Interesting discussion on authenticity/inauthenticity of Quran

Submitted by Prashant (United States), May 5, 2021 at 00:10

Dear Dr Pipes, A very interesting discussion on the (in)authenticity of the Quran has been taking place between AVCR, DNM, M Tovey, and myself on your site. This is a very good sign and I hope more people join this discussion as readers and authors. I hope this happens not just on this site but around the world.

All four the above participants approach this discussion as non-Muslims and so we have no reason to believe that Quran is the word of God. All four participants agree that Quran leaves a lot to be desired before we can call it an authentic word of God or, even, a good manual for everyday spiritual or worldly living.

The four participants bring three complementary but different appraches to the discussion. Though my understanding may not be perfect, I want the discussion to continue and expand. For the benefit of the future participants, I will try to summarize the above three approaches.

M Tovey brings the theological angle. His emphasis is on how Quran falls short of the Jewish and Christian scriptures that it claims to improve.

DNM, in the current discussion, is questioning Quran on the basis of its historicity and its linguistic constructs. His emphasis is on falsifying or disproving the historic Islamic narrative created around Quran.

My approach is slightly different. I do not want to question the historicity of the Quran. I do not care whether Muhammad wrote it, plagiarized it, got it directly from God. Or, if he farmed out its authorship to potential helpers. How the quran was compiled and when is not my concern. My concern is whether the message of Quran defensible, usable, and good.

AVCR takes a approach between mine and DNM's. She enjoys DNMs investigative approach about how the product (the Quran) was constructed and she also likes my evaluation of how good the product is. And, she adds her contribution to all three approaches.

Luckily, all approaches are good, mutually complementary, and most welcome. Content of the Quran might be of questionable quality because -hypothetically- it was not written by one author at one time but by many authors at different times and, potentially, with questionable motives. I, personally, will not mind if Quran were to be written by a hundred people over centuries as long as its message was coherent and good. Nor would I mind if it was partly or wholly copied from other scriptures. I just want its message to be coherent and good. And, most importantly, I want the Quran to be presented to people with humility and courtesy so we are more inclined to forgive any shortcomings that we see in the book.

My bigger goal, as always, is to do a polite but firm questioning of Islam and Quran. I want more people to do it at more places in the world. In particular, I would also like islamic scholars to present strong and polite defence of their book.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".