That’s option (b).
2 Likes
How could Muhammad receive verses from the Quran? Are you claiming that it existed before he knew of it?
2 Likes
Ok. Let me go through your responses tonight. I think I may understand where you’re coming from but I have to read all of them to put your theory back together. So then I can explain what you’re not considering. I have had counseling for post-partum anxiety and kind of understand how a person talks themselves into something that’s not true, because I did. 
Thankfully I’m much healthier now.
Yes, I do think he borrowed a ton of material from Jews and Christians he talked with. Like I had said earlier in this thread, when I read the Quran, my impression was most of the actual stories in it are shortened, more poetic, sort of sloppy retelling of what’s in the Bible. A few were not in the Bible. The rest is doctrinal/instructional from what I remember. I only read it once.
That doesn’t address my question at all.
You said he received verses FROM the Quran. How could that happen unless it already existed?
I’ve had lunch and am feeing less crabby, now. 
I believe it most likely Jesus and at least some of the disciples really existed. He was a leader of what we would consider a cult at the time, and the disciples were his first followers. As the cult grew, stories arose and were repeated about Jesus and his first followers. As will happen, these likely had at least a kernel of truth to them, but gained details and new aspects were added to the story with repeated re-telling, not with anyone necessarily deliberately fabricating anything. The Gospels are written versions of some of these stories that were recorded some time after they had been circulating for a number of decades.
4 Likes
Quran Surah (29:46)
And do not argue with the followers of earlier revelation otherwise than in a most kindly manner - unless it be such of them as are bent on evildoing 42 - and say: “We believe in that which has been bestowed from on high upon us, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you: for our God and your God is one and the same, and it is unto Him that We [all] surrender ourselves.”
Quran Surah (29:47)
For it is thus 43 that We have bestowed this divine writ from on high upon thee [O Muhammad]. And they to whom we have vouchsafed this divine writ believe in it - just as among those [followers of earlier revelation] there are some who believe in it. And none could knowingly reject Our messages unless it be such as would deny [an obvious] truth: 44, 45
Quran Surah (29:48)
for, [O Muhammad,] thou hast never been able to recite any divine writ ere this one [was revealed], nor didst thou ever transcribe one with thine own hand 46 - or else, they who try to disprove the truth [of thy revelation] 47 might indeed have had cause to doubt [it].
Quran Surah (29:49)
Nay, but this [divine writ] consists of messages clear to the hearts of all who are gifted with [innate] knowledge 48 - and none could knowingly reject Our messages unless it be such as would do wrong [to themselves].
42 Sc., “and are therefore not accessible to friendly argument”: the implication being that in such cases all disputes should a priori be avoided. As regards religious discussions in general, see note 149 on 16:125.
43 I.e., “in this spirit”: a reference to the sameness of the fundamental truths in all revealed religions.
44 I.e., “they to whom We grant the ability to understand this divine writ”.
45 This rendering of the verb jahada in the present instance and in verse 49 below (as well as in 31:32, 40:63 or 41:28) - in the sense of a person’s denying or rejecting something which he knows to be true is based on the authority of Zamakhshari’s Asas.
46 Lit., “with thy right hand” - the term yamin being used here metonymically, denoting no more than one’s “own hand”. - It is historically established that Muhammad, the “unlettered prophet” (cf.7:157 and 158), could neither read nor write, and could not, therefore, have derived his extensive knowledge of the contents of earlier revelations from the Bible or other scriptures: which - as the Qur’an points out - ought to convince any unprejudiced person that this knowledge must have come to him through divine revelation.
47 The participial noun mubtil is derived from the verb abt ala, “he made a false [or “vain”] claim”, or “tried to disprove the truth [of something]”, or “to reduce [something] to nothing”, or “to prove [it] to be of no account”, or “null and 'void”, or “unfounded”, “false”, “spurious”, etc.; irrespective of whether the object is true or false, authentic or spurious, valid or unfounded (Lisan al-'Arab and Taj al-'Arus).
48 Lit., “self-evident (bayyinat) in the breasts of those who have been given knowledge” - the term 'ilm having here the connotation of intuitive, spiritual perception.
Ok. Thanks. You saved me a lot of time having to go back through your comments.
So how do you explain Paul’s letters since they are dated first Pauline epistles - Wikipedia
Also, what parts of the book of Acts do you accept? Because if you think it sort of just came about over time, then you have to decide which parts of the history of Acts is fake because it can’t be true. Then also decide when the Book of Acts was fabricated and how the church did it and why they had it addressed to a specific person as they did with the gospel according to Luke.
Explain Polycarp’s letter and how it was able to include so many quote from the New Testament if the stories were embellished over time, they needed more time to circulate around when there was no internet or cars. 
Here’s a translation with references in the text, so you can see the breadth of quotes included. CHURCH FATHERS: Epistle to the Philippians (Polycarp)
This one has the text references at the bottom so may be easier to read. https://www.agape-biblia.org/literatura/PolycarpToPhilippians.pdf
Again, explain how if these stories were embellished over time we don’t have any accounts of the apostles saying, oops, not worth it guys. Is there anyone calling it out, saying - hey that contradicts something else I heard about Jesus while they were swapping stories? Do you see contradictions in the gospels? If it took a while, someone’s memory is going to go bad. Who are the best candidates for putting them together? Polycarp claimed to know John, maybe it’s him or John. But then who wrote Paul’s letters and how did churches begin in those places they’re addressed to?
I’m glad you also believe Jesus is God then since our God is one and the same.
then the details of the Quran should match the New Testament perfectly if we believe in the same God and Mohammed is right that what is bestowed upon us should be believed in. Do they match perfectly?
…then the details of the Quran should match the New Testament perfectly if we believe in the same God and Mohammed is right that what is bestowed upon us should be believed in. Do they match perfectly?
The Quran does not mention in the above verses what was revealed to the previous people as the New Testament Bible or as a “Bible of Isa” (Jesus) specifically, the Quran only mentions early revelation.
General View:
Muslim scholars have resisted identifying the Injil with the New Testament Gospels. Some have suggested the Injil may be the [Gospel of Barnabas] or [Gospel of Thomas] More commonly, Muslim scholars have argued that the Injil refers to a text now lost or hopelessly corrupted…
He claims to have received it from an Angel who called himself Gabriel. It’s obvious he genuinely believed that these revelations were supernatural in nature.
I personally believe there was a supernatural agency involved. I just don’t think it was Gabriel or any angel of God.
I Believe…
In The Name of God, The Most Gracious, The Dispenser of Grace:
112:1
SAY: "He is the One God: (2) "God the Eternal, the Uncaused Cause of All Being.1 (3) "He
begets not, and neither is He begotten; (4) "and there is nothing that could be compared with
Him.2
1 This rendering gives no more than an approximate meaning of the term as-samad, which occurs in the Qur’an only once, and is applied to God alone. It comprises the concepts of Primary Cause and eternal, independent Being, combined with the idea that everything existing or conceivable goes back to Him as its source and is therefore, dependent on Him for its beginning as well as for its continued existence.
2 Cf. note 2 on 89:3, as well as surah 19, note 77. The fact that God is one and unique in every respect, without beginning and without end, has its logical correlate in the statement that “there is nothing that could be compared with Him” - thus precluding any possibility of describing or defining Him (see note 88 on the last sentence of 6:100). Consequently, the quality of His Being is beyond the range of human comprehension or imagination: which also explains why any attempt at “depicting” God by means of figurative representations or even abstract symbols must be qualified as a blasphemous denial of the truth.
And I Believe Prophet Isa PBUH…
19:30 [But] he said:23 "Behold, I am a servant of God. He has vouchsafed 24 unto me revelation and made me a prophet, (19:31) and made me blessed wherever I may be; and He has enjoined upon me prayer and charity as long as I live, (19:32) and [has endowed me with] piety towards my mother; and He has not made me haughty or bereft of grace.
19:33 “Hence, peace was upon me on the day when I was born, and [will be upon me] on the day of my death, and on the day when I shall be raised to life [again]!”
23 Although the Qur’an mentions in 3:46 that Jesus would “speak unto men [while yet] in his
cradle” - i.e., would be imbued with wisdom from his early childhood - verses 30-33 seem to be in the nature of a trope, projecting the shape of things to come by using, for the sake of emphasis, the past tense to describe something that was to become real in the future. (See also next note.)
24 Since it is not conceivable that anyone could be granted divine revelation and made a prophet before attaining to full maturity of intellect and experience, 'Ikrimah and Ad-Dahhak -as quoted by Tabari - interpret this passage as meaning, “God has decreed (qada) that lie would vouchsafe unto me revelation…”, etc., thus regarding it as an allusion to the future. Tabari himself applies the same interpretation to the next verse, explaining it thus: “He has decreed that He would enjoin upon me prayer and charity”. However, the whole of this passage (verses 30-33) may also be understood as having been uttered by Jesus at a much later time - namely, after he had reached maturity and been actually entrusted with his prophetic mission: that is to say, it may be understood as an anticipatory description of the ethical and moral principles which were to dominate the adult life of Jesus and particularly his deep consciousness of being only “a servant of God”.
He claims to have received it from an Angel who called himself Gabriel. It’s obvious he genuinely believed that these revelations were supernatural in nature.
I personally believe there was a supernatural agency involved. I just don’t think it was Gabriel or any angel of God.
Quran Surah 16:102
Say: “Holy inspiration 128 has brought it down from thy Sustainer by stages, setting forth the truth, so that it might give firmness unto those who have attained to faith, and provide guidance and a glad tiding unto all who have surrendered themselves to God.”
128 As in the three other places in which the expression ruh al-qudus occurs (2:87 and 253, and 5:110),1 am rendering it here, too, as “holy inspiration” (see surah 2, note 71), a term which, to my mind, is a Qur’anic synonym for “divine revelation”. However, a literal rendering-“spirit of holiness” - is also possible if one applies this term to the angel who communicates God’s revelations to the prophets. (See also verse 2 of this surah and the corresponding note 2.)
(Muhammad Asad : The Message of the Quran)
What do I need to explain? Paul was an early convert to Christianity. So what?
No, I don’t have to do any of that. I just have to say that any specific claims of truth cannot rely merely on the fact that part of the New Testament says it is true. I’m not a Christian, so it is of no importance to me which small parts of the NT might actually be historically accurate.
Those particular quotes already existed at the time the letter was written. Just what is the problem you see here? As simple as my explanation is, it seems you are still having trouble understanding it.
Why would we?
Yes.
Again, you do not seem to understand what I am saying: The Christian religion existed and was growing. There were lots of stories being told and being written down as this was happening. The Gospels that have survived to our day are a small part of this that were recorded relatively late in this process.
You are making no arguments or claims that challenge any of this.
2 Likes
1 Like
By your standards we cannot say any part of history is correct because the stories we have could have evolved over time.
You have to actually fit your scenario within the dates involved.
Not at all. We can examine the stories as well as other extraneous pieces of evidence and arrive at a conclusion regarding how likely these stories are to be accurate.
One easy part of this process is as follows: Any part of the story that alleges things to have happened that, as far as our experience tells us, cannot possibly happen is instantly rejected as ahistorical. That rules out all the parts about resurrections, walking on water, and other such nonsense.
And, to be clear, I am not here ruling out the possibiliity of miracles a priori. I am simply using the same method we use when assessing any other claim, which is to assess the likelihood of various explanations compared to our observations and experience. So when I see hoofprints in the ground here in Canada and conclude they were most likely produced by a horse, could possibly but not likely have been produced by a zebra, and almost certainly could not have been produced by a unicorn, I am not taking an a priori position against the existence of unicorns. I am just going with the odds.
2 Likes
Yes, but we do so by proving a hypothesis. You only have a hypothesis. You haven’t proven anything - why it’s BETTER than the one that Jesus actually rose from the dead, people saw it, Paul was converted; Paul wrote letters to the churches, he founded; gospels were written, the apostles died because of what they believed, and Polycarp had all the texts in the early 2nd century to be able to write his letter.
You’re just saying it happened over time. But you’re not fitting the pieces of data (the people, places, writings) into a historical timeline.
Just because I say the sky is red because I don’t like the idea that the sky is blue doesn’t mean the sky is red until I prove it to be more likely.
All of that is consistent with people falsely believing that Jesus has risen from the dead and founding a religion on this belief.
It is a common occurrence that people found religions on false beliefs, I am sure you agree. You believe this applies to all of the thousands of religions that have existed thru history, except for the one you happen to believe in.
We have not a single instance of a dead person coming back to life.
So the explanation you are offering is no more rational than suggesting that hoofprints in the ground were created by a unicorn. We know horses exist. We have no evidence that unicorns exist. So the hoofprints are to be assumed to have been created by a horse, pending further evidence of the existence of unicorns.
2 Likes
Again, you have proven nothing. You’re arguing such as a thing as the resurrection can’t happen because you say it doesn’t happen. You haven’t proven that in this particular case it is less likely given the evidence.