Who wrote the Quran?

Do our resident christfags ever comment in this threads?

>tfw all religion threads are by one person.

The Quran is eternal and uncreated, an integral attribute of our Creator Allah, the All-merciful

why do people keep spoiling the movie with this pic

Do you think his friends called him Mo?

John Green

I did
AMA

Each of the books of the Bible was written by a different person or group. Some are just history books, some are poetry, some are prophecies. Each is said to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. Later these books were compiled by different Christian councils.

Why did you use Gabriel instead of some other angle?

Moroni was busy.

Nope. These are the hadiths. A collection of misleading stories and obscurantist law.

They wrote the Quran down for him too. Sometimes on vellum, other times on palm leaves, sometimes on camels.

Gabriel best name

IT WAS ME, AUSTIN! IT WAS ME ALL ALONG!

Since nobody wants to give you a normal answer i'll try. Like most of the books of the bible, the author is unknown. The authors of the quran were probably monks, priests, poets, arab christians or whatever. Just some highly literate people in Arabia/Syria. Don't forget semitic peoples had been writing this kind of stuff for thousands of years.
The quran seems to be a compilation of some sort, a lectionary. The word quran means recitation or the book to recite.
However, what's shady about it is the language used. If you research pre quranic arabic, you won't find much. The authors seem to be inventing a language using a mix of arabic, aramean, hebrew and syriac.
Also, do not believe any stories they tell you about muhammad. Apart from the fact that he was a leader in Arabia, nothing is known historically. All the hadiths were written much later.
For all we know, the traditional story of a new arabian religion could be true or completely invented.
Maybe when Arabs conquered Syria/Palestine, they asked a bunch of educated monks to write some non trinitarian texts.
Sorry for the english

confirmed for not reading any of those books

A sand nigger

More like confirmed for not being a Christfag

This
The historical Muhammad is even more elusive than the historical Jesus

The style is too consistant. The Quran couldn't have been written by multiple authors. They wrote what he recited but there wasn't any difference in style.

It was compiled and completed by one person. However, it was said to have been written down on anything they had available.

Hey guys, what's the best translation of the Quran? Which has the prettiest prose?

I have three versions. The Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Holy Qur'an which is thick and huge. The Oxford Quran and then an Abridged Quran.

>The authors of the quran were probably monks, priests, poets, arab christians or whatever.

why would they do that though and mix it with blatantly Arab and not-Christian things?
>The quran seems to be a compilation of some sort, a lectionary. The word quran means recitation or the book to recite.

It's a compilation of recitations lmao. The word Qur'an is the q-r root meaning reading/writing/reciting, ie 'sharing knowledge'.

>However, what's shady about it is the language used. If you research pre quranic arabic, you won't find much. The authors seem to be inventing a language using a mix of arabic, aramean, hebrew and syriac.

'I don't know anything about Arabia so I'm just going to assume there was no real Arab language and that the Qur'an just plagiarized a ton of different languages to create what we now call Arabic.'

What a moron. Yes it's true that the Qur'an uses loanwords (mostly of Persian origin like Firdaus). The Qur'an itself says that it was revealed in 'plain Arabic' meaning that it was not difficult for the Arabs to understand at it's time for it's time.

What's strange is not the loanwords but the style of writing. It uses a distinct form that doesn't exist in pre-Islamic times and hasn't really attempted to be imitate after it was written.
>Also, do not believe any stories they tell you about muhammad. Apart from the fact that he was a leader in Arabia, nothing is known historically. All the hadiths were written much later.

'Do not believe anything because I don't know anything about history'

Some hadith compilations were written hundreds of years afterwards, the hadiths themselves were not. Islamic scholars are still in the process of authenticating and rejecting which ones are authentic and which ones are not, the last of the great ones being Muhammad al Albaani. It would be stupid to say 'we can't trust Muslims on Islamic history' as it would be to say 'we can't trust Christians on Christian history'. Yes both sides are prone to errors but they're better than nothing.

>Maybe when Arabs conquered Syria/Palestine, they asked a bunch of educated monks to write some non trinitarian texts.

Yeah that makes fuckin sense. Hey we joined together for literally no reason and we want you to completely invent for us a religion as well as a founding prophet, oh and while you're at it make sure it doesn't follow the Trinity because er, we don't know, we have no real history or culture or language.

All are shitty translations in the case of poetry but Yusuf Ali/Sahih International/Mushin Khan are the most authentic. Don't fall for The Study Qur'an hype, it's extremely modernist. The Oxford as well is bad and not an Orthodox Islamic translation.

Not that guy but can you explain why the Qur'an has a rather obvious Biblical subtext?

Could you back this up? Legit curious.

A good starting point is The Emergence of Islam by Gabriel Said Reynolds

King Mo for sure.

I don't understand most of your arguments but I'll try to give you my opinion.

>why would they do that though and mix it with blatantly Arab and not-Christian things?

I don't believe in angels so I'm just speculating who wrote those texts/poems. They mix it with non christian ideas because the whole point is a reform of the 'Jesus is god' idea. You could still call it christian though since Jesus was born by the will of god and performed miracles. The difference is small and huge at the same time. Will of God vs. Holy spirit, son of God vs not son of God.

>The Qur'an itself says that it was revealed in 'plain Arabic' meaning that it was not difficult for the Arabs to understand at it's time for it's time.

I really doubt that it was easy to understand for the Arabs of the time with all those complicated words. Yes arabs understood arabic but to what extent that ressembled quranic arabic is hard to tell since there are no arabic books before that. There are only epigraphs. All I'm saying is we don't know but if you know, please, tell us.

About the hadiths, it's very hard to know what to believe. I have no problem with you believing the most trustworthy ones. To me a lot of it seems to be mythology.

>Hey we joined together for literally no reason and we want you to completely invent for us a religion as well as a founding prophet, oh and while you're at it make sure it doesn't follow the Trinity because er, we don't know, we have no real history or culture or language.

Again I'm just speculating. The muslims conquered the Levant, where there were syriac christians, jews and arabs. It's not unthinkable that the texts were compiled then. I never said they had no culture or language. I'm just saying northern arabia is more likely than central arabia for the birth of those texts. I don't think they invented a religion or a prophet, but rather that they wrote down the ideas of the new leaders.

What is actually your opinion?

Muhammad said things through a span of years claiming that God told him to say those things. Some people memorised what he said and some wrote it down. When Muhammad died, people figured (his political and religious successor, I think) that it would be a good idea to put all those recitations into a single book.

>You could still call it christian
No, you couldn't. Everyone is born by the will of God and many prophets performed miracles. Muslims deny Christ's divinity and they deny that the resurrection ever happened. They also place Muhammad as a prophet greater than Christ.

Yeah but he was born of a virgin, which makes him unique in islamic mythology. But I agree, it's not christian since jesus is not the central figure. However they seem to think he'll come back at the end of times, which makes him really great. Also, Muhammad is the central figure of islamic mythology, but not of the Quran. He's barely mentionned in it.

>The difference is small and huge at the same time

Like denying a fact that is historically agreed about him that he died on the cross under Pontius Pilate?

Muslims have so much 'respect' for Jesus, that they cant even quote him. Though in Islam, he is created like Adam and lived a perfect life; Muhammad is their chosen messenger and the person to be emulated.

They use Jesus to prop up their religious tradition.

Actually, some of the passages in the Quran seem misinformed and naive. That could point to a Southern Arabic origin, like Yemen or to the traditional Mecca Medina origin, i.e. far from the centers of biblical knowledge. Syriac christians knew what they were talking about, they would have done a better job.