• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

“The Koran Is Borrowed”: Hitchens claim; refuted.

gnostic

The Lost One
Personally after reading the Qur'an i don't think you need Hitchens to suspect that Muhammed plagiarised the OT and NT to be the author of the Qur'an,just as Xtians with the OT,i would guess Humans have been borrowing from earlier religions and cultures for thousand of years.
Muhammad didn't just adapt the Hebrew and Christian scriptures, but inserted some pre-Islamic Arabic religion into the abrahamic myths, like the jinns for example.

And not all the borrowing come from canonical texts.

The story of Solomon of being able to talk to animals or controlling winds, army of animals and jinns, come from Jewish folk legend that were commonly known among Jews at that time, that were recorded in midrash and aggadah. In the Jewish version, Solomon possessed a magic ring that enabled him to control demons, talk to or command animals to do his bidding.

A whole bunch of Jewish legends and folk tales, like that of Solomon, existed long before Muhammad, both orally and written, were meant to be told to children, just like any Western parents telling fairy tales to children before bedtime.

I find it odd that anyone would deny that the Qur'an didn't borrow any stories from the Jewish Tanakh or from th gospels. Just because Muhammad changed the stories to certain degrees, it doesn't mean he did use them for whatever warped agenda.

Even his story of meeting an angel in a cave is not an original one, and giving him knowledge or the so-called "prophethood". Muhammad's story bear striking resemblance to that of the prophet Jeremiah.

Both of them, the reluctant prophets, and unskilled - Muhammad unable to read and write, while Jeremiah was too young and inexperienced for public-speaking, and yet God passed on the knowledge to them in some unexpected ways.

The stories doesn't have to be exactly the same, and the Qur'an is not exact copy, but borrowing ideas and modifying them is the normal approach of starting a new religion.

And the Qur'an is not the only culprit for borrowing older existing myths. The folk tale of Muhammad's famous night journey that were narrated in one of the hadiths, in which ascended and witnessed multiple heavens, bear striking resemblance to the apocryphal "Ascension of Isaiah" (written at some times between 1st and 2nd centuries CE) or the more famous and earlier 2 Enoch (more briefly told in 1 Enoch). In Muhammad's version, it was a ridiculous magical flying steed that took him to 7 heavens, while it was angels that guided Isaiah to 7 heavens and Enoch to 10 heavens.

Just as Hebrew authors had borrowed the flood myth and Noah (Genesis) from the Babylonians (in which the Babylonian Utnapishtim was derived from older Akkadian Atrahasis, who in turn was derived from the original Sumerian Ziusudra). The Qur'an version of Noah (and flood) is clearly borrowed from the Genesis Noah, even though the details are not the same.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
I believe that the Koran offers enough reasons for Muslims to explore the Bible if they have the opportunity. It is certainly a credit to Mohammed that he talked God down from prayer fifty times a day to five times a day.
This myth about Muhammad's 5 prayers negotiation, bear a striking resemblance to Abraham pleading to spare Sodom and Gomorrah, if there were 50 good people, negotiated down to ten.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
As the name of the book"god is not great" suggests Hitchens wanted to attack Quran/Islam/Muhammad in his book but his study of Quran was only shallow as is evidenced from the fact that he could not quote even a single complete verse from Quran in support of his viewpoint, not to speak of giving the context verses.
Hitchens, therefore, could not create even a smallest dent in Quran or in the truthful religion.
Regards
 

jonathan180iq

Well-Known Member
The entire creation story as found in Islam is just a hacked up version of the zany mythology found in Judaism, Christianity, Canaanite and a few other Mesopotamian religions... It's not based in reality yet is obviously portrayed in the Quran as being reveled to Mohammed by Allah. It's plagiarism. It's not authentic, and it highlights the fraudulent basis of the entire faith.

Here's just one example:

Genesis 1:2
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

vs.

Quran 11:7
And it is He who created the heavens and the earth in six days - and His Throne had been upon water

There is no factual historicity to anny of it. So for the Quran to state such a blatant cloning of concepts as part of it's creation story means that it copied the ideas directly from Christian and Jewish sources... There's no other explanation. Even if you want to argue that it's not a copy of Jewish or Christian texts directly, the whole idea is not original to Islam and was copied from some other source. The 6-day creation, tales of Adam and Eve, the garden of Eden, all of that crap was stolen directly from earlier sources. It has no basis in reality yet is clearly written in the Quran as being the creation story of humanity... You have no way around this obvious plagiarism.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
The entire creation story as found in Islam is just a hacked up version of the zany mythology found in Judaism, Christianity, Canaanite and a few other Mesopotamian religions... It's not based in reality yet is obviously portrayed in the Quran as being reveled to Mohammed by Allah. It's plagiarism. It's not authentic, and it highlights the fraudulent basis of the entire faith.

Here's just one example:

Genesis 1:2
Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

vs.

Quran 11:7
And it is He who created the heavens and the earth in six days - and His Throne had been upon water

There is no factual historicity to anny of it. So for the Quran to state such a blatant cloning of concepts as part of it's creation story means that it copied the ideas directly from Christian and Jewish sources... There's no other explanation. Even if you want to argue that it's not a copy of Jewish or Christian texts directly, the whole idea is not original to Islam and was copied from some other source. The 6-day creation, tales of Adam and Eve, the garden of Eden, all of that crap was stolen directly from earlier sources. It has no basis in reality yet is clearly written in the Quran as being the creation story of humanity... You have no way around this obvious plagiarism.

There is little common in both quotes. There is no plagiarisation there, it is perhaps your mind working.
Regards
 

jonathan180iq

Well-Known Member
There is little common in both quotes. There is no plagiarisation there, it is perhaps your mind working.
Regards
...So the creation story as found in Genesis, which is a known creation of mythology prior to the advent of Islam, is quoted in the Quran not as a copy but as an original document? Is that what you are saying?

The story found early in Genesis of God creating the Earth in 6 days, and resting above the water, and Adam and Eve, and the tree of of good and evil, and the garden of Eden - you're saying those are all true and factual things that happened in History and that Mohammed didn't simply copy those stories from Jewish and Christian tradition?
 
The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths” Hitchens claims.

Surat al-Kahf contains reference to 2 Christian myths that were common in late antiquity, the 7 sleepers of Ephesus, and the (Syraic) Alexander Legend.

This is acknowledged in certain tafsir is it not? Classical tafsir certainly equates Dhul Qarnayan with Alexander at least, and the parallels with the sleepers is clear. (I think) al-Kahf was revealed in response to question from 'people of the book', which seems to further support the link.
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Index “God is not great”: page 312, edition “TWELVE”: under word “Koran”.
Quote:
“Koran, 46, 55, 123–37, 151, 181, 188, 227, 252
alleged satanic verses of, 134, 136
and destructiveness of religion, 23,26, 29, 33
on eating pork, 37–38
language of, 12–13, 124–26, 129, 131,137
Mormons and, 161, 164
revelations and, 98, 128–29, 134–35,161
on tolerance of other religions, 133–34
transcription and compilation of,130–32
and words and deeds of Muhammad, 127–31”
We take the entry mentioned as pages 123–37 from the index.

“The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths” Hitchens claims.

Hitchens failed to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s or surah/s from Quran and then to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s from NT Bible or OT Bible that Quran has borrowed from them.

Due to his casual reading of Quran, Hitchens wrote such words rather a whole chapter from pages 123–37 based on hearsay.

Chapter Nine - “The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths”: “God is not great”.

Where Hitchens failed; yet there could be some of his fans who could come up to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s or surah/s from Quran and then to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s from NT Bible or OT Bible that Quran has borrowed from them.
This doesn't refute his claim. It just points out a lack of citations. Can you actually refute his claim?
 

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Index “God is not great”: page 312, edition “TWELVE”: under word “Koran”.
Quote:
“Koran, 46, 55, 123–37, 151, 181, 188, 227, 252
alleged satanic verses of, 134, 136
and destructiveness of religion, 23,26, 29, 33
on eating pork, 37–38
language of, 12–13, 124–26, 129, 131,137
Mormons and, 161, 164
revelations and, 98, 128–29, 134–35,161
on tolerance of other religions, 133–34
transcription and compilation of,130–32
and words and deeds of Muhammad, 127–31”
We take the entry mentioned as pages 123–37 from the index.

“The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths” Hitchens claims.

Hitchens failed to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s or surah/s from Quran and then to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s from NT Bible or OT Bible that Quran has borrowed from them.

Due to his casual reading of Quran, Hitchens wrote such words rather a whole chapter from pages 123–37 based on hearsay.

Chapter Nine - “The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths”: “God is not great”.

Where Hitchens failed; yet there could be some of his fans who could come up to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s or surah/s from Quran and then to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s from NT Bible or OT Bible that Quran has borrowed from them.
Also, Jewish and Christian stories are in no way limited to the Bible. There were a plethora of traditions that didn't make the cut.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
There is also Gog and Magog which is found in Greek, Roman, Jewish, Christian and probably other sources I am not aware of. The Syriac Christian versions are the closest to the Quranic version. The Quranic version is the combination of two narratives from Syriac sources.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Paarsurrey still doesn't understand that you don't need to copy word-for-word in order to plagiarise an idea, just show that his definition is very narrow and his lack of education.

Borrowing certain passages, and modifying it, is still plagiarising.

Borrowing a theme, even if details are not exactly the same as its predecessors, is still plagiarism.

The OP is a lame attempt by paarsurrey to test us, with specific passages he had chosen, to test if we can find exact copy of the verses in the bible. Since no one can find similar passages in the bible to match his selections, he can claim victory that the Qur'an was copying from the bible.

It is very apparent and childish tactics, one you would expect from ignorant person who never study literature and historical backgrounds of abrahamic religions. I don't think he has read the bible, from cover to cover, just demonstrate that he doesn't know what he is talking about.

That's why he often skirt anything one of us brining up different passages or different themes that Muhammad had "borrowed" from.

Look at my posts - 61 & 62. He has not venture to counter my claims, because he can't.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Paarsurrey still doesn't understand that you don't need to copy word-for-word in order to plagiarise an idea, just show that his definition is very narrow and his lack of education.

Borrowing certain passages, and modifying it, is still plagiarising.

Borrowing a theme, even if details are not exactly the same as its predecessors, is still plagiarism.

The OP is a lame attempt by paarsurrey to test us, with specific passages he had chosen, to test if we can find exact copy of the verses in the bible. Since no one can find similar passages in the bible to match his selections, he can claim victory that the Qur'an was copying from the bible.

It is very apparent and childish tactics, one you would expect from ignorant person who never study literature and historical backgrounds of abrahamic religions. I don't think he has read the bible, from cover to cover, just demonstrate that he doesn't know what he is talking about.

That's why he often skirt anything one of us brining up different passages or different themes that Muhammad had "borrowed" from.

Look at my posts - 61 & 62. He has not venture to counter my claims, because he can't.

Quran is original revelation from G-d and has copied nothing from others sources.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Quran is original revelation from G-d and has copied nothing from others sources.
That's because
(A) you have read no other sources, other than the Qur'an (and possibly the hadiths); and
(B) God being the author of the Qur'an is a matter of your personal belief, which have nothing to do with reality or common sense, which make what you claim - biased.
I have read not only the bible, but also other sources that predated Muhammad.

I have made some points already, in the other replies (posts 61 & 62), which you have addressed, that indicated not only the Muhammad borrowed and modified ideas, themes or stories from the bible, but also those that come from other less-knownsources to average Christians or Muslim.

Llike the utterly silly Qur'anic story of Solomon being able to speak to, but also command jinns and animals in an army. This story that Muhammad had stolen, come from the Haggada, a Jewish legend, based on ancient oral traditions. This story can be found in modern translation by Louis Ginzberg (The Legends of the Jews, 1909, volume IV, chapter 5 Solomon, read Wisdom and Solomon master of Demons).

Nothing in the bible, state that Solomon had the abilities to talk to animals or to control demons (jinns in the Qur'an). Even Solomon's ability to talk to ants, come from the Haggadah, before that of the Qur'an; read "Lessons in Humility".

The Haggada, is basically folklore that Jewish parents would tell children. The story weren't meant to be taken seriously, and yet Muhammad included this abilities in his short account of Solomon. That he would include Solomon's magical abilities, demonstrate that Muhammad knew of this story, probably by some Jews that lived in Mecca or Medina, either when he was younger, during his apprenticeship with his uncle, or by one of his Jewish converts. It certainly did come from God, because it is utterly ridiculous.

Seriously, what can be more ridiculous than Solomon being able to understand the speech of ants, or him controlling jinns, birds and winds. Only a human would believe in such silly abilities of Solomon? But if you are telling that Allah was the one that actually give this revelation to Muhammad, then your Allah is not God, unless Allah is a storyteller, who like to exaggerate or embellish.
 
Last edited:

David M

Well-Known Member
Borrowing certain passages, and modifying it, is still plagiarising..

Unless you acknowledge the source of the material, which the Quran does (paasurreys ignorance of this fact does not refute it). So it would be wrong to claim that the Quran plagiarises the Torah and Bible, but it certainly borrows from it.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
Index “God is not great”: page 312, edition “TWELVE”: under word “Koran”.
Quote:
“Koran, 46, 55, 123–37, 151, 181, 188, 227, 252
alleged satanic verses of, 134, 136
and destructiveness of religion, 23,26, 29, 33
on eating pork, 37–38
language of, 12–13, 124–26, 129, 131,137
Mormons and, 161, 164
revelations and, 98, 128–29, 134–35,161
on tolerance of other religions, 133–34
transcription and compilation of,130–32
and words and deeds of Muhammad, 127–31”
We take the entry mentioned as pages 123–37 from the index.

“The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths” Hitchens claims.

Hitchens failed to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s or surah/s from Quran and then to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s from NT Bible or OT Bible that Quran has borrowed from them.

Due to his casual reading of Quran, Hitchens wrote such words rather a whole chapter from pages 123–37 based on hearsay.

Chapter Nine - “The Koran Is Borrowed from Both Jewish and Christian Myths”: “God is not great”.

Where Hitchens failed; yet there could be some of his fans who could come up to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s or surah/s from Quran and then to quote a passage/s or page/s or a chapter/s from NT Bible or OT Bible that Quran has borrowed from them.

People aren't responding in great numbers because they don't care one way or the other where the crap in the Quran came from.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
People aren't responding in great numbers because they don't care one way or the other where the crap in the Quran came from.

Please see another thread started by me which supports its contents:
#1042 "Is Quran copied from Jewish Bible/Torah? : Quran did not copy from Jewish Bible/Torah".
Also please read Post
#330 and p
ost #331 in the thread "Koran dated to before Muhamad birth."
Regards
 

McBell

Unbound
People aren't responding in great numbers because they don't care one way or the other where the crap in the Quran came from.
It may also be they have already went a trip on his merry--go-round of flat out denial and are not bored enough for another trip.
 
Top