Der Koran hat Recht, die Bibel nicht?
02.07.2007 um 12:47
The Christian Missionary Charge of Plagiarism
This is the first article in aseries of articles which proposes to examine the Christian missionary paper Embryology inthe Qur'ân. The Christian author is described as a "practising medical doctor in theUnited Kingdom" who wishes to remain anonymous. Writing under the secretive internete-mail alias of Lactantius, the missionary writes:
However, the most convincingexplanation, and the most worrying for those who maintain that the Qur'an is God'seternal Word, untampered with and free from any human interference, is that the Qur'an isusing the enormously influential Greek physician Galen's teachings that the second stageof foetal development is a vascular mass, in which case not only is the Qur'an wrong, butit also plagiarises ancient Greek literature!
According to the missionary, theQur'ân plagiarises ancient Greek Literature, and as a result, it should be rejected as adivinely revealed or inspired scripture. This short paper proposes to examine theChristian charge of plagiarism, and using their own methodology apply their argument tothe Bible.
Proof Demanded
To plagiarise something is to commit literarytheft by appropriating and passing off the ideas or words of another as one's own. Themissionary accuses the Prophet Muhammad(P)[1] of plagiarism and charges him with stealingand passing off the ideas of Galen as his own :
the Qur'an is using the enormouslyinfluential Greek physician Galen's teachings... it also plagiarises ancient Greekliterature!
This is a serious charge and one would expect the missionary to haveprovided sufficient evidence in order to "prove beyond reasonable doubt" that Muhammad(P)is indeed the plagiariser and liar that Christian missionaries consider him to be.[2]
Yet the missionary provides no evidence, no proof whatsoever to substantiatethis claim of plagiarism. The missionary cites neither the original Greek text of Galennor the Arabic of the Qur'ân; nor does he provide a sufficiently thorough analysis of thetwo accounts in order to substantiate his claim. And neither does the missionary cite anyhadith or eye-witnesses accounts to prove that the Prophet(P) plagiarised ancient Greekliterature. Where then is the proof that Muhammad(P) plagiarised the Galenic stages ofdevelopment?
We are not asking the missionary to provide evidence of Greekinfluence on the Qur'ân (a subject of a forth coming paper), but proof that the ProphetMuhammad(P) consciously and knowingly stole and passed off the ideas of Galen (notablyGalen's second stage of foetal development) as his own. If the missionary is unable toprove "beyond reasonable doubt" that Muhammad(P) plagiarised the Galenic stages ofdevelopment then why make such an accusation in the first place?! If the missionary isunable to prove his case "beyond reasonable doubt" then this material should be removedand an apology printed. It is very easy for Christian missionaries to make suchaccusations, and it is even easier to make them while hiding behind fictitious e-mailaccounts and aliases. It seems that this missionary wishes to remain anonymous so that hemay continue to befriend (attempt to convert) Muslims in public, while slandering theirreligion and Prophet(P) in private.
The Bible Plagiarises Ancient GreekLiterature
To summarise, the Christian Missionary says that:
the Qur'ân isusing the enormously influential teachings of the Greek physician Galen.
theQur'ân is plagiarising ancient Greek Literature.
and as a result, it should berejected as a divinely revealed or inspired scripture. Furthermore, by implication, theProphet Muhammad(P) could not be a true Prophet of God as he plagiarised ancient Greekliterature by consciously and knowingly stealing the ideas of Galen and claiming them tobe his own.
What if we were to apply this method of reasoning to the Bible itself?What if we were to apply the same standards against the Bible? If we were to find theBible plagiarising ancient Greek Literature, then it too should also be rejected as adivinely revealed or inspired scripture -- according to the missionary's own testimony,according to his own standards of reasoning and evidence.
So, what does the Biblesay concerning Embryology? In this section we cite embryological references to be foundin Bible using the same source as used by the missionary, A History of Embryology[3] byJoseph Needham. It would seem that the missionary has deliberately failed to cite somevital pieces of information concerning Embryology in Antiquity which we aim to supplyhere.
Embryology in Antiquity
During the period when the biological schoolof Alexandria was at its height, that city became an important Jewish centre. Twocenturies later it was to produce Philo, but now the Alexandrian Jews were writing thatpart of the modern Bible known as the Wisdom Literature. In books such as the Wisdom ofSolomon, Ecclesiasticus, Proverbs, etc. the typical Hellenic exclusion of the action ofgods in natural phenomena is clearly to be seen. There are two passages of embryologicalimportance. Firstly, in the Book of Job (10:10), Job is made to say,
"Remember, Ibeseech thee, that thou hast fashioned me as clay; and wilt thou bring me into the dustagain! Hast thou not poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese? Thou hast clothedme with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and sinews."
Thiscomparison of embryogeny with the making of cheese is interesting in view of the factthat precisely the same comparison occurs in Aristotle's book On the Generation ofAnimals, as we have already seen.[4]
We now discover that:
the Bible isusing the enormously influential teachings of the Greek philosopher Aristotle
theBible is plagiarising ancient Greek Literature
and as a result, the Bible should berejected as a divinely revealed or inspired scripture -- according to the missionary'sown testimony, according to his own standards of reasoning and evidence!
Anotherembryological reference occurs in the Wisdom of Solomon which also copies (plagiarises)an Aristotelian theory:
Still more extraordinary, the only other embryologicalreference in the Wisdom Literature, which occurs in the Wisdom of Solomon (vii. 2), alsocopies an Aristotelian theory, namely, that the embryo is formed from (menstrual) blood.There the speaker says,
"In the womb of a mother was I moulded into flesh in thetime of ten months, being compacted with blood of the seed of man and the pleasure thataccompanieth sleep."
Needham concludes that both references in the Bible can betraced back to Aristotle and even Hippocrates:
Perhaps it is no coincidence thatboth these citations can be referred back to Aristotle, and in the second case even toHippocrates; perhaps the Alexandrian Jews of the third century B.C. were studyingAristotle as attentively as Philo Judaeus studied Plato a couple of hundred yearslater.[5]
Conclusions
The Christian missionary is now left with severaldifficulties. The missionary needs to explain to the Muslim:
Why the Bible usesthe enormously influential teachings of the Greek philosopher Aristotle?
Why theBible plagiarises ancient Greek Literature?
Why other non-Christian scriptures(e.g. the Qur'ân) would be rejected as a divinely revealed or inspired scripture if theyused (or were influenced by) the writings of ancient Greek scientists - but the Biblewould not?
Why other non-Christian scriptures (e.g. the Qur'ân) would be chargedwith plagiarism if they used (or were influenced by) the writings of ancient Greekscientists - but the Bible would not?
Why the Prophet Muhammad(P) is charged withplagiarism but the authors of Job and the Wisdom of Solomon are not?[6]
WhyChristian missionaries continue to charge the Prophet Muhammad(P) with plagiarism of theGalenic stages of development even though they have failed to prove theircase?
And more controversially,
Why do these missionaries reject theWisdom of Solomon as a divinely inspired scripture when majority of the world'sChristians accept it as the word of God?
Concerning the Wisdom of Solomon theEncyclopaedia Britannica informs us that it is:
... an example of the "wisdom"genre of religious literature, which commends a life of introspection and reflection onhuman existence, especially from an ethical perspective. It is an apocryphal work(noncanonical for Jews and Protestants) but is included in the Septuagint (Greektranslation of the Old Testament) and was accepted into the Roman canon.[7]
Thusthe Wisdom of Solomon is accepted as a divinely inspired book by Roman Catholics and isincluded in Roman Catholic Bibles.
The Roman Catholics in the world outnumber allother Christians combined.[8]
The Protestants however, have rejected the book andonly include it as part of the Apocrypha even though fragments of it were discovered inthe Essene library, at Qumran, in Palestine.[9]
For a discussion concerning theBiblical Canon see Church Tradition & The Textual Integrity Of The Bible and TextualReliability Of The New Testament.
Modifying the Missionary's own words weconclude:
However, the most convincing explanation, and the most worrying forthose who maintain that the Bible is God's eternal Word, untampered with and free fromany human interference, is that the Bible is using the enormously influential Greekphilosopher Aristotle's teachings for the stages of foetal development, in which casenot only is the Bible wrong, but it also plagiarises ancient Greekliterature!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
[1] The missionaries believethe Prophet Muhammad(P) to have been the author of the Qur'ân, who "plagiarised" Biblicalstories and Rabbinic legends in order to compose the Qur'ân. See the Refutation Of TheBible Borrowing Theories.
[2] See the Refutation Of The Bible BorrowingTheories.
[3] Joseph Needham, A History of Embryology, Cambridge University Press,1959.
[4] Ibid, pp. 64-65.
[5] Ibid, p. 65.
[6] For an interestingexample of copying or "plagiarism" within the Bible compare II Kings 19 with Isaiah 37which are word for word 100% identical yet are attributed to two different authors!According to the Revised Standard Version (William Collins Sons & Co, 1952) the author ofII Kings is unknown (RSV, Simple Helps and Visual Aids to the Understanding of the Bible,p. 13) while the book of Isaiah is
mainly credited to Isaiah. Parts may have beenwritten by others. (Ibid, p. 15).
[7] "Solomon, Wisdom of," EncyclopaediaBritannica CD 99 Standard Edition © 1994-1999 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.
[8]"Christianity: Roman Catholicism", Encyclopaedia Britannica, CD 99 Standard Edition ©1994-1999 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.
[9] Ibid.
bekchris schrieb:Warum zog Mohammed wohl in Mekka kampflos ein ??
