Koran dated to before Muhamad birth.

[outhouse]

A professor from SOAS recently said that the writing looks distinctively late 7th C,

Sources please.

If you did not know the older fragments were found mixed in with 7th century text.

 

[George-ananda]

We already know the book was plagiarized from the Bible, that's not even up for debate.

Who is this 'We' you talk about as some final authority that make proclamations that as you say are 'not even up for debate'? The Koran does not at all sound like a the Bible to me.

 

[outhouse]

The Koran does not at all sound like a the Bible to me.

how sad.

 

[Augustus]

However, some scholars had speculated that the early followers might have written scattered sections of the Koran on parchment and palm leaves

Along with this, it should be noted that Uthman didn't create the first written Quran, he standardised the Quran. Many copies preexisted the standardisation according to Islamic history, in fact Uthman demanded they all be burned.

From my take it looks like, the time it took them to compile the works into one piece, means its about a 70% shot of being early and 30% chance it was compiled in his lifetime.

Sorry, but it is terribly flawed reasoning to use those percentages. Given that standard history dates it at the later part of that time period, and current knowledge of orthography places it late 7th C, you have to take that into context when evaluating how probable something is.

It doesn't 'prove' anything,; it's not definitive. But it does shift the probabilities. You have to take into account all available information.




Saying that, something interesting I've just noticed is that it contains part of Surat al-Kahf, which relates to the 7 sleepers of Ephesus, a Christian myth that dates to the 5th C, and is documented in Syriac sources of various dates.

Al-Kahf (not the parts documented in the Birmingham Quran though) also contains the verses about Dhul-Qarnayan, who is accepted by classical Islamic exegisis to be Alexander the Great. Tafsir al-Jalyan - "And they, the Jews, question you concerning Dhū’l-Qarnayn, whose name was Alexander; he was not a prophet. Say: ‘I shall recite, relate, to you a mention, an account, of him’, of his affair." (although this view has been subject to revision for obvious reasons).

These verse closely relate in style and content to a Syriac version of the Alexander Romance. There is good reason to date this revelation to around 630, although this revelation is generally accepted to postdate the 'sleepers in the cave' revelation. It also places the verses in context of an interfaith dialogue/challenge. (As always, uncertainties of historical analysis apply to datings though)

(Some of this is discussed in Chapters 5 and 8 or 'The Quran in its historical context - Gabriel S reynolds (ed)' - you easily can find the whole book online if interested)

The other part of the manuscript relates to Surat Maryam - also obviously based on Christian tradition being related to Mary.

If you are looking at preexisting tradition then, seems worthy of further enquiry as the verses in the document both relate to Christian themes. Didn't realise until I was writing this. Interesting.

Another article people might be interested in http://www.the-tls.co.uk/tls/public/article1589562.ece

 

[Godobeyer]

I can't believe my eyes !!

this is pro-Islam subject make up as anti-Islam subject !!!

maybe the ink is old and paper is old too , maybe the test is not very perfect enough .

anyway i believe if you found it's less or plus day or hours , you would not believe .

 

[Augustus]

I can't believe my eyes !!

this is pro-Islam subject make up as anti-Islam subject !!!

maybe the ink is old and paper is old too , maybe the test is not very perfect enough .

anyway i believe if you found it's less or plus day or hours , you would not believe .

How is anything that I said 'anti-Islam'?

It is about the inherent uncertainties in historical enquiries that points out both factual information and the difficulty in interpreting factual information due to the ambiguity of evidence from an era where there is very little evidence.

History is about identifying potential interpretations of ambiguous information and reaching tentative hypotheses based on such limited evidence.

You don't get 'days and hours' in 1500 year old information, you get ranges that may be quite narrow or may be 100 years plus.

If you want to accept radiocarbon dating, you have to accept the range, but as I also said, it is not accurate so you also have to look at other available information.

 

[Gharib]

Not that factual evidence would change anyone's faith, but here is a new twist on an old game.


http://www.inquisitr.com/2382300/th...-shake-the-foundations-of-islam-scholars-say/


Radiocarbon dating of a Koran manuscript found last month at the University of Birmingham’s Cadbury Research Library suggests that it could predate the Prophet Muhammad.


Radiocarbon analysis carried out by experts at the University of Oxford dated the parchment on which the Koran text was written to the period between 568 A.D. and 645 A.D. with an estimated accuracy of 95.4 percent, according to a release by the University of Birmingham.

So that's without actually reading the text where it says it is being revealed to Muhammed? Why would the text say it is being revealed to Muhammed before Muhammed was born. He was the only person with that name. I mt had not been used before till then.

And the age of the paper doesn't mean the text is older too. I can get access to paper that's older than I am. And ????

 

[paarsurrey]

Can somebody give full text of verses in the manuscript with the text of verses in the Quran in vogue, for comparision? Please
Regards

 

[gnostic]

I'm sure we both know that parchment was expensive and durable. So the age of the parchment doesn't necessarily reflect the age of the writing on it.
Tom

True.

The parchment could be older than the writing itself. It certainly doesn't mean the Qur'an is older than Muhammad.

 

[outhouse]

So that's without actually reading the text where it says it is being revealed to Muhammed?

The academic world does not view any self proclaimed revelation as anything credible historically speaking.

That position is one of faith only.

 

[outhouse]

The parchment could be older than the writing itself

They don't let animal skins sit around, they are made to write on for said event.


Writing was an event during this period, and they just didn't leave skins laying around willy nilly.

 

[Shad]

Not that factual evidence would change anyone's faith, but here is a new twist on an old game.


http://www.inquisitr.com/2382300/th...-shake-the-foundations-of-islam-scholars-say/


Radiocarbon dating of a Koran manuscript found last month at the University of Birmingham’s Cadbury Research Library suggests that it could predate the Prophet Muhammad.


Radiocarbon analysis carried out by experts at the University of Oxford dated the parchment on which the Koran text was written to the period between 568 A.D. and 645 A.D. with an estimated accuracy of 95.4 percent, according to a release by the University of Birmingham.

Selection bias. The date range covers before the birth of Muhammad, during his life and after his death. More so the dating is done in the paper not the ink. The script used does not predate Muhammad. If you want to find points of plagiarization of earlier works look no farther than Syriac Christian work like the Alexander Romances. The Quran combined two separate stories into one.

 

[Shad]

Because you have to actually study something to understand it. Reading helps

The text was completed in 650-653 A.D under Caliph Uthman. Thus, if the Birmingham Koran was produced on or before 645 A.D. it confirms that written portions of the Suras had existed earlier than official Islamic history acknowledges.

Which Islamic tradition states there were in fact other written accounts as early as Abu Bakr and before. The Uthman codification was done using existing texts. Ergo the point is irrelevant.

 

[Shad]

So that's without actually reading the text where it says it is being revealed to Muhammed? Why would the text say it is being revealed to Muhammed before Muhammed was born. He was the only person with that name. I mt had not been used before till then.

And the age of the paper doesn't mean the text is older too. I can get access to paper that's older than I am. And ????

Easily, it is called an interpolation. The reference could have been added later. Say I take a text on general relativity made by Einstein. I remove his name and place my own there. Thus the text is made by me before I was born

 

[Gharib]

Easily, it is called an interpolation. The reference could have been added later. Say I take a text on general relativity made by Einstein. I remove his name and place my own there. Thus the text is made by me before I was born

hmmmm.....

 

[Smart_Guy]

I see "could", accuracy percentages and "estimated" all over the place

Science is prefect indeed, but only as a notion. Claims based on scientific practices are not necessarily facts.

 

[FearGod]

They don't let animal skins sit around, they are made to write on for said event.


Writing was an event during this period, and they just didn't leave skins laying around willy nilly.

Are you saying They were killing an animal once they got an idea to be recorded on the animal skin ?!

 

[Godobeyer]

How is anything that I said 'anti-Islam'?

It is about the inherent uncertainties in historical enquiries that points out both factual information and the difficulty in interpreting factual information due to the ambiguity of evidence from an era where there is very little evidence.

History is about identifying potential interpretations of ambiguous information and reaching tentative hypotheses based on such limited evidence.

You don't get 'days and hours' in 1500 year old information, you get ranges that may be quite narrow or may be 100 years plus.

If you want to accept radiocarbon dating, you have to accept the range, but as I also said, it is not accurate so you also have to look at other available information.

100 years plus !!!!


According to Islam history , a part of Quran writen during Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) ,as separate chapters , and whole Quran written just after his death , just after the death of 70 of the memories in battle , the
Companions (Abu bakr, Uthman) of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) decide to register/collect whole Quran in one Book.

all Islamic sources said this ( in Arabic ) confirmed that , so i found this link in English :

Once Quranic verses were revealed, the Prophet Muhammad used to select one of his companions to write down the verses. He also advised its placement within the growing body of text and also used to review with the writer during the writing process. Once a writer completed writing a verse, the prophet said: “read it to me”, to correct any slipup; otherwise the writer would spread it among the people.

At the time of Abu Bakr Caliphate many of Arab tribes converted these scribes and early Muslim devotees were killed in the Battle of Yamama. While the community mourned the loss of their comrades, they also began to worry about the long-term preservation of the Holy Quran. Recognizing that the words of Allah needed to be collected in one place and preserved, the Caliph Abu Bakr ordered all people who had written pages of the Quran to compile them in one place. The project was organized and supervised by one of the Prophet Muhammad’s key scribes, Zayd bin Thabit.

from this link :



http://www.quran.bh/en/holy-quran/quran-compilation

 

[Shad]

hmmmm.....

You inability to accept this as a possible conclusion is due to your religon. You are unable to compromise between academic thought and religious thought since you are invested financially and emotional into your religion. Thus you hold a bias which rejects any view which does not align to your indoctrination.

 

[FearGod]

You inability to accept this as a possible conclusion is due to your religon. You are unable to compromise between academic thought and religious thought since you are invested financially and emotional into your religion. Thus you hold a bias which rejects any view which does not align to your indoctrination.

Academic thought

And what about the events that were happening at the era of Mohammed and verses revealed accordingly according to such specific events,
was it recorded before such events had occurred, lets just use our minds beside science, science can't be useful if we can't have minds to think, just saying .