Religion
See other Religion Articles
Title: The 'Birmingham Koran' fragment that could shake Islam after carbon-dating suggests it is OLDER than the Prophet Muhammad
Source:
Daily Mail Online
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... het-Muhammad-scholars-say.html
Published: Aug 31, 2015
Author: Jennifer Newton
Post Date: 2015-08-31 07:29:52 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 6807
Comments: 35
- Fragments of the oldest Koran were discovered last month in Birmingham
- Carbon dating found the pages were produced between 568AD and 654AD
- But several historians now say that the parchment may predate Muhammad
- They believe that this discovery could rewrite the early history of Islam
Fragments of the world's oldest Koran, found in Birmingham last month, may predate the Prophet Muhammad and could even rewrite the early history of Islam, according to scholars.
The pages, thought to be between 1,448 and 1,371 years old, were discovered bound within the pages of another Koran from the late seventh century at the library of the University of Birmingham.
Written in ink in an early form of Arabic script on parchment made from animal skin, the pages contain parts of the Suras, or chapters, 18 to 20, which may have been written by someone who actually knew the Prophet Muhammad - founder of the Islamic faith.
Scroll down for video
Discovery: Fragments of what is believed to be the world's oldest Koran. Several historians have said it could even predate the Prophet Muhammad
The pages were carbon-dated by experts at the University of Oxford, a process which showed the Islamic holy book manuscript could be the oldest Koran in the world.
The discovery was said to be particularly significant as in the early years of Islam, the Koran was thought to have been memorised and passed down orally rather written.
But now several historians have said that the parchment might even predate Muhammad.
It is believed that the Birmingham Koran was produced between 568AD and 645AD, while the dates usually given for Muhammad are between 570AD and 632AD.
Historian Tom Holland, told the Times: 'It destabilises, to put it mildly, the idea that we can know anything with certainty about how the Koran emerged - and that in turn has implications for the history of Muhammad and the Companions.'
Keith Small, from the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library, added: 'This gives more ground to what have been peripheral views of the Koran's genesis, like that Muhammad and his early followers used a text that was already in existence and shaped it to fit their own political and theological agenda, rather than Muhammad receiving a revelation from heaven.
The pages were carbon dated by experts at the University of Oxford, which showed it could be the oldest Koran in the world
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
What it mostly does, is cast into doubt the accuracy of carbon dating. It is already known (among professionals) to be a relatively unreliable way to date things. This is merely an example of that.
#2. To: cranky (#0)
Keith Small, from the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library, added: 'This gives more ground to what have been peripheral views of the Koran's genesis, like that Muhammad and his early followers used a text that was already in existence and shaped it to fit their own political and theological agenda, rather than Muhammad receiving a revelation from heaven.
Oh Peoples gonna die!
Oh peoples gunna get gun down!
Oh peoples gonna get blowed up!
Actually I think all religions start this way.
#3. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
It is already known (among professionals) to be a relatively unreliable way to date things.
Even if the 'things' were once living?
You might want to verify that.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
#4. To: cranky (#3)
Even if the 'things' were once living?You might want to verify that.
Yes. Even if the things were living.
#5. To: Vicomte13 (#4)
Yes. Even if the things were living.
Dang!
Too bad no one told those cretins at Oxford University that little uncontested fact.
The could have saved themselves tons of ridicule from the scientific community.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
#6. To: Vicomte13, Justified, cranky (#1) (Edited)
What it mostly does, is cast into doubt the accuracy of carbon dating. It is already known (among professionals) to be a relatively unreliable way to date things. This is merely an example of that.
Carbon dating is becoming more unreliable by the day.
ArsTechnica: Our reliance on fossil fuel combustion is ruining carbon dating
| Radiocarbon dating is an incredibly useful technique. It has been used to date objects from within approximately the last 60,000 years, revolutionising archaeology and finding uses in everything from detecting fake wine vintages to identifying illegal ivory. Unfortunately, humanity's reliance on fossil fuel combustion may ultimately mean that our species can’t have nice things like handy dating techniques. We’re releasing ancient carbon—in which the carbon-14 has long since undergone radioactive decay—into the atmosphere at such a rate that living organisms are absorbing less carbon-14, making them look old in the eyes of carbon dating. If we keep going at our current rate, we’ll hit a point in just 35 years where it’ll no longer be possible to tell the difference between modern objects and those that were on this fair Earth 1,000 years ago. In 85 years, we'll no longer be able to use radiocarbon dating to tell whether a sample is modern or from 2,000 years ago. The best case scenario, writes Heather Graven in this week’s issue of PNAS, is that we implement ambitious plans to reduce fossil fuel combustion, and slow the carbon ageing of the atmosphere, avoiding the most extreme effects (and, you know, solving that whole climate change thing). Even in this scenario, though, there are fields that use carbon dating to look at quite recent changes, meaning that they would still be rendered useless by the changing atmosphere. |
Given the expansion of dirty coal plants in China, India and the Third World, we should expect serious problems with the accuracy of carbon dating by 2030.
#7. To: TooConservative (#6)
I guess we have never had a massive world forest fire before or volcanoes that spew stuff into the air! LOL
Carbon dating assumes alot things to make it work. Its been reasonably accurate up to 10k after that its been iffy.
To me this kinda smells like more global warming one world government stuff. 8)
#8. To: Justified (#7)
To me this kinda smells like more global warming one world government stuff. 8)
Not really. Coal plants are bad news in many ways. With the industrialization of Asia, increased coal plant use is going to render carbon dating increasingly unreliable.
It's isn't a global warming agenda to document the change in atmospheric carbon-14 over decades. Problems with dating should be something we anticipate.
#9. To: TooConservative (#6)
Carbon dating is becoming more unreliable by the day.
Maybe.
But today, to professionals in the feld, it is an invaluable and accurate tool.
I don't know what Gravin's track record as a prognosticator but I suspect carbon dating will be around long after Gravin is forgotten.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
#10. To: cranky (#9)
It is an invaluable and inaccurate tool, but you use what you have.
#11. To: TooConservative (#8)
Not really. Coal plants are bad news in many ways. With the industrialization of Asia, increased coal plant use is going to render carbon dating increasingly unreliable.
Good luck getting China to do anything other than be a pain.
#12. To: cranky, liberator, CZ82, GarySpFc, *Religious History and Issues* (#0)
But now several historians have said that the parchment might even predate Muhammad.
It is believed that the Birmingham Koran was produced between 568AD and 645AD, while the dates usually given for Muhammad are between 570AD and 632AD.
That's the problem with carbon dating...and scholars who try to infer something from it.
Muhammad proclaimed he received the words of the Koran from an angel. We also know from history there are "two" Muhammad's. The one who preached peace and love when he was not in power; and the Muhammad who when gaining power and both Medina and Mecca was a warlord who showed little mercy to the conquered.
It is believed that the Birmingham Koran was produced between 568AD and 645AD, while the dates usually given for Muhammad are between 570AD and 632AD.
Now how ridiculous is the above. A few years 'left and right' and somehow the book predates the guy who claimed to write the book and is all about him:)
I am not Muslim as you know, but maybe you now see the stupidity of some of these 'scholars' making these raving claims "the Qur'an predates the founder"!
So what's the difference with this 'discovery?' Let's compare. Christians will use apologetics and scholarship to refute the "Jesus had a wife" fragment. Muslims will now firebomb the city of Birmingham to refute this 'finding.'
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#13. To: cranky, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, liberator, CZ82 (#0)
Keith Small, from the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library, added: 'This gives more ground to what have been peripheral views of the Koran's genesis, like that Muhammad and his early followers used a text that was already in existence and shaped it to fit their own political and theological agenda, rather than Muhammad receiving a revelation from heaven.
The sophistry continues. Do they really believe what they are saying?
Of course Muhammad uses a text that was already in existence....The TaNaKh and the NT. He grew up with Christians and Jews and did business with both. So yes, he did have a text available and Muhammad had ample and equal contact with Christians, Jews and pagans. That is why the Koran and Hadith is a mishmash of all of the above.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#14. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
What it mostly does, is cast into doubt the accuracy of carbon dating. It is already known (among professionals) to be a relatively unreliable way to date things. This is merely an example of that.
True. What is hilarious is the dating is a few years left and right of the historical account of Muhammad's life.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#15. To: redleghunter (#12)
We also know from history there are "two" Muhammad's. The one who preached peace and love when he was not in power; and the Muhammad who when gaining power and both Medina and Mecca was a warlord who showed little mercy to the conquered.
My understanding is a little different. The Muhammad in his hometown Mecca was the Religion Of Peace™ guy. The warlord of Medina came after his escape, supposedly from plotters, from Mecca and ascendance at Medina.
The Medina period is also the major supposed source of the hadith, the oral sayings of Muhammad which are mostly legendary material but are used to support some of the harshest religious laws under sharia.
Beyond the Cusp: Which Quran, Mecca or Medina?
#16. To: cranky, Vicomte13, liberator (#5)
Dang!Too bad no one told those cretins at Oxford University that little uncontested fact.
The could have saved themselves tons of ridicule from the scientific community.
Carbon dating is good but the older the artifact the less accurate the dating method reliability.
For this case, making a statement the Qur'an predated Muhammad and then give dates a few years left and right of the actual life and death of Muhammad is bad scholarship.
Christians can trace the veracity of the Scriptures by the eyewitness accounts of those who saw the miracles and Power of God displayed.
Muslims and Westerners can trace the Qur'an to the power of the sword Muhammad used to conquer.
All these 'scholars' have done is invite violence to their city for the sophistry they displayed. They ignored a lot of history to come up with their conclusions.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#17. To: redleghunter (#12)
That's the problem with carbon dating
Carbon dating the remains of a carbon-based creature that aspirated to ascertain the approximate date of death of that creature is considered accurate and is relied upon by trained professionals in their respective fields regardless of what anonymous internet scholars might have you believe.
Nobody is claiming any time frame whatsoever as to when the ink might have been applied to the parchment, as far as I know.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
#18. To: redleghunter (#14)
What is hilarious is the dating is a few years left and right of the historical account of Muhammad's life.
Not really. Given the problems of dating a 1400yo text now, a few decades of margin of error in the dating is quite significant and entirely possible. If this document had been located and tested decades back, we would have a much more accurate assessment of its true dating and might discover that it predates Muhammad or that the dates of his rule are inaccurate. As it is, we can have no certainty and no hope for improvements in dating accuracy.
#19. To: TooConservative (#6)
The best case scenario, writes Heather Graven in this week’s issue of PNAS, is that we implement ambitious plans to reduce fossil fuel combustion, and slow the carbon ageing of the atmosphere, avoiding the most extreme effects (and, you know, solving that whole climate change thing). Even in this scenario, though, there are fields that use carbon dating to look at quite recent changes, meaning that they would still be rendered useless by the changing atmosphere.
I knew there was a reason for the global warming hysteria!:)
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#20. To: cranky (#17)
Nobody is claiming any time frame whatsoever as to when the ink might have been applied to the parchment, as far as I know.
Your posted article makes the claim that carbon dating puts the exhibit before the time of Muhammad. That's a ridiculous claim to make as the dates are so close 'left and right' to make the dating insignificant. What these scholars should have concluded is that the dating provides evidence that it was scribed during Muhammad's lifetime.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#21. To: TooConservative (#15)
My understanding is a little different. The Muhammad in his hometown Mecca was the Religion Of Peace™ guy. The warlord of Medina came after his escape, supposedly from plotters, from Mecca and ascendance at Medina.
My statement was summarized. It focused on the Muhammad not in power and the Muhammad who had the power. The peaceful Muhammad came first.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#22. To: TooConservative (#18)
Not really. Given the problems of dating a 1400yo text now, a few decades of margin of error in the dating is quite significant and entirely possible. If this document had been located and tested decades back, we would have a much more accurate assessment of its true dating and might discover that it predates Muhammad or that the dates of his rule are inaccurate. As it is, we can have no certainty and no hope for improvements in dating accuracy.
I'm glad you agree.
Take a look at the dates. 2 years to the left and 15 to the right. My point was to make such a statment as these scholars claim, is ridiculous. The overlapping dates are insignificant...especially the later dates.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#23. To: cranky, redleghunter, Vicomte13, Justified (#17)
Carbon dating the remains of a carbon-based creature that aspirated to ascertain the approximate date of death of that creature is considered accurate and is relied upon by trained professionals in their respective fields regardless of what anonymous internet scholars might have you believe.
There are constant disputes over the accuracy of carbon dating and have been for decades.
A well-known example is the Voynich manuscript. In efforts to determine its origin, they did carbon dating on 4 vellum leaves of the manuscript.
CipherMysteries: Voynich radiocarbon dating, part one…
CipherMysteries: Radiocarbon dating and the Voynich Manuscript…
These links offer a decent intro to some of the many problems of carbon dating when applied to a specific alleged medieval document, one-third the age of this alleged Koran document in the thread's article.
#24. To: TooConservative (#23)
There are constant disputes over the accuracy of carbon dating and have been for decades.
Fine.
Then feel free to disregard it as you will.
As for me, I will continue to take it for what it is worth.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
#25. To: redleghunter (#20)
Your posted article makes the claim that carbon dating puts the exhibit before the time of Muhammad.
The carbon dating indicated when the creature that became the parchment expired.
That's all carbon dating can do.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
#26. To: cranky (#24)
Fine.Then feel free to disregard it as you will.
As for me, I will continue to take it for what it is worth.
I have not 'seen' such faith in a method in all of North America.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#27. To: cranky (#25)
The carbon dating indicated when the creature that became the parchment expired.That's all carbon dating can do.
Well that IS a very logical conclusion. So in this case, the thing that died was 'used' during the time of Muhammad's life.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#28. To: cranky, redleghunter, TooConservative, Vicomte13, All (#0)
Why the hell didn't ancient writers and scribes date their writtings (preferably in the upper righthand corner of the parchment or whatever). Christ....er....Allah....that would have solved the whole problem. I mean doesn't God think of theses things? Just sayin'.
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
#29. To: SOSO, TooConservative, Vicomte13, liberator, GarySpFc, Cranky (#28)
Why the hell didn't ancient writers and scribes date their writtings (preferably in the upper righthand corner of the parchment or whatever). Christ....er....Allah....that would have solved the whole problem. I mean doesn't God think of theses things? Just sayin'.
I can't speak of Muslims but I believe they date everything starting with Muhammad's vision.
Come on ol' Jasper I KNOW they teach theology at Manhattan (my nephew just started there:)
This is how the Hebrews and Semitic peoples of ancient times dated:
1 Kings 22:41 Jehoshaphat the son of Asa had become king over Judah in the fourth year of Ahab king of Israel. 42 Jehoshaphat was thirty-five years old when he became king, and he reigned twenty-five years in Jerusalem. His mother’s name was Azubah the daughter of Shilhi.
51 Ahaziah the son of Ahab became king over Israel in Samaria in the seventeenth year of Jehoshaphat king of Judah, and reigned two years over Israel.
Ezra 1:
Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying,
Daniel 1:
In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it. 2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with some of the articles of the house of God, which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the articles into the treasure house of his god.
The Hebrew tribes related all of these years of kings going back to their Exodus from Egypt. Some go as far as the patriarch Abraham.
Take a look at The Genealogy of Jesus Christ in Matthew Chapter 1 which concludes with the following:
17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations, and from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations.
The above is convincing I am sure for a Semitic people, but what about we knuckle dragging Gentiles?
Dr. Luke knew we would need huge bread crumbs.
Luke 1:Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, 2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, 3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, 4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.
5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah. His wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. 7 But they had no child, because Elizabeth was barren, and they were both well advanced in years.
Luke 2:
And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered. 2 This census first took place while Quirinius was governing Syria. 3 So all went to be registered, everyone to his own city.
4 Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, 5 to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child. 6 So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered. 7 And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling cloths, and laid Him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn.
Luke 3:
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea, Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene, 2 while Annas and Caiaphas were high priests, the word of God came to John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
Dr. Luke continues to tie events with rulers and physical locations throughout the Acts of the Apostles as well.
In the 19th Century Liberal Christianity ruled in the German theological universities. They thought the historical accounts related by Luke were rubbish or later fabrications. An English scholar and archaeologist set out to confirm or deny the claims of Dr. Luke:
Educated at Oxford, Ramsay held several prestigious professorships, including "First Professor of Classical Archaeology" and "Lincoln and Merton Professorship of Classical Archaeology and Art" at Oxford, and "Regius Professor of Humanity" at the University of Aberdeen. He received gold medals from Pope Leo XII, the University of Pennsylvania, the Royal Geographical Society, and the Royal Scottish Geographical Society, and was knighted in 1906.
He was the first Professor of Classical Archaeology at Oxford University and pioneered the study of antiquity in what is today western Turkey.
William Ramsay was known for his careful attention to New Testament events, particularly the Book of Acts and Pauline Epistles. When he first went to Asia Minor, many of the cities mentioned in Acts had no known location and almost nothing was known of their detailed history or politics. The Acts of the Apostles was the only record and Ramsay, skeptical, fully expected his own research to prove the author of Acts hopelessly inaccurate since no man could possibly know the details of Asia Minor more than a hundred years after the event—this is, when Acts was then supposed to have been written. He therefore set out to put the writer of Acts on trial. He devoted his life to unearthing the ancient cities and documents of Asia Minor. After a lifetime of study, however, he concluded: 'Further study . . . showed that the book could bear the most minute scrutiny as an authority for the facts of the Aegean world, and that it was written with such judgment, skill, art and perception of truth as to be a model of historical statement' (The Bearing of Recent Discovery, p. 85). On page 89 of the same book, Ramsay accounted, 'I set out to look for truth on the borderland where Greece and Asia meet, and found it there [in Acts]. You may press the words of Luke in a degree beyond any other historian's and they stand the keenest scrutiny and the hardest treatment...'
When Ramsay turned his attention to Paul's letters, most of which the critics dismissed as forgeries, he concluded that all thirteen New Testament letters that claimed to have been written by Paul were authentic.
As I know you still have a keen mind in your golden years, I recommend you read the actual work of Ramsay. It's free on line here:
The bearing of recent discovery on the trustworthiness of the New Testament
Also Here for a different download
Now of course, the Western world influenced by Christianity gave us BC and AD:
"Done in convention by the unanimous consent of the states present the seventeenth day of September in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the United States of America the twelfth."---US Constitution.
(oops, did the founders really invoke God in the Constitution!---different subject:))
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#30. To: redleghunter, TooConservative, Vicomte13, liberator, GarySpFc, Cranky (#29)
Come on ol' Jasper I KNOW they teach theology at Manhattan (my nephew just started there:)
Come on you ol' Ram, I KNOW that at least a few people at Fordham have a sense of humor and recognize sarcasm (even some Jesuits). Oh, the current Pope is a Jesuit isn't he?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
#31. To: SOSO (#30)
I KNOW that at least a few people at Fordham have a sense of humor and recognize sarcasm (even some Jesuits). Oh, the current Pope is a Jesuit isn't he?
All the good Jesuit jokes are in Latin. The 'punch lines' get lost in translation:)
But really, you should read some of the works of William Ramsay. You will enjoy them and if not such academic pieces make for an early bedtime:)
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#32. To: redleghunter (#31)
All the good Jesuit jokes are in Latin. The 'punch lines' get lost in translation:)
LOL. But which dialect?
потому что Бог хочет это тот путь
#33. To: redleghunter (#29)
The bearing of recent discovery on the trustworthiness of the New Testament
All the latest research from 1915? : )
It was a good effort though. If anything, the last century has heaped up mounds of further evidence in support of the widespread presence of the NT among the ancient churches spread across the Roman empire.
#34. To: TooConservative (#33)
All the latest research from 1915? : )
I always like to start with the pioneers:) And Sir William Ramsay's works was the stake in the heart of the 19th Century liberal theological skeptics.
Plus, 1915 was waaaay before the internet and drive by blog sites full of unsubstantiated assertions. If you have not read that book, I recommend it.
It was a good effort though. If anything, the last century has heaped up mounds of further evidence in support of the widespread presence of the NT among the ancient churches spread across the Roman empire.
Indeed.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#35. To: cranky (#5)
...those cretins at Oxford University that little uncontested fact.The could have saved themselves tons of ridicule from the scientific community.
The "Scientific Communitah" is already a discredited joke.
"Global Warming" anyone?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]