Christian/Muslim ThreadsNo Proof Quran Copied from Bible, Gnostic or Jewish Sources1) Loki has now given a more reasonable definition of plagiarism. Let us see if the definition fits the accusation that Muhammad (pbuh) plagiarised from the apocryphals. Two things: i) To appropriate the writings or ideas (copying from text or oral transmission) Loki has not been able to prove that the Prophet copied from the text of the Arabic Gospel of Infancy although he inferred that it is possible that the Prophet get his story from other individuals. He has since not been able to say from exactly which person the Prophet is supposed to get his story. I even asked if he thought the Prophet got the stories from a committee? ii) Represent the end product as one's own. This is more difficult task to prove. I challenge Loki to prove to me that Muhammad (pbuh) claimed/declared/signed/authorised the Quran as his own writing/ideas. 2) If Loki does not have any evidence to support his initialy claim of carbon-dating, then he shouldn't have raised it in the first place. Being careless is one thing, giving false claim is another. 3) Loki came up with another 'brilliant' idea. He wanted to persuade the readers that Muhammad (pbuh) copied from the Jewish writings. This is a serious claim indeed. He wrote: I would like Loki to show me the text from the Jewish writings against the verses from the Quran to first see if the arguments stand. We can discuss the details later. 4) Loki wrote initially that "Mecca and Medina was infested with heretic christians (banned to the arabian pensulina by the catholic church)." He further wrote that it is "more rational to believe that they were allready there and a large part of it's society?" I have never deny that there were Christians at Medina, but to say that "Mecca and Medina was infested with heretic christians" and that the heretical Christians represent "a large part of it's society" is something which I wanted Loki to prove. Whatever 'subjective' number he envisioned of 'infested', he should provide us backings from scholars who have made studies on 'heretical Christians' in Mecca and medina. 5) Loki even misinterpreted what I wrote: I did not say that the Arabic Gospel of Infancy is 'bad' or 'nonsensical arabic'. I wrote that the Infancy Gospel was probably Egyptian or Syriac Arabic and not Quraish as spoken and written in Mecca. In view of that, it is difficult to prove that the book existed in Mecca for copying/plagiarising etc. 6) Now, be prepared for this: i) Muhammad (pbuh) has many enemies in Mecca and Medina. Did anyone complained that Muhammad (pbuh) got his stories from person A or person B or committee C? Do you have any writings from "people living in muhammed's time" which states that he got his sources from someone? ii) There is no such thing as "proof with 100% certainty". You either have the proof or you dont. 7) Loki wrote You did not give any proof. You just pick up some ideas without backing from realiable sources. You are only speculating, and that is not proof. One thing which Loki and other Christians failed to provide is: MOTIVE for copying the stories. You probably would hear that word crop up in court cases. Why would Muhammad (pbuh) copied/plagiarised from apocryphal or folklore, as Loki mentioned? What benefit would he get from Christians during his time? 8) I did not say there were no Christains at Medina during his time. Loki however wrote that "muhammed was surrounded with people who had knowledge about 'the people of the book' " The word 'surrounded' seems to suggest that he was in constant contact with Jews and Christians. That is historically inaccurate. I would suggest that Loki seeks the help of his Holy Spirit, if it is available to him, to be more careful when giving his arguments. salam |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame