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


'Islamic State' a.k.a. IS...
Today at 02:30 PM

NayaPakistan...New Pakist...
Today at 12:50 PM

Qur'anic studies today
Today at 12:14 PM

New PM incoming
Today at 11:54 AM

مدهش----- لماذا؟؟؟؟
Yesterday at 02:47 PM

No Outsiders? Except at t...
October 15, 2019, 08:35 PM

Freely down loadable Boo...
October 15, 2019, 03:45 PM

Catalan protests
October 14, 2019, 06:06 PM

Excellence and uniqueness
October 14, 2019, 12:15 PM

Neo prounouns & facism
October 13, 2019, 10:35 PM

New tunisian prez
October 13, 2019, 09:24 PM

Kyrgyzstan and islamisati...
October 13, 2019, 01:36 PM

Theme Changer

 Topic: Qur'anic studies today

 (Read 358052 times)
  • Previous page 1 ... 242 243 244245 246 ... 267 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7290 - August 16, 2019, 12:03 PM

    As I presume you all know, Stephen Shoemaker has found 11 sources that describe Muhammad taking part of the invasion of Palestine. The invasion probably took place around 634, two years after he supposedly died. This is seriously challenging the Muslim traditions. If they were wrong in such an important happening, what else could be wrong?
    My question is how do the academics view Shoemaker's findings?

     Now my questions are .,   

    1). What did Shoemaker write about Prophet of Islam  w.r.t   his birth.....where he grew up... and what he did.....  until he was 40 or so before that first revelation

    2). And and which Muhammad was Shoemaker'  talking about on that Islamization/Muslimization  of Palestine dear Asbjoern1958 ??

    I guess you are talking about this book of dr.  Shoemaker



    well let me watch and hear  some discussion in these videos/audios

    Quote
    1.   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7cO6mztBp4

    2.  Professor Stephen Shoemaker Discusses His Book "The Death Of A Prophet"(Part 1)The Josh Marshall Show

    3. Reading into Islamization
     
    .....

    note: ....There are very good discussion on that subject of Islamization of nations... by various faculties including Stephen Shoemaker  in that link no.3


    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7291 - August 16, 2019, 12:58 PM

    Persian conquests:

    So you have the Persian conquests having happened from 628-632 during Mohammed's lifetime. But nowhere is Mohammed mentioned. This is an indication that Mohammed if he existed had no leading role in the East.
    In the West there is mention of a prophet or something like Mohammed, but he seems to have participated in the conquest of the Holy land post 632.

    Does this change our Mohamedinian scenario? I guess so, but how can we make sense of this?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7292 - August 16, 2019, 01:02 PM

    Björn,

    I didn't see your comment before posting mine...

    How do we merge the info Shoemaker brings and the info from Pourshariati?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7293 - August 16, 2019, 03:25 PM

    Like Pourshariati, Shoemaker is not a "member" of the family of the Quranic Studies. Even if his recycling of the Casanova thesis (early 20 c. Muhammad announced the end of the world) is  adopted by quantities of more or less "revisionist" scholars. Sinai, Dye, Segovia, etc., it does not mean that his other statements ( 11 sources that describe Muhammad taking part of the invasion of Palestine.) are accepted. It is not the case. Most of scholars are generally stuck with the narrative.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7294 - August 16, 2019, 04:08 PM

    Björn,

    I didn't see your comment before posting mine...

    How do we merge the info Shoemaker brings and the info from Pourshariati?



    I personally do not merge anything as I consider one information as inexact ; the sole existence of Muhammad holding in the Quranic texts and nowhere else.
    The war in Iraq has started even earlier than Pourshariati said :suffice to read the sources outside the narrative.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7295 - August 16, 2019, 05:27 PM

    Altara,

    How do you explain Mohammed in the Quranic texts? Later addition? When?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7296 - August 16, 2019, 05:42 PM

    Altara,

    ..........Mohammed in the Quranic texts..............

    Dan Gibson says something on that word "Muhammad" in Quran in this tube dear mundi..

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIw1OPH6QvM

    watch him....  and and read these verses

    Quote
    Suarh  Aal-i-Imraan,   Verse #144:   And muhammad is no more than an apostle; the apostles have already passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least and Allah will reward the grateful.

    Suarh  Al-Ahzaab,  , Verse #40 :   Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but he is the Apostle of Allah and the Last of the prophets; and Allah is cognizant of all things.

    Suarh  Muhammad,  , Verse #2  : And (as for) those who believe and do good, and believe in what has been revealed to muhammad, and it is the very truth from their Lord, He will remove their evil from them and improve their condition.

     Surah  Al-Fath,  Verse #29 :  Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah, and those with him are firm of heart against the unbelievers, compassionate among themselves; you will see them bowing down, prostrating themselves, seeking grace from Allah and pleasure; their marks are in their faces because of the effect of prostration; that is their description in the Taurat and their description in the Injeel; like as seed-produce that puts forth its sprout, then strengthens it, so it becomes stout and stands firmly on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the unbelievers on account of them; Allah has promised those among them who believe and do good, forgiveness and a great reward.

     
    and..and  more importantly., figure out who added those verses and when??

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7297 - August 16, 2019, 07:13 PM

    None of the manuscripts that are available on corpus coranicum seems to have added or skipped the word "Mohammed". That means it must have been added before the archetype was distributed...

    That means probably before 650, maybe before 630... (cfr C14 dating)
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7298 - August 16, 2019, 08:14 PM

    At the writing (yawn...)
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7299 - August 16, 2019, 09:44 PM

    As I presume you all know, Stephen Shoemaker has found 11 sources that describe Muhammad taking part of the invasion of Palestine. The invasion probably took place around 634, two years after he supposedly died. This is seriously challenging the Muslim traditions. If they were wrong in such an important happening, what else could be wrong?
    My question is how do the academics view Shoemaker's findings?


    This is what Shoemaker states but looking into those 11 eleven sources doesn't corroborate this ; basically, you go from arguing on translation (The Secrets of Rabbi Shimʿōn b. Yoḥai,), taking an apologetic and non historical text at face value (Doctrina Jacobbi) and arguing that the mention of Muhammad among texts that don't describe events in details including the sequence of events proves he was there during the so called conquests (chronicle of Khuzistan), etc,etc,etc.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7300 - August 16, 2019, 09:50 PM

    Björn,

    I didn't see your comment before posting mine...

    How do we merge the info Shoemaker brings and the info from Pourshariati?



    Well, in his review of Jacob of Edessa writings, Shoemaker states that those texts do place Muhammad death in 627/628 but then goes into a different rationale to say it could prove Muhammad was still alive in 632/634.

    However, one could consider that Jacob dating does tie up with Pourshariati findings and this could solve the puzzle. One can then wonder if this discrepancy is not in fact the proof of the rewriting of the muslim narrative at different stages in time based on the original events.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7301 - August 16, 2019, 09:56 PM

    None of the manuscripts that are available on corpus coranicum seems to have added or skipped the word "Mohammed". That means it must have been added before the archetype was distributed...

    That means probably before 650, maybe before 630... (cfr C14 dating)


    In his review of verse 6 of surah 61, Gallez compares the current Quran with the so-called version of Ubbay and argues that the word Ahmad is an addition vs the Ubbay version. There are confusing reports among the muslim writings on Quranic texts.

    http://www.lemessieetsonprophete.com/annexes/s.61,6_ahmad.htm

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7302 - August 17, 2019, 03:06 AM

    In his review of verse 6 of surah 61, Gallez compares the current Quran with the so-called version of Ubbay and argues that the word Ahmad is an addition vs the Ubbay version. There are confusing reports among the muslim writings on Quranic texts.

    http://www.lemessieetsonprophete.com/annexes/s.61,6_ahmad.htm



        that link says

    Quote
    A h mad course serves as Mu h ammad , in a sentence that seems so implausible less than if it were coldly told that Jesus announced Mu h ammad. Now it suffices to say that the Paraclete coincides with a h mad .


     .. well everything is  about mad here ...that word "Ahmad"  is  is far away from Muhammad .,  anyways  I did not  put that verse in that earlier post so   let us read that verse here

    Quote
    As-Saff, Chapter , Verse #6:  And when Isa son of Marium said: O children of Israel! surely I am the apostle of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Taurat and giving the good news of an Apostle who will come after me, his name being ahmad, but when he came to them with clear arguments they said: This is clear magic.


    well that link is NOT a publication but appears to be a blog .. I  wonder any one publishing it in a peer reviewed publication  on those 5 verses which contains word Muhammad and Ahamad

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7303 - August 17, 2019, 08:31 AM

    When Gallez rewrites the Quran everything looks easier for him to fit his thesis.

    However, it is not impossible to assume that the two versions of the central part of verse 6 exposed above replaced a development relating to a theme that no longer needed to be mentioned in the Koran: the (material) return of the Messiah Jesus.

    With this kind of manipulation he can make the text say what he wants ( the (material) return of the Messiah Jesus).
    That is why, even if he debunk some interesting things, he is not taken seriously about his main thesis.

  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7304 - August 17, 2019, 04:36 PM

    When Gallez rewrites the Quran everything looks easier for him to fit his thesis.
     


     well It is easy for French , British , American to rewrite Quran or for that matter any religious book...

    But I am interested reading Quran  that is  re-written by  people from  countries like ... Iran...Iraq..Jordan... Pakistan.. Egypt ..Saudi Arabia

    Anyways I wonder any of you guys read this book




    https://www.amazon.com/Quran-Kader-Abdolah/dp/9462380236
    Rewriting the Qur'an: Kader Abdolah and his controversial interpretation of Islam's holy book

    Quote


    good stuff.. good stuff to read

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7305 - August 17, 2019, 06:42 PM

    Gallez and Ahmad,

    He does have a point that Ahmad in 61:6 is kind of a strange addition here. I checked with the early manuscripts and 61:6 is not represented in the earliest dated ones. At least the material evidence, doesn't contradict his thesis here.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7306 - August 17, 2019, 07:00 PM

    Gallez and Ahmad,

    He does have a point that Ahmad in 61:6 is kind of a strange addition here. I checked with the early manuscripts and 61:6 is not represented in the earliest dated ones. At least the material evidence, doesn't contradict his thesis here.

    dear mundi which  early manuscripts are you talking?  links please.

    and do you mean to say .."Whole verse is missing in those manuscripts"  or just that word  "ahmad"

    in other words in that verse  6:

     And when Isa son of Marium said: O children of Israel! surely I am the apostle of Allah to you, verifying that which is before me of the Taurat and giving the good news of an Apostle who will come after me, his name being ahmad, but when he came to them with clear arguments they said: This is clear magic.

    in those manuscripts you are talking .,  that verse is there but "his name being ahmad" is missing?? or whole verse is missing??

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7307 - August 17, 2019, 07:31 PM

    Yeez,

    Sanaa 1, Birmingham/Arab 328c,
    Qaf 47, also Dam 1-25.1 and Dam 1-29.1 have all been c14' ed to around 650, and possibly earlier (630). S 61.6 is not found in these manuscripts (see corpus Coranicum). Of course, that could be chance.

    Often later additions are suggested, but the manuscripts contradict it. But that at least, is not the case for 61.6.

    Nothing proven, but nothing disproven either. That is worth something, no?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7308 - August 17, 2019, 08:04 PM

    Yeez,

    Sanaa 1, Birmingham/Arab 328c,
    Qaf 47, also Dam 1-25.1 and Dam 1-29.1 have all been c14' ed to around 650, and possibly earlier (630). S 61.6 is not found in these manuscripts (see corpus Coranicum). Of course, that could be chance.

    Often later additions are suggested, but the manuscripts contradict it. But that at least, is not the case for 61.6.

    Nothing proven, but nothing disproven either. That is worth something, no?

    Thank you for that response dear mundi.,    in other words.. you are saying., whole verse may have been added in to that surah at later times.... ..

    how about the four verses in this post.,  Are they present in those manuscripts ??

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7309 - August 17, 2019, 08:33 PM

    Mohammed verses for the earliest manuscripts mentioned above:

    3:144   No mention in any of the early manuscripts
    33:40  only present in Dam 1-25.1 (no image available)
    3: 2  only present in Dam 1-29.1 (no image available, only partial presence "mh")
    48:29 only present in Dam 1-29.1 (no image available, part of verse containing "mhmd"is missing)

    The dating of Dam 1-25.1 and 1-29.1 is controversial. These datings are done by the lab of Lyon that apparently dates "too early"

    So this little survey leaves room for speculation. In any case no evidence of the verse being present and the word mhmd being omitted. I want to add that for the Dam 25 and 29, no images available in corpus coranicum, so difficult to really check.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7310 - August 17, 2019, 09:55 PM

    I'm rather sceptic about the argument that, as earliest manuscripts are not complete, that means that was written down was only what one have today : incomplete manuscripts  and that the rest of sura was written down later by scribes, etc.
    I'm really dubious about that.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7311 - August 18, 2019, 03:39 AM

    Especially because your assumption is that stories of Muhammad were coming from the Quran  Roll Eyes  a weird statement as, when one read the Quran without being influenced by the muslim narrative, one ends up wondring where the Quran speak about a Muhammad, Mecca, etc,etc.......
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7312 - August 18, 2019, 06:43 AM

    Earliest stories of Muhammad commence with few lines. Through time the narrative increase. All of this is documented ; later hadith historiographers  add details that earliest did not mention : how can it be? Simply because they invent it. Occam's razor since they are not H.G. Wells.
    Otherwise it is interesting to note that more or less "revisionist" scholars following the Wansbrough theory of the composition of the Quran with script layers (which is now more and more accepted among them ; only Cuypers is not agree) do not use the Mundi argument. Yet they could:"Folks! If one have incomplete manuscripts, it is because the rest is not still written down by scribes! That is the reason why!"
    On the other hand, it goes in my way. If "Muhammad" are interpolations, it means that the text has nothing to see with the narrative of an historical figure since they had to interpolate this name in a text which did not have it...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7313 - August 18, 2019, 08:43 AM

    additions and early manuscripts:

    I am not saying the non-presence of Mohammed or other suspected additions in very early manuscripts is proof of the later addition. I never said it or implied it. I look at the early manuscripts for material proof that might discredit the theories like the Ahmed theory of Gallez. His reasoning implies a quite late addition of the Ahmed part of the verse. A time frame that the Islamic exegetes were fully active. If that verse would have been found in one of the very early manuscripts, that theory would be disproven without doubt.  I think that is a worthwhile research path, no?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7314 - August 18, 2019, 10:58 AM

    Quote
    I look at the early manuscripts for material proof that might discredit the theories like the Ahmed theory of Gallez. His reasoning implies a quite late addition of the Ahmed part of the verse. A time frame that the Islamic exegetes scribes were fully active.


    Ok. Gallez sees interpolation everywhere it fits his theory. There are interpolations, of course. But imo, it does not concern the core text. Dye has shown that end of sura in the actual corpus order has probably seen additions to fit this order which is artificial. I follow him on this.
    Quote
    If that verse would have been found in one of the very early manuscripts, that theory would be disproven without doubt.


    Yes. It's a bet from Gallez that one will not find earliest manuscripts.  It is risky.
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7315 - August 18, 2019, 12:41 PM

    Early manuscripts:

    It is surprising that no real changes have been found in these manuscripts, especially seen the early dating. From the very start (630? 650?) it was deemed not done to fix the text. Maybe complete additions of verses/ surahs were still possible. Dat is more difficult to prove seen complete absence can be chance.

    Dye:

    Altara, do you have the article where Dye argues that the text was arranged to adapt to the order? I have read that  but can't find it anymore...
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7316 - August 18, 2019, 02:07 PM

    ......................

    Dye:

    Altara, do you have the article where Dye argues that the text was arranged to adapt to the order? I have read that  but can't find it anymore...

     
     are you talking about this one dear mundi??

    The Qur'an and its Hypertextuality in Light of Redaction Criticism  by Guillaume Dye

    Well folks have published works before  Guillaume  on that " Surah arrangement .. or so-called revelation order vs compilation order "

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7317 - August 18, 2019, 02:22 PM

    Yeez,

    Maybe that's the article. Do you know where Dye argues that text was adapted to the changed Surah order? Can you give me the page?
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7318 - August 18, 2019, 02:31 PM

     .. read this 2nd paragraph right in the beginning .. copy/pasting a pdf document becomes a mess in the post..

    Quote
    ......A close examination of the Qur’ānic corpus provides arguments for a different view. .............

    read that paragraph... but he starts the publication with a BIIIIGGG "IF"..

    .........if Muhammad was the sole author of Quran....

    it is well established that "Muhammad" was NOT sole author of Quran... because .. THERE WAS NO Muhammad..

    Do not let silence become your legacy  
    I renounced my faith to become a kafir, 
    the beloved betrayed me and turned in to  a Muslim
     
  • Qur'anic studies today
     Reply #7319 - August 18, 2019, 03:24 PM

    Early manuscripts:

    It is surprising that no real changes have been found in these manuscripts, especially seen the early dating. From the very start (630? 650?) it was deemed not done to fix the text. Maybe complete additions of verses/ surahs were still possible. Dat is more difficult to prove seen complete absence can be chance.


    Can you reformulate?


    Quote
    Dye:

    Altara, do you have the article where Dye argues that the text was arranged to adapt to the order? I have read that  but can't find it anymore...


    Dye just remarks that the end of (some) sura (in the Vulgate order) is tied with the following one.
    I (not him, me...) add that it was probably done to tie sura in the Vulgate order one knows. Dye details how much sura it concerns :
    “Réflexions méthodologiques sur la ‘rhétorique coranique’, in M.A. Amir-Moezzi & D. de Smet (éd.) Controverses sur les écritures  canoniques de l’islam, Paris : Les Éditions du Cerf, 2014.pp. 147-176.
  • Previous page 1 ... 242 243 244245 246 ... 267 Next page « Previous thread | Next thread »