Skip navigation
Sidebar -

Advanced search options →

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
Today at 12:20 AM

Freely down loadable Boo...
May 18, 2019, 03:16 AM

شهر العودة إلى الله
May 17, 2019, 03:46 PM

Sufism
May 17, 2019, 11:17 AM

Month of Return to Allah
May 13, 2019, 09:29 AM

Hi everyone
May 07, 2019, 07:08 PM

Hello Everyone in Oxfords...
May 07, 2019, 07:07 PM

Discussion about "My Orde...
May 05, 2019, 06:20 AM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 280650 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 137 138 139140 141 ... 224 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4140 - September 19, 2018, 01:46 PM

    Altara, interesting to hear that Hoyland is not a revisionist. In his book In God's Path he writes about the difficult position for revisionist:
    "  ....many academics, who are usually left leaning liberals, shy of criticizing Islam and this has favoured the traditionalist approach while pushing sceptics/ revisionists to become more extreme". ( page 232).


    Above all, the fact that he is not a revisionist is evidenced of what he says about the conquests in "In God's Path..." : no differences (at all) with the Muslim narratives. No need to read him for knowing what happened between 632 and 640, Tabari (et al.) are sufficient.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4141 - September 19, 2018, 01:52 PM

    What does a revisionists have to say about the conquests in order to be a revisionist? A clear and concise answer is sufficient. 
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4142 - September 19, 2018, 01:55 PM

    He is.


    I have indicated his last book that evidenced that he is in line with the Muslim narrative.
    You have no sources to show that he would be revisionist. Don't be ridiculous.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4143 - September 19, 2018, 01:56 PM

    What does a revisionists have to say about the conquests in order to be a revisionist? A clear and concise answer is sufficient.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4144 - September 19, 2018, 01:56 PM

    What does a revisionists have to say about the conquests in order to be a revisionist?


    Please...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4145 - September 19, 2018, 01:56 PM

    Was Crone a revisionist?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4146 - September 19, 2018, 01:57 PM

    Quote
    Please...


    No really, what does someone have to say about the conquests in order to be considered a revisionist?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4147 - September 19, 2018, 02:01 PM

    Was Crone a revisionist?


    Nope. Wansbrough was.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4148 - September 19, 2018, 02:04 PM

    Damn! And you told me not to be ridiculous? The basic implication of this is, in my opinion, that no one is or really was a revisionist apart from you and some handful scholars here and there. Pretty dogmatic. If the one the founder of revisionism was not a revisionist, then I really do not know what to say.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4149 - September 19, 2018, 02:15 PM

    Please mention some real revisionists, then? You, Dye, Reynolds, Segovia, de Prémare, Gallez, Kerr, Shoemaker, Ferrin, etc.? Are those revisionists or not?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4150 - September 19, 2018, 02:17 PM

    Can you please provide a concrete definition of a revisionist? An objective definition, and not some idiosyncratic one that confirms to your or someone else' scholarly opinion on certain topics.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4151 - September 19, 2018, 02:25 PM

    Skeptic is a good label to describe Crone and scholars similar to her.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4152 - September 19, 2018, 02:35 PM

    Please mention some real revisionists, then? You, Dye, Reynolds, Segovia, de Prémare, Gallez, Kerr, Shoemaker, Ferrin, etc.? Are those revisionists or not?

    Dye, Segovia, Gallez, Kerr :  sceptics and revisionists
    The rest could be call ( but it is not necessarily how they define themselves) : sceptics.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4153 - September 19, 2018, 02:39 PM

    Good that you at least acknowledge that Crone et al. are/were skeptics.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4154 - September 19, 2018, 03:23 PM

    Quote
    Good that you at least acknowledge that Crone et al. are/were skeptics.


     Crone is nor sceptic nor revisionist.  With Hagarism she has decided to set aside the narrative and see what was possible to tell with the non Muslims sources. To do this is not an evidence that she believed this or that ; she did her job of historian.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4155 - September 19, 2018, 03:24 PM

    I am very sorry for my extended absence. I was dealing with a personal crisis and took time off the internet. This interview, perhaps it is already posted, is very informative of Hoyland's opinion and approach.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEASBafQD88

    Furthermore it is clear that he buys the Mecca Medina story and that Mohammad is the author of the Quran, but he doesn't mention zemzem of course.  This suggests he is not to be included in the 'revisionist camp'. His skepticism of 9th century sources is standard historical methodology as he explains.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4156 - September 19, 2018, 03:26 PM

    Don't you think that Mecca existed in any way, canaaniteshift? Could please outline your beliefs on this topic?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4157 - September 19, 2018, 03:26 PM

    Hoyland is a skeptic.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4158 - September 19, 2018, 03:33 PM


    Furthermore it is clear that he buys the Mecca Medina story


    Of course.

    Quote
    and that Mohammad is the author of the Quran,


    Idem.


    Quote
    but he doesn't mention zemzem of course.

     

    He should. finmad
    Quote
     This suggests he is not to be included in the 'revisionist camp'.


    Of course.
    Quote
    His skepticism of 9th century sources is standard historical methodology as he explains.


    I, of course, do not agree (at all) with that.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4159 - September 19, 2018, 03:44 PM

    Don't you think that Mecca existed in any way, canaaniteshift? Could please outline your beliefs on this topic?


    I do not "believe" in things. There is no evidence for a pre-Islamic Mecca, simple as that. There is evidence that the area was inhabited but nothing like a huge settlement. The stories about Mecca in Islamic source are clearly a-historical. If evidence of Mecca appears I will accept it, and then only its existence not the stories about it. Until then all we have are a collection of stories that also include flying donkeys and space elevators. We are not at liberty to edit these myths to make them 'factual'. They are entirely mythological, the Pegasus is just as mythological as Mohammad destroying idols in the Kaabah. One is not more likely because it does not include magical beasts.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4160 - September 19, 2018, 07:15 PM

    Quote
    There is evidence that the area was inhabited

    What evidences?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4161 - September 19, 2018, 08:17 PM

    How do Western scholars, revisionists and traditionalists, interpret verses like the following?

    The Hour has come near, and the moon has split [in two]. And if they see a miracle, they turn away and say, "Passing magic." [54:1-2]
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4162 - September 19, 2018, 08:32 PM

    Quote
    Crone is nor skeptic nor revisionist.


    Crone was a skeptic and a revisionist, but certainly a skeptic. Denying that is, with all due respect, ludicrous and a sign of polemics.

    Quote
    I do not "believe" in things. There is no evidence for a pre-Islamic Mecca, simple as that. There is evidence that the area was inhabited but nothing like a huge settlement. The stories about Mecca in Islamic source are clearly a-historical. If evidence of Mecca appears I will accept it, and then only its existence not the stories about it. Until then all we have are a collection of stories that also include flying donkeys and space elevators. We are not at liberty to edit these myths to make them 'factual'. They are entirely mythological, the Pegasus is just as mythological as Mohammad destroying idols in the Kaabah. One is not more likely because it does not include magical beasts.


    We all believe in things. Anyways, no need to get caught up in semantics. I think we can all agree that there probably was no large settlement in Western Arabia. However, would say there is no seventh century evidence for Mecca too? Or would you only say that there is no pre-Islamic attestations of the city? There is, in my opinion, a crucial difference between the two propositions. Even Sean Anthony concedes the latter point. As for the pre-Islamic attestation, Ptolemy mentions a certain Moka (Græcification of Makkah) somewhere in Arabia Petraea (Claudius Ptolemæus, The Geography by Claudius Ptolemy, Greek Geographer of the 2nd Century A.D., Book 5: Asia Minor, the Armenian Highlands, the Caucasus, Cyprus, Syria, Palestina, Arabia Petraea, Mesopotamia, Arabia Deserta, Babylonia, trans. Edward L. Stevenson, New York, p. 129). Crone also argued for this based on additional corroborations (see: Meccan Trade and the Rise of Islam, Princeton, 136, 137, and esp. 196–198). For several seventh century historical attestations for Ḥajj and the Kaʿbah, please see Sean W. Anthony (via Twitter: https://bit.ly/2PQ3YcV). He will publish his results in two years or so.

    A friend of mine recently alerted to several epigraphic findings attesting the exodus from Mecca and Medina. If I receive further details I will share them with you.

    Quote
    Furthermore, it is clear that he buys the Mecca Medina story.


    Here you also mention Medina. What part of the Medina story is in your opinion a-historical? It's existence? Further clarification is appreciated and sources as well.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4163 - September 19, 2018, 08:33 PM

    Quote
    How do Western scholars, revisionists and traditionalists, interpret verses like the following?


    Read Daniel A. Beck's article on this. See his academia.edu page.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4164 - September 19, 2018, 08:35 PM

    Revisionism:

    Apparently the recent epigraphic KSA-finds prove that all these early islamic figures have existed. This is the end for revisionism?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4165 - September 19, 2018, 08:40 PM

    Mundi - Epigraphic findings are of the outmost importance. Unfortunately, they are for the most part ignored. Most are unpublished, anyways. But as I wrote in my earlier post on Mecca (see above), there are new epigraphic findings attesting the exodus from Mecca and Medina. Let us wait for further details. Süleyman Dost’s doctoral dissertation is a good example of a recent work that made good use of hitherto ignored inscription by (some) revisionists that seem to support aspects of the narrative, especially a Arabian locality.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4166 - September 19, 2018, 08:49 PM

    Maggraye- epigraphy

    So do you predict the end of revisionism?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4167 - September 19, 2018, 08:53 PM

    No.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4168 - September 19, 2018, 08:57 PM

    Recent KSA epigraphy is proving the revisionists wrong, surely their position will be untenable?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #4169 - September 19, 2018, 09:06 PM

    I was just reminded of the Jerusalem 32 Inscription from 32 AH/652 CE that mentions three of Muḥammad’s companions—ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. ʿAwf, Abū ʿUbaydah b. al-Jarrāḥ, and Muʿāwiyah. The information provided by the inscription is in line with the historical data.
  • Previous page 1 ... 137 138 139140 141 ... 224 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »