientific miracles. In previous articles and videos he used to say the Quran did in fact have scientific miracles but now he has changed his mind (which he also admits to in the video). So according to your logic, you will believe in his previous videos discussing scientific miracles but not this one in which he rejects his own previous work.
Damn, ignorance sure is bliss lol…
LikeLike
General
You said;
In previous articles and videos he used to say the Quran did in fact have scientific miracles but now he has changed his mind (which he also admits to in the video). So according to your logic, you will believe in his previous videos discussing scientific miracles but not this one in which he rejects his own previous work.
Damn, ignorance sure is bliss lol…
I say;
Hamza is a human being and all scholars are human beings. They are not perfect as Hamza himself was recently found his former name with Ashley Madison and some of us supported him in that it could not be him. We do not know and only God knows and I personally will not hold him responsible for only God knows and only God can judge.
I will not believe him but will use my intellect to take what makes sense in his argument. Yes, the Quran did not say this is embryology, this is the big bang, this is a scientific miracle, this is this, this is that but will say something using a simple language that is understandable to an ancient Arab and to a modern day scientist in his lab and that’s it.
No one claims the Quran teaches embryology. Not at all, if that what Hamza taught in the past, then he is in error because the Quran does not teach embryology or any scientific miracle but study shows some simple language in it is in conformity with modern understanding of science and that is it.
Thanks.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Good I’m glad you now see the Quran does not contain scientific miracles.
LikeLike
As I said, circular.
How do we know a Hadith is reliable? Person A was trustworthy?
How do we know person A was trustworthy? Narration tells us so.
Believe if you wish but it seems like ridiculous fundamentalism.
LikeLike
Mark, even modern day detective investigation require historical records to provide background information on a subject. So evidence collection and preservation are very important in arriving at the right conclusion. The more thorough the evidences the better. Nothing circular it is just logical.
LikeLike
We can’t really know if a Hadith is reliable these days because a Muslim will pick and choose which one is authentic based on whether they like it or not.
Most sahih hadiths are authentic, and when I say that I don’t mean they are true, just that they come from a reliable source.
Now simply read some sahih hadiths like bukhari and Muslim and see how absurd some of the statements are.
If person A was trustworthy and told about a story where he heard Muhammad say the devil urinates in your ear then according to the procedure he would be telling the truth. If he also said that Muhammad told him the gender of a baby depends on which parent had an orgasm first during intercourse then he would also be telling the truth since he is trustworthy. Many hadiths are like this and in those times were more believable. But now in our modern era we know that many of these hadiths do not make sense or aren’t logical so Muslims will change their mind about whether it is authentic or not, even though it is actually still authentic.
LikeLike
With the name of Allah the Gracious The Merciful
Hi General , thanks for your contribution.
The truth of the Qur’an is not because it talks about big bangs, embryology, etc I don’t think the Qur’an even make such claim
I am myself are never willing to give Da’wah by telling people scientific facts in the Qur’an.
This post argue about the transmission of hadiths which have been scrupulously filtered to protect any problems of authenticity compared to OT and NT. While the Quranic revelation has in itself unique history which is fundamentally different from any other religious texts. It was transmitted to Muhammad by Archangel Gabriel, taught by the prophet himself to the believers, by method of learning it by heart / memorisation such that we know the text has been better preserved and It does not give rise to any problems of authenticity.”
Now If we are contrasting the Qur’an with the OT and NT literature. You can find the OT and NT literature to have questionable content of a scientific nature; where the Qur’an did not contain errors of that kind. Also some Qur’anic passages seems in its scale of interpretation to allow scientific meanings to be read into the text
So the Qur’an deserves a higher status on account of:
However the Qur’an is not a book about scientific discovery, it is the book of guidance. I think this the correct approach muslims should view the Qur’an.
LikeLike