@MuslimIQ @ScholarlyIslam I used the word ‘progression,’ which is true, but I never called it a “progression theory.” You coined that term.
— Nabeel Qureshi (@NAQureshi)
If one organizes the Qur’an based on chronology of the revelation, is it not generally true that the latter years contained verses with less pacifism than say, the verses revealed in Mecca, collectively speaking?
The whole Mecca vs. Medina revelations dichotomy?
I know Ahmadi Muslims don’t believe in the concept of abrogation of the Qur’an. Fine.
But it is generally suggested that as the years progressed in Muhammad’s prophethood, that there is a disproportionate (increasing) treatment of topics with violence discussed, than in the earlier Surahs.
Is that agreed upon by everyone here, or is even that premise disputed?
For example, CSPI (I’m sure not a popular source with Muslims) did publish a Koran with verses arranged in chronological order of revelation. Forget their translations for a moment. See: https://www.politicalislam.com/product/a-simple-koran/. Read your own respective translations, but in that sequence.
If we read the Qur’an in that way, would we not find a progression (increased frequency) of content dealing with situations of violence? Perhaps Muslims wish to say that’s because more wars or such had to be fought. Whatever your reasoning, do you dispute that this progression is present?
If this cannot be established as an agreed upon common ground (everyone free to qualify it their own way), perhaps an article/rebuttal on this topic needs to be addressed first.
Though I’m not sure how one would argue against this suggested progression. Dr. Bill Warner has run a lot of statics on these subjects: https://www.politicalislam.com/trilogy-project/statistical-islam/.
Incidentally, any Ahmadi Muslim rebuttals of the statistical work of Dr. Bill Warner?