• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Koran dated to before Muhamad birth.

paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
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 75: Al-Qiyamah
[75:17]Move not thy tongue with this revelation that thou mayest hasten to preserve it.
[75:18]Surely upon Us rests its collection and its recital.
[75:19]So when We recite it, then follow thou its recital.
[75:20]Then upon Us rests the expounding thereof.

http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=75&verse=16

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

Shad

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said:
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 75: Al-Qiyamah
[75:17]Move not thy tongue with this revelation that thou mayest hasten to preserve it.
[75:18]Surely upon Us rests its collection and its recital.
[75:19]So when We recite it, then follow thou its recital.
[75:20]Then upon Us rests the expounding thereof.

http://www.alislam.org/quran/search2/showChapter.php?ch=75&verse=16

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

Which is nothing but following religious dogma.
 
C

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
paarsurrey said:
You did not understand the argument. Please
Regards
Click to expand...
"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, "
This is the circular reasoning. It is quite evident.
Tom
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
columbus said:
"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, "
This is the circular reasoning. It is quite evident.
Tom
Click to expand...
No it is not.
Carbon dating of the manuscript provides only a range of time, not the exact time accurate to second/minute/hour/day/week/month not even to the year. There is no tool yet with science to do that. The ink used in the manuscript cannot be carbon-dated, they say.
So, presently only the inner evidence could decide if Recitation was :
  1. before Muhammad
  2. or after him
  3. or within his life time
That is what I am doing. Right?

Regards
 
Shad

Shad

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said:
No it is not.
Carbon dating of the manuscript provides only a range of time, not the exact time accurate to second/minute/hour/day/week/month not even to the year. There is no tool yet with science to do that. The ink used in the manuscript cannot be carbon-dated, they say.
So, presently only the inner evidence could decide if Recitation was :
  1. before Muhammad
  2. or after him
  3. or within his life time
That is what I am doing. Right?

Regards
Click to expand...

That is circular reasoning as your belief makes statements which you verify using the same text making the statements. It is no better than "I am right because I say I am right" or "The Bible is true because it says it is true."
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
paarsurrey said:
that Quran cannot be dated before Muhammad
Click to expand...

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.
 
outhouse

outhouse

Atheistically
Milton Platt said:
....they only dated the parchment....NOT the INK. So it is really still up in the air.
Click to expand...

And the skin did not show as being used before. These text were also important and skins were often made for these specific writing events.

These skins were made to use at time of making the skin. So the writing will date to about the same year.

Skins were not made to sit on a shelf then to be used years later, no skin sat on a shelf for a decade. SO provided there was no writing under the text in question.

The dating range is correct to the stated 95.4%
 
Milton Platt

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
outhouse said:
And the skin did not show as being used before. These text were also important and skins were often made for these specific writing events.

These skins were made to use at time of making the skin. So the writing will date to about the same year.

Skins were not made to sit on a shelf then to be used years later, no skin sat on a shelf for a decade. SO provided there was no writing under the text in question.

The dating range is correct to the stated 95.4%
Click to expand...

Not disagreeing with the date range. I am not saying the writing is not that old, but is there something in the paper published by the scientists that indicates the writing is in the same range as the papirus dates. Didn't the papirus get reused with some frequency in those days?
I cannot "prove there is nothing under the writing". I do not possess either the paper or the technology to test it, obviously. Just asking questions....I do not have a dog in the fight, so to speak.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top