Showing posts from January, 2016

The Qur'anic Quandary

The following approach is a deductive assessment towards the Qur'an. That is, if the presumptions are true then the conclusions logically fall into place. The question is, are the presumptions more plausibly true than not, if so than the conclusion is the best logical answer.

Presumption 1: The Christians (and Jews) possessed books that the Qur'an affirms, identified as the "Injeel" (Gospel) physically in their possession during the lifetime of Muhammad (Surah 3:4-5).

Presumption 2: The Qur'an commands that the "People of the Injeel" (Christians) judge by the "Injeel" (Gospel) that they possess or they are labelled as being "disobedient" with "nothing to stand on" (Surah 5:46-47, 68).

Presumption 3: The Qur'an denies the Trinity (Surah 4:171), the deity of Christ (Surah 5:116), as well as the crucifixion and resurrection (Surah 4:157).

Conclusion: The "Injeel" (Gospel) as it existed in the lifetime of …

The Birmingham Qur'an Discovery and How it Impacts Islam

In July 2015 Birmingham University announced the discovery and dating of two parchment leaves from the Mingana Collection of what could potentially be the oldest Qur’anic manuscript ever found. This discovery has created a considerable impact on the nature, understanding, and implication of both Islamic history and Muslim belief. 

The announcement was made through a BBC article entitled “Oldest’ Koran Fragment’s found in Birmingham University,”[1] making the statement that the leaves of parchment had been dated by the Oxford University Radiocarbon Accelerator Unit to between the years of 568 and 645 A.D. Meaning, that the fragments would indeed be the earliest evidence within the record of Qur’anic history.[2] However, if the dating is accurate the Birmingham manuscripts have even greater significance than simply being the oldest. If they were  written between the years of 568 and 645 AD, it creates some serious problems in context to traditional Islamic history. 

The manuscripts themse…

"Jesus Never Existed" - Responding to Valerie Tarico's Ojections

Every year, around Christmas and Easter, the usual objection articles start to pop-up. Last year the infamous Kurt Eichenwald The Bible" So Misunderstood It's a Sin article arose (my response can be found here). This year however, Valerie Tarico of RawStory has come out of the woodwork to take things to an entirely different level, questioning Jesus' existence in her piece entitled Here are 5 Reasons to Suspect Jesus Never Existed.

While these theories may be popular on the internet, they hold next to no scholarly backing. The fact remains that your typical Easter/Christmas hit piece will not usually attack external factors, such as Jesus' actual existence. Rather, it will focus on the internal material of the Bible, seeking to rewrite its contents concerning Jesus, because virtually all scholarship is unanimous on certain facts about him. Mainly, that he did exist.

Take your pick of scholarship, from as skeptical and left-wing as Bart Ehrman and Dominic Crossan to a…