The Qur'an Noble?
Above is the proper definition of the word noble. This word is often used by muslims in their description of the "holy text" called the qur'an. Sometimes this description is even applied to the title of the book by the printer or scribe and so people think that it is part of the title.
If you ever take the time and trouble to read this book you will quickly see that the definition of "noble" in no way applies to it. The qu’ran is not NOBLE in any sense of the definition. It is a hodge-podge of unrelated and out of synch chapters (called surah’s) that purport to have been delivered to muhammad directly by either allah or Jibril (Gabriel in most of the English bibles, properly Gabriy’el as in the Restored Names Version). If the reader has any idea of the chronology of the history of islam, it is very easy to detect that many of the chapters were added by muhammad at the time he needed them in order to authorize or validate his personal activities. For instance, if he wanted to have a child bride, he merely had a "revelation" from allah authorizing it, and so forth. Other chapters purport to be the history of individuals such as Abraham, Yishma’el, Yitschaq, and the patriarchs of Yisra’el, Mosheh (Moses), and others of important status, but you will see that the stories vary considerably from those in scripture. In many cases people who lived several hundred years apart are given in the same story as living at the same time and interfacing with each other. Other stories are completely garbled or follow the fables found in Talmudic Judaism, which is where muhammad got his ideas for that part of his religion. (More later on where his ideas of the true Savior of mankind, Yahushua the Anointed, came from and how he perverted all of that story too.)
Muslims would like for the non-muslim world to think that the qu’ran is exactly the same book no matter where in the world it may be found, but in fact there are at least seven different versions, and maybe more, in use by the multiple and various denominations of islam. The differences in these versions is not merely a word here or a word there that has no bearing on the import of the sentences either. They are major differences that cause different denominations of islam (of which there are many) to believe different things, just as so-called "Christianity" does concerning the doctrines of the Anointed.
According to the qu’ran (11 verses) and any muslim you may want to ask, the qu’ran was delivered to muhammad in the "Pure Arabic" language. Specifically it was supposedly delivered in the dialect of muhammad’s native tribe, although at a later date he (muhammad) made the claim that it was also delivered in seven different tribal dialects. This is seen by those who are not fooled by his lie as an attempt to pacify those tribes because they refused to accept the book in any but their native tongue. After he made this claim they did begin to accept it.
There is no such thing as a "Pure Arabic" language and muslims hate the idea that the majority of their Arabic language is derived from the hated Ibriy (Hebrew) language. They will deny that fact at every chance, but any person of average intelligence can see that is in fact the case just by making comparisons of the spelling and meaning of the words, the composition of their writings, and even their manner of writing (right to left).
In fact the very word qur'an is from the Arabic word qara which is in turn derived from the Ibriy word qara' (ar'q' - Strong's H7121) and has the exact same meaning that the muslims use (to call, call out, recite, read, cry out, proclaim).
The qu’ran itself gives the whole lie away to those who have their eyes open and are paying attention. For instance, the true name of the Son of Yahuwah is Yahushua. The qu’ran acknowledges Him but denies that He was anything but a prophet, and one inferior to muhammad, by the way. This name Yahushua is a compound word, which is typical of names in the Ibriy language, that literally means "Salvation of Yahuwah." This name is translated/transliterated as several different names in the English versions of scripture, such as Joshua and Jehoshua, and nowhere in the Ibriy scripture (from B'ereshiyth [Genesis] to Mal’akiy) is this name given as being that of the Messiah. The name is given to the One called The Branch (see ZekarYahuw [Zechariah] 3:8) Who WILL be the Savior in His incarnation as the son of Miryam (Mary), but He is NOT called the Messiah.
From the Greek portion of the scriptures His name usually has been rendered in English as JESUS, even though it is Yahushua Whom is being talked about. In the King James Version there is even one place where the person being talked about was the confederate of Mosheh, who also has a book of scripture named after him, but who was called JESUS (Ibriy 4:8). The name JESUS is a perversion of His true given name that has evolved by passing through several languages to the present error. (See the article Names on this same web site to see that process).
The point of all this information is that the qu’ran invariably uses words, names, and titles that are derived from transliterations of the foreign (to Arabia) languages rather than Arabic or the Ibriy when talking about our Savior. Besides that, had Gabriy’el actually been the deliverer of this information to muhammad, he, being the high deputy of the true Eloah, would not have been telling these things to muhammad in some language other than his native tongue. Muhammad even admits to this when he tries to convince people that it was delivered to him in "Pure Arabic." There would have been no reason to give muhammad information in a foreign language that would have required transliteration. That would have been like Gabriy’el telling Daniy’el things in Greek instead of his native tongue. It just never happens in scripture.
Another proof of this is the word messiah which is a Latin word that appears in some English and Latin versions of scripture (usually only in the book of Daniy’el). This word is derived from the Ibriy mashiach (meaning anointed). The qu’ran uses the Arabic term al-Masih (meaning the Messiah), which is very obviously the transliteration from the Latin term messiah and NOT the Ibriy word mashiach. Remember too that the qu’ran uses many words directly from the Ibriy language without any modification at all.
When the Greek language expresses the same idea, the term used is kristos. This Greek term also means "anointed" and it is also used in the qu’ran. Makes that question of what language this was delivered to muhammad in come back up again, does it not? The English rendering is usually Christ.
The qu’ran uses a name that is derived from the Greek name and not the Ibriy when directly mentioning Yahushua, our Savior. The name they use is ‘Issa, which is a transliteration of the Greek Iesous and not a transliteration of His actual name.
You will also see some stories concerning Yahushua that come from sources such as the "Gospel of Thomas," which is not in the accepted canon of scripture. (By reading that "gospel" it is evident why it is not.) This is some more evidence that the source of the qu’ran is not the high deputy of our Creator but the people around muhammad during the years he was writing this thing the muslims call a sacred book.
History shows that muhammad had much personal exposure to the so-called Christians of that day, who for the most part belonged to what was to become Roman Catholicism although there was some Gnosticism involved, and from that exposure he developed his erroneous ideas about what true Christians believe. For instance he writes in the qu’ran that Christians believe in a "holy trinity" (qu’ran 4:171) and today the muslims say that "holy trinity" is composed of the Father, the Son, and Mary. The Catholics of that day were already into venerating Miryam as the "queen of heaven," but they never placed her in their polytheistic trinity. To my knowledge NO group calling themselves Christian has ever done that. On top of that, where in scripture or any kind of sacred writings is there any mention of a "trinity" except in the apostate early assemblies (after the Council of Nicea)?
The Noble Qu’ran? I think not!
Below is the true source of the qu’ran. This passage could have been spoken directly to and about muhammad and his pagan religion of islam.
Yahuchanan (John) (RNV) 8:44 You are of your father the devil and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.
For comment, questions, or discussion, contact one of the brothers in the Contact Us link in the menu bar above.