01 Jan '07 23:34>
As I understand it what you are saying is
1) Quran is memorised from the prophet himself. It cannot be wrong. There is a history associated with the learning process. It cannot be wrong.
2) The collated version was checked against the spoken version. It was proved to be correct. It cannot be wrong.
3) Why were the original bits destroyed? Answer: To ensure that others could not add bits later, and thus corrupt the book.
But this assumes that process 1 and 2 can have a flaw that would allow such a claim to be considered valid, wouldn't it?
1) Quran is memorised from the prophet himself. It cannot be wrong. There is a history associated with the learning process. It cannot be wrong.
2) The collated version was checked against the spoken version. It was proved to be correct. It cannot be wrong.
3) Why were the original bits destroyed? Answer: To ensure that others could not add bits later, and thus corrupt the book.
But this assumes that process 1 and 2 can have a flaw that would allow such a claim to be considered valid, wouldn't it?