Talk:Historical reliability of the Quran

redoing the article
There are two wikipedia articles on the bible with similar names: The difference between them is described in this disambiguization note:
 * Criticism of the Bible
 * Biblical Criticism
 * "This article (Biblical Criticism) is about the academic treatment of the Bible as a historical document. For criticisms made against the Bible as a source of reliable information or ethical guidance, see Criticism of the Bible.

I propose doing the same with "Criticism of the Quran and this article, which I propose to rename to something like Historical Criticism of the Quran or Origin of the Quran according to academic historians. (The phrase "Quranic criticism" would make a nice symmetry with "Biblical criticism", but nobody uses it in the same way as "Biblical criticism" according to google.) --Louis P. Boog (talk) 15:59, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposed new lede
How would the redone article be different? Here is my proposed new lede:


 * Historical and scholarly criticism of the Quran (or secular Quranic studies) involves investigating and verifying the Quran's origin, text, composition, history, in a manner similar to Biblical criticism (and unrelated to criticism in the sense of "expressing disapproval"). Issues examined might include variations in text among different versions/manuscripts; the intended audience (such as whether the audience was assumed to be familiar with the Christian Bible); puzzles of unclear letters, words and phrases, unexplained by early exegetes; themes and stories found in other earlier texts (such as narratives about Alexander the Great) and religious works (especially the bible, apocryphal gospels and Jewish legends); patterns and repetition of text suggesting oral transmission, etc.


 * As the holy book of Islam, the Quran is believed by orthodox Muslims to have been sent down by Allah (God) and revealed to Muhammad by the angel Jabreel (Gabriel), and to be divine, perfect, and unchangeable. Consequently many not only see no need for investigation of the Quran (traditional Islamic religious sciences having already provided "all the answers to questions posed by modern western orientalists" except those "that issue from the rejection" of the Quran's "Divine Origin"), but many find the field "disturbing and offensive", "dangerous", and even an "assault", on the holy book, and some Muslims have been punished for attempting it.


 * Scholarly criticism of the Quran is thus a relatively new area of study, but has been practiced by secular, (mostly) Western scholars (such as John Wansbrough, Joseph Schacht, Patricia Crone, Michael Cook) who set aside doctrines of its divinity, perfection, unchangeability, etc. accepted by Muslim Islamic scholars;

--Louis P. Boog (talk)

Merge with Criticism of the Quran
After some thought, I believe the best way to proceed is to merge this article with Criticism of the Quran. Dividing the subject into "Criticism of the Quran and something like Historical Criticism of the Quran or Origin of the Quran according to academic historians, has its merits but there is also some overlap.  --Louis P. Boog (talk) 03:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC)