Before we discuss the ‘alien’ issue, let us look into another logical proposition that is presented against the Divine nature of the Qur-aan. I consider it to be a minor objection, so let me address that first and then move on to answer the question of the ‘alien’. The proposition is this:
(1.) If the Qur-aan is so advanced that it couldn’t have been authored by a simple man like Muhamamd then it could possibly have been plagiarized from the Bible and other existing works, by Muhammad, and then falsely attributed to God, for strategic reasons of course.
(2.) This seems to be an improbable hypothesis, because if Muhammad plagiarized the Qur-aan and then falsely attributed it to God then it basically means that Muhammad lied to us, and we have already discussed that to be unlikely:
(a.) Given the reputation that Muhammad had of being a truthful (‘saadiq’) and trustworthy (‘ameen’) man.
(b.) Moreover, a liar wouldn’t be able to withstand, for the sake of a false mission, the kind of tribulations that Muhammad suffered, that too for 23 long years!
(c.) Muhammad stood against the whole of Arabia, a single man to begin with, he was offered the leadership of the Arab tribes, offered kingship and all the riches of the world, but in return asked to abandon his mission. He refused. So much for being a liar!
(d.) He warned the Arabs beforehand, even while he was weak and helpless in Makkah, that he would defeat them all, and so he did, in the course of just 20 years the whole of Arabia had accepted Muhammad as the prophet of God and their leader! He had also given the glad tidings to his miserable followers that they would take over the Persian and the Roman empires! And so they did! Sounds more like a ‘prophet’ than a liar to me!
(e.) Also, plagiarization implies the existence of prior Arabic work(s) similar to the Qur-aan. The fact is, prior to the Qur-aan, no similar book existed in Arabia. There were poems and prose, and we have already discussed that the Qur-aan is neither poetry nor prose, it’s a novel form of literature. And Muhammad being an untrained man, he couldn’t possibly have created it. We have discussed why this is so in my articles seven, eight, and nine.
(f.) The Bible existed prior to the Qur-aan but its literary form is nowhere close to the Qur-aan’s. And thus the above argument holds again.
(g.) Not just the literary form, the details of the topics addressed by the Qur-aan too are different from the details of the Bible.
(i) For example, the issue of Jesus’s death: The Christians believed that Jesus died on the cross and then rose from the dead and was then lifted by God to the heavens. But the Qur-aan says that Jesus didn’t die on the cross. He was given a natural death sometime after the crucifixion event and then his body was raised up to the heavens so as not to be defiled by his enemies. And according to another Quranic interpretation, he didn’t die at all, neither on the cross nor anytime after the crucifixion, rather, raised up alive to the heavens so that he might return in the last era of the world prior to the day of judgment.
(ii) Another example: The Christians believe in a worldwide cataclysmic flood in the times of Noah; the famous story of the Noah’s Ark! The Qur-aan on the other hand doesn’t refer to any global flood, just a local one that afflicted the nation or community of Noah.
(iii) Here’s another example: The Bible tells us that God created the heavens and the earth in six days and then He rested on the seventh day. The Qur-aan on the contrary asserts that God never gets tired and hence there’s no mention of God resting on the seventh day after the creation of the universe.
(iv) The Christians had a dogmatic belief in the divinity of the Trinity – the triune godhead of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit – while the Qur-aan condemns it as a polytheistic belief.
(v) The Christians had developed the belief that Jesus was the begotten son of God. The Qur-aan condemned this belief too and called it out as a polytheistic notion.
(vi) The Bible says that the Pharaoh who denied Moses, was drowned in the sea by God. The Qur-aan added that the Pharaoh’s body wasn’t totally destroyed by the sea, it was preserved as a lesson for the future generations!
(vii) The differences between the details (of the Qur-aan) and the Christian beliefs (derived from the Bible) are too many to be listed here in this article. They encompass all possible subjects or domains of human knowledge: spirituality, epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of religion, philosophical theology, natural philosophy, ethics, personal-social-economic-political-international-military laws, historical accounts, future predictions, etc.
(h) To create a new book with so many fine differences, and that too in a novel form of literary style, would have called for an expert in literature and all the above mentioned domains of knowledge. Muhammad was far from being an expert or even a dabbler in any domain of human intellectual endeavour. So Muhammad is an improbable source of the Qur-aan, for reasons already discussed above and in my articles seven, eight, and nine.
(i) Why would Muhammad contradict the Christians and the Jews on so many accounts despite the fact that conforming to the dogmas of Christianity and Judaism would have been a better strategic move that would have reduced their antagonism to Islam and hence could have fetched Muhammad more followers! Especially the dogmas which are not explicitly polytheistic and hence vehemently argued to be monotheistic by the Jews and the Christians, like the ones cited above in (2.g.iv) and (2.g.v). And also those concepts, beliefs, and statements which in no way posed any apparent harm to Islam, like (2.g.i) and (2.g.iii) cited above.
A person who is so unethical that he would plagiarize stuff and then attribute it to none other than God would use all possible means that would enhance his chances of gathering more followers, rather than teach things that would repel prospective converts!
(3.) The above mentioned reasons nullify another similar proposition that some early Muslims might have plagiarized from the Bible and produced the Qur-aan and then falsely attributed it to Muhammad receiving it from God.
(a.) Why would the Muslims who plagiarized the Qur-aan not use the means that would have enhanced their chances of winning over the Jews and the Christians? Why would they contradict the Biblical narratives despite the implied consequences of losing potential converts?
(b.) Moreover, the people who produced the content of the Qur-aan in the literary form that it is, would be geniuses. Why would their identity not come to light? How could their talent remain hidden for so long?
(c.) If it is conceded that the source of the Qur-aan is not God, not even Muhammad, not even some alien(s), if it is believed that some early Muslims produced the Qur-aan and Islam as a result, and then falsely but successfully attributed it to Muhammad receiving it from God, then this feat would have to be recognized as the biggest successful mass conspiracy ever hatched on this planet! There being no credible evidence in support of this conspiracy theory whatsoever, to believe in it calls for more faith than believing that the Qur-aan is from God!
(d.) To believe in this conspiracy theory is to discard the established history of Muhammad (d.632 CE) which is equivalent to discarding the history of Buddha (d.5th century BCE), Socrates (d.399 BCE), Plato (d.348/347 BCE), Aristotle (d.322 BCE), Jesus (d.30/33 CE), Constantine the Great (d.337 AD), and other similar figures! These people traversed the Earth’s surface hundreds of years even before Muhammad, so one cannot accept their history on one hand and reject Muhammad’s on the other!
Thus we have established that the Qur-aan is neither from Muhammad, nor from any other humans, hence the only option left over is the alien(s) hypothesis. Let’s analyze that now!
(4.) There are seven logical possibilities regarding the ‘alien’ who brought the Qur-aan to Muhammad. It could have been:
(i) An evil entity like the Satan (or the Devil) with some evil intention(s).
(ii) An evil entity like the Satan (or the Devil) with some neutral intention(s).
By an evil entity I mean a purely diabolical being that has no potential for goodness.
(iii) A non-evil and non-angel entity belonging to and sent by an intelligent community of alien species with some good intention(s).
(iv) A non-evil and non-angel entity belonging to and sent by an intelligent community of alien species with some malicious intention(s) against humans.
(v) A non-evil and non-angel entity belonging to and sent by an intelligent community of alien species with some neutral intention(s) like checking the impact of the Qur-aan on humans, as part of an experiment, project, or some need(s) or ambition(s) of their own.
By a non-evil and non-angel entity I mean a being like humans that has potentials for both goodness and evil.
(vi) An angelic entity (like Gabriel) with some good intention(s).
(vii) An angelic entity (like Gabriel) with some neutral intention(s).
By an angelic entity I mean a being that is purely virtuous, with no potential for evil.
I’ll critically examine each of the above options, but in the next article! So, keep reading!