Two Korans?

[ThePenguin]

Some friends and I got to talking about the Ground Zero mosque in New York and I mentioned that I'm against it because Muslims flew the planes into the towers for Allah, and that Muslims always build mosques on the sites they conquer. My other friend said that that's because they were following a different version of the Koran, the one that tells Muslims to kill infidels. I'm confused because isn't there only one Koran? And even if there are two, there are still several other books that Muslims consider holy that tell them to kill too.

Are there really two versions of the Koran?

[icebear]

from what i have been reading, there are kind of two korans. the ones translated to English have been 'cleaned up' dramatically.
there are other books used to support the koran because the koran is nonsensical without them.
Sira, hadith and Ta'rikh

there is a thread here about Islam and i linked to the book "Prophet of Doom" for free download. the introductory pages explains this better than i can.

Usama Dakdok has put together a direct translation in English to both expose it and as an outreach.
http://www.thestraightway.org/

i'm considering ordering a copy myself.

[ThePenguin]

there is a thread here about Islam and i linked to the book "Prophet of Doom" for free download. the introductory pages explains this better than i can.

I saw that; it's quite an interesting read. I don't remember reading about more than one Koran in the intro but I could've missed something (I usually don't read intros to things so I might've skipped it ).

But I remember reading that there's the original Koran written in the religious Arabic and then the translations. Could my friend be talking about the English Koran versus the original one written with religious Arabic?

[carol1948]

Wouldn't that be like having a Bible that takes out all references to hell or judgement, making it more acceptable to some? IMO if there are people who call themselves Muslims but don't adhere to the teachings of Mohammed, why don't they call themselves something else and break completely away from the teaching of the Koran? The fact that the Koran encourages them to lie, cheat, etc., to further Islam does not help their cause. Further I can only guess that any who call themselves Muslim would be afraid on pain of death, torture, etc., to leave Islam. Islam is what the original Koran says it is, not what some people claim it is for them in their own personal space. The same applies to Christianity. It is what the Bible says it is, not what some people want to claim it is. The biggest reason for not being tolerant of Islam and Muslims is that it is not trustworthy, it openly hates and wants to conquer and dominate. Neither Christianity or any other religion in this country advocates such criminal, violent behavior toward anyone including those of other belief systems. IMO the only peace Islam adheres to is the peace that comes when the one under its boot stops squirming in death or submission.

[Wally]

My understanding is there is one version of the koran in arabic. (Other older versions have been destroyed or are in safe keeping) As for translations, they can be used, but once not in arabic, they are susceptable to corruption.

There is another work, the hadith, which is a commentary on the koran. It carries just as much weight but is second to the koran.

[BlessedinHim]

I think the radical islam use the milder american islam to invade. the radical islam is parasitic to the watered down american islam who do not read the arabic koran. so, the arabic speaking muslim use the non arabic speaking muslim to infiltrate and try to "prove" that islam is peaceful . . . . guess they think we are all blind. just got to watch the news . . .

[JPE]

Penguin, this is a post from the thread "Killing Christians in the Q'uran," which is farther down the list of titles in this section, you might want to check out the whole thread.

Here's an Important Consideration When Looking Up Verses in Koran:

There are several different translations of the Koran in circulation, and the different translations say very different things.

Here's an example that I just discovered today:


Sura 9:123 is as follows:

from the Rashad Khalifa translation:

"O you who believe, you shall fight the disbelievers who attack you--let them find you stern--and know that GOD is with the righteous."

now compare that with the same verse, different translation...

from the translation that is stamped as an authentic translation "Completed at: The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd Complex For the Printing of the Holy Quran, Al-Madinah Al-Munawarah under the Auspices of the Ministry of Hajj and Endowments, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 1413 H." (no specific translator's name is given):

"O ye who believe! Fight the Unbelievers who are near to you
And let them find harshness in you:
And know that Allah is with those that fear Him."

One says fight those who attack you and the other says fight those who are near to you. And one says to be harsh and the other says to be stern. Those verses say different things.



Here's another conflicting pair:

Sura 5:51 reads as follows:

from the Rashad Khalifa translation:

"O you who believe, do not take certain Jews and Christians as allies; these are allies of one another. Those among you who ally themselves with these belong with them. GOD does not guide the transgressors."

now compare that with the same verse, different translation...

from the translation that is stamped as an authentic translation "Completed at: The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd Complex For the Printing of the Holy Quran, Al-Madinah Al-Munawarah under the Auspices of the Ministry of Hajj and Endowments, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 1413 H." (no specific translator's name is given):

"O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians
For your friends and protectors:
They are but friends and protectors
To each other. And he
Amongst you that turns to them
(For friendship) is of them.
Verily Allah guideth not
A people unjust.

One translation says certain Jews and Christians should not be regarded as allies, while the other makes no such distinction. And specifying that it's just certain Jews and Christians that one shouldn't be allied with changes the meaning of the following verse, since "them" then refers only to certain Christians and Jews. Those 2 translations do not say the same thing.

This is especially ironic since Muslims have such a habit of criticizing the fact that we have so many different translations of the Bible, and they assert that each translation says a different thing.

[HumbleBerean]

There is only one Koran. Your friend may be referring to the Hadith which is the sayings of Mohammed.

Mohammed started his religion by saying that the angel Gabriel came to him in a cave and gave him a message from god(sounds like mormonism). He started out peaceful but had trouble finding converts. He was running low on money and couldnt get the Jews to convert to Islam so he says god told him it would be ok to steal from the infidels. Seemed to work out for him and as time went by he found more extreme measures to be very effective, such as convert or die. Its one way to get what you want I suppose.

Where I think the split comes is in the Hadith. Some in Islam say it is from god and others not so much.

All Islamic teaching eventually leads to extremism. The only way you are assured of salvation in Islam is to become a martyr for Allah.