In this clip from a debate, you can listen to a Muslim speaker (Jamal Badawi) discussing this topic starting from 18:55 and onwards:
To state my own views regarding this argument:
The miracle of the Quran is not that it cannot be imitated by anyone else, but that Muhammad was illiterate and that there is no indication that he had lessons from someone else on linguistic/literary, historical, theological, and/or scientific fields of study, and yet he came up with a book that no one could re-produce or make something similar to it. So, for people at that time, the Quran was a miracle. When the Arabs heard the revelation recited, they became overwhelmed and even jealous by the literary beauty of the Quranic verses. They couldn't believe how an illiterate man could write something like that all by himself. Even today, most of the Quranic scholars and experts consider the literary aspect of the Quran to be something amazing while knowing the fact that Muhammad was not a trained poet nor was he able to read.
However, I do think that some Muslims exaggerate this argument by implying as if this is a "conclusive proof" of the Quran's divinity. Like padraic pointed out, this is a logical fallacy because not being able to reproduce or imitate a part of text doesn't necessarily mean that it cannot be ever done. One may just say that this is a mildly or a fairly interesting argument for the Quran, or something that strengthens the Quran's claims, but it would be unreasonable to use this argument as a conclusive evidence.
To state my own views regarding this argument:
The miracle of the Quran is not that it cannot be imitated by anyone else, but that Muhammad was illiterate and that there is no indication that he had lessons from someone else on linguistic/literary, historical, theological, and/or scientific fields of study, and yet he came up with a book that no one could re-produce or make something similar to it. So, for people at that time, the Quran was a miracle. When the Arabs heard the revelation recited, they became overwhelmed and even jealous by the literary beauty of the Quranic verses. They couldn't believe how an illiterate man could write something like that all by himself. Even today, most of the Quranic scholars and experts consider the literary aspect of the Quran to be something amazing while knowing the fact that Muhammad was not a trained poet nor was he able to read.
However, I do think that some Muslims exaggerate this argument by implying as if this is a "conclusive proof" of the Quran's divinity. Like padraic pointed out, this is a logical fallacy because not being able to reproduce or imitate a part of text doesn't necessarily mean that it cannot be ever done. One may just say that this is a mildly or a fairly interesting argument for the Quran, or something that strengthens the Quran's claims, but it would be unreasonable to use this argument as a conclusive evidence.
