Hi,
Ultimately us who don't believe in the Quran don't need to provide a reason for why of course, but for as long as we are free to do so some of us will openly object to submission to the Quran due to various reasons.
If that describes you, by special request from one of our RF members who shall not be named this is the thread for you.
This is your one stop shop for Quran criticism, doesn't matter if it's content criticism, scientific criticism, or any other criticism under the sun.
Since I'm the writer of the OP I get the privelege of picking the lowest hanging fruit for first go.
Firstly though I'd like to tell you about my approach. My approach is that as time goes on and new information comes to light, I believe people will inevitably endeavour to post hoc rationalise the Quran and other texts held as sacred in order to try and make the interpretation of the sacred book sound more appealing to a more modern/more informed audience. But if a text obviously referred to some scientific or other fact it should have been obvious to the earlier interpreters of the book who were faithful and devoted students of it who did not have that hindsight. Therefore ideally one would have the interpretation of the book within the lifetime of it's earliest sources, but failing that, the earlier the translation/interpretation the less post-hoc rationalisation will be expected in my opinion.
Hence the reason I pretty much stick to the Yusuf Ali translation, because it is possibly the earliest scholarly translation we have to English by a faithful widely respected scholar of Islam, therefore I would expect it to have less post-hoc rationalisation than later translations (although I'm inclined to think that even it is likely to have some inevitable degree of post-hoc rationalisation given that it is fairly modern).
So here is the opening criticism, I like it because unlike highly technical criticisms which are less accesible to the common folk this one just requires some basic empathy for women;
From Surah 2. Al-Baqara Translation by Yusuf Ali | Islamic Reference | Alim
Verse 282
'O ye who believe! when ye deal with each other in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time reduce them to writing. Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties...
.....And get two witnesses out of your own men and if there are not two men then a man and two women such as ye choose for witnesses so that if one of them errs the other can remind her.'
Even if only interpreted as being a reference to financial transactions, in my opinion this unnecessarily incoveniences women by requiring double the number of women for testimony in the place of one man. One could easily see how a fallible patriarchal human could author such an error, but an omniscient God should know that two women are as suitable for testimony as two men, or that one man and one woman is as suitable for testimony as two men.
Now it is your turn to criticise the Quran if you wish to do so
Ultimately us who don't believe in the Quran don't need to provide a reason for why of course, but for as long as we are free to do so some of us will openly object to submission to the Quran due to various reasons.
If that describes you, by special request from one of our RF members who shall not be named this is the thread for you.
This is your one stop shop for Quran criticism, doesn't matter if it's content criticism, scientific criticism, or any other criticism under the sun.
Since I'm the writer of the OP I get the privelege of picking the lowest hanging fruit for first go.
Firstly though I'd like to tell you about my approach. My approach is that as time goes on and new information comes to light, I believe people will inevitably endeavour to post hoc rationalise the Quran and other texts held as sacred in order to try and make the interpretation of the sacred book sound more appealing to a more modern/more informed audience. But if a text obviously referred to some scientific or other fact it should have been obvious to the earlier interpreters of the book who were faithful and devoted students of it who did not have that hindsight. Therefore ideally one would have the interpretation of the book within the lifetime of it's earliest sources, but failing that, the earlier the translation/interpretation the less post-hoc rationalisation will be expected in my opinion.
Hence the reason I pretty much stick to the Yusuf Ali translation, because it is possibly the earliest scholarly translation we have to English by a faithful widely respected scholar of Islam, therefore I would expect it to have less post-hoc rationalisation than later translations (although I'm inclined to think that even it is likely to have some inevitable degree of post-hoc rationalisation given that it is fairly modern).
So here is the opening criticism, I like it because unlike highly technical criticisms which are less accesible to the common folk this one just requires some basic empathy for women;
From Surah 2. Al-Baqara Translation by Yusuf Ali | Islamic Reference | Alim
Verse 282
'O ye who believe! when ye deal with each other in transactions involving future obligations in a fixed period of time reduce them to writing. Let a scribe write down faithfully as between the parties...
.....And get two witnesses out of your own men and if there are not two men then a man and two women such as ye choose for witnesses so that if one of them errs the other can remind her.'
Even if only interpreted as being a reference to financial transactions, in my opinion this unnecessarily incoveniences women by requiring double the number of women for testimony in the place of one man. One could easily see how a fallible patriarchal human could author such an error, but an omniscient God should know that two women are as suitable for testimony as two men, or that one man and one woman is as suitable for testimony as two men.
Now it is your turn to criticise the Quran if you wish to do so