Posted: Oct 10, 2015 8:45 pm
by tolman
Oeditor wrote:
tolman wrote:Does Islamic tradition make explicit claims about sacred texts only ever being written on freshly-made substrates?
Of course not. But religions make a great deal of dates or at any rate sequences of events. If it were just a matter for historians a major discrepancy would be a matter for red faces and mayvbe a damaged reputation but in a religious context it's far more serious.

Seriousness depends on what is being claimed.

Oeditor wrote:Imagine if someone had proven that Pontius Pilate was in Gaul all through Jesus's supposed time.

And imagine if someone had proven beyond all doubt that Mohammed was born in 1500AD. Or 500BC.

But that's not what we're talking about here.

Not only do the dates so far not fundamentally contradict anything important, but even if they had done, we're talking about a single document fragment which sufficiently motivated people could explain away either by finding some way of doubting the dating, or finding a more religion-based explanation for how 'impossible' dates could be accounted for by some kind of miracle.