1. Research Objective
One of the theories proposed in recent years regarding the language of the Quran is the notion of the "oratory nature of the Quranic language." This theory links judgments about the Quranic language to judgments about the arrangement of verses within surahs. The foundation of this notion is that the verses in the Quran’s surahs are organized based on their order of revelation, and the circumstances of revelation have necessitated their current arrangement. Consequently, according to this theory, two conclusions are drawn: first, that the Quranic language is oratory in nature, and second, that in some cases, there is "discontinuity" and "lack of coherence" between different sections of a surah.
The aim of this study is to evaluate the validity of the theory regarding the oratory nature of the Quranic language by examining its claims about the lack of coherence in verses within surahs and its justification for this discontinuity based on the connection between verses and their circumstances of revelation.
2. Research Methodology
The research method employed in this article is library-based and descriptive-analytical. The overall structure of the research proceeds as follows: first, the theory of the oratory nature of the Quranic language is presented, and its judgment regarding the connection between verses within surahs—based on their thematic incoherence and their relationship to circumstances of revelation—is explained. Subsequently, criticisms directed at this theory's judgment about thematic discontinuity in surahs are discussed.
3. Research Findings
The following criticisms are raised against the theory of the oratory nature of Quranic language concerning the arrangement of verses within surahs and thematic incoherence in surahs 
^{1. Foundational Criticism:}
Analysis reveals that contrary to this theory’s judgment, verses within surahs are not necessarily arranged according to their order of revelation. In some cases, it can be demonstrated that verses have been arranged in an order different from their chronological revelation in the Quran. As a result, it can be argued that the arrangement of verses in surahs is influenced more by divine will and wisdom than by circumstances of revelation.
2^{.  Criticism of Examples Highlighting Incoherence:}
Examination of examples cited by this theory as instances of contextual disjunction shows that these examples are coherent when considering two factors:
First, by taking into account the Quran's unique rhetorical style, which often addresses multiple dimensions of a subject. This rhetorical feature—creating dualities that appear oppositional—can explain connections between various topics within a surah.
Second, by recognizing recurring patterns in thematic sequences across different surahs. These patterns demonstrate that diverse topics in Quranic culture are interrelated, indicating no actual thematic disjunction has 
occurred.
^{3. Criticism of the Lack of Coherence Based on the Wisdom Behind Divine Actions}
Accepting the theory of the oratory nature of the Quranic language—which is based on thematic incoherence within surahs and the connection of verses due to circumstances of revelation—implies denying the existence of wisdom in one of God’s actions, namely, the arrangement of verses within surahs. According to this theory, first, the selection of topics for each surah and the arrangement of verses within surahs, and second, the creation of surah structures in the Quran, lack wisdom and logical reasoning. Instead, the current sequence of topics is merely a result of their association during the time of revelation.
^{4.  Criticism of Incoherence Considering Features of Oral Culture}
One key feature of speech in oral cultures is the effort to preserve it through coherence. Therefore, if we believe that the Quran has been destined for eternal preservation from its inception, we must also accept that factors ensuring its preservation—including coherence—have been accounted for.
4. Final Conclusion
The theory suggesting the oratory nature of Quranic language and its acceptance of thematic incoherence within surahs—justifying this incoherence by referencing the connection between verses and circumstances of revelation—has deviated from accuracy.