Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

duvduv · **#21** by **duvduv** » Aug 23, 2015 8:16 am

Which evidence, Thomas?

Thomas Eshuis · **#22** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 23, 2015 8:21 am

duvduv wrote:Which evidence, Thomas?

Archeological, written, etc.

duvduv · **#23** by **duvduv** » Aug 23, 2015 8:26 am

What written or archeological evidence concerns why the Quran does not mention Paul or the gospels?

Thomas Eshuis · **#24** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 23, 2015 8:28 am

duvduv wrote:What written or archeological evidence concerns why the Quran does not mention Paul or the gospels?

Try reading the thread again. You're asking questions that don't make sense.

duvduv · **#25** by **duvduv** » Aug 23, 2015 8:32 am

Please be specific. Whether or not you think my questions make sense is subjective. It does not explain why you think the gospels and Paul are not mentioned in the Quran.

Thomas Eshuis · **#26** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 23, 2015 8:35 am

duvduv wrote:Please be specific.

I will, if you start adressing what people actually post, rather than responding to non-sequitur straw-men.

duvduv wrote: Whether or not you think my questions make sense is subjective.

Wrong. It's objective that your questions and responses do not actually adress what I post.

duvduv wrote: It does not explain why you think the gospels and Paul are not mentioned in the Quran.

QED, I never said I had a particular hypothesis.

See: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/islam/why-does-quran-not-mention-paul-gospel-writers-t50328.html#p2284492
So I'll ask you again to read the thread.

duvduv · **#27** by **duvduv** » Aug 23, 2015 10:14 am

Unfortunately no one has yet provided yet a substantive reply to my initial question to explain why the Quran doesn't mention Paul or the gospel writers. I'm still waiting on that.

Thomas Eshuis · **#28** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 23, 2015 10:20 am

duvduv wrote:Unfortunately no one has yet provided yet a substantive reply to my initial question to explain why the Quran doesn't mention Paul or the gospel writers. I'm still waiting on that.

Horseshit.
Multiple people have pointed out to you that you should ask the relevant Qu'ranic/Arabic experts.

duvduv · **#29** by **duvduv** » Aug 23, 2015 11:38 am

Then why do we bother exchanging opinions on forums about anything?! Just tell the hundreds of posters to consult relevant experts! Close forums, right Thomas?
You and I have as much right to investigate and offer opinions as the experts. And besides, WHO do you consider to be your accepted experts who have valid opinions? Sunnis? Shia? Christians? Secularists?
Wahabis? Ismailis? Evangelicals?!

Thomas Eshuis · **#30** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 23, 2015 11:51 am

duvduv wrote:Then why do we bother exchanging opinions on forums about anything?!

Because not everything is based on speculation alone. Because there are threads and a subforum, especially for less rigourous dicsussions.
Because certain evidence can lead to multiple, conflicting interpetations.
Because new evidence comes to light from time to time.

duvduv wrote: Just tell the hundreds of posters to consult relevant experts!

The point is, that there are no members on this site that are qualified experts on this particular topic.
Meaning you won't be able to get an informed, fact based opinion, on this site. Which is why people told you to find said experts and ask them.

duvduv wrote: Close forums, right Thomas?

What is it with your repeated failure to adress what I actually post?
Nothing I posted in this thread can be construed as support for the above.
Stop with these incessant attempts to put words and claims in my mouth.

duvduv wrote:You and I have as much right to investigate and offer opinions as the experts.

No-one said otherwise. Stop attacking straw-men and start adressing what's actually posted in this thread.
My point is that blind speculation isn't on the same level as informed, fact based analysis, which, you claimed to be looking for specifically.

duvduv wrote: And besides, WHO do you consider to be your accepted experts who have valid opinions? Sunnis? Shia? Christians? Secularists?
Wahabis? Ismailis? Evangelicals?!

Why not ask an honest question? Instead of asking leading questions?

duvduv · **#31** by **duvduv** » Aug 23, 2015 11:57 am

This is ridiculous. A person can exchange ideas andclesrn new things. And history is ultimately speculation based on available evidence, INFERENCE, comparison and context. People even discuss medical issues on forums, but on Islam people should shut up?!

Thomas Eshuis · **#32** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 23, 2015 12:09 pm

duvduv wrote:This is ridiculous.

What? You're constant refusal to adress what I actually post, rather than some doom scenario straw-man I have not expressed in any way?
Yes, that's quite ridiculous.

duvduv wrote: A person can exchange ideas andclesrn new things.

QED, never said they couldn't.

duvduv wrote: And history is ultimately speculation based on available evidence, INFERENCE, comparison and context.

Nope it's not.
It's not remotely similar to blind speculation.

duvduv wrote: People even discuss medical issues on forums, but on Islam people should shut up?!

QED, I haven't said anything that could be remotely construed as supporting the above notion.
Get back to me, when you're done with your straw-men and ready to adress what I actually post.

duvduv · **#33** by **duvduv** » Aug 23, 2015 11:07 pm

Thomas, it doesn't help to attack an opening thread subject by telling the person to go take a hike. Either you want to engage in substantive informative discussion or you don't.
One thing the authors of the Quran and the gospels had in common: they either did not know the universe of Torah Judaism or they did know it but got everything confused intentionally or unintentionally.
But the bottom line here is that the authors of the Quran who put the text together for Mansour (as Eusebius's people put the NT together for Constantine) rejected official Christianity and acted as though they had a non-canonical "tradition" of Isa/Yeshu/Jesus as a mortal messiah figure born of a woman Maryam who did not even consider being married to Joseph or anyone else.

Thomas Eshuis · **#34** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 24, 2015 7:30 am

duvduv wrote:Thomas, it doesn't help to attack an opening thread subject by telling the person to go take a hike.

Earth to duvduv, earth to duvduv, can you actually read the thread and not engage with fantasies?

duvduv wrote:Either you want to engage in substantive informative discussion or you don't.

And I've repeatedly pointed out that blind speculation =/= substantive informative discussion.

duvduv wrote:One thing the authors of the Quran and the gospels had in common: they either did not know the universe of Torah Judaism or they did know it but got everything confused intentionally or unintentionally.
But the bottom line here is that the authors of the Quran who put the text together for Mansour (as Eusebius's people put the NT together for Constantine) rejected official Christianity and acted as though they had a non-canonical "tradition" of Isa/Yeshu/Jesus as a mortal messiah figure born of a woman Maryam who did not even consider being married to Joseph or anyone else.

Just like the Christians did with the OT.

But you'd still have to ask the relevant experts, if there's any evidence to support any theory as to why the Qu'ran doesn't do Paul.

SkyMutt · **#35** by **SkyMutt** » Aug 24, 2015 4:38 pm

I've just gone through this thread, and I don't see any explanation of why the Quran should include any references to Paul et al., that the absence of such references is seen as a lack worthy of questioning. It is acknowledged by many scholars that Islam is a syncretistic religion. There is no rule that I'm aware of which states that syncretists must include all aspects of predecessor elements, or even acknowledge aspects that a predecessor considered significant. They choose aspects that they consider advantageous, and one might surmise that those who created the Quran did not see any advantage to be gained by including references to Paul, etc.

Shrunk · **#36** by **Shrunk** » Aug 24, 2015 4:40 pm

SkyMutt wrote:I've just gone through this thread, and I don't see any explanation of why the Quran should include any references to Paul et al., that the absence of such references is seen as a lack worthy of questioning. It is acknowledged by many scholars that Islam is a syncretistic religion. There is no rule that I'm aware of which states that syncretists must include all aspects of predecessor elements, or even acknowledge aspects that a predecessor considered significant.

Thomas Eshuis · **#37** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 24, 2015 4:40 pm

scott1328 · **#38** by **scott1328** » Aug 24, 2015 4:44 pm

It would certainly help to move the discussion along if the OP would simply state his opinion about the omission of the mentioning of St. Paul by the Koran and the implications of said omission.

duvduv · **#39** by **duvduv** » Aug 24, 2015 6:39 pm

As requested, although I wanted input from others first. In any case, I believe the authors of the Quran rejected in principle the Church view of Jesus, but maintained their own concepts that they developed in rejecting Church dogma, especially if they were more Jewish-friendly types of people, even PRIOR to the emergence of the stories of Muhammad. I wonder why they didn't go all the way and assume Jesus had a human father as well. I guess the idea of the virgin birth itself was quite popular.

And if they were rejecting the Church canon, it didn't mean they rejected the story behind the canon. The Arabs in those centuries must have had their own tales that found their way into the Abbasid regime's book.

Thomas Eshuis · **#40** by **Thomas Eshuis** » Aug 24, 2015 7:32 pm

duvduv wrote:As requested, although I wanted input from others first. In any case, I believe the authors of the Quran rejected in principle the Church view of Jesus, but maintained their own concepts that they developed in rejecting Church dogma, especially if they were more Jewish-friendly types of people, even PRIOR to the emergence of the stories of Muhammad. I wonder why they didn't go all the way and assume Jesus had a human father as well. I guess the idea of the virgin birth itself was quite popular.

And if they were rejecting the Church canon, it didn't mean they rejected the story behind the canon. The Arabs in those centuries must have had their own tales that found their way into the Abbasid regime's book.

The Qu'ran does not actually support the son-of-god part of the Jesus myth, rather Jesus was commanded into existence in Mary's womb.
And there's no solid evidence to support the assertion that the qu'ran was created or written by the Abbasids, there are, for example, the Hijazi texts which date from the Ummayad, not Abbasid caliphate.

Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Re: Why does Quran not mention Paul, gospel writers?

Who is online