GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2004-07 > 1090341286


From: (Jared Linn Olar)
Subject: Re: Jesus
Date: 20 Jul 2004 09:34:46 -0700
References: <1e2.255590ce.2e26e482@aol.com> <ac1a3786.0407150822.83f9817@posting.google.com> <ac1a3786.0407160512.1016af50@posting.google.com> <VHQJc.3624$K53.1844@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <ac1a3786.0407161102.6a41873c@posting.google.com> <DFZJc.3829$K53.2108@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <ac1a3786.0407190859.1489ab63@posting.google.com> <vmYKc.8132$K53.3063@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <ac1a3786.0407191934.95a102d@posting.google.com> <5E3Lc.8613$K53.4844@news-server.bigpond.net.au>


Peter Stewart <> wrote in message news:<5E3Lc.8613$>...
> Jared Linn Olar wrote:
> > Peter Stewart <> wrote in message news:<vmYKc.8132$>...
> I didn't challenge this - what I did object to was your statement
> "Muslim documentation does not appear until long after the time when
> Muhammad traditionally lived (hint: oral tradition, no matter how
> trustworthy, is not a document). Will and Peter are spectacularly
> wrong on this point. A heap of documents dated to a short time after a
> religion's origin versus no documents dated to a short time after a
> religion's origin". Comparisons are irrelevant: you are wrong.
>
> Will and Peter were not wrong on this matter - I haven't read all of
> Will's posts in the thread so I can't speak for him on anything
> extraneous to this very specific point. Islam IS documented from the
> 7th-century, and if you don't know that you should not label other
> people's information as "spectacularly wrong".

I'm sorry that I have not been as clear as necessary. To clarify:
not all documentation of Islam is "Muslim documentation," just as not
all documentation of Christianity is "Christian documentation." In
that context, I was specifying documents produced by Muslims in the
600s A.D. versus documents produced by Christians in the first century
A.D.

I have also inaccurately and unintentionally said there was no
documentation of Islam from the 600s A.D., when I knew there certainly
was non-Muslim documentation of Islam. I have already corrected my
misstatement on that point. Besides that, you have claimed that there
are be two or three Muslim documents from the 600s A.D., which if true
would make my claim that there are none to be slightly exaggerated.

> > I think my standard works pretty well. Of course that would
> > mean Christianity's origins are better documented than Islam's
> > origins, so obviously there must be something wrong with my
> > standard, since everyone knows that Islam's origins are better
> > documented, right?
>
> I didn't say that - perhaps Will did, but if so I missed it. You should
> try to be more accurate when spraying around inferences about your
> interlocutor's opinions.

Yes, Will said Islam is better documented, which is what started this
particular branch of this offtopic discussion. I did not say or imply
that you said Islam was better documented, but you can't blame me for
assuming that the topic under discussion in this branch of the thread
was in fact under discussion in this branch.

> > My remarks were about the documentation of the origin of the
> > Christian religion, and there is no origin of the Christian religion
> > without the life of Jesus Christ.
>
> There would be none _with_ his life unless some people thought his
> nature to be divine as well as human, and it's only when they believed
> and said (or indeed wrote) so that the Christian religion came into
> being.

That's one hypothesis. Another is that Jesus said He is both divine
and human.

> Semantics are not going to alter the fact that you misspoke in
> criticism of others & then set off at a tangent from that point in the
> thread.
>
> Peter Stewart

Yes, and I've already said I misspoke -- even though you know full
well that my very slight errors do not actually affect the accuracy of
my claim that Christianity is better documented than Islam.

Now then, having established that Islam's origins are not as well
documented as Christianity's, let's apply some Herculean effort to
shove this thread onto something appropriate for Gen-Medieval. For
instance, something I'm curious about is what kind of source material,
and of what quality, do we have for the traditional descent of the
Emirs and Sheriffs of Mecca (not to mention the modern Hashemite
dynasty) from al-Hassan, son of Fatima, daughter of Muhammad?

(We could also choose to discuss medieval descents from Jesus and/or
His relatives, but since there is really no way to demonstrate any
such descents, that discussion would probably be very short.)

Jared Linn Olar


This thread: