Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Thoughts on the Qur'an and the Old & New Testament, their origins, and how they've transformed from the original text.


Chris Iorio

Thoughts on the Qur'an and the Old & New Testament, their origins, and how they've transformed from the original text.

Learning that the Torah, Old Testament of the Bible, and various parts of the Qur'an (such as The Heights, The Rocky Tract, Noah, etc.) are all translations and 'revisions' of the original Torah has raised great concern in regards to the validity of the latter texts. I greatly question the validity of the latter texts because not only are there modifications made to the texts, but they are also not in the original language, but are translations (and sometimes even translations of translations!).

The fact that they are translations raises the concern that the original meanings of various passages are lost in translations from Hebrew to Greek to Latin and then to English! There are many examples of how various passages in the Old and New Testament of the Bible have greatly changed from the original meanings. One example brought up in class multiple times is the Lucifer passage. In Isaiah 14:12 , the King James version (the most popular version of the Bible) states “O Lucifer, son of the morning!,” (1) while the original translation from the Hebrew version of the bible states “O day-star, son of the morning!” (2) Furthermore, with the usage of the name Lucifer in this passage, it has become a common misconception that Lucifer is a direct reference to Satan, when it in fact is not in this passage, but a reference to a Babylonian King (Isaiah 14:4). This is just one example of many where a difference in wording due to translations can greatly affect how a reader interprets the text.

The Qur'an raises some concerns with me because many passages that originated from the Torah have been 'revised.' While I do feel that many of these revisions of the stories make more sense, such as everything being created in 6 days as opposed to 7 days, as Allah does not need to rest on a seventh day like in the Biblical Genesis, this still raises great concerns to me. By what right or authority does anyone have to drastically modify the text of an original document and claim it to be a valid account? If the original Torah is supposed to be of divine origin, as all the Abrahamic religions profess, then why would such divine pieces of scripture need to be so drastically revised? Furthermore, how would this be any different or more or less valid if I were to go and make the “Chris Iorio version of the Old Testament” and make modifications to the stories as I please? I don't bring this up to try to tear down the Qur'an, but more so out of a genuine curiosity as how this is accepted as permissible? Again, I'll point out that from what I've read of all three version of the Old Testament that I actually like the Qur'an version the best from a literary perspective, as it flows a lot better and makes more sense. From a literal and historical perspective though, I have a hard time believing that it may be an accurate representation of the whole meaning and intent of the original texts due to so many modifications.

1.http://bible.cc/isaiah/14-12.htm
2.http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1014.htm

No comments:

Post a Comment