☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
What Do You Think Of Islam?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="AngloSikhPeace" data-source="post: 191654" data-attributes="member: 19790"><p><strong>Re: Muslims and Islam.</strong></p><p></p><p>Risky is correct to say that there have been (and still are) many variations of the Bible. This is because the Bible is composed of a large number of different books, and Christians have never agreed on which books should be regarded as legitimate parts of the Bible. These books have been written in many different languages, for example the Old Testament books have been passed down for millennia in the Hebrew language, whilst books of the New Testament are also written in languages such as Greek and Aramaic. </p><p>However I find the claims that this damages Christianity's legitimacy as religion (an argument generally put forward by Muslims) to be incorrect. If Christians claimed that the Bible was the <em>direct </em>word of god, then critics would have a point. However, the Christians do not believe this, instead they believe that the Bible is the <em>inspired</em> word, written by many different authors and guided by the holy spirit into the correct form.</p><p>--------------------------------------------------------------------</p><p></p><p>Now, whether or not the Qur'an has changed over the centuries is a very controversial debate. The orthodox view of western historians is that after Muhammad's death, several variations of the Qur'an were created. The third Caliph, Uthman, responded to this by ordering the destruction of all variant texts, and their replacement with a single properly-authorised version. This version was complete with vowel markings in order to help the newly-conquered non-Arab subjects of the expanding Caliphate read the words of the Qur'an properly. It is usually believed that this version has remained the same until the present day. </p><p>Recently however historians have begun contesting this, and arguing that the Qur'an has an origin story beyond 'Muhammad wrote it all and it's still the same today'. Chief amongst these is Patrica Crone, the author of the book <em>Hagarism</em>. Her theories are repeated in an easily-digestible format by Tom Holland in his book <em>In the Shadow of the Sword</em>. These historians argue, amongst other things, that some of the suras of the Qur'an were once separate books, which were compiled into a single document early in Islamic history, that Islam originated not in modern Mecca but considerably further north, and that the entire body of the Hadith is completely unreliable. </p><p>I must stress though that these are <em>not</em> mainstream opinions, they are revisionist theories (perfectly legitimate ones, not akin to Holocaust revisionism or anything) trying to start up debate and encourage 'thinking outside the box'. <em>Hagarism</em> has fallen out of fashion, with modern scholars encouraging a sort of compromise between taking traditional accounts at face-value like the 'orthodox' historians, and completely throwing the baby out with the bathwater like Crone. Tom Holland's recent work has revived a bit of interest in the origins of Islam, but he's not an academic, and In the Shadow of the Sword is a pop-history book at heart, not scholarly.</p><p></p><p>Really there is too little evidence from the time to properly debate and decide upon when and how the Qur'an appeared. What we do know is that it hasn't changed substantially since the 7th century, which is quite an impressive run.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AngloSikhPeace, post: 191654, member: 19790"] [b]Re: Muslims and Islam.[/b] Risky is correct to say that there have been (and still are) many variations of the Bible. This is because the Bible is composed of a large number of different books, and Christians have never agreed on which books should be regarded as legitimate parts of the Bible. These books have been written in many different languages, for example the Old Testament books have been passed down for millennia in the Hebrew language, whilst books of the New Testament are also written in languages such as Greek and Aramaic. However I find the claims that this damages Christianity's legitimacy as religion (an argument generally put forward by Muslims) to be incorrect. If Christians claimed that the Bible was the [I]direct [/I]word of god, then critics would have a point. However, the Christians do not believe this, instead they believe that the Bible is the [I]inspired[/I] word, written by many different authors and guided by the holy spirit into the correct form. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Now, whether or not the Qur'an has changed over the centuries is a very controversial debate. The orthodox view of western historians is that after Muhammad's death, several variations of the Qur'an were created. The third Caliph, Uthman, responded to this by ordering the destruction of all variant texts, and their replacement with a single properly-authorised version. This version was complete with vowel markings in order to help the newly-conquered non-Arab subjects of the expanding Caliphate read the words of the Qur'an properly. It is usually believed that this version has remained the same until the present day. Recently however historians have begun contesting this, and arguing that the Qur'an has an origin story beyond 'Muhammad wrote it all and it's still the same today'. Chief amongst these is Patrica Crone, the author of the book [I]Hagarism[/I]. Her theories are repeated in an easily-digestible format by Tom Holland in his book [I]In the Shadow of the Sword[/I]. These historians argue, amongst other things, that some of the suras of the Qur'an were once separate books, which were compiled into a single document early in Islamic history, that Islam originated not in modern Mecca but considerably further north, and that the entire body of the Hadith is completely unreliable. I must stress though that these are [I]not[/I] mainstream opinions, they are revisionist theories (perfectly legitimate ones, not akin to Holocaust revisionism or anything) trying to start up debate and encourage 'thinking outside the box'. [I]Hagarism[/I] has fallen out of fashion, with modern scholars encouraging a sort of compromise between taking traditional accounts at face-value like the 'orthodox' historians, and completely throwing the baby out with the bathwater like Crone. Tom Holland's recent work has revived a bit of interest in the origins of Islam, but he's not an academic, and In the Shadow of the Sword is a pop-history book at heart, not scholarly. Really there is too little evidence from the time to properly debate and decide upon when and how the Qur'an appeared. What we do know is that it hasn't changed substantially since the 7th century, which is quite an impressive run. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
What Do You Think Of Islam?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top