Why the Quran Was a Bestseller Among Christians in 18th Century America (and Thomas Jefferson)

History.com ^ | Jan 2019 | Becky Little

[CondoleezzaProtege]

“The Quran gained a popular readership among Protestants both in England and in North America largely out of curiosity,” says Denise A. Spellberg, a history professor at the University of Texas at Austin and author of Thomas Jefferson’s Qu'ran: Islam and the Founders. “But also because people thought of the book as a book of law and a way to understand Muslims with whom they were interacting already pretty consistently, in the Ottoman Empire and in North Africa.”

When Jefferson bought his Quran as a law student in 1765, it was probably because of his interest in understanding Ottoman law. It may have also influenced his original intention for the the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom to protect the right to worship for “the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination,” as he wrote in his autobiography.

This professed religious tolerance was probably mostly theoretical for Jefferson. At the time, he and many other people of European descent likely weren’t aware of how far Islam extended into parts of Africa not controlled by the Ottoman Empire; which means that, ironically, they might not have realized that many enslaved people in North America held the very faith they were studying.

Jefferson’s Quran was a 1734 translation by a British lawyer named George Sale. It was the first direct translation of the Quran from Arabic to English (the only other English version was a translation of a French translation published in 1649), and would remain the definitive English translation of the Quran into the late 1800s. In his introduction, Sale wrote that the purpose of the book was to help Protestants understand the Quran so that they could argue against it.

[CondoleezzaProtege]

In his introduction, Sale wrote that the purpose of the book was to help Protestants understand the Quran so that they could argue against it.

[Leaning Right]

I suppose that would be like reading Mein Kampf to see how the Nazis thought.

Back then, most folks didn’t take Mein Kampf seriously. Just as today most folks don’t take the Quran seriously. That’s a problem. A big problem.

Both books are serious business. They mean what they say.

[ansel12]

“”””an English translation of the Quran (or Koran) actually became a bestseller among Protestants in England and its American colonies.””””

Almost all Americans were Protestant so this seems to be that type of wording chosen to continue giving the impression that early America was like today, completely multi everything.

[dfwgator]

Know your enemy, because they sure know you.

[ansel12]

“”””Given its history, Tlaib and Ellison’s choice to use Jefferson’s Quran in their private swearing-in ceremonies carries a particular significance. “By using Jefferson’s Quran, they’re affirming the fact that Islam has a long history in the United States, and is in fact an American religion,” Spellberg says.””””

More fake history through careful wording which leaves an impression of something false, they were not learning about Muslims because of diversity, they were learning about an old enemy and what makes them tick.

[ckilmer]

The quran was popular because it had the low view of christ—just like the unitarians.

The low view of Christ is also known as the The Arian Heresy which was first promoted by Servitus in the late 16th century. His views were rationalized to become a part of all educational institutions by Descartes. Sir Issac Newton then became an acolyte of the Unitarian view. He was the master in the anglo saxon world.

If the master believed it to be true —then it must be true.

That was the foundation of jefferson and adam’s unitarianism.

Since the Unitarians and the Muslim’s held the same view of Christ as being a good man but not God—there were not strong disagreements between them.

Hence the great novel of the 19th century Moby Dick began with the words “ Call Me Ishmael” . But Melville after he finished the novel went on to attend a unitarian church for the first time.

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

The Quran is made up of 114 chapters call “sura”. There is a brief opening chapter, with the following early chapters being lengthy. Succeeding chapters then become shorter and shorter.

I have read a good bit in the Quran, and my impression was that the first few chapters are mildly interesting reading. However, each succeeding chapter becomes more and more ridiculously repetitive and boring and mundane.

In Islam there are no compelling prophecies about the coming of Mohammed. Muslims cannot appeal to that as prove that the Quran is from God. Instead Muslims try to say that the Quran can be shown to be divine because of its beauty—such beauty that could only come from God. I’ve read the Quran, and I just don’t see that. And it’s not a very objective criteria. If you put the Quran alongside some of the prophecies in the book of Isaiah, there is simply no contest between the two when it comes to beauty. Even books like Les Miserables and The Lord of the Rings are far more beautiful than the Quran. But I don’t think that we should start a new religion because of them. If you want to talk about beauty, compare the Quran to many of the passages in the book of Isaiah, or writings in the Psalms, or passages in books like I John. There is absolutely no comparison. It shows a desperation to have to claim that the beauty of the Quran is the primary proof of its divine origin.

Their claims are not totally unlike that claims of Mormons regarding the Book of Mormon. Mormonism depicts a pre-Columbian history that, not only hasn’t been proven, but has been pretty much strongly disproven. Their aren’t any compelling prophecies about the coming of Joseph Smith. So, what do the Mormons do to try to convince you that the Book of Mormon is from God? They can’t count on fulfilled prophecies or historical reliability. So they urge you to read the Book of Mormon and see if the Holy Spirit doesn’t confirm it in you with what they call the “burning in the bosom”. I’ve never gotten that burning in the bosom from reading the Book of Mormon. And I think that any beauty in the Quran pales in comparison to Isaiah, or Psalms, or the Gospel of John, or even many secular works. They don’t actually have proof, so they are grasping at straws.

[DesertRhino]

“ Given its history, Tlaib and Ellison’s choice to use Jefferson’s Quran in their private swearing-in ceremonies carries a particular significance. “By using Jefferson’s Quran, they’re affirming the fact that Islam has a long history in the United States, and is in fact an American religion,” Spellberg says.”

It’s the agenda. Our grandchildren will soon be taught about the rich history of Islam in America. Probably already is.

[Buttons12]

Muslims were a problem. Search “Barbary Wars.”

[Angelino97]

I found a free copy of the Koran in a Little Library. I’ve flipped through it, reading parts. It’s boring.

[A Navy Vet]

So who actually wrote the chapters in the Koran? And what are the Hadiths about and who wrote them?

[Angelino97]

Muslims try to say that the Quran can be shown to be divine because of its beauty—such beauty that could only come from God.

A Mormon made a similar argument to me. She read a passage to me from the Book of Mormon, then said that she found it to be so beautiful and holy that it convinced her the book must be divinely inspired.

[Leaning Right]

I’ve been told that many English translations of the Koran have been sanitized, meaning that most of the harsh phrases have been replaced with gentler phrases.

II’s that’s really true, I wouldn’t be surprised.

[SunkenCiv]

Zul-Qarnain - What is the argument?
by Jochen Katz

I have never claimed that Zul-Qarnain *is* the historical Alexander the Great. I don't know why your move to agree with me in this is considered a rebuttal... The argument is then that the Qur'anic story is clearly taken from the legends about Alexander. There are many many details of the Qur'an account which are nearly verbatim to be found in the Alexander legends. Conclusion: Zul-Qarnain clearly is the Alexander the Great of the legend stories. And because the Qur'an presents the material from the legends as if this were history, it shows that Muhammad could not distinguish between legends and history when he incorporated this material in the Qur'an. This is evidence that the Qur'an is not of divine origin.

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

And what are the Hadiths about and who wrote them?

The Hadiths are oral traditions of the words and actions of Mohammed or of his closest companions. There are differing views within Islam as to exactly how much authority is to be given to which hadith. They are generally divided into three groups, based on how certain they are believed to come from Mohammed: authentic, good, and weak. Many scholars doubt the legitimacy of any of them, and there are small groups within Islam (particularly the Quranists) who contend that only the Quran should be authoritative. Nevertheless the hadiths are widely used and respected. They, instead of the Quran, tend to be the primary basis for the details of Sharia law.

[BenLurkin]

Mormonism, Mohamedism, and Scientology.

All phony “religions” concocted by evil men for personal gain.

[Carry_Okie]

Almost all Americans were Protestant

With the possible exception of Maryland.

[A Navy Vet]

"They, instead of the Quran, tend to be the primary basis for the details of Sharia law."

That's what I thought after reading passages from the Koran and the Hadiths. The Hadiths are the instigators of Sharia Law and all the trouble that Law causes. I wonder which sect subscribes to Sharia Law more? Sunni or Shia?

[9YearLurker]

Reading the full Koran is a very good cautionary tale.

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

I wonder which sect subscribes to Sharia Law more? Sunni or Shia?

Elements of both do. There are actually various sects within both Sunni and Shia Islam. Some, probably most, are quite moderate. The more extreme groups within each are the ones most likely to be strong advocates of Sharia law in all of its aspects. Shia Islam is usually thought of as the more extreme, but some of the extreme sects within Sunni Islam are perhaps the most noteworthy. I think that Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Wahhabism, and the Muslim Brotherhood all are or were part of Sunni Islam.