A popular argument used by Christian polemicists is to claim that the author of the Qur’an (whom they take to be Muhammad), borrowed stories from early Christian apocryphal works. The assumption appears to be that because the Qur’an’s truths appear in earlier literature (including the Bible) whose sources are in most cases lost, then this kind of apocryphal writing cannot contain material that was handed down from some earlier genuinely prophetic document.
It is characteristic of Christian polemic to deploy criticisms of Islam that would quickly rebound on the Bible if only they they were honest enough to use their criteria consistently. But they never do.
Here is an example of what I mean.
Jude 9 mentions an incident in The Assumption of Moses, an apocryphal work that was never part of the Jewish canon of Scripture:
Yet in the same way these dreamers also defile the flesh, reject authority, and slander the glorious ones. But when the archangel Michael contended with the devil and disputed about the body of Moses, he did not dare to bring a condemnation of slander against him, but said, ‘The Lord rebuke you!’
Did Michael actually say “The Lord rebuke you!”? God knows best. But The Assumption of Moses is usually dated to the 1st century BC. Moses probably lived and died mid-13th century BC. The historical gap is enormous. Conservative Christians do not usually hesitate to accept this story as historical simply because it is in the Bible. Yet historians will tell you it is apocryphal.
Another example from the same letter:
It was also about these that Enoch, in the seventh generation from Adam, prophesied, saying, ‘See, the Lord is coming with tens of thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgement on all, and to convict everyone of all the deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him.’
Here we apparently have the actual words of Enoch the grandfather of Noah just seven generations from Adam! The quote originates in The Book of Enoch an ancient Jewish religious work. Modern scholars estimate the older sections (mainly Book of the Watchers where the quote is located) to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the first century BC.
When did Enoch live? This depends on when we date Adam. If you accept modern science, then this suggests that we (Homo sapiens) have lived from about 250,000 years ago to the present. The Book of Enoch was compiled many centuries after Enoch, to put it mildly.
I am not saying that just because a text is classified as ‘apocryphal’ by historians then it is unhistorical. A case can be made that the ‘apocryphal’ stories in the Quran are based on history. The same kinds of literature are used by New Testament authors yet are accepted as historical without any hesitation by Christian apologists. To misquote James White:
‘I have yet to meet a consistent Christian.’
Categories: Bible, Christianity, Judaism, Quran
Blogging Theology 
Christians have double standards in regard to Qur’an?? I’m Shocked!!! 🙂
Good article!
LikeLiked by 4 people
Thanks
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting examples.
I guess our Christian friends would also believe Moses copied from the Epic of Gilgamesh if they were consistent.
James White uses this anti-Islam polemic of borrowing too. Just goes to show that talking about consistency is easier than being consistent.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Fair point.
I think the problem for Muslims is slightly different though, in that the apocryphal stories it adopts are CONTRARY to known history.
You said at the end that you believe a case can be made that they are historical- that is the crux and I’d be interested to hear your evidence.
LikeLike
For example?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pick anyone you like. I don’t mind.
LikeLike
Don’t play games. You make a claim:
‘I think the problem for Muslims is slightly different though, in that the apocryphal stories it adopts are CONTRARY to known history.’
Now back it up with actual evidence. I know of no examples.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Try 3:37.
LikeLike
quote it please.
LikeLiked by 1 person
3:37 Her Lord graciously accepted her and made her grow in goodness, and entrusted her to the charge of Zachariah. Whenever Zachariah went to see her in her sanctuary, he found her supplied with provisions. He said, “Mary how is it you have found these provisions?” and she said, “They are from God: God provides limitlessly for whoever He wills.”
LikeLike
‘I think the problem for Muslims is slightly different though, in that the apocryphal stories it adopts are CONTRARY to known history.’
You have not said why this story is “CONTRARY to known history”
Get to the point dude!
LikeLiked by 4 people
favourite christian past-time: throw red herrings because I can’t defend my Bible.
LikeLiked by 4 people
“favourite christian past-time: throw red herrings because I can’t defend my Bible.”
Indeed!
LikeLiked by 2 people
very true in my experience
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paulus is a master at the art of throwing out red-herrings, its pretty much all he does.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“A case can be made that the ‘apocryphal’ stories in the Quran are based on history.”
Do you agree that this is a story taken from the protoevangelium of James?
LikeLike
Quote me the text of James you think relevant.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Now who is playing games? It’s a simple question Paul. What are you afraid of?
LikeLike
Paulus, you clearly don’t want to provide evidence for your claim, presumably you are embarrassed and do not have any.
Because you are insincere I will not bother replying to your question.
Motto: don’t feed the trolls.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Do you agree that this is a story taken from the protoevangelium of James?
Evidence provided. I explicitly cited the document.
Just answer the question, or will you admit that you can’t actually defend your claim?
LikeLike
Where did you cite the protoevangelium of James?
LikeLiked by 1 person
The problem with christians as the Lion, Ahmed deedat has said ” They don’t read their bible”!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Oh dear, a deedat fan…
LikeLike
“Where did Jesus say I’m God”!
He’s the person who has released that question which has not been answer till this moment.
His questions and challenges still stand.
Indeed,I’m a big fan. May Allah have mercy on him, and May Allah reward him.
LikeLiked by 3 people
It tells…
LikeLike
“Paulus is a master at the art of throwing out red-herrings, its pretty much all he does.”
Actually, I said that Paul had a fair point. But there are some things that are not parallel. Paul also said that a case can be made for the historicity of the Koranic gnostic fables. I’m still waiting for him to give me the evidence. So no red herrings, just pushing Paul to answer a question for once
LikeLike
The premise of brother Paul Williams’ article is the double standard christians apply to the use of non-canonical texts. You have failed, or did-not bother to justify why the epistle of Jude uses apocryphal texts, and immediately set upon attacking the Quran. This is a red herring.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Paulus, you clearly don’t want to provide evidence for your claim ‘the apocryphal stories it adopts are CONTRARY to known history’ – presumably you are embarrassed and do not have any.
Because you are insincere I will not bother replying to your question.
Motto: don’t feed the trolls.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Paulus is throwing a red herring to distract from his previous red herring! I told u he is the Master! 😂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Son of Issam.
You are clearly no logician dear boy
LikeLike
There were many accounts about Jesus’ life even before the gospel of Luke was written:
“1 Many have undertaken to draw up an account of the things that have been fulfilled[a] among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word. 3 With this in mind, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, 4 so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught.” [Luke 1:1-4]
If the author is correct that many took it upon themselves to compile accounts about Jesus even before “Luke” wrote his work, then we should ask what these accounts are? We can think of Mark or Q or even Matthew as being before “Luke” but these would not be “many”. Where are the rest? Is it possible that some of the other accounts made it into the writings of other Christian groups that the imperial church of the fourth century chose not to include?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Luke investigated the evidence from eyewitness testimony.
Muhammad adopted gnostic fables from later centuries.
Hardly a comparison
LikeLike
The point is that there were many written accounts that preceded Luke.
Where are these accounts and what do they contain? Did some part of these accounts make their way to other writings?
The accounts you dismiss as gnostic fables from our perspective is like the Book of Enoch to you. They have both true and false elements. Christians are forced to accept that BOE has genuine elements because Jude’s quote from Enoch is found there. So even if you reject the bulk of BOE you have to admit that there is still some truth in BOE.
Likewise we see the different canons of the different Christian sects as containing both true and false elements. The 27 books that the fourth century imperial church deemed canon has both truth and falsehoods. Likewise other sets of writings of groups now considered Jewish-Christian or gnostic also have both truth and falsehood.
LikeLiked by 1 person
BTW, the narratives in the 4 canonical gospels contradict each other.
For example, “Luke” says Jesus appeared to the 11 remaining disciples simultaneously in the upper room.
“John” says Thomas was not present and met Jesus after days.
If only one of these books had made it into the canon, you would have dismissed the other account as a fable.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi
Very interesting article I will add some info after work I hope will help generate some meaningful dialogue.
LikeLike
I can bearly wait.
LikeLike
Hi Paul
you quote Jude 1:14 as coming from.the book of Enoch.
Jude said “And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these”
When did prophesying become quoting from a book?
Just because someone quotes a person that
gives a prophesy it does mean they have written a book
Thayer Definition:
to prophesy, to be a prophet, speak forth by divine inspirations, to predict
to prophesy
with the idea of foretelling future events pertaining especially to the kingdom of God
to utter forth, declare, a thing which can only be known by divine revelation
Strong’s Definition: From G4396; to foretell events, divine, speak under inspiration, exercise the prophetic office: – prophesy
And the “ten thousand of his saints” is not unique to Enoch.
Deut 33:2
And he said, The LORD came from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them; he shined forth from mount Paran, and he came with ten thousands of saints: from his right hand went a fiery law for them
who is Moses quoting?
LikeLike
What is the point your trying to make?
If you are saying that Moses was quoting Enoch, it s not clear from the text that Deut 33:2 is a quote from anywhere to begin with. Please let me know why you think Deut 33:2 is a quote from somewhere else. I would love to know.
Even if we say Moses was quoting an earlier Enoch-ic source, the point still stands. There is no way to substantiate the existence of an Enoch-ic source at the time of Moses. So from where did Jude get the quote? The point is that Jude explicitly connects the quote to Enoch. He does not connect the quote to Moses or Solomon. For Jude to be true, both the prophecy and its attribution to Enoch must be genuine.
Now it is entirely possible that an Israelite prophet (maybe Moses) was made aware of the prophecy from Enoch through revelation and that this genuine prophecy made it’s way into sources like Jewish oral tradition and the Book of Enoch. From this perspective while the oral tradition and the Book of Enoch may contain false information, there would still be elements of truth in them. Those truths could include both the prophecy and it’s connection to Enoch. If you accept this explanation, then I do not see what would your argument is.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“A case can be made that the ‘apocryphal’ stories in the Quran are based on history.”
1. What stories are you referencing?
2. Please make your case.
LikeLike
Waiting for you to give your evidence Paul…
LikeLike
You will be waiting a very long time…
LikeLike
Hot air. Full of. Typical muhammadan
LikeLike
Oh well what can you do?
LikeLike
Williams, you are considerably smarter than this. Apart from the tu quoque fallacy, you are comparing apples and pineapples and here is why. Do you believe the Quran is the uncreated speech of Allah?
LikeLike
This is not a tu quoque fallacy.
We are accepting the possibility of a document containing both truth and falsehood.
The NT has both truth and falsehood.
The writings of other Christian groups also has truths and falsehoods.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Hi Fawaz
The bible says in Jude 1:14 and Enoch prophesied of these saying.
When Jude was quoting Enoch it does not say he was quoting from a book.
Jude does not say “as written by the prophet Enoch”
So why do you assume its a book.
The reason I went to Moses is because there are a couple things that match what Jude wrote.
1. The Lord is coming.
2. With 10,000 saints
3. With the Law / jude says execute Judgement.
What event are they both talking about is it the same one?
LikeLike
Fawart, pretend that you actually comprehend the argument. Therefore, let me try this again. Do you believe that the Quran is the uncreated speech of Allah?
And dare to debate me on whether your profit thought that the Scriptures of the Jews and Christians contained truth and falsehoods? You got the Bible confused with the Quran and sunnah which is filled with stupidity and nonsense.
LikeLike
Sam you know the Islamic answer to your question. Get to the point if you have one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@defendchrist,
Jude does not say he is quoting a book. But he attributes the prophecy to Enoch.
He does not attribute it to Moses (Deut 33:2) or Solomon(Song of Songs 5).
So how does Jude know that Enoch was the one who made this prophecy.
The canonical sources (Deuteronomy and Song of Songs) don’t say Enoch was there source.
If Jude had said that Moses or Solomon made this prophecy you would have a point.
The connection of this prophecy to Enoch cannot be established in the canon. But Jude makes this attribution to Enoch.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think that this post presents a legitimate argument but can be answered. I’m considering doing a post on it, though I have the next 3 or 4 posts planned. Either way, look for the post on my blog – allanruhl.com in the near though not immediate future.
LikeLike
Hi Paul
Can you quote from the Koran any text the gospel which is true.
I know the koran says or should I say Allah that the prophet Muhammad is in the gospel.
Fawaz said there is truth and falsehood in the NT and I know one verse you quote but not the following verse.
Acts 2:22-24
22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:
23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.
so Paul verses 23 and 24 are false are they?
Verse 23 is confirned by Roman historians where are no friends of the church.
so can you quote some of the truth of the gospel from your koran
you like areas, pharisees, scribes, passover any of the gospel miracles not gnostic ones but gospel an actual gospel miracle.
LikeLike
This is garbled
LikeLike
Extremely poor reasoning, Paul.
Jude 9 is not claiming that these apocryphal stories are true, just that the teachings are true.
The quran, by contrast, is claimed to contain the historical actions of jesus and others. Do credible NT scholars believe it to be historical that jesus spoke at birth? Do they believe it to be historical that jesus made little animals from clay and brought the to life? Do they believe it to be historical that Alexander the great reached the place on the earth where the sun sets? Did a human corpse truly come back to life when it was hit with a steak?
The answer to all these islamic “truths” is “NO!!!”, no credible scholar finds these to be historical. The quran is false, ergo.
LikeLike
authors of four contradictory gospels claiming their versions are true.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All anonymous too
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kev, the extremely poor reasoning is on your part.
The argument is that “Jude” (whoever he is) uses non-canonical/apocryphal texts AS AUTHORITY, regardless of whether he believes the story.
To say that he does not believe in these stories is a LIE. Can you show me the evidence where it suggests that? Rather, he mentions stories from the Bible and these apocryphal sources without differentiating them, as if they were all scripture or authority. I am all too familiar with your methods in mutilating scripture.
You and other christians are adamant in using the Genetic fallacy: if there are apocryphal references in the bible, they’re true, if they are in the Quran, they’re false; and provide no proper historical method to prove either.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Plus, the old christian habit of machine-gunning is not proving your case nor dismissing ours.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Poor fools.
Paul’s post is a jumble of half baked assertions and unresolved points.
The quran is claimed to have been uniquely revealed by some demonic like entity, claiming to be an angel of allah (who, itself claims to be I AM, but never actually says so), over a period of twenty or so years to an illiterate nomad.
The presence of fables and apocrypha from other faiths is hugely problematic for anyone who cares about reason, logic, and truth. If mohammed merely regurgitated these fables, then they were clearly not revealed to him, which means that islam is a development and not a unique revelation.
The quran is not revealed, and islam is false. Ergo.
LikeLike
Another problem is that the fables he utilised, he often paraphrased them. Kinda demonstrates that the idea of isnaad is proven false by Muhammad’s failure to adhere to the idea.
LikeLike
Any comment of the NT use of apocryphal stories?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Paul Williams
“Any comment of the NT use of apocryphal stories?”
They serve as valuable teaching tools and don’t claim to be more than that. The quran – as you have pointed out – claims to be the revealed word of allah, yet it plagiarizes fables and apocrypha from other faiths that no credible scholar claims are historical.
The only historicity associated with such apocrypha is that they pre-date mohammed and are thus, not divine revelation.
Even more awkwardly, some of these fables strongly portray jesus as a divine figure – he creates life, and is god’s word. In any case, the quran is proved to be false.
LikeLike
Paulus
That is a great point – as Andy Bannister points out in his work, the structure of the quran indicates that it is a written version of an oral tradition, written in the style of an oral tradition. Yet, there are enough changes in the apocryphal stories to completely destroy the notion of miraculous transmission of the quran across decades.
Another shot in the foot for islam.
LikeLike
Kev,
“Do credible NT scholars believe it to be historical that jesus spoke at birth?”
Reply:
Are you talking about empirical history or biblical studies?
Historians are unanimous that miracles are outside the realm of secular history. So such a question frequently asked by you people is just moot.
If you think otherwise, which secular historian confirmed the virgin birth historically? What about Jesus’ first miracle of turning water into booze?
“Do they believe it to be historical that jesus made little animals from clay and brought the to life?”
Reply:
Ditto.
“Do they believe it to be historical that Alexander the great reached the place on the earth where the sun sets?”
Reply:
Neither the Qur’an not canonical Hadith mentioned Alexendar the Great.
“Did a human corpse truly come back to life when it was hit with a steak?”
Reply:
Still, the same moot question. And, did a human corpse come back to life when it was touched by a bone of another dead man (2 Kings 13:21)?
Based on the same logic, why didn’t you find the Bible and Christianity false? Fallacy of inconsistency?
LikeLike
Paulus & Kev,
This topic is not for you. Go and play away from here. We’re just enjoying slapping you, and I think you’ve got enough. You’re just embarrassing yourselves, btw.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Abdullah
No one’s gotten slapped but the muslim bros. Paul’s post is exposed as a jumble of half baked ideas, poor reasoning, and logical faux pas.
LikeLike
Kev & Paulus, here is the question you haven’t answered for the umpteenth time:
Why do Xtians consider it valid when their Bible uses the Assumption of Moses and the Book of Enoch, which date form the Greco-Roman era, i.e: thousands of years from the events they narrate, and are considered apocryphal by christian authority;
But consider it invalid when the Quran agrees with the nativity gospels which date within a century of the events they narrate, and were considered truthful accounts of the missing years of Jesus by early christians?
Ramblings, autistic screechings, red herrings, genetic fallacies, propaganda, insults and ad hominems do not constitute a proper response. If you have nothing meaningful to say, do not waste our time. You can post your rabid, hateful comments in your forums, not in a site which values serious and academic discussion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ibn Awad
Your concerns have been amply answered in my previous posts. The quran is considered to be the word of god, yet it plagiarizes fables, myths, and materials rejected by scholars as unhistorical.
Biblical reference to possible apocrypha are inerrant in their teaching.
Thus, the quran is false and from satan.
LikeLike
Wow. What you just said is the textbook example of a genetic fallacy. It seems you really have nothing meaningful to say except insults. Typical xtian attitude.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ibn
LOL!! Classic islamic thinking.
The origin of the texts and materials is the crux of the debate you fool. If muslims claim that the plagiarized materials in the quran are special and unique revelation – which they do – then pointing out that these materials have origins decades and centuries before mohammed lived pretty much falsifies your false beliefs.
There is no genetic fallacy in showing that mohammed took man made materials and claimed to have received them from some divine source. Even the quran notes that mohammed’s peers knew the stories he told were myths and fables and they mocked him for it.
LikeLike
No, fool, the one and only question of this article is the double standard Xtians employ, ignoring the fact that their own Bible uses “apocryphal” sources. The question is not whether the Quran contains stories found in non-biblical sources. That’s why the brothers ignored your incessant ramblings.
The genetic fallacy you are using ad nauseam is: even though my bible quotes non-canonical material, it’s inerrant. If the Quran does it, it’s not.
By the way, it is your religious duty to answer such a question, and with respect and humility:
“Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with GENTLENESS AND RESPECT”. 1 Peter 3:15
Again: the question is to justify double standard xtians use even though their bible uses non-canonical material; not whether the Quran narrates stories not found in the Bible.
If you’re going to repeat the same hogwash, consider the discussion over.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From the article: “It is characteristic of Christian polemic to deploy criticisms of Islam that would quickly rebound on the Bible if only they they were honest enough to use their criteria consistently. But they never do.” This is the ever repeated question we ask you, which you never answered.
LikeLike
Ibn awad
Classic strawman fallacy.
My argument is not in any way what you foolishly represent it to be.
The muslim claim is that apocrypha that appears in the quran is not apocrypha at all, but the unique revelation of allah to mohammed. Thus, it is the word of your god.
Clearly, these passages in the quran come from pre-mohammedan non-muslim sources, and are overwhelmingly held to be unhistorical by credible scholars.
listen carefully now, I’ll try to go slowly so that you get what I’m saying. Biblical reference to apocrypha is inerrant in its teaching, not its historicity. The teaching is divinely inerrant, not the historicity. Get it?
So, it can be, and has been demonstrated that what muslims believe to be divine words, are man made fables, making the quran false.
It isn’t hard.
LikeLike
Ibn Awad
Ibn Awad
Oops, formatting problem. Here it is again….
LOL!!
This is a significant problem with Paul’s fallacious reasoning. You cannot apply the same criteria to both materials because the claims made about each one is different. It’s like claiming that buses are not a mode of transport because they don’t have wings like planes. It is utilizing the wrong criteria to assess different modes of transport.
The muslims and christians do not make the same claims about their respective books, so the criteria applied to one cannot in this case be applied to the other.
LikeLike
Your “argument” is so filled with nonsense, I need to refute it in point format:
1) Empty Claim/Baseless statement: “Biblical reference to apocrypha is inerrant in its teaching, not its historicity”. You haven’t provided evidence for the validity of this position. This position is not dogma, just one variety in interpreting scripture. Biblical Inerrantists/Literalists will disagree with your position. Plus, it can lead to sophistry, if any story in the bible is proved to be unhistorical, one can just say it is symbolic, so what part of the bible is to be read symbolically and what is to be read literally?
2) Historian’s fallacy: presuming those from the past had the same position as those from the present.
You assumed that your position (inerrant teaching, errant historicity) is the same as that of the writer of Jude. This remains to be proven.
In other words, I don’t care if you believe that, prove that “Jude” did, he is the one under question.
3) Causal oversimplification: for e.g. increase violence among young people today is due to video games. You saying that the Quran can only come from unhistorical sources, without considering alternatives.
4) The ever annoying genetic fallacy: which basically summarises your argument.
LikeLike
The criteria, genius, is that if a holy book contains stories from non-canonical material, it is proven false, that is what you xtians say. If we reverse that to the bible, guess what?
LikeLike
By the way, your initial argument is that “Jude” himself did not necessarily take these stories to be true, which is another empty claim/lie.
LikeLike
Ibn awad
“Empty Claim/Baseless statement: “Biblical reference to apocrypha is inerrant in its teaching, not its historicity”. You haven’t provided evidence for the validity of this position.”
LOL!!
Great way to show that this discussion is flying way over your head. The point wasn’t to prove my position is the correct one, but to demonstrate that the criteria you are trying to apply is incorrect. It really, really is not hard.
“You assumed that your position (inerrant teaching, errant historicity) is the same as that of the writer of Jude. This remains to be proven.”
OMG!! You just keep proving that you are a complete fool. Show me where Jude claims that his reference to extra-biblical material is a reference to god’s literal word? The quran claims to be god’s literal word. Your arguments are stupid.
” You saying that the Quran can only come from unhistorical sources, without considering alternatives.”
Wut?!! The plagiarized fables in the quran are demonstrably taken from pre-islamic materials, long dismissed as unhistorical by all credible scholars. Hate the scholars, not the messenger.
“The ever annoying genetic fallacy: which basically summarises your argument.”
Again, the subject of the debate is the origin of materials. There is no genetic fallacy here. You are a fool.
LikeLike
Ibn Awad
“The criteria, genius, is that if a holy book contains stories from non-canonical material, it is proven false, that is what you xtians say. If we reverse that to the bible, guess what?”
No, fool, the criteria is that if a holy book is claimed to be the literal word of god and it can be demonstrated that it contains materials with the exact wording from pre-existing sources, then it is likely not the literal word of god, but a tradition that was plagiarized and incorporated into said holy book.
The quran contains materials overwhelmingly known to have been taken from pre-islamic fables, myths, and apocrypha that are rejected by scholars as unhistorical, and thus both unlikely to be divine, and likely to be a load of rubbish.
LikeLike
The burden of proof is on YOU. You need to prove that Jude did not take these stories to be true, even though he mentions them along with biblical stories WITHOUT DISTINCTION, unless you’re willing to say he did not believe also in the exodus or the story of Sodom and Gomorrah . You said that Jude did not take these stories to be necessarily true, and provided no evidence except a personal position which you cannot prove to be the position of Jude.
“The subject of the debate is the origin of materials”, who’s using straw-mans here?
I feel that you’re starting to go into another rambling tirade, so this discussion is to come to a close.
LikeLike
Last of all, thank you for showing me christian love, in the form of unsolicited insults “fool, rubbish, devilish, etc…”. You are indeed spreading the gospel through gutter talk.
LikeLike
“But consider it invalid when the Quran agrees with the nativity gospels which date within a century of the events they narrate, and were considered truthful accounts of the missing years of Jesus by early christians?”
I cited S3:37. It borrows from the protoevangelium of James, the earliest copy we have dates from the3rd centuryAD. It is rejected by scholars as unhistorical. Yet, your Koran adopts its stories.
LikeLike
Ibn awad
“The burden of proof is on YOU. “
Wrong.You guys made the claim that Jude was quoting sources believed to be historical. The burden of proof is on YOU.
LikeLike
Hi
I am still to hear from the muslims in regards to what Jude said about how Enoch prophesied.
Jude does not say…as written in the book of Enoch.
how did this book if written survive it would have to have been written many years before Abraham and Jacob not forgetting Moses.
and if so on what?
LikeLike
THIS FOR WILLIAMS SO HERE GOES.
Williams since orthodox sunni Islam affirms the uncreated nature of the Quran seeing that it is supposed to be the speech of Allah, and therefore one of his essential attributes, this means that all the apocryphal fables that the Quran plagiarizes from are uncreated as well.
Therefore, be so kind and answer the following questions.
How did these fables which were written by uninspired Jews and Christians manage to find themselves in a revelation that is supposed to be without beginning?
Does this mean that Allah caused these fables to be written down by uninspired anonymous men and/or women before he revealed them to Muhammad? If this is what he did then please be so kind and explain to us how Allah managed to guide such anonymous authors to write down fairy-tales that have always existed when such individuals were neither prophets or messengers?
But it gets a whole lot worse for you since the Quran garbles up all of the apocryphal fairy-tales and legends which it includes as part of its uncreated, beginningless contents. Does this therefore mean that Allah deliberately had anonymous and/or pseudonymous authors record the wrong versions of the fables included in the uncreated speech of Allah? If this is what he did then why did he? Why did he have people record the wrong versions of the Quran’s eternal, uncreated fairy-tales?
Or should we assume that Allah’s uncreated speech was shaped, formed and fashioned by what Allah knew would eventually be written down and passed on orally by creatures who hadn’t come into existence? If so then doesn’t this make Allah dependent upon his creatures since their existence and the fables which they would write and/or transmit orally had to necessarily come into being in order for the Quran to be what it’s supposed to have always been? And if the existence of such beings and sources were necessary then that means Allah was bound and obligated to create them, since his uncreated speech would be jeopardized if he didn’t create these individuals and the fairytales that they ended up producing.
Or should we instead assume that Allah predestined that these fairy tales would be written down and/or passed on orally, and also predestined the existence of those who would transmit such fables? If so then why did he predestine the wrong version of these legends and fables which do not correspond exactly to the fairy tales and nonsense found in the Quran?
Hopefully Williams you will be honest enough to post this and not delete it, and do your best to answer these questions. Let’s see how well you do.
LikeLike
I know already that you’re an ignorant man, but I haven’t realized the level of your ignorance till I read this comment. Man, your case is very serious!
LikeLike
Bilal does seem to hold a very unorthodox position on the Koran. By admitting that the Koran contains apocryphal stories he has stepped outside of the orthodox Sunni position
LikeLike
Sam, i honestly can’t believe how dumb you are. Let me make it really simple for you, do you believe yahweh’s attributes eternal?
The answer would obviously be yes,as you believe God eternally loved himself [the three persons loved each other since eternity] etc. Love is an attribute.
Now, do you believe Yahweh has had everything in his knowledge since eternity [which would include the text in the old testament/new testament, would include your actions in this world etc]?
LikeLike
“Modern scholars estimate the older sections (mainly Book of the Watchers where the quote is located) to date from about 300 BC, and the latest part (Book of Parables) probably to the first century BC.”
So your arguments are based on estimates and guesstimates. No science involved.
More likely that these writings came after the NT with the purpose of discrediting it.
LikeLike
Estimation IS a scientific tool. We do it in Economics all the time.
LikeLike
Typical conversation with Kev:
Muslim: Hi, how are you?
Kev: I’m fine, thus, Islam is false.
LikeLiked by 2 people
LOL
LikeLike
Paul, aren’t you meant to answer the questions asked by Sam? Good luck!
LikeLike
Maybe. Maybe not.
LikeLike