Answering Paul Williams

Paul's latest post at bloggingtheology.wordpress.com is something he deems contreversial but his own understanding of the issue please read that before contuing. one of the passages Paul quotes claim to be Allah explictly speaking, in fact "he sent down" implies the opposite. Appealing to the Bible third person writing form wont help the Quran here since its not the verbatim direct words of God but merely inspired by him. Further more the Quran twice explictly states "This is the word of an honored messenger". The Quran also confuses so called words of God (the "We" claimed to be God by Muslims) with created angels 19:63-65 many other examples like these exist. The first chapter being another clear example of human prayer to God something disputed by early Muslims themselves if we take hadith seriously. Thus Pauls claim is largely disputable. And clearly more than two options exist. It also cannot be known ( assuming Mohammed existed) how much of the Quran he recited and whether it existed as a single unit of 114 chapters and how many times this was redacted and how many prophets , heretics and authors came up or influenced what chapters. The Quran is such a cesspool and mishmash of theologies, contradictions and errors the only way to project it as a single piece of literature is by going outside of itself something the Quran itself expictly condemns. Yes the Quran like the Bible never asserts canonical inerrancy or having a single narrow minded intrepretation of every verse of itself as its fundamental truth. Like the Bible Muslims can selectively interprete and pick canon, the only diffence is the majority of Muslims have a fixed tradition and become heretics when that tradition is violated while Christians are less bound by tradition. Paul wishes there was no third alternative by neglecting the most skeptical western scholarship, you know the kind that goes by evidence fand not fabricated political narratives?