Koran dated to before Muhamad birth.

[paarsurrey]

Science freely admits that it utilizes discoveries of the past in order to make new discoveries today. What's your point? That's the entire point of science. And, frankly, I dont see anything negative about the Quran borrowing from oral Hebrew traditions/stories either. Maybe that is what Muhammad wanted to provide... Small tweaks to the ancient Hebrew stories that everyone was already familiar with at the time.

So, in other words you mean that science plagiarizes. Is that what you mean? Please
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

So, in other words you mean that science plagiarizes. Is that what you mean? Please
Regards

No, of course not. Scientists admit it openly that they build off past theories, so they aren't passing the work off as originally from them, which is a requirement for plagiarism.

 

[paarsurrey]

No, of course not. Scientists admit it openly that they build off past theories, so they aren't passing the work off as originally from them, which is a requirement for plagiarism.

Do you mean that if one openly admits and plagiarizes then it is far from plagiarization in terms of science?
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

Do you mean that if one openly admits and plagiarizes then it is far from plagiarization in terms of science?
Regards

Plagiarism is when you pass off someone else's work as your own original work. So, if you use other people's work openly (citations and such) then it is not plagiarism.

 

[paarsurrey]

Muhammad did not claim that he is the only Messenger of G-d, he was one among so many in the world:
[46:10]Say, ‘I am no new Messenger, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you in this life. I do but follow what is revealed to me; and I am but a plain Warner.’
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=46&verse=9
He had therefore common access to the original Word Revealed on any prophet from G-d in the world since inception.
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

Muhammad did not claim that he is the only Messenger of G-d, he was one among so many in the world:
[46:10]Say, ‘I am no new Messenger, nor do I know what will be done with me or with you in this life. I do but follow what is revealed to me; and I am but a plain Warner.’
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=46&verse=9
He had therefore common access to the original Word Revealed on any prophet from G-d in the world since inception.
Regards

Or, he could have just borrowed the oral traditions that were already known. You have to at least concede it's a possibility.

 

[Augustus]

Or, he could have just borrowed the oral traditions that were already known. You have to at least concede it's a possibility.

It's a bit more than oral traditions though. Certain Quranic passages display an understanding of quite subtle theological issues suggesting that the author was not just aware of traditions, but of contemporary theological disputes and arguments.

 

[paarsurrey]

The carbon dating of the Birmingham manuscript, as is evident, is not correct to second/minute/hour/day/year extent, it only provides a range within which it could be possibly located. Rest is to be decided by the inner evidence from the text of the scripture.
The inner evidence rejects that Quran could be before Muhammad's birth for the reasons I have mentioned. Similarly, Muhammad was a real and historic person, the inner evidence of the Birmingham manuscript rejects that Quran descended after Muhammad.
The only possibility is that it was descended on Muhammad within his life span, though codified later in the time of Caliph Uthmān. Birmingham manuscript is similar to Uthmān Codex without change.
One cold observe the correctness of my above expression from the following verse of Quran:

The Holy Quran : Chapter 10: Yunus
[10:16]And when Our clear Signs are recited unto them, those who look not for the meeting with Us say, ‘Bring a Qur’an other than this or change it.’ Say, ‘It is not for me to change it of my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me. Indeed, I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the punishment of an awful day.’
[10:17]Say, ‘If Allah hadsowilled, I should not have recited it to you nor would He have made it known to you. I have indeed lived among you awholelifetime before this. Will you not then understand?’
[10:18]Who is then more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah orhewho treats His Signs as lies? Surely, the guilty shall never prosper.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=10&verse=11

The OP or anybody else to tell us which other scripture could have come up with the above verse except Muhammad.
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

It's a bit more than oral traditions though. Certain Quranic passages display an understanding of quite subtle theological issues suggesting that the author was not just aware of traditions, but of contemporary theological disputes and arguments.

And, that makes it even more clear.

 

[leibowde84]

The carbon dating of the Birmingham manuscript, as is evident, is not correct to second/minute/hour/day/year extent, it only provides a range within which it could be possibly located. Rest is to be decided by the inner evidence from the text of the scripture.
The inner evidence rejects that Quran could be before Muhammad's birth for the reasons I have mentioned. Similarly, Muhammad was a real and historic person, the inner evidence of the Birmingham manuscript rejects that Quran descended after Muhammad.
The only possibility is that it was descended on Muhammad within his life span, though codified later in the time of Caliph Uthmān. Birmingham manuscript is similar to Uthmān Codex without change.
One cold observe the correctness of my above expression from the following verse of Quran:

The Holy Quran : Chapter 10: Yunus
[10:16]And when Our clear Signs are recited unto them, those who look not for the meeting with Us say, ‘Bring a Qur’an other than this or change it.’ Say, ‘It is not for me to change it of my own accord. I only follow what is revealed to me. Indeed, I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the punishment of an awful day.’
[10:17]Say, ‘If Allah hadsowilled, I should not have recited it to you nor would He have made it known to you. I have indeed lived among you awholelifetime before this. Will you not then understand?’
[10:18]Who is then more unjust than he who forges a lie against Allah orhewho treats His Signs as lies? Surely, the guilty shall never prosper.
http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=10&verse=11

The OP or anybody else to tell us which other scripture could have come up with the above verse except Muhammad.
Regards

How is this relevant. No one has claimed that there aren't parts LG the Quran that are original.

 

[paarsurrey]

How is this relevant. No one has claimed that there aren't parts LG the Quran that are original.

What do you mean by the word "LG" used in your above post.
Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

The hadith say that the quran was conserved on animal skin and leaves. And that when the quran was being collected some parts of it were lost. one hadith even says that a goat ate a part of the quran. and that there were chapters that didnt make it to the modern quran, such as the chapter of breast feeding.

Not mentioned in Quran or any other source of Muhammad's time.
Hadith was written 250/300 years after Muhammad.
Quran if the first and the foremost source of Islam/Muhammad whatever the denomination.
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

What do you mean by the word "LG" used in your above post.
Regards

Typo. *in

 

[paarsurrey]

Typo. *in

Please be a little more expressive. I still don't understand it.
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

Please be a little more expressive. I still don't understand it.
Regards

"How is this relevant. No one has claimed that there aren't parts in the Quran that are original."

 

[paarsurrey]

Bible:
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.
Genesis 1:1-5 - KJV

Does one hold that the words used in the above sentences are patented for the Jewish scripture and nobody could use these words in any form, and using them is stealing? Man! be reasonable.
Regards

 

[leibowde84]

Does one hold that the words used in the above sentences are patented for the Jewish scripture and nobody could use these words in any form, and using them is stealing? Man! be reasonable.
Regards

I thought the claim was "copying", not "stealing". You understand the monumental difference right?

 

[paarsurrey]

I thought the claim was "copying", not "stealing". You understand the monumental difference right?

Quran is primarily a verbal Recitation, so its style is different from the writings in vogue today. It criticised/reformed other scriptures for this it had to quote or verbally cite their existing thoughts and then to tell the truth in them. It is not "copying" even.
Regards

 

[NathanShepard8888]

The Quran speaks about Muhammad. It speaks about Muslim battles that happened in Muhammad life time. The Quran was written in Muhammad lifetime.

 

[Augustus]

The Quran speaks about Muhammad. It speaks about Muslim battles that happened in Muhammad life time. The Quran was written in Muhammad lifetime.

Using your logic:

The Bible speaks about Jesus. It speaks about miracles performed in Jesus' life time. The Bible was written... umm never mind...