TABLE OF CONTENTS:

 

INTRODUCTION.

A LITTLE HISTORY.

TO THE MANUSCRIPTS.

CONCLUSIONS.

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

 

This is not done through “belief,” “tradition,” or “theology,” but by looking only at the evidence as supported by the existing Manuscripts.  What is supported by the Manuscripts is what we will be looking at and what they actually reveal.  No bias, no assumptions, only the truth of what the Manuscripts present to us.

 

 

A LITTLE HISTORY

 

 

In 325 A.D., the “Council of Nicaca,” was formed, mostly to declare as “heretics” false Christian communities who held to the false doctrine of the Godhead being “Non-Trinitarian,” despite in the very beginning of the Word of God, “let US make man in OUR image,” Genesis 1:26.  The councils conclusions were based upon history, language, inscriptions, and Manuscripts.

 

With this understanding, we can now better understand the original Qur’anic Manuscripts and where they originated from.

 

 

TO THE MANUSCRIPTS

 

 

The Christian Manuscripts, of which the Holy Bible is comprised from, all agree with each other and are not the discussion here.  See my Bible Study:  “BIBLE MANUSCRIPTS.”  The Manuscripts we are concerned about are the ones used to translate and comprise the Qur’an.

 

The evidence we will be looking at is not claims, beliefs, or assumptions.  But rather, the physical evidence.  We will be looking at “ink, script, parchment, writing style, corrections in the text,” and anything that can give us a date of the writing.

 

The most famous Manuscript according to Islamic dogma, is the “Birmingham Qur’an,” also known as “Mingana 1572a.”  It consists of only two parchment leaves and only contains parts of chapters 18 to 20 of todays Quran.  Radiocarbon dating shows the animal skin to date between 568 and 645 A.D.  However, this does not give us the timeline of when it was written upon; which would be sometime after 645 A.D.  This Manuscript represents less than 3% of the Qur’an.  There is nothing about authorship, revelation, or preservation.  What it does prove, if it is only a copy of a copy, is that Qur’anic material existed before the existence of Islam and before it was fully formed.

 

Another supposed Manuscript of Islam, the most recently discovered Manuscript of Islam, is the “San’a’ Palimpsest,” found in Yemen in 1972 A.D.  This Manuscript contains two Qur’ans situated upon the same page.  The older portion Qur’an was written upon, then erased, and then replaced with a different version.  The text underneath, known as the “lower text,” obviously differs from the later overwritten Qur’anic text, in wording, verse order, and structure.  This is not a scribble error.  This is an obvious editorial revision in order to go along with a belief system, and not truth to the validity of its true origin.  It is a revision for saving face of one’s religion and not the truth of that religion.  It alone destroys the Islamic claim of “perfect preservation.”

 

A better portion of the Qur’an is contained in the “Codex Parisino-Petrioikutabys,” which preserves about 40 to 45 per cent of the Qur’an.  It is spread across Paris, France, Saint Petersburg, Russia, the Vatican, in Rome, Italy, and lastly in multiple private collections.  Meaning changes to it will be exposed by others who hold their copies.  And as such, no changes have been attempted to be changed, except for the changes already in them.  Because, they were all written by multiple scribes, and each scribe wrote in a slightly different style and mannerism, which is how we know they are not one and the same scribe.  Different spelling of words of their time period, different verse divisions, different conventions.  Thus, this is not a unified Divine Manuscript.  But rather, communal copying.

 

Another supposed Qur’anic Manuscript is the “Ma’il Qur’an,” which is now held in the British Library, is written in a slanted vertical script, and is heavily edited.  This can be done because there are no vowels, no dots to distinguish the original true word or meaning, and no standardization to the text.  There are many scribes and each writer writes slightly differently from the other.  This copy is actually Arabic before Arabic existed as a fixed language.  It shows experimentation rather than revelation.

 

The “Topkapi” and “Samarkand” Qur’ans, claimed to be early versions written by Caliph Uthman, were actually dated to be in the late 7th or early 8th centuries by “Palaeography.”  Each script differs slightly from each other.  They are large monumental codices, the kind delivered by an empire.  Not by a religious sect attempting to preserve the truth. What they really represent is standardization, not origin.

 

Now we come to one of the most complete early Qur’anic Manuscripts, the “Codex Mashhad.”  However, it is a composite Manuscript.  It contains edits, later repairs and additions.  It demonstrates that the Qur’an was still being managed, corrected, assembled, well after the period of supposed revelation.

 

 

CONCLUSIONS

 

 

The Qur’an was not written in “Clear Arabic” as Islam claims.  And even more shocking, it borrows heavily from Syriac Christianity, which denies the Trinitarian Doctrine.  The language is of the Eastern Christian churches in form and style and belief system.  The proof is in words found in the Manuscripts such as “Injil, Salat, Zakat, and Furqan.”  This is not borrowing or taking from pagan Arabs or early traditions.  But rather, this is definitively deriving from, originating from and borrowed from non-Trinitarian Christian liturgical language.

 

The fact that the Qur’an rejects the Trinitarian view of Christendom, lets us conclude that the Qur’an comes from the non-Trinitarian Christian groups condemned after the “Council of Nicaea.”  In essence, the Qur’an is attempting to preserve a lost Christian theology.

 

In hopes to better eat this conclusion, in 691 A.D., Qur’anic inscriptions appeared upon what is today known as “The Dome Of The Rock” in Jerusalem. One of the inscriptions referrers to Muhammad as, “The Praised One.”  However, we now know this to be actually be referring to Jesus Christ.  For “The Praised One” is simply a title, and not a name.  See my Study:  “MUSLIMS, A MUST READ.”  The inscriptions upon “The Dome Of The Rock” overwhelmingly address Christians, as these anti-Trinitarian writings attack them.  They have nothing to do with Islam.  The deny Christology.  They deny Divine Sonship.  They deny the Trinity.  Their focus is against Christianity in its true form, not Islamic beliefs and practices.

 

What we see is not a new religion announcing itself in the Manuscripts, or a new revelation, other than denial of the true religion.  Islam did not create the Qur’an; it inherited it.  What is actually revealed is Christian Theological Polemic.  The evidence is not ambiguous.  The Qur’an was not written by Muslims.  It emerged from non-Trinitarian Christian communities and was later rebranded by an Islamic empire in order to wipe out Christianity and the originators of it, Jews.  And if I say so myself, it is backed and originated by Satan himself.  For Muslims truly do not know why they need to kill people in order to go to a Paradise that teaches them to kill.  Sounds Satanic to me.