Origins of the Quran

[Unveiled Artist]

Because the authors are clearly human

Yo dont believe all where written by god, man inspired?

 

[psychoslice]

I feel that it is childish to argue over who has the true scriptures, the so called scriptures are only someone's interpretation of how they see what God wants, and that is all it is. All this stupid caring on's about who has the true scripture is just ridiculers, like children those who believe they have the truth and them only, is nothing more than being a big stupid child that wants its only way, and hence, religion.

 

[Augustus]

Look there are only two choices here...I actually do have the education,

The first part and the second part are mutually exclusive.

Nobody with 'the education' would present such a foolish dichotomy with such stridency.

Do all the Islamic studies/linguistics/history departments simply sit around debating - God or Waraqa? God or Waraqa?

Here are some [secular] academic views on the theory:

"The trouble is that there is simply no way to substantiate or disprove such suppositions, which are speculative and/or circular – the putative evidence is too shaky and meagre indeed to allow any conclusion." G. Dye - Jewish Christianity, the Qur’ān, and Early Islam

"To sum up, [the Waraqa theory] is highly speculative and poorly documented" G. Bowering - Recent research on the construction of the Quran

"[This theory remains] controversial within mainstream Qur’ānic Studies... it is true that such theories, like all those that seek to find a hidden and meanwhile convenient “source” for Islamic origins, are either short sighted or have within them the polemical tendency to rob Islam of its creative force and reduce it to heretical—i.e. illegitimate—beginnings. However, in recent years more nuanced studies—including that by Holgen Zellentin—have searched within the verses of the Qur’ān itself to guide their search for neighboring textual or religious impulses that might shed some light on the Qur’ān’s “legal culture,” and its place between “Rabbinic Judaism and Ecclesiastical Christianity.” Emran Elbadawi -The Impact of Aramaic (especially Syriac) on the Qur’ān

"Robinson notes that we have few biographical details, most of them legendary, on Waraqa, an Arab monotheist contemporary of the Prophet. The possibility that Waraqa was an Ebionite or an Elkasaite has caught the fancy of some con- temporary Arab intellectuals. Thus Joseph Azzi, in a book written in Arabic and translated into French with the title Le prêtre et le prophète, suggests, without bringing any evidence, that “la véritable intention de Waraqa était de designer Mohammed pour lui succéder à la tête de l’assemblée des nazaréens de la Mecque” (p. 85) and that he had tried to unify the Jewish Christian sects." G. Stroumsa - Jewish Christianity and Islamic Origins


Just like with Trump, simply saying something forcefully and repeatedly don't make it true.

 

[paarsurrey]

Muslims.
I was told by a christian the other day that Muhammad took parts of the Bible and put it into the Quran. She asserted that her faith is true one of many reasons because other religions "stole" from the Bible. Is the former true?
I told her that time period doesnt change a sacred book's authenticity. How does being the oldest abrahamic faith (which I believe is Judaism to make it simple) make one religion true and the other false?

Impossible!
Muhammad did not author Quran, he only relayed what was revealed on him by G-d. Is it impossible to relay? Please
Regards

 

[outhouse]

Yo dont believe all where written by god, man inspired?

I know with certainty they were written by men and only men.

No god had a part in any text ever. It would demean a god to say he committed all these errors, and wrote misleading mythology that has only mans handprint

 

[outhouse]

Do all the Islamic studies/linguistics/history departments simply sit around debating -

There are very no Islamic studies on the koran that are credible, in islam. There are no Islamic scholars hat are credible.

They are apologist. It would be the same as saying YEC scholars are credible. There is no such thing as a credible YEC scholar.

YOU need to supply links to your sources. WE require honesty here

 

[outhouse]

Here are some [secular] academic views on the theory:

Lest talk about YOURS

Where did muhammad learn the biblical traditions?

Where did illiterate muhammad learn to write it in Arabic, or who did it for him?

 

[outhouse]

"Robinson notes that we have few biographical details, most of them legendary, on Waraqa,

This also applies to muhammad in full.

 

[outhouse]

"To sum up, [the Waraqa theory] is highly speculative and poorly documented" G. Bowering - Recent research on the construction of the Quran

This also applies to muhammad in full.

 

[outhouse]

http://www.academia.edu/9997797/Jewish_Christianity_and_Islamic_Origins

As in the case of Christianity or Manichaeism, Islam permits us to observe how a religion is born, although we know infinitely more about the birth of Christianity than about that of Islam.

 

[outhouse]

Here are some [secular] academic views on the theory:

Just like the many different hypothesis of jesus, this is one or two cherry picked guesses

 

[outhouse]

http://www.academia.edu/9997797/Jewish_Christianity_and_Islamic_Origins


From different angles, the hypothesis has been made of a pre-Islamic Abrahamic trend, i.e., one or a few religious groups perceiving themselves to be following in the spiritual footsteps of Abraham, and practicing the true religion which Abraham had discovered (or established). This religion would have been perverted by both Jews and Christians, who considered themselves to be his [spiritual] offspring

Even more than in the case of the Jewish Christians, our sources are here almost totally silent


Basically this says exactly what I have, Arabic perversion of the bible.

 

[outhouse]

G. Stroumsa - Jewish Christianity and Islamic Origins

After reading the whole text, do you realize how worthless this is?

Look at his conclusion, it is a non answer.

http://www.academia.edu/9997797/Jewish_Christianity_and_Islamic_Origins

The mystery of the birth of a religion cannot be solved, and neither can the alchemical transformation of religious ideas, of their passage from fluid to solid state.


WORTHLESS

 

[Augustus]

There are very no Islamic studies

Not only are you unfamiliar with the sources, you are even unfamiliar with the name of the discipline. If you want to play the big shot historian, you look a bit silly if you don't even understand something as basic as the name of the discipline you are supposed to be knowledgeable about. It's like claiming to be an expert physicist and not understanding what physics is.

Google 'Islamic Studies'

Understand now?

YOU need to supply links to your sources. WE require honesty here

Get off your high horse.

Sources are clearly attributed and you even managed to find some.

This also applies to muhammad in full.

So?

I was explaining why you were wrong, not talking about Muhammed.

Basically this says exactly what I have, Arabic perversion of the bible.

It really says nothing approaching what you said. You just don't understand it (shock!).

You said Muhammed got the Quran from Waraqa. This doesn't.

The mystery of the birth of a religion cannot be solved, and neither can the alchemical transformation of religious ideas, of their passage from fluid to solid state.


WORTHLESS

You boast of your academic knowledge and training yet make a comment like this? Really? You might as well just admit you made it all up.

Anyway, don't think Carlita wants her thread derailed with this back and forth.

Start a new thread if you want to discuss further.

 

[outhouse]

Sources are clearly attributed and you even managed to find some.

Links are required

 

[outhouse]

You said Muhammed got the Quran from Waraqa.

I never stated in entirety.

Its probable though.

 

[outhouse]

Where did muhammad learn the biblical traditions?

Where did illiterate muhammad learn to write it in Arabic, or who did it for him?

 

[outhouse]

You boast of your academic knowledge and training yet make a comment like this?

The article concludes the evolution from bible to koran is mystery. There is no value in saying I cannot provide any answers what so ever.

It is your source.

 

[outhouse]

Google 'Islamic Studies'

Understand now?

As I stated it means NO CREDIBILITY it is apologetics. Its just like YEC studies. It is theological in nature NOT historical

 

[YmirGF]

If I may, I think what Outhouse is trying to convey is that Muhammad most likely absorbed information about Judaism and Christianity from perhaps a variety of sources. According to legend, he did do a fair amount of traveling on trade missions and it isn't hard to imagine him talking at length with people he may have encountered. That is, imho, the most likely situation, as it did take him 23 years to "hand down" his slim little tomb. So, it's not like he didn't have loads of time to reason things out.

For example, the Qur'an wouldn't even have been recognizable as a book for the first several years. It was just a weird collection of oddball comments when looked at chronologically.

The alternative is that Muhammad really did get the Qur'an from god, via Gabriel, which is sort of weird because the Muslim god is said to have no partners, but needed Gabriel to spill the beans to Muhammad. Maybe Allah was into LLC's. Who knows? The point is, if Muhammad really did get this from God that is not exactly happy news to either Jews or Christians and later to the Bahai's and the Ahmadiyya's.

@outhouse @Augustus @Carlita

In regards to the Christian cited in the OP that bewildered Carlita, that person obviously has zero understanding of the roots of Christianity, Judaism or Islam and should be smiled at and politely ignored. Next time it comes up, try changing the subject.