Origins of the Quran

[outhouse]

Abraham is buried in Hebron, Palestine

He factually has no historicity as ever existing,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham

By the beginning of the 21st century, archaeologists had "given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac or Jacob credible 'historical figures'".


Maybe your mistaken that the koran has no mythology. I'm sorry your beliefs are not historically accurate.

 

[outhouse]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_mythology

Islam incorporates many Biblical events and heroes into its own mythology. Stories about Musa (Moses)[1] and Ibrahim (Abraham)


Here this says the koran has biblical abraham mythology added to it.

So the question REALLY becomes, WHO TAUGHT MYTHOLOGY TO MUHAMMAD ????????

 

[Gharib]

He factually has no historicity as ever existing,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham

By the beginning of the 21st century, archaeologists had "given up hope of recovering any context that would make Abraham, Isaac or Jacob credible 'historical figures'".


Maybe your mistaken that the koran has no mythology. I'm sorry your beliefs are not historically accurate.

Right, so just because someone can't find something then it doesn't exist. Just like Mars didn't exist 200 years ago. But then when it was found it suddenly existed.

I told you he is buried in Palestine. Do you honestly think people would claim a grave as that of Abraham for thousands of years if it wasn't so? And all three faiths, Judaism, Christianity and Islam agree that the grave found in Hebron, Palestine is that of Abraham.

Nice try though. Your circular logic is starting to get too old

 

[outhouse]

Right, so just because someone can't find something then it doesn't exist.

No. Sir you actually have to read the whole link and study the topics before showing us all you don't know what your even debating.

It is not that they have found nothing.

It is you do not look for literary creations so there is no need to look. No need to search for mythology.


WE NOW KNOW polytheism existed long after King Josiahs monotheistic reforms in 622 BC

And that Israelites evolved from displaced Canaanites and that Israelites were never in Egypt.

Your circular logic is starting to get too old

Sir you have no right to talk down to me because you refuse modern education

in favor of ancient mythology you don't know the first thing about.

I told you he is buried in Palestine

Sir you have no credibility

You seem to be just another fundamentalist refusing academic reality.


What is sad, is I believe you represent all muslims

 

[Augustus]

I am. But errors have never stopped you from a reply

You have been very, very insistent that it either came from God or Waraqa. On this forum you have said we know Muhammed's teacher was Waraqa. Anyone who denies this, in your book, is an 'apologist' to be met with or and usually some other form of insult regarding their intellectual inferiority. All of this exist in black and white for anyone to find via the forum search function.

Neither view is highly regarded in academic history. The first because, by definition, academic history rules out the possibility that 'God did it'.

Your view is not highly regarded either, which is why you are still unable to support it with recourse to any actual academic material, instead relying on your own logic based on a practically non-existant understanding of any actual research from the past 30 years. The one scholar I can find that it is associated with (who you haven't read either) is Joseph Azzi, considered more of a Christian polemicist that a 'real' scholar.

Strangely, despite thinking you are being radical your view is actually very traditionalist, in that it accepts the Islamic tradition to be mostly correct, albeit with a slight tweak to remove any supernatural causes (as per academic necessity).

The most traditionalist academic scholarship would take the Islamic tradition to be fully correct, except without the supernatural source of the message. Yours is simply one step off this.

I'll make a new thread with a summary of some other explanations if you would like to show you that there are many more options than 'God or Waraqa'.

 

[YmirGF]

I could say the same thing for the opposite side, that he never had time to know about Judaism and Christianity because he was always travelling.

But on a different note, if he did learn during his travels, there needs to be evidence that the places he went to and the people who accompanied him to these journeys were/knew everything about Judaism and Christianity. If you have such evidence then maybe your theory has some credence. Otherwise it's nothing more than a baseless claim.

Whatever, Gharib. My claim is no more ludicrous than the claims which Muslims accept. You don't have any evidence either other than Muhammad said so.

 

[Gharib]

Whatever, Gharib. My claim is no more ludicrous than the claims which Muslims accept. You don't have any evidence either other than Muhammad said so.

You are right I don't have anything other than Muhammed said so. And you too have a right to reject that, I don't have a problem with that. You don't need to give me evidence for your rejection, but to make a claim as you did then you are obliged to provide evidence otherwise what I said stands.

 

[LuisDantas]

You are right I don't have anything other than Muhammed said so. And you too have a right to reject that, I don't have a problem with that. You don't need to give me evidence for your rejection, but to make a claim as you did then you are obliged to provide evidence otherwise what I said stands.

Except that there is a strong asymmetry between the two claims.

Claims of divine inspiration are very ambitious and do demand strong evidence.

People are entitled to doubt them without such evidence. And also to have a measure of worry about those who believe without proper evidence.

 

[Gharib]

No. Sir you actually have to read the whole link and study the topics before showing us all you don't know what your even debating.

It is not that they have found nothing.

It is you do not look for literary creations so there is no need to look. No need to search for mythology.

WE NOW KNOW polytheism existed long after King Josiahs monotheistic reforms in 622 BC

And that Israelites evolved from displaced Canaanites and that Israelites were never in Egypt.

Sir you have no right to talk down to me because you refuse modern education

in favor of ancient mythology you don't know the first thing about.

Sir you have no credibility

You seem to be just another fundamentalist refusing academic reality.

What is sad, is I believe you represent all muslims

I don't think you understand much either way. Yes blame all Muslims, that's typical western ignorance. How amusing, you're telling me I have no credibility, so where's your evidence then. I haven't seen anything from you other than make a baseless claim just because you've learned that someone named Waraqah was a Christian.

 

[raph]

Many of the Quran stories are also in the Bible. (But there are also some good stories in it, that are not in the Bible)

So from a unbeliever POV Muhammad copied the Bible stories.

From a believer POV God reminded us and rewrote and corrected some stories of the Bible and gave a new spin to them.

 

[Gharib]

Except that there is a strong asymmetry between the two claims.

Claims of divine inspiration are very ambitious and do demand strong evidence.

People are entitled to doubt them without such evidence. And also to have a measure of worry about those who believe without proper evidence.

That would only be if my beliefs were forced onto others, then I would need evidence to justify my actions. Islam cannot be forced on anyone, it's there for you to accept or reject. It is my belief that Islam comes from God. There are many examples that disprove the claim that the Qur'an is the work of a man who copied the previous scriptures.

So I do need evidence to counter such a claim, just as you'd need to provide evidence for such a claim. But I don't need to provide evidence for my belief that the Qur'an is divine.

 

[LuisDantas]

Many of the Quran stories are also in the Bible. (But there are also some good stories in it, that are not in the Bible)

So from a unbeliever POV Muhammad copied the Bible stories.

From a believer POV God reminded us and rewrote and corrected some stories of the Bible and gave a new spin to them.

That brings the question of how come belief is even socially accepted, since it so often and so tragically promotes accusations and hostility.

And what for? It is increasingly hard to deny that belief is by no means necessary and arguably not even advisable from a social or moral perspective.

 

[LuisDantas]

That would only be if my beliefs were forced onto others, then I would need evidence to justify my actions.

The way I see it, such is the case. We all are responsible for our beliefs and actions, particularly when it comes to moral, politics and religion.

For good or worse, what we believe in shapes what we pursue, and what we pursue encourages and restricts the actions and rights of others.

I don't think any of us truly has a choice in that regard, although it might be more confortable if we had.

Islam cannot be forced on anyone, it's there for you to accept or reject. It is my belief that Islam comes from God. There are many examples that disprove the claim that the Qur'an is the work of a man who copied the previous scriptures.

To the satisfaction of many Muslims, apparently. But I don't think it has been provided in a way that is convincing to anyone not predisposed to accept it.

So I do need evidence to counter such a claim, just as you'd need to provide evidence for such a claim. But I don't need to provide evidence for my belief that the Qur'an is divine.

Fair enough.

 

[Gharib]

The way I see it, such is the case. We all are responsible for our beliefs and actions, particularly when it comes to moral, politics and religion.

For good or worse, what we believe in shapes what we pursue, and what we pursue encourages and restricts the actions and rights of others.

I don't think any of us truly has a choice in that regard, although it might be more confortable if we had.

This happens regardless of being a believer or a non-believer. So not a valid argument.

To the satisfaction of many Muslims, apparently. But I don't think it has been provided in a way that is convincing to anyone not predisposed to accept it.

Here's one, how did Muhammed know that the universe is expanding, while the Bible in it's attempts at anything scientific fails miserably. How did Muhammed know which verses to take and not take because in the future they would end up being wrong. Please give me a rational explanation for this and then we can continue on.

"And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander."
[51:47]

 

[LuisDantas]

This happens regardless of being a believer or a non-believer.

Very true.

So not a valid argument.

Sorry, but I am simply not following. Far from invalid, it looks like an argument that can't really be countered.

Here's one, how did Muhammed know that the universe is expanding, while the Bible in it's attempts at anything scientific fails miserably. How did Muhammed know which verses to take and not take because in the future they would end up being wrong. Please give me a rational explanation for this and then we can continue on.

"And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander."
[51:47]

From what I have seen of the Quran, you are projecting into it meanings that are just not there.

Similar efforts have been directed towards the Bible as well. But the plain fact is that the Qur'an does not even attempt to be a scientific book. And it does show.

 

[YmirGF]

Here's one, how did Muhammed know that the universe is expanding, while the Bible in it's attempts at anything scientific fails miserably. How did Muhammed know which verses to take and not take because in the future they would end up being wrong. Please give me a rational explanation for this and then we can continue on.

"And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander."
[51:47]

But the simple fact is that this passage has been translated over the years in many different ways. In the majority of translations the word used is "expanse" which is not quite the same idea as the "expanding universe". My guess is that this is merely a modern translation designed to make shoehorn the Qur'an into modern scientific understanding. A small bugaboo also is that it is talking about "the heavens" and not our universe, precisely. What I am getting at is that it is highly unlikely that Muhammad understood this phrase to mean that the universe was expanding, as again, most of the translations imply an expanse, say as you would describe the large expanse in a football arena.

The use of the word "expander" is only used in 5 translations in the list given below, so it is far from a majority opinion on what the text means which directly supports my assertion that this translation gimmick is a recent innovation.
http://www.islamawakened.com/Quran/51/47/default.htm

 

[outhouse]

You have been very, very insistent that it either came from God or Waraqa

Your avoidance is noted.

So the question REALLY becomes, WHO TAUGHT MYTHOLOGY TO MUHAMMAD ????????

 

[outhouse]

but to make a claim as you did then you are obliged to provide evidence otherwise what I said stands.

No.

We have educated choices to make, not just YOUR outright refusal of knowledge

 

[Augustus]

So the question REALLY becomes, WHO TAUGHT MYTHOLOGY TO MUHAMMAD ????????

I wrote a thread about various academic perspectives

http://www.religiousforums.com/thre...n-islam-various-academic-perspectives.182886/

Feel free to comment there

 

[outhouse]

I have no credibility

No sir you have not shown a correct answer or conclusion yet.

You have not provided a single academic position, and only refused credible knowledge, in favor of mythology you don't seem to know the first thing about.

you've learned that someone named Waraqah was a Christian.

We as in academia have learned much more then that.

We have learned that muhammads own cousin was a priest who was known to pervert the bible in Aramaic, did have contact with muhammad.

All sources of this are Islamic and only Islamic, and we do not suspect they would ever say and angle did not teach the man that Waraka did.

Waraka is also the first person to call him a prophet, that means muhammads mythology pleased this man who was known to pervert the bible ion Arabic language.


WE HAVE DATED the koran to exactly Warakas time with 95% accuracy.

We know there are traditions that show a life long relationship between the two.


Sorry if I don't believe in mythology like you.