A Crushing Critique of the Contradicting Qira'at Qur'ans

[The Theosist]

Game over.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_v6BkxYtEc[/yt]

Examples of variants begin at 1:15:00. But more interesting than any theological implications of variants is the mere fact that the claims of Muslim apologists concerning the history and singular status of the text is horse manure.

[Vetus Ordo]

The science of the qira'at is one of the most well-established disciplines of the Islamic religious sciences. It would not have been possible for Jay Smith, or any other Western critic, to become aware of this fact if it hadn't been discussed in Islamic scholarship for more than a millennium. Some works dealing with the ahruf and the qira'at have only recently been translated into English.

There's nothing new or secretive about this fact. For instance, there are competitions of huffaz every year across the globe. In them, every contestant has to declare which accepted recitation he's using. Traditional Islamic scholarship has maintained that the different qira'at complement one another and add nuance to the meaning of the Qur'an. One may accept or reject the rationale of Islamic scholarship on this point but it's disingenuous to present these facts to an English-speaking audience as watershed moments that will crush the integrity of the koranic text. Even skeptics and revisionist historians admit that the Qur'an we have today is remarkably uniform and that there are no other passages, or wholly unknown texts claiming to be Qur'an, in existence.

For a traditional take on this subject, I recommend this video:

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5oEYQbnkDk[/yt]

[The Theosist]

Typical straw man and distracting non-response to the content of the video and the actual critique being levelled against the claims of the Islamic tradition. You haven't dealt with it in any way. Deal with the points raised and actual arguments made, or shut up. This is not a difficult concept to grasp. There is no "the Qur'an"; its a logical nonsense.

[The Theosist]

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJs95LZX9tw[/yt]

Wherein a Muslim admits that the traditional understanding of which our resident dago Islamophile speaks cannot answer pressing questions on this issue being asked by Western scholarship.

Obviously. This is like comparing the "science" of the Medieval Scholastic historiography with modern textual criticism and archaeology and claiming the former has dealt with the discoveries, issues and questions of the latter concerning the Old and New Testaments and the formative history of the Hebrew and Christian religion. (Several Catholic theologians wrongly excoriated as "Modernists" at least attempted to arrive at honest solutions to these problems in Christianity.)


Trust Vetus ... or believe the Muslim and watch the first video for yourself.

[Vetus Ordo]

Trust Vetus ... or believe the Muslim and watch the first video for yourself.

Dr. Qadhi already clarified those statements recently.

Furthermore, Islamic scholarship is not confined to Dr. Qadhi. There's an actual field of study regarding the ahruf and the qira'at that spans more than a thousand years.

People who wish to engage meaningfully with Islamic scholarship know where to find it. Even if one has to reject its concept of the Qur'an and the accepted recitations, it's nevertheless important to understand their own methodology, rationale and literature. The video I shared is simply an introduction to it.

[Fleur-de-Lys]

Our resident dago!   

You should make that your custom title, Vetus.

[The Theosist]

Our resident dago!   

You should make that your custom title, Vetus.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjgWWjkNbhU[/yt]

[Vetus Ordo]

Our resident dago!   

You should make that your custom title, Vetus.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjgWWjkNbhU[/yt]

I think he likes you, Fleur.

[TheReturnofLive]

Our resident dago!   

You should make that your custom title, Vetus.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjgWWjkNbhU[/yt]

I can't get over the picture of a cartoon lion giving bedroom eyes.

[Fleur-de-Lys]

Our resident dago!   

You should make that your custom title, Vetus.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjgWWjkNbhU[/yt]

I can't get over the picture of a cartoon lion giving bedroom eyes.

I feel for you, Live. I've learned not to click on The Theosist's videos since he posted one by Air Supply.

[The Theosist]

Our resident dago!   

You should make that your custom title, Vetus.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjgWWjkNbhU[/yt]

I can't get over the picture of a cartoon lion giving bedroom eyes.

I feel for you, Live. I've learned not to click on The Theosist's videos since he posted one by Air Supply.

Still not as bourgeois, trashy and sappy as a Jane Austen novel.

[Fleur-de-Lys]

Our resident dago!   

You should make that your custom title, Vetus.

[yt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjgWWjkNbhU[/yt]

I can't get over the picture of a cartoon lion giving bedroom eyes.

I feel for you, Live. I've learned not to click on The Theosist's videos since he posted one by Air Supply.

Still not as bourgeois, trashy and sappy as a Jane Austen novel.

You've correctly identified my avatar as a cinematic depiction of Jane Austen. I'm impressed. Since you couldn't possibly have seen the film, despising her work as you do, you must have done a reverse image search on my avatar. I don't know whether to be flattered or disturbed by such attention, Theosist.

Be that as it may, my avatar is simply a picture of a lady reading. But, if it is giving people flashbacks to high school English class and traumatizing them as much as your musical selections, then I might consider changing it.

[The Theosist]

Because I have no idea who Anne Hathaway is.