Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 10-07-2012, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duvduv

Ironically this would seem to go further than the critical work of scholars who do not critically examine the content and contexts of ancient Christian apologists, but who instead rely upon them.

On the other hand mainstream academics take at face value the historical narrative of Muslim apologetics. Yet the profession easily dismisses the narrative of Judaism without batting an eyelash.

It's time for you to either stop making these accusations against academics (that they accept some things uncritically) or back then up with actual examples of these sins and a discussion of the issue.

Duvduv · 10-07-2012, 02:27 PM

Toto, you would be entirely correct if I singled out someone by name rather than make a generic statement. But I can say I haven't found anyone yet doing a critical analysis of the content and context of justin, irenaeus or others that would call into question the dating or authenticity of the traditional authorship and dating, whether by historicists or mythists.
I think this is because they maintain an attachment to at least a second century Christianity. Thus they would not want to be identified as academic heretics.

If they are going to deconstruct the New Testament texts they should also spend time deconstructing the apologists writings.

Toto · 10-07-2012, 02:47 PM

Duvduv - Jay Rakin wrote a book that did what you are looking for.

The Evolution of Christs And Christianities (or via: amazon.co.uk)

He was due to revise it, and there were some technical problems with the printing, but you might find it of interest.

I point this out because you can't just say, no one has examined this critically. You have to give some idea of what the results might be after that critical examination, and why we should care.

Otherwise, you are not holding up your part of the conversation.

Mat · 10-09-2012, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by James The Least

"The Muslims' delusion that they have eyewitness reports for every aspect of Muhammed's life is similar to the delusion of fundamentalist and evangelical Christians that in the gospels they have eyewitness reports of the life of Jesus. Likewise, Orthodox Jews are convinced they have a record of all that is worth knowing about the life of Moses in the Pentateuch and the Talmud. The motivation for all these fantasies is the same. Believers, of necessity, need something to believe, and if the information is not to hand there are always those ready to supply it. Not always or necessarily in a spirit of deliberate falsification and conscious deceit, but as a natural product of the hothouse that is the pious imagination -- this is how it must have been -- given their view of God, man, history, and the scraps of information about the past that they happened to have. In other words, not what actually happened but what certain people believed to have happened. What we have in such documents as the Pentateuch, the New Testament, and the Sira (Life of Muhammed), is not history as understood by modern secular historians, but something that is at best called salvation, or sacred history, the history of God's plan for mankind. That is, not history at all in the sense of a record of real events in the ordinary world, but an imaginative literary genre."

Ibn al-Rawandi, "Origins of Islam: A Critical Look at the Sources," from Ibn Warraq, editor, The Quest for the Historical Muhammad (Prometheus Books, 2000),p. 92.

The thing about is that the Talmud is not like the Ahadith(Hadiths) in that it contains every minute detail regarding Moses's life rather it just basically a commentary of the Mishnah. Anything regarding Moses would in the Aggadic contents of the Talmud and would be there to provide a moral or theological lesson.

Duvduv · 10-09-2012, 05:15 PM

Thank you for the reference. I guess I had in mind all those controversial scholars the board has been discussing over the months.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Duvduv - Jay Rakin wrote a book that did what you are looking for.

The Evolution of Christs And Christianities (or via: amazon.co.uk)

He was due to revise it, and there were some technical problems with the printing, but you might find it of interest.

I point this out because you can't just say, no one has examined this critically. You have to give some idea of what the results might be after that critical examination, and why we should care.

Otherwise, you are not holding up your part of the conversation.

Duvduv · 10-09-2012, 07:27 PM

Changes in the Quran over the centuries:

http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/15565/
http://www.newenglishreview.org/cust...8/sec_id/16608

Al-Suyütï, Itqän fï ‘ulüm al-Qur’än, 2 vols., in 1, Halabï, Cairo, 1935 / 1354 , Pt.2 , p.25.

“‘Abdulläh b. ‘Umar reportedly said, ‘Let none of you say, “I have got the whole of the Koran.” How does he know what all of it is? Much of the Koran has gone [Arabic: Dahaba]. Let him say instead, “I have got what has survived.”’ [3]

This sentiment is echoed by a hadith in Al-Sijistänï, ‘Abd Alläh b.Sulaymän b.al-Ash‘ath, Abü Bakr Ibn Abï Däwüd 's Kitäb al-Masähif:[4]

“‘Umar b.al Khattäb enquired about a verse of the Book of God. On being informed that it had been in the possession of so-and–so who had been killed in the Yemäma wars, ‘Umar exclaimed the formula expressing loss, ‘We are God’s and unto Him is our return.’ ‘Umar gave the command and the Qur’än was collected. He was the first to collect the Qur’än.”

The written codex of Ibn Mas‘üd (died 653 C.E.) was well regarded in Kufa whereas the codex of Ubayy ibn Ka‘b (died 649 C.E. or 654 C.E.) was highly esteemed in most parts of Syria. However, we do not possess any of the early codices, the variant readings of Ibn Mas‘üd or Ubayy ibn Ka‘b have only come down to us in the early scholarly literature.

Ibn Mas‘üd:

"I have seen a number of Quranic manuscripts, which the transcribers recorded as manuscripts of Ibn Mas‘üd. No two of the Quranic copies were in agreement …" The Fihrist of al-Nadïm.

Duvduv · 10-15-2012, 05:20 AM

Ibn Warraq is a very controversial figure because he rejects the conventional wisdom. Apparently he argues that the conquest of North Africa by Arabs was not carried out by "Muslim" Arabs at all.

Virtually the entirety of mainstream scholarship on the emergence of Islam accepts the traditional narrative.
However, the contributors to his book must already be the core of new scholars taking a whole new look.

Quote:

Originally Posted by James The Least

Anyone interested in this subject should pick up a copy of Ibn Warraq's "The Quest for the Historical Muhammed." (or via: amazon.co.uk) I started reading it yesterday and couldn't put it down. Very comprehensive and thorough, well-written, and accessible. We also find the same divide that is found in Jesus studies. Arab scholars in places like Cairo accept as authentic a whole lot more than non-Arab scholars in places like London or New York. The latter point out that there is no evidence for the Koran prior to the 9th or 10th century.

Clivedurdle · 10-15-2012, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Ibn Warraq is a very controversial figure because he rejects the conventional wisdom.

??

Duvduv · 10-15-2012, 07:22 AM

His view of the emergence of Islam does not correspond to the mainstream which basically accepts the historical existence of Mohammed, the conquests of the "Muslims", the emergence of the Shia in the 7th-8th century, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

Quote:

Ibn Warraq is a very controversial figure because he rejects the conventional wisdom.

??

Duvduv · 10-17-2012, 02:50 PM

I have ordered Warraq's book and hope to engage in interesting discussion on the Forum as I go along. Unfortunately it appears that very few participants are interested in this subject. Hopefully this will change.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-07-2012, 02:27 PM	#92
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Toto, you would be entirely correct if I singled out someone by name rather than make a generic statement. But I can say I haven't found anyone yet doing a critical analysis of the content and context of justin, irenaeus or others that would call into question the dating or authenticity of the traditional authorship and dating, whether by historicists or mythists. I think this is because they maintain an attachment to at least a second century Christianity. Thus they would not want to be identified as academic heretics. If they are going to deconstruct the New Testament texts they should also spend time deconstructing the apologists writings.

10-07-2012, 02:47 PM	#93
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Duvduv - Jay Rakin wrote a book that did what you are looking for. The Evolution of Christs And Christianities (or via: amazon.co.uk) He was due to revise it, and there were some technical problems with the printing, but you might find it of interest. I point this out because you can't just say, no one has examined this critically. You have to give some idea of what the results might be after that critical examination, and why we should care. Otherwise, you are not holding up your part of the conversation.

10-09-2012, 07:27 PM	#96
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	Changes in the Quran over the centuries: http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/15565/ http://www.newenglishreview.org/cust...8/sec_id/16608 Al-Suyütï, Itqän fï ‘ulüm al-Qur’än, 2 vols., in 1, Halabï, Cairo, 1935 / 1354 , Pt.2 , p.25. “‘Abdulläh b. ‘Umar reportedly said, ‘Let none of you say, “I have got the whole of the Koran.” How does he know what all of it is? Much of the Koran has gone [Arabic: Dahaba]. Let him say instead, “I have got what has survived.”’ [3] This sentiment is echoed by a hadith in Al-Sijistänï, ‘Abd Alläh b.Sulaymän b.al-Ash‘ath, Abü Bakr Ibn Abï Däwüd 's Kitäb al-Masähif:[4] “‘Umar b.al Khattäb enquired about a verse of the Book of God. On being informed that it had been in the possession of so-and–so who had been killed in the Yemäma wars, ‘Umar exclaimed the formula expressing loss, ‘We are God’s and unto Him is our return.’ ‘Umar gave the command and the Qur’än was collected. He was the first to collect the Qur’än.” The written codex of Ibn Mas‘üd (died 653 C.E.) was well regarded in Kufa whereas the codex of Ubayy ibn Ka‘b (died 649 C.E. or 654 C.E.) was highly esteemed in most parts of Syria. However, we do not possess any of the early codices, the variant readings of Ibn Mas‘üd or Ubayy ibn Ka‘b have only come down to us in the early scholarly literature. Ibn Mas‘üd: "I have seen a number of Quranic manuscripts, which the transcribers recorded as manuscripts of Ibn Mas‘üd. No two of the Quranic copies were in agreement …" The Fihrist of al-Nadïm.

10-17-2012, 02:50 PM	#100
Duvduv Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: USA Posts: 4,095	I have ordered Warraq's book and hope to engage in interesting discussion on the Forum as I go along. Unfortunately it appears that very few participants are interested in this subject. Hopefully this will change.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.