If Muhammad wasn't an actual prophet, then where did the Qur'an come from?

[Debater Slayer]

We all know that Muhammad (PBUH) was an unlettered man. If he wasn't actually a prophet, then where did the Qur'an come from?
It would be better if you have actually read the Qur'an in Arabic beforehand as it cannot be fully appreciated any other way.

 

[PolyHedral]

...from the magical game of Telephone that all historical documents pass through.

 

[Debater Slayer]

...from the magical game of Telephone that all historical documents pass through.

You can search for the oldest surviving copy of the Qur'an and it would be the same as the current version. What's your point?

 

[Storm]

We all know that Muhammad (PBUH) was an unlettered man. If he wasn't actually a prophet, then where did the Qur'an come from?
It would be better if you have actually read the Qur'an in Arabic beforehand as it cannot be fully appreciated any other way.

I believe he was a genius-level mystic. The kind of natural ability that Mozart had.

The Qur'an was his interpretation of his theophanies.

 

[Twig pentagram]

The same place all other books came from, the human intellect.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I believe he was a genius-level mystic. The kind of natural ability that Mozart had.

The Qur'an was his interpretation of his theophanies.

Again, the way the Qur'an is written and composed cannot possibly come from a regular human, much less an unlettered one. Even if he was a genius-level mystic, how could he convey his visions and theophanies in words?

 

[Marble]

You can search for the oldest surviving copy of the Qur'an and it would be the same as the current version. What's your point?

Isn't the Sana'a manuscripts the oldest surviving copy of the Quran?
Looks like this copy has no didactic marks:

 

[Archer]

We all know that Muhammad (PBUH) was an unlettered man. If he wasn't actually a prophet, then where did the Qur'an come from?
It would be better if you have actually read the Qur'an in Arabic beforehand as it cannot be fully appreciated any other way.

Muhammad was an intelligent man. I am not a Muslim and I do not accept the Qur'an as a Holy text but I have read much of it and do find much wisdom in it's pages. I can not say if an Angel came to him in a cave but I can say that he was inspired by peace if nothing else in the beginning and many of the latter parts are not understood by westerners and hence they will discount it as a work of hate.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Isn't the Sana'a manuscripts the oldest surviving copy of the Quran?
Looks like this copy has no didactic marks:

There are seven punctuated versions of the Qur'an, but the punctuation doesn't change the meaning in any way that could affect or change the substance
of the texts. I'm talking about entirely different versions, like the different versions of the Bible available with completely different verses etc.

Muhammad was an intelligent man. I am not a Muslim and I do not accept the Qur'an as a Holy text but I have read much of it and do find much wisdom in it's pages. I can not say if an Angel came to him in a cave but I can say that he was inspired by peace if nothing else in the beginning and many of the latter parts are not understood by westerners and hence they will discount it as a work of hate.

I will repeat what I said earlier: how could even an intelligent man who is unlettered convey his visions and theophanies in words that are so well-written
and eloquent if he was not a prophet?

 

[Koldo]

Again, the way the Qur'an is written and composed cannot possibly come from a regular human, much less an unlettered one. Even if he was a genius-level mystic, how could he convey his visions and theophanies in words?

You are underrating human capabilities.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This strikes me as an interesting piece ...

 

[Storm]

Again, the way the Qur'an is written and composed cannot possibly come from a regular human, much less an unlettered one. Even if he was a genius-level mystic, how could he convey his visions and theophanies in words?

Because that was his mode of interpretation. Most humans think in language. His genius extended to articulation. Just because he was illiterate doesn't mean he was stupid or inarticulate.

As for being beyond human capacity... people have said the same of the pyramids, and Stonehenge. I think such declarations denigrates the ancients.

BTW, I mean no offense by asking, but is English your native tongue (if not, you're quite impressive!)?

 

[Debater Slayer]

You are underrating human capabilities.

No offense here, but have you even read the Qur'an in Arabic? It's translation in English just falls short of conveying the articulation and eloquence of the Arabic version.

This strikes me as an interesting piece ...

I'm no Muslim scholar to refute this, but I'm sure I've read similar things somewhere and they were all systematically refuted. Go search it if you don't believe me. BTW WikiIslam is the worst place to get info about anything related to Islam. Lots of facts are distorted and/or altered just for the sake of bashing
the religion (also bear in mind that I don't acknowledge any Shiite sources as their beliefs are substantially different than mine in terms of this particular issue).

Because that was his mode of interpretation. Most humans think in language. His genius extended to articulation. Just because he was illiterate doesn't mean he was stupid or inarticulate.

As for being beyond human capacity... people have said the same of the pyramids, and Stonehenge. I think such declarations denigrates the ancients.

Let's leave the "beyond human capacity" part out of the conversation for now. Even if he was a genius in articulation, he wouldn't be able to write it with his own hand or transcribe it into texts, would he? And I don't see how this denigrates the ancients in any way, if anything it gives them more credit for their great accomplishments like the different architectural feats you just mentioned.

BTW, I mean no offense by asking, but is English your native tongue (if not, you're quite impressive!)?

It's not, and as a matter of fact I have never even been to an English-speaking country. Why the question though?

 

[Storm]

Let's leave the beyond human capacity part out of the conversation for now. Even if he was a genius in articulation, he wouldn't be able to write it with his own hand or transcribe it into texts, would he?

Well, no. But doesn't Muslim tradition maintain that it was his companions who did the transcribing?

And I don't see how this denigrates the ancients in any way, if anything it gives them more credit for their great accomplishments like the different architectural feats you just mentioned.

I thought you wanted to leave the human capacity element out of it for the moment?

It's not, and as a matter of fact I have never even been to an English-speaking country. Why the question though?

Because I can be careless with my own phrasing from time to time, but I try to be more deliberate with non-natives. I needed to know whether to spell out things that I'd expect a native speaker to understand implicitly. That's all.

While we're on the subject, I'll restate that I'm impressed by your excellent English. I don't even have a second language!

 

[Archer]

Even if he was a genius in articulation, he wouldn't be able to write it with his own hand or transcribe it into texts, would he?

And we accept this as fact for what reason? He was man making faith where there was none. He brought order from chaos which is again chaos.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Well, no. But doesn't Muslim tradition maintain that it was his companions who did the transcribing?

Yes, but I don't believe that any human can compose and put together such excellent texts all by himself. There are some verses which contain scientific references that have just been recently discovered (that's beside the main point though).

I thought you wanted to leave the human capacity element out of it for the moment?

Sorry, I got too carried away by the conversation to care.

Because I can be careless with my own phrasing from time to time, but I try to be more deliberate with non-natives. I needed to know whether to spell out things that I'd expect a native speaker to understand implicitly. That's all.

While we're on the subject, I'll restate that I'm impressed by your excellent English. I don't even have a second language!

Thanks.
It's not that much of a concern when your native language is English. After all almost the whole world speaks your language.

 

[Storm]

Yes, but I don't believe that any human can compose and put together such excellent texts all by himself.

Well, we're getting back into human capacity now.

Let's back up:
When I say theophany, or mystic, what do those words mean to you?

There are some verses which contain scientific references that have just been recently discovered (that's beside the main point though).

They're also hotly contested, but I really don't want to get into that.

Sorry, I got too carried away by the conversation to care.

It's fine I was just confused. Let's make sure we're not talking past each other before we address it, though.

Thanks.

You're welcome.

It's not that much of a concern when your native language is English. After all almost the whole world speaks your language.

Yeah, it can be convenient.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Well, we're getting back into human capacity now.

Let's back up:
When I say theophany, or mystic, what do those words mean to you?

A theophany refers to the sight/vision of a deity by a human or other worldly being, or in broader terms, the disclosure of any divine entity in general
to an earthly being.

They're also hotly contested, but I really don't want to get into that.

Neither do I. Let's not stray away from the main subject of the thread.

It's fine I was just confused. Let's make sure we're not talking past each other before we address it, though.

Fair enough.

You're welcome.

So are you.

Yeah, it can be convenient.

Sure it can and it is.

 

[Storm]

OK.

I believe God is beyond human comprehension. We can "see" it, but never understand.

Muhammad was a natural mystic whose native gift verged on superhuman. Theophany came as naturally, and perhaps as involuntarily to him as breathing.

But he was still a man. Like all humans, his theophany was interpreted through the lens of preconception. Personal ethics and preconceived notions of what God is played huge parts in his attempt to understand what was happening.

With me so far?

 

[Debater Slayer]

OK.

I believe God is beyond human comprehension. We can "see" it, but never understand.

I believe he's beyond comprehension too, but I don't believe that we can actually ever "see" God.

Muhammad was a natural mystic whose native gift verged on superhuman. Theophany came as naturally, and perhaps as involuntarily to him as breathing.

The difference is that theophanies must come from God though. He can't have chosen to have those visions or revelations placed upon him but they did anyway because of God's choice.

But he was still a man. Like all humans, his theophany was interpreted through the lens of preconception. Personal ethics and preconceived notions of what God is played huge parts in his attempt to understand what was happening.

The preconceptions of God at that time were very diverse; you had the Christian God who was and still is essentially thought to be Jesus; you had pre-Islamic Arabs and tribes who worshipped the moon and different idols. Muhammad's (PBUH) idea of God was very different than what was prevalent at the time. That's why so many people turned against him and waged war on him when he reported his first revelation and sighting of an angel (Gabriel).

With me so far?

Sure are.