580
edits
Historical Errors in the Quran: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Haman in ancient Egypt: Added a new potential historical error, with Mecca being sworn on as a safe sanctuary.
| [checked revision] | [unchecked revision] |
(→Noah's worldwide flood: Have added in some more verses on the story of Noah relevant for it being a worldwide flood. And made the point that all classical scholars took it to refer to a worldwide flood citing a range of the most popular exegesis. Plus provided a link/source from an modern geologist academic providing an overview of the geological issues of a worldwide flood.) |
(→Haman in ancient Egypt: Added a new potential historical error, with Mecca being sworn on as a safe sanctuary.) |
||
| Line 198: | Line 198: | ||
This may have been done for literary/storytelling purposes: | This may have been done for literary/storytelling purposes: | ||
{{Quote|Reynolds, Gabriel Said. The Qur'an and its Biblical Subtext (Routledge Studies in the Qur'an) (pp. 212-213). Taylor and Francis.|The pairing of Qorah and Haman, if not in line with the Biblical account, is hardly unreasonable in literary terms. Both acted as the nemesis of God’s servant (Qorah of Moses, Haman of Mordecai). Qorah was extremely wealthy. Haman was extremely powerful. The argument that the is somehow wrong or confused by placing Haman and Qorah in Egypt (or, for that matter, that the Talmud is wrong by placing Jethro, Balaam, and Job there) seems to me essentially irrelevant. The concern is not simply to record Biblical information but to shape that information for its own purposes. The more interesting question is therefore why the connects Haman and Qorah with the story of Pharaoh. The answer, it seems, is that the Pharaoh story is to the a central trope about human conceit and rebelliousness, on the one hand, and divine punishment, on the other. Accordingly the characters of Haman and Qorah, and the legend of the Tower of Babel, find their way into the account of Pharaoh. Thereby the connects this account to its lessons elsewhere on the mastery of God over creation.}} | {{Quote|Reynolds, Gabriel Said. The Qur'an and its Biblical Subtext (Routledge Studies in the Qur'an) (pp. 212-213). Taylor and Francis.|The pairing of Qorah and Haman, if not in line with the Biblical account, is hardly unreasonable in literary terms. Both acted as the nemesis of God’s servant (Qorah of Moses, Haman of Mordecai). Qorah was extremely wealthy. Haman was extremely powerful. The argument that the is somehow wrong or confused by placing Haman and Qorah in Egypt (or, for that matter, that the Talmud is wrong by placing Jethro, Balaam, and Job there) seems to me essentially irrelevant. The concern is not simply to record Biblical information but to shape that information for its own purposes. The more interesting question is therefore why the connects Haman and Qorah with the story of Pharaoh. The answer, it seems, is that the Pharaoh story is to the a central trope about human conceit and rebelliousness, on the one hand, and divine punishment, on the other. Accordingly the characters of Haman and Qorah, and the legend of the Tower of Babel, find their way into the account of Pharaoh. Thereby the connects this account to its lessons elsewhere on the mastery of God over creation.}} | ||
=== Mecca as a safe sanctuary === | |||
The Quran references Mecca as a safe haven while swearing an oath. | |||
{{Quote|{{Quran|95|1-3}}|By the fig and the olive, and Mount Sinai, <b>and by this city (of Makkah), a haven of peace</b>}} | |||
While it may have appeared to have been secured at the time, the city has seen many violent events, such as the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Mecca_(683) 683] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Mecca_(692) 692] Sieges of Mecca, when Ibn al-Zubayr rebelled against the Umayyad caliphate rulers. And more recently the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mosque_seizure Grand Mosque Seizure] attack - making this description redundant. | |||
== References == | == References == | ||