In this article, the "Islamic Awareness" team (a record 8 members) attempts to attack an argument that was never made. In spite of the accusation that this is an age old polemic, the "Islamic Awareness" team tells us in their CONTENT tag:
In fact, the Answering-Islam site has, since 1997, denied that Muhammad copied verses from Imru'l Qais. So, what is the point of the "Islamic Awareness" article?
Was Imru'l Qais a Christian?
The "Islamic Awareness" team often believes that one looks best when they are on the attack. In this article, they must find, or invent, an argument to attack. Their first target is Louis Cheikho who, in the 1890's, claimed that Qais was a Christian. I am not sure why this is an issue, and the article provides no background information as to why this is relevant to an argument that Christians have not made against the Qur'an!
A Kind Word for Rev. W. St. Clair Tisdall?
The "Islamic Awareness" team now turns to Rev. W. St. Clair Tisdall, one of their favorite targets for ad hominem attacks. However, Rev. W. St. Clair Tisdall cannot be attacked in this debate. According to the "Islamic Awareness" team:
After all of these words, the "Islamic Awareness" team has no one to attack for an accusation (that Muhammad copied the works of Imru'l Qais) that was never made.
Sir C. J. Lyall
Lacking an argument, or person, to attack, the "Islamic Awareness" team turns to Sir C. J. Lyall. They quote a passage from Arabic Literature to the End of the Ummayad Period (A.F.L. Beeston, T.M. Johnstone, R.B. Serjeant and G.R. Smith (ed.), 1983, Cambridge University Press) :
The Qur'ân is not verse, but it is rhythmic. The rhythm of some verses resemble the regularity of Saj', and both are rhymed, while some verses have a similarity to Rajaz in its vigour and rapidity. But it was recognized by Quraysh critics to belong to neither one nor the other category.[10]
Was that so difficult for Lyall to say that?
The most reasonable explanation for this could be that Lyall was most concerned with pre-Islamic Arabic poetry. This assumption can be made from the title of Lyall's book : Translations of Ancient Arabian Poetry, Chiefly Pre-Islamic. Lyall does make some minor points concerning the Qur'an, especially the issue of the "Satanic Verses" (page xxix), however, the Qur'an is not the subject of this book.
Quotes provided by the "Islamic Awareness" team must also be placed in the context in which they were written. Beeston, Johnstone, Serjeant and Smith were quoting Mubarak's Nathr. The authors agree that the Qur'an is in a literary category of its own. However, on pages 196-197, they tell us:
On page 198, we are told:
As in other articles, the "Islamic Awareness" team "quote mines" sources in an attempt to find some information which will extricate the Qur'an from charges that Muhammad borrowed from other traditions. In this case, the "Islamic Awareness" team attempts to rescue the Qur'an from an accusation that was not made - that Muhammad plagiarized the work of Imru'l Qais. As in other articles, the sources that the "Islamic Awareness" team "quote-mines" do not prove their position. These sources, more often than not, contradict the "Islamic Awareness" arguments and further support the idea that Muhammad borrowed his materials from Pagan, Jewish, and Christian traditions.
Sources of the Qur'an
Responses to Islamic Awareness
Answering Islam Home Page