Odon-Pt 2: Why is the Qur'an called an "Arabic Qur'an"?

You can see more of Odon Lafontaine's Videos on his YouTube channel at: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCBK-jorCkGWOgo0ZfAOF_Lg/videos Odon investigates what the word "Qur'an" really means, and why the Qur'an refers to itself as "The Arabic Qur'an"? He begins by asking what is the word “Quran” in the Quranic text? It comes, he says, from the QRA root (qāf rā hamza - ق ر أ): which means to recite, to read. So it could be a recitation, a reading (a lectionary?), taken from scripture. The Aramaic word: qorono or qer’yana which specifically means lectionary, from the sacred scripture, used in ritual masses. There are 88 occurrences of the QRA root in the quranic text, and 85 of them relate to a “quran” or a recitation of a text, the other 3 have no relationship to a Qur’an. In Islamic, or the later Abbasid Arabic “the Quran”, is understand as the one and only Quran, the sacred book of Islam, the word of God preached by the prophet Muhammad according to the Standard Islamic Narrative. So, the “Quran” word became as a proper noun. Yet there are many Quranic occurrences in the Qur’an which do not fit this explanation. There are also other Quranic expressions, such as ‘to recite’ = talā (TLW root - tā lām wāw - ت ل و) with 63 occurrences, which mean to recite, recitation, the recitants. Also, ‘narrate’ = qaṣṣa (QSS root - qāf ṣād ṣād - ق ص ص) with 20 occurrences of the verb qaṣṣa, and 6 occurrences of the noun qaṣaṣ (narration, story). And also ‘To recite’ = rattal (rā tā lām - ر ت ل) with 4 occurrences (to recite, recitation). During the 7th – 8th centuries, there were many Qur’ans, all used by these preachers. The SIN doesn’t understand this, and therefore only refers to one book. S.6:19; 25:30; 27:76 we find “this Qur’an” which means that there were other Qur’ans, and this assumes it. S.10:15 we find “a Qur’an other than this or change it”, suggesting that there could be other Qur’ans. S.85:21 we find “But this is an honored Qur’an” in contradistinction to another Qur’an. So, this Abbasid Qur’an was introducing a specific Qur’an, which was: S.12:2; 20:113; 39:28; 42:7; 43:3 = “An Arabic Qur’an” pointing out the Arabic-ness of this Qur’an. S.41:44 = “And if we had made it a non-Arabic Qur’an”. S.26:192-195 = “In a clear Arabic language”. Conclusion: Thus, we have found that the Qur’an is really not just one book, but something which comes out of many Qur’ans, and this Abbasid text is “An Arabic Qur’an”. This means the other earlier ‘Qur’ans’ were not Arabic. As we now know these earlier ‘Qur’ans’ were mostly in Aramaic, and the word used for them was ‘Qer’yana’ which means ‘lectionaries’. You wouldn’t have to make the point in the verses above of an Arabic Qur’an unless there were other language texts which it is comparing itself to, nor would those verses make any sense if there was always just one Qur’an, as the SIN suggests. Once again Odon confronts the Standard Islamic Narrative's view that there is and always has been only ONE QUR"AN, eternal and un-created, residing on tablets in heaven (Surah 85:22) by pointing out that at the time of the Qur'an's creation in the 7th - 8th centuries, there were a multiplicity of Qur'ans, mostly written in Aramaic, but in other languages as well. The final 8th-9th century Abbasid Qur'an, the one we use today, is the "Arabic Qur'an", written in the Arabic language for the Arabic people, pointing clearly to a distinction between this later Qur'an, and the earlier one from which it derived its material. © Pfander Centre for Apologetics - US, 2022 (60,730) Music: "Friends" by Aleksound, from filmmusic-io