Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →
↑ ↓
CEMB → Forum → Life, The Universe & Everything → Religions and Gods → Qur'anic studies today

Welcome

Welcome to CEMB forum.
Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?

Donations

Help keep the Forum going!
Click on Kitty to donate:

Kitty is lost

Recent Posts

Qur'anic studies today
by zeca
Yesterday at 07:11 PM
What's happened to the fo...
by zeca
Yesterday at 06:39 PM
New Britain
Yesterday at 05:41 PM
Do humans have needed kno...
Yesterday at 05:47 AM
Iran launches drones
April 13, 2024, 09:56 PM
عيد مبارك للجميع! ^_^
by akay
April 12, 2024, 04:01 PM
Eid-Al-Fitr
by akay
April 12, 2024, 12:06 PM
Lights on the way
by akay
February 01, 2024, 12:10 PM
Mock Them and Move on., ...
January 30, 2024, 10:44 AM
Pro Israel or Pro Palesti...
January 29, 2024, 01:53 PM
Pakistan: The Nation.....
January 28, 2024, 02:12 PM
Gaza assault
January 27, 2024, 01:08 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 1272802 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 17 18 1920 21 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #540 - September 03, 2015, 12:32 PM
    moi: Arculf visited Jerusalem in the 660s and found a cube or rectangle on the Rock, not the octagon. Also (once the octagon was up) the inscriptions of the surrounding arcade are in the same hand as the papyrus font "Kufic". And it has a date, "72" - so not the Christian dating system, it's presumably the "sana qada mu'minin" that is, what's now called Hijri. (But the inscription does credit the wrong caliph now - apparently al-Ma'mun overwrote Abd al-Malik's name.)

    As for how we know it quoted from the Qur'an - that's the nature of how it parallels sura 4. Its relationship with sura 19 is more difficult to judge.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #541 - September 03, 2015, 04:08 PM
    Zim, are you aware of anybody making the argument that the archaic 'cube' on the Temple Mount (per Arculf) and the Ka'ba of Mecca are connected?  I recall there was also some sort of "cube" in the Church of the Resurrection or something like that.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #542 - September 03, 2015, 10:14 PM
    Zaotar, Arculf and his scribe Adomnan only talk of a crude rectangle, that wasn't a church. As of 2012 I didn't know if anyone had claimed that this was in ka'ba form - I'd still like to know if anyone has. Holland did note the ka'ba as a common West-Arabian shrine-pattern, pp. 242 (Nabataea) and 282 (Najran).

    I suppose going to the Haram al-Sharif with a pick and a shovel is out of the question.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #543 - September 04, 2015, 03:05 AM
    One more corrigendum, to: Starting with Nöldeke, scholars have observed that Q 17:1 was interpolated - That would be starting with Gustav Weil.

    Nöldeke reacted to Weil thus: he agreed that something was up with the verse Q 17:1. Nöldeke thought it was a genuine Qur'anic verse but either mislaid, or else broken and missing other verses that might bridge it better to the rest of the sura. Nöldeke asserted (strenously) in Geschichte 1.134f. that the verse was, nonetheless, authentic and not (pace Weil) interpolated. Volume 2.85f. attempts to explain why Weil was wrong.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #544 - September 04, 2015, 05:37 AM
    Thanks much for the correction Zim ... for whatever reason I only read volume 2 on this, and couldn't quite figure out why Noldeke was arguing so hard that the verse had lost its conclusion when it obviously (to me at least) was just interpolated.  I need to fix that, look into Geschichte 1, also look into Weil's arguments.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #545 - September 09, 2015, 06:49 PM
    Keith Small - The Birmingham Qur'an: too many options

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/keith-small/birmingham-quran_b_8101734.html
    Quote
    ....
    If these pages date to the early or middle part of the date range, from 568-610, then the controversial idea of there being a Qur'an-like book before Muhammad is very possible, even likely. Either that or Muhammad's prophetic career needs to be pushed back well into the 6th century. Both of these ideas disagree radically with Islamic tradition and current academic consensus. Not only would the content on these pages predate Muhammad's career, but the form, layout and script of the manuscript points to an established written literary culture that would have taken at least decades to develop. Options from this date range would then have a Qur'an-like book coming into existence from an oral version originating at least in the early 6th century, well before Muhammad's prophetic call in 610, if not his birth in 570, rather than the Qur'an being the first Arabic book in the mid-to-late 7th century.

    If the pages date to the latter part of the date range, from 610-645, then there is more ground for support of the traditional narrative of the Qur'an's origins, but even here there are problems. First, if they date to within Muhammad's career (610-632) they demonstrate that there was an established scribal culture in the early Muslim community, something which goes against the picture in Islamic historical tradition. If it dates to the last 13 years of the date range (632-645), the years immediately after Muhammad's death, it is also problematic for that same reason and more.
    ....

    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #546 - September 09, 2015, 07:49 PM
    I repeating my thanks for all the work everyone has done in this thread, again. so much reading to do.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #547 - September 14, 2015, 04:16 PM
    This is a fantastic new article (out of what seems likely to be the dominant text for many years on Late Antique Roman-Arab relations) on Arab Christianity in the Sixth Century.  Borderline mandatory reading IMO for those interested in the milieu where Qur'anic composition arose.

    https://www.academia.edu/7806301/_Christianity_and_the_Arabs_in_the_sixth_century_in_G._Fisher_and_J._Djikstra_eds._Inside_and_Out_Interactions_Between_Rome_and_the_Peoples_on_the_Arabian_and_Egyptian_Frontiers_in_Late_Antiquity_Peeters_2014_in_press

    It breaks the Noldekian dogma that Arab Christianity was largely limited to the advances of the imperial-backed church hierarchy.  "However, the increasing importance of non-Chalcedonian confessions meant that Christianity could be de-coupled from its Roman associations, and take on other forms of political significance in the hands of both the Persian shahs and the Arab rulers themselves."

    And I would add even more significantly (since I see ur-Quranic composition as a form of monastic anti-Chalcedonian rebellion against 'corrupt' church hierarchy), here are the concluding sentences:

    "But we should also be prepared to an even broader range of ‘non-state actors’ in our imagination of the process of conversion. First among these are the missionaries and their hagiographers, who selected patrons who could sponsor religious adjudication or patronage after being rejected in the Roman world. In return, their Arab patrons might cease to be ‘barbarians’, unworthy of a political voice, and become ‘orthodox’, bastions of true belief set between ‘heretical’ or ‘pagan’ persecutors. Secondly, we should also remember that subordinate Christian Arab groups, of whom the ʿIbād of al-Ḥīrah are examples, might also be agents in the process of Christianization, and play a role in accelerating the conversion of their kings and communicating the event to their co-religionists."
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #548 - September 17, 2015, 06:19 PM
    Quote from: Gabriel Said Reynolds
    Thoughts on #Quran translations (1): Droge offers best rigorous academic translation of the Quran with annotations:  http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Annotated-Translation-Comparative-Islamic/dp/1845539451/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1441110198&sr=1-1&keywords=droge+quran&pebp=1441110201945&perid=1TJADGDFE6QXYBYAM0KX

    Thoughts on #Quran translations (2): Quli-Qara'i offers attractive Arabic/English format, notes w/Shi'ite readings:  http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-Phrase-Phrase-Translation/dp/0940368218

    Thoughts on #Quran translations (3): perhaps the most eloquent English translation is Khalidi:  http://www.amazon.com/The-Quran-A-New-Translation/dp/0143105884

    Thoughts on #Quran translations (4): French translation of Abu-Sahlieh presents the #Quran in "chronological" order:  http://www.amazon.fr/Coran-traduction-fran%C3%A7aise-chronologique-abrogations/dp/288108849X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1441540007&sr=8-2&keywords=abu+sahlieh

    Thoughts on #Quran translations (5): "The Monotheist Group" uses a 'Qur'anist' (text w/o exegesis) methodology:  http://www.amazon.com/The-Message-Translation-Glorious-Quran/dp/097967154X
    ....
    Less than one month away from the opening of my (free!) online course on the Quran:  https://www.edx.org/course/introduction-quran-scripture-islam-notredamex-th120-2x

    https://mobile.twitter.com/GabrielSaidR
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #549 - September 17, 2015, 06:41 PM
    Gabriel Said Reynolds - review of the first English translation of Noldeke's History of the Qur'an

    http://www3.nd.edu/~reynolds/index_files/Noldeke,%20History%20of%20the%20Q.pdf
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #550 - September 17, 2015, 07:02 PM
    Gabriel Said Reynolds - On the Presentation of Christianity in the Qurʾān and the Many Aspects of Qur’anic Rhetoric

    http://www3.nd.edu/~reynolds/index_files/heresies%20in%20al-bayan.pdf
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #551 - September 23, 2015, 03:12 PM
    IQSA promotional video
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O2g-HWsPpMY
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #552 - October 02, 2015, 06:44 PM
    I'm not sure whether this has already been posted

    Ali ibn Ibrahim Ghabban - Inscription of Zuhayr, the oldest Islamic Inscription (AH 24/AD 644)

    https://www.academia.edu/3576977/The_Inscription_of_Zuhayr_the_oldest_Islamic_Inscription_AH_24_AD_644_
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #553 - October 02, 2015, 07:06 PM
    Robert Hoyland - Late Roman Arabia, Monophysite Monks, Arab Tribes

    https://www.academia.edu/3567964/Late_Roman_Arabia_Monophysite_Monks_Arab_Tribes
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #554 - October 03, 2015, 07:57 PM
    Quote from: Gabriel Said Reynolds
    Interviewed this morning with @BBCRadio4 on Birmingham Quran manuscript. Program to air Sunday morning (UK time):  http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06f4z37

    https://mobile.twitter.com/GabrielSaidR/status/649955894881583105
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #555 - October 05, 2015, 06:37 PM
    Richard Carrier - Did Muhammad exist?: http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/8574

    Ian David Morris on Carrier's article: https://mobile.twitter.com/iandavidmorris/status/649539322979483648
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #556 - October 05, 2015, 06:44 PM
    Ian David Morris on Luxenberg: https://mobile.twitter.com/iandavidmorris/status/650675959742484480
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #557 - October 05, 2015, 07:10 PM
    Birmingham Qur'an goes on show: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/perspective/features/2015/10/02/Old-Quran-goes-on-show-in-UK-Just-don-t-call-it-the-oldest.html

    Quote from: Michael Pregill
    Odd how favoring the equally plausible pre-muhammadan date is judged a misuse of the data? @iqsaweb @GabrielSaidR   https://twitter.com/frankjosefine/status/650018114478825472

    https://mobile.twitter.com/michael_pregill/status/650416211151470592
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #558 - October 14, 2015, 10:20 PM
    New article by Guillaume Dye on Jewish Christianity and the Qur'an.

    https://www.academia.edu/16774708/Jewish_Christianity_the_Qur_%C4%81n_and_Early_Islam_some_methodological_caveats
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #559 - October 14, 2015, 11:20 PM
    Quote from: shaytanshoes on November 04, 2014, 04:04 PM
    I find it weird that most Western non-Muslim scholars are still afraid of digging in with sharp knives into the carcass of the Qur'an... Are they scared of being physically harmed by fanatics or having their funding cut by Islamophobia-phobic administrators?

    I'd say the level of physical terror depends on the physical location of the scholar, and on his or her personal faith-tradition. Wansbrough, a Westerner, was able to let his freak-flag fly. Bashear, coming from a form of Islam, was severely beaten for much less.

    But most of the reticence is because the primary sources haven't been fully marshalled yet. Nobody wants to be the first to be wrong in the most hilarious and public way. So the scholars instead (the best of them anyway) have been laying the groundwork - getting those sources in order.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #560 - October 14, 2015, 11:29 PM
    Quote from: Zaotar on October 14, 2015, 10:20 PM
    New article by Guillaume Dye on Jewish Christianity and the Qur'an.

    Its conclusion mainly distills (and credits) Tannous's thesis, Syria between Byzantium and Islam, chapters 4-5 (p. 213-86):
    http://users.clas.ufl.edu/sterk/Mission&Conversion/Tannous%20Syria%20between%20Byzantium%20and%20Islam.pdf

    I'll have to spend some time reading both, as the original thesis looks excellent.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #561 - October 14, 2015, 11:42 PM
    Thanks - that's a very interesting article. It relies heavily on the arguments in Jack Tannous's dissertation, which, as a reminder, is online here:

    http://users.clas.ufl.edu/sterk/Mission&Conversion/Tannous%20Syria%20between%20Byzantium%20and%20Islam.pdf

    Edit: Zimriel got there first.
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #562 - October 15, 2015, 05:24 PM
    Thanks, I hadn't seen Tannous' thesis before, and it is full of great content (although his long biographical introduction boggles the mind).

    I definitely agree with Dye/Tannous on heterogeneity, and (to my mind) the innovative character of Qur'anic discourse.  Arguments for a 'hidden sect' of old Christian heresies/groups always seemed to suck by my lights.

    Actually I more and more tend to see archaic Qur'anic though as a form of anti-ecclesiastical ascetic Christianity (probably first generated in the late sixth century) that was premised on several key innovations in theology, authority, and sacrament.  I.e., it wasn't just an older form of Christianity restated in Arabic, and it wasn't Islamic either.  It was a sort of 'pure restatement of Christianity,' very creative (rather than following some older dogma/sect), free from any ecclesiastical oversight or hierarchy, accompanied by a vigorous effort to craft a supporting Arabic liturgy/rituals/sacrament.  A creative attempt that failed, but its remnants later proved suitable for articulating a new Arabic monotheism that supported rising Arab political power.

    Because of this, efforts to tie the emergence of Qur'anic composition to any particular Christian doctrine or sect are, in my mind, doomed to failure.  Even the most archaic Qur'anic text is characterized by an amazing degree of independence from ecclesiastical orthodoxy (and to my mind does not bear an iota of resemblance/affinity to Judaism).  The Qur'an seems very conscious that it is rejecting the entire concept of clerical legitimacy over the believers, and this is easiest to explain as a form of radical monastic independence/authority, rejecting the corrupt priestly sacraments (since accepting them would necessitate recognizing the superior authority of the priesthood).
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #563 - October 15, 2015, 05:37 PM
    Quote
    Actually I more and more tend to see archaic Qur'anic though as a form of anti-ecclesiastical ascetic Christianity (probably first generated in the late sixth century) that was premised on several key innovations in theology, authority, and sacrament.  I.e., it wasn't just an older form of Christianity restated in Arabic, and it wasn't Islamic either.  It was a sort of 'pure restatement of Christianity,' very creative (rather than following some older dogma/sect), free from any ecclesiastical oversight or hierarchy, accompanied by a vigorous effort to craft a supporting Arabic liturgy/rituals/sacrament.  A creative attempt that failed, but its remnants later proved suitable for articulating a new Arabic monotheism that supported rising Arab political power.

    Something like an early Protestantism?
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #564 - October 15, 2015, 05:47 PM
    Yes, quite like that actually!  I hadn't thought of that, but you are exactly right.

    This makes perfect sense in the sixth century because of three specific features of Arab Christianity during that era:  (1)  it was fiercely opposed to accepting sacraments from the Chalcedonian 'heretic' priests; (2) it was dominated by ascetics who followed Syriac Christian tradition; and (3) imperial suppression of anti-Chalcedonian Christianity meant that there was a terrible lack of priests to administer to Arab believers.

    This ecclesiastical vacuum was a perfect environment for ascetics who hated the Chalcedonian ecclesiastical hierarchy, but who (not being ordained priests) could not themselves administer Christian sacraments, to restate their faith in an anti-priestly way, which mimicked many features of orthodox ecclesiastical Christianity but without the priesthood and its specific sacraments.  In other words, a more pure and original faith, asserted by more pure and original believers.  As you say, like Protestantism.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #565 - October 15, 2015, 05:59 PM
    I wonder if there might be parallels with the slightly later disputes over iconoclasm as well - though that's a subject I've read about but never quite got my head around. I'm also not clear where the non-Chalcedonian churches stood over iconoclasm.
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #566 - October 15, 2015, 06:08 PM
    It is possible, because I see that as a subset of the same problem:  Heretic priests (the Chalcedonians) controlled (a) the holy places; (b) the relics; and (c) the sacraments.  So you either took communion with the heretics, submitting to their authority, or you had to come up with some sort of ritual innovations that allowed you to get around them.

    The anti-Chalcedonians had to grapple with these problems and came up with many creative solutions (portable relics, spiritual pilgrimage, novel sacramental forms).  But the most radical solution to the Chalcedonian stranglehold on Christian ritual was to completely reject the religious authority of the 'heretic' priesthood, its holy places, and its relics -- instead claiming and articulating a purer and older faith, with the religious authority of 'messengers' instead of priests.  I see archaic Qur'anic text as having taken that radical solution.  Many of the peculiarities of the Qur'an can be explained from this approach.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #567 - October 15, 2015, 06:21 PM
    I'm just about to re-read Patricia Crone on iconoclasm...

    Islam, Judeo-Christianity and Byzantine Iconoclasm: https://www.hs.ias.edu/files/Crone_Articles/Crone_Islam_Judeo-Christianity_and_Byzantine_Iconoclasm.pdf
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #568 - October 15, 2015, 06:59 PM
    Also on iconoclasm and cited by Crone:

    Peter Brown - A Dark-Age crisis: aspects of the Iconoclastic controversy

    http://ehr.oxfordjournals.org/content/LXXXVIII/CCCXLVI/1.short?rss=1&ssource=mfr
    Which side are you on?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #569 - October 16, 2015, 04:24 PM
    Tom Holland - Islam: executioner or heir of Antiquity (podcast/video)

    http://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/islam-executioner-or-heir-antiquity

    Edit: I posted this link before I'd actually listened to it but it's actually a very good and accessible introduction to the questions over Islamic origins. I wouldn't be so sure now about his confidence in the authorship of the Quran, or the survival of Christian heresies in the desert.
    Which side are you on?
  • Previous page 1 ... 17 18 1920 21 ... 368 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »