Proof that the Bible is ‘Corrupted’

[`Abd al-Azeez]

:sl:

Well the reason I decided to make this topic is because whenever Muslims tell Christians that the Bible is changed, altered etc. Christians always demand proof, well here is the proof we've been waiting for:

Quotes From Bible Scholars Claiming The Bible Has Been ‘Altered’

The NT was written by Christians for Christians ; it was moreover written in Greek for Greek-speaking communities, and the style of writing (with the exception, possibly, of the Apocalypse) was that of current literary composition. There has been no real break in the continuity of the Greek-speaking Church and we find accordingly that few real blunders of writing are met with in the leading types of the extant texts. This state of things has not prevented variations ; but they are not for the most part accidental. An overwhelming majority of the 'various readings' of the MSS of the NT were from the very first intentional alterations. The NT in very early times had no canonical authority, and alterations and additions were actually made where they seemed improvements

(Encyclopedia Biblica (Vol. 4. p. 4980)

also proof that:

Mark 16:9-20 Is a Fabrication!

The oldest Bible we possess today, Codex Sinaiticus, which contains both Old and New Testaments does not conatin Mark 16:9-20 infact, it stops at Mark 16:8 :

The scribe who brought Mark's Gospel to an end in Codex Sinaiticus had no doubt that it finished at chapter 16, verse 8. He underlined the text with a fine artistic squiggle, and wrote, "The Gospel according to Mark." Immediately following begins the Gospel of Luke

( Secrets of Mt. Sinai, James Bentley p. 139)

Thats all for now.

:w:

[lolwatever]

lol im pretty sure we got a zillion and 3 quarters of these threads lying around lol

[Vishnu]

So many points of view....


Is Mark 16:9-20 Spurious or Genuine?

Howard See

Nashville, Tennessee
In a recent, late-night television interview of a snake handling preacher from East Tennessee, the text of Mark 16:9-20 was attacked as being spurious. This was an effort to try to offset the teaching in Mark 16:18, "'They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them . . . ." The attack on the genuineness of the passage is reminiscent of sectarian arguments in an effort to offset the teaching on baptism being essential to salvation in verse 16. Even if it could be shown that this portion of Mark's Gospel is spurious, it would help neither those who want to offset Mark 16:18 nor those who wish to offset Mark 16:16. There are other passages that teach that signs and miracles followed the early Christians to confirm the word, just as there are other passages which teach that baptism is essential to salvation. Neither is it necessary to claim that Mark 16:9-20 is spurious in an effort to offset the practice of handling snakes, drinking poison, etc., as applying to Christians today. There are other passages which teach that the miraculous gifts of the spirit were to cease, fail and vanish away (cf. 1 Cor. 13:8). History also confirms that the miraculous signs did cease. It was interesting to note that when a caller pointed out that these miraculous signs were to cease, fail and vanish away, that the host of the show did not give the preacher an opportunity to make a reply.

In regard to the inspiration of Mark 16:9-20, it needs to be be first pointed out that the authenticity of this passage (i.e. the historical accuracy and correctness of its teaching) has never been questioned by scholars. The only question that has been raised as to its genuineness pertains to whether or not it was written by Mark and whether it should be considered a part of Mark's original manuscript. Since the accuracy and correctness of the teaching cannot be successfully denied, for the passage to be attached to the close of Mark's Gospel does not render it any less valuable even though some other Apostle or inspired writer should have been its author.

The basis of the spurious argument.is twofold. First, it is claimed to be spurious because the passage is omitted from the Vatican and the Sinaitic Manuscripts. These being two of the older known manuscripts (the Sinaitic dating in the fourth century, around 340 A.D.; the Vatican manuscript also dating in the fourth century, probably around 350 A.D., some think as early as 325 A.D.) and since Mark 16:9-20 is omitted, it is argued that the passage was not a part of Mark's Gospel. Jerome and some fourth century writers are also quoted to say that the passage was absent in some of the Greek copies of their day. Second, it is said that there are words and phrases found in Mark 16:9-20 that are not found in the rest of Mark's Gospel. From this it is concluded by some that this passage was written by someone other than Mark. A thorough examination of these arguments, however, will not only show that the passage is authentic in all its details, but will also show that there is no real reason to doubt that it was also written by Mark.

The genuineness of Mark 16:9-20 may be seen from the following:

1. The facts stated in Mark 16:9-20 are mentioned in the Gospels (cf. Luke 8:2; John 20:1-8, etc.) and the promise concerning the signs was fully verified by miracles practiced by the Apostles and Christians as listed in the book of Acts. Heb. 2:4 and other passages further confirm that such signs did follow the believers.

2. Mark 16:9-20 is found in nearly all of the other Ancient Manuscripts. These include the Alexandrian (dated around 450 A.D.) which is next to the Vatican in accuracy and importance.

3. Justin Martyr quoted from Mark 16:9-20 about A. D. 160. Among other second century writers quoting this passage are Irenaeus and Tatian. It was also quoted by Hyppolytus and Dyonisius of Alexandria in the third century. All of these lived and wrote from one hundred to two hundred years earlier than the earliest existing manuscript was written or before Jerome indicated that the passage was not found in some of the Greek manuscripts of his day. The words of Irenaeus indicate that the passage was part of the Gospel of Mark in the second century and that Mark was regarded as its author. .He stated, "But Mark, in the end of his Gospel, says; and the Lord Jesus, after that he had spoken to them was received up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God." It is therefore apparent that this passage was a part of the Gospel of Mark and was written by Mark.

4. It is interesting to note that all of the ancient versions of the New Testament contain Mark 16:9-20. This of necessity emphasizes that the passage was a part of the Greek text from which these translations were made. Among these versions are the Pe****o Syriac, the Old Italic, the Sahidic and the Coptic. All of these existed long before the Vatican and the Sinaitic Manuscripts and long before Jerome. It is altogether unreasonable to argue that since it was omitted from these two manuscripts that it is spurious since all of the Ancient Versions, including those that existed long before these two manuscripts, included it as a part of the text of Mark's Gospel.

5. Further it seems highly improbable that Mark would have so abruptly closed his Gospel at the end of verse 8. The first eight verses of Mark 16 discuss the resurrection of Christ. Verses 9-11 discuss the appearance of Jesus to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection. Verses 12-13 discuss the Lord's appearance to two disciples on the way to Emmaus (cf. Luke 24:1335). Verses 14-18 discuss the appearance of Jesus to the eleven, state the commission which Jesus gave the disciples to preach the gospel state the conditions of salvation, and promise signs for confirming the Word as being the truth of God. Verses 19-20 of Mark 16 speak of the ascension of Christ and affirm that the Lord confirmed their word with signs as he had promised. What more logical way would there have been for Mark to have brought his Gospel to a close.

6. The same two manuscripts that omit Mark 16:9-20 also omit other passages of scripture. Notably among these are John 7:53-8:11. These same verses are omitted in both manuscripts. Yet those who argue that Mark 16:9-20 is spurious because both manuscripts omit these verses, never argue that John 7:53-8:11 is spurious. When it is remembered that the Monks were using the pages of the Sinaitic Manuscript to light the Monastery fires when Dr. Constantin Tischendorf found them in the "Monastery of St. Catherine at Mt. Sinai" in 1844, there seems to be a rather rational explanation as to why this and other passages were not found to be a part of the Manuscript.

7. The forty-seven translators of the Authorized Version, or the King James translation put Mark 16:9-20 in the text. Further the one hundred and one translators of the American Standard Version put Mark 16:9-20 in the text. Dr. Phillip Schaff, who served as president of the American Revision Committee said of Mark 16:9-20, "The section is found in most of the Uncial and in all the existing Greek and Syriac lectionaries as far as examined; and Irenaeus, who is a much older witness than any of our existing Manuscripts, quotes verse 19 as a part of the Gospel of Mark. A strong intrinsic argument for the genuineness is also derived from the extreme improbability (we may say impossibility) that the evangelist should have intentionally closed his Gospel with `for they were afraid' " (Companion to the Greek New Testament, page 190). Alexander Roberts, also an imminent member of the American Revision Committee said, with emphasis, that the author of Mark 16:9-20 was surely "one who belonged to the circle of apostles," and that it "is inserted, without the least misgiving, as an appendix to that gospel in the Revised Version" (Companion to the English New Testament, page 63).

We have noted that some attempt to argue that Mark 16:9-20 is spurious and was not written by Mark since there are words and phrases found in these last twelve verses of Mark 16 that are not found in the rest of Mark's Gospel. It has been observed that there are no less than seventeen words and phrases in this passage that are not used elsewhere by Mark. In response to this argument, J. W. McGarvey observed that Prof. John A. Broadus, a Baptist of Greensville, S.C., published in an article in the Baptist Quarterly for 1869, a list of exactly seventeen words and phrases used by Mark in the twelve verses immediately preceding Mark 16:9-20 that are used nowhere else by Mark. Yet critics of Mark 16:9-20 never question the authorship or genuineness of these twelve verses. McGarvey emphasized that the fact that the same argument could be made against the preceding twelve verses "is at once a surprising fact and a startling exposure of the fragile foundation on which this famous critical structure has been erected. It shows that the same use of the Greek Concordance which led to the origin of this criticism, if pushed a little farther, would have smothered it in its birth, and would have saved some distinguished critics from being detected in a flimsy though pretentious fallacy" (Commentary on Mark, page 380). McGarvey applied the same test to the last twelve verses of the Gospel of Luke and found that there are nine words found in these verses which are used by Luke nowhere else in his gospel. Not only so, but four of these words are found nowhere else in the New Testament.

However, none of the critics of Mark 16:9-20 never question the authorship or genuineness of authorship of Luke 24:42-53. Other examples of this kind could probably be found in the New Testament. These are sufficient however, to show that this reasoning on the part of the critics is shallow sophistry. That which is spurious is their argument, not the text of Mark 16:9-20. It is evident, therefore, that the voice of scholarship negates the spurious claim. There is absolutely no reasonable basis to claim that Mark 16:9-20 is anything other than the inspired word of God and that it was written by Mark as a part of his Gospel.
Truth Magazine XIX: 29, pp. 454-455
May 29, 1975

[QuranStudy]

http://members.aol.com/ckbloomfld/

This site has everything a beginner needs to know on how the Bible got corrupted.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Joe98]

The problem is that Muslims believe so strongly in their religion, that they believe the other religions had to happen just the same way.

Muslim belief: God spoke to Mohammad. And the Koran is the EXACT words of God

Muslim logic: God spoke Jesus and God’s word was recorded EXACTLY but has since become corrupted.

Muslim mistake: That God’s approach with Jesus and God’s approach with Mohammad was the same.

[Joe98]

Jews and Christians do not claim that their books are the EXACT word of God. Only Muslims claim that.

According to the Christians, Jesus went around saying nice things and being a very nice person.

The disciples wrote about what he did and said. Different disciples see it from a different point of view and wrote differently.

[lolwatever]

^ god spoke 2 neither of them:rollseyes

[Joe98]

What was the question???????

[lolwatever]

you said god spoke to them.... that's a lie... :uhwhat:

[Zone Maker]

you said god spoke to them.... that's a lie... :uhwhat:

:sl:
That’s what I hate about non-Muslims they always claim that they know everything about Islam while they still show ignorance:mad: .
:w:

[`Abd al-Azeez]

:sl:

An excellent book that exposes the foregreries in Christianity:

http://www.apollonius.net/forgery.pd...hristianity%22

:w:

[Joe98]

^ god spoke 2 neither of them:rollseyes

I have no idea what this means. Spoke to neither of who???

[lolwatever]

Allah didn't talk to Muhammad PBUh nor did he to Jesus... it was only via Jibreel he revealed to them the quran and instructions.

Moses was the only one who talked to Allah directly at Mount Sinai

[Joe98]

My point is still valid

[QuranStudy]

My point is still valid

Got morals??

[lolwatever]

Jews and Christians do not claim that their books are the EXACT word of God. Only Muslims claim that.

According to the Christians, Jesus went around saying nice things and being a very nice person.

The disciples wrote about what he did and said. Different disciples see it from a different point of view and wrote differently.

well that's to their bad luck innit :uhwhat why do they follow something that's not perfectly divine instead of somethign that is..

That God’s approach with Jesus and God’s approach with Mohammad was the same.

and? Allah didn't promise to protect the bible from alterations and edits, but he did promise to protect the Quran till the end of time..... there's no evidence to show that the quran underwent any new editions or edits... attemps to disseminate false copies always get busted :uhwhat


so you decided to become a priest and rabii combo now :?

[Trumble]

Just once it would be nice to see one of these "proofs" in relation to Bible or Qur'an that actually proves anything, other than the fact that the author is totally clueless as to what the word "proof" means.

The first post is an argument, not a proof. And, as usual, not much of one.

[syilla]

long time no see trumble :thankyou:

welcome back

btw...i don't think you are that bothered about the bible because you are a buddhist.

[Trumble]

welcome back

Thank you, although I have been lurking in "world affairs".

btw...i don't think you are that bothered about the bible because you are a buddhist.

I'm not, but I am a little picky as to philosophical terminology! :D

[lolwatever]

Just once it would be nice to see one of these "proofs" in relation to Bible or Qur'an that actually proves anything, other than the fact that the author is totally clueless as to what the word "proof" means.

The first post is an argument, not a proof. And, as usual, not much of one.

to me the fact that the bible, in the old testemant can accuse prophets and messengers of obscene things is proof enough of its corruption.. if it isn't, what is :?

as far as Quran is concerned, proof of what?

[Trumble]

as far as Quran is concerned, proof of what?

'Proof' that the Qur'an is the word of God and not of man, deduced logically from its contents. A consequence of such a 'proof' must also be that any other version of what God says or thinks must be wrong.

Muslims seem very keen on trying to do that, far more than Christians with the Bible, although I will admit the Qur'an is probably rather more favourable ground. Christians are much happier just to rely on faith, which I rather sympathise with, considering that none of the attempted "proofs" I have seen have been remotely convincing without a large dash of faith thrown in, usually by their author.

[lolwatever]

Well god has made a fair number of challenges, including the challenge of 'bring on a similar verse or chapter if u can'... as well as some of the things mentioned that would be ridiculous to attribute to the inbuilt ability of human beings

srsly.. how is an arab in the middle of arabia suppose 2 knwo about water under currents, and how is someoen in such an area supose 2 hav any clue about air pressure rising as you ascend up (considering there's barely any decent mountains to show that property in arabia)... amongst other things

if it's not god who revealed that info, then who?

some ppl come up with mythst hat the prophet went to the greeks or wat not, where's the proof? and the greeks hav a fair share of sci inaccuracies, especially aristotlean outlook on the universe, so obviously the quran would hav inherited some of those errors if that where indeed true.

[evangel]

Got morals??

Do you realize you insult everyone who is non-Muslim? It seems to me that all but the more radical Muslims distance themselves from your arrogant, aggressive and childish attitudes.


Matthew 7:1,2
"Judge not, that you be not judged.
For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get."

John 8:15
You judge according to the flesh, I judge no one.

[جوري]

'Proof' that the Qur'an is the word of God and not of man, deduced logically from its contents. A consequence of such a 'proof' must also be that any other version of what God says or thinks must be wrong.

Muslims seem very keen on trying to do that, far more than Christians with the Bible, although I will admit the Qur'an is probably rather more favourable ground. Christians are much happier just to rely on faith, which I rather sympathise with, considering that none of the attempted "proofs" I have seen have been remotely convincing without a large dash of faith thrown in, usually by their author.

I am ok with people not wanting to be Muslim but I rather like it more when people bring something to the table I can chew on.... I can give countless examples some off the top of my head..... for instance the Quran addressing the bees in the female form... something that wasn't even done up to Shakespearean time, if you'd refer to some of some of his enlightened literature...In the 16th chapter the Qur'an mentions that the female bee leaves its home to gather food.l2 Now, a person might guess on that, saying, "The bee that you see flying around - it could be male, or it could be female. I think I will guess female." Certainly, he has a one in two chance of being right. So it happens that the Qur'an is right. But it also happens that was not what most people believed at the time when the Qur'an was revealed. Can you tell the difference between a male and a female bee? Well, it takes a specialist to do that, but it has been discovered that the male bee never leaves his home to gather food. However, in Shakespeare's play, Henry the Fourth, some of the characters discuss bees and mention that the bees are soldiers and have a king. That is what people thought in Shakespeare's time - that the bees that one sees flying around are male bees and that they go home and answer to a king. However, that is not true at all. The fact is that they are females, and they answer to a queen. Yet it took modern scientific investigations in the last 300 years to discover that this is the case.

. I can't imagine why that along with countless others isn't significant? or considered "subjective" and based on faith when it is truly remarkable ... just that as a lone example is remarkable to me even if I knew nothing at all of science, or history or the age of this book.... so why this vehemence on how remotely "unconvincing"
– Worker bees being female (Qur'an 16:68)

A subtle yet extraordinary precision in describing a natural phenomenon occurs in Q.16:68: “And your Lord inspired the bee, (saying), 'Take for yourself dwellings in hills, on trees and in what they (mankind) build.’” The imperative “take” above is the translation of the Arabic word “ittakhidhi”, which is a feminine form (for Arabic verbs, unlike English ones, differentiate between the sexes). In Arabic, the female form is used when all those it refers to are female, whereas the masculine is used when a group contains at least one male. Therefore the Qur’an is in fact saying: “Take for yourself, you female bees, dwellings…”

I really love the verse from the Qur'an that states بَلْ يُرِيدُ كُلُّ امْرِئٍ مِّنْهُمْ أَن يُؤْتَى صُحُفًا مُّنَشَّرَةً {52}

[Yusufali 74:52] Forsooth, each one of them wants to be given scrolls (of revelation) spread out!
I think it applies for a great majority......... if it were the word of Mohammed what would he have to gain by living poor and calling to the belief in one God? I'd think he'd want a peter the great style kingdom to sing his praise........
peace

[dougmusr]

Well god has made a fair number of challenges, including the challenge of 'bring on a similar verse or chapter if u can'... as well as some of the things mentioned that would be ridiculous to attribute to the inbuilt ability of human beings

This verse would be a pretty untrustworthy test of the Quran's divine origin for several reasons. There is no criteria provided by which the produced work can be evaluated, nor is there any qualifications given to the witnesses. I have read the entire Bible and much of the Quran. I find the Bible to be a superior piece of work, and I have many witnesses who agree. Therefore I would have to say the Bible has met the challenge of this verse and has won the challenge.

002.023
YUSUFALI: And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true.
PICKTHAL: And if ye are in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto Our slave (Muhammad), then produce a surah of the like thereof, and call your witness beside Allah if ye are truthful.
SHAKIR: And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to Our servant, then produce a chapter like it and call on your witnesses besides Allah if you are truthful.

[جوري]

This verse would be a pretty untrustworthy test of the Quran's divine origin for several reasons. There is no criteria provided by which the produced work can be evaluated, nor is there any qualifications given to the witnesses. I have read the entire Bible and much of the Quran. I find the Bible to be a superior piece of work, and I have many witnesses who agree. Therefore I would have to say the Bible has met the challenge of this verse and has won the challenge.

.

How so? because you and several "witnesses" say so?
what do you mean by criteria provided? and what do you mean by qualifications of witnesses?... it is simple really... if you can produce a sura of any sort even like the shortest sura (108) comprable to the beauty, the rhyme, the meaning.. the time transcendance to that of the quran then by all mean do so... you can't compare the bible to the Qur'an... it is apples and oranges.... one thing in the least you'd have to read it in Arabic to actually fully grasp what we mean otherwise it is all talk.... when you see a sura part mekya, part medina... 10 years or more apart... yet carry on the same rhythm, fit in with meaning, textual style and divine brilliance... can we come and compare the book that has been altered a thousand times over to fit the centuries choice... to the book that has stood the test of time
peace:)

[dougmusr]

How so? because you and several "witnesses" say so?
what do you mean by criteria provided? and what do you mean by qualifications of witnesses?... it is simple really... if you can produce a sura of any sort even like the shortest sura (108) comprable to the beauty, the rhyme, the meaning.. the time transcendance to that of the quran then by all mean do so... you can't compare the bible to the Qur'an... it is apples and oranges.... one thing in the least you'd have to read it in Arabic to actually fully grasp what we mean otherwise it is all talk.... when you see a sura part mekya, part medina... 10 years or more apart... yet carry on the same rhythm, fit in with meaning, textual style and divine brilliance... can we come and compare the book that has been altered a thousand times over to fit the centuries choice... to the book that has stood the test of time
peace:)

That's just it. It does not say, if you can write better arabic, or better rhyme, or better prophecy. It does not specify who is responsible for making the determination that an attempted sura has met the challenge, except that the person who writes it can choose the evaluators. It does not establish any criteria.

[جوري]

the criteria is.... if you don't believe it is the word of God then bring forth the word of God in similar or better style.... why is that difficult?

[dougmusr]

the criteria is.... if you don't believe it is the word of God then bring forth the word of God in similar or better style.... why is that difficult?

I believe the Bible is a better book in a better style, but that's what I would be expected to believe as a Christian.

Have you spent any time reading the Hadiths?

[جوري]

I believe the Bible is a better book in a better style, but that's what I would be expected to believe as a Christian.

Have you spent any time reading the Hadiths?

What sort of question is that?.......... in fact my reading the hadiths affirms to me that the man who spoke those words couldn't have come up with the Qur'an... no two suras are the same whereas the style of the hadiths is very distinct... what are you derving at?............... I am glad the bible works better for you in a superior style... blessings to you :)

[dougmusr]

What sort of question is that?.......... in fact my reading the hadiths affirms to me that the man who spoke those words couldn't have come up with the Qur'an... no two suras are the same whereas the style of the hadiths is very distinct... what are you derving at?............... I am glad the bible works better for you in a superior style... blessings to you :)

I am under the impression that Islam considers the Hadiths to be an inspired historical account of how Muhammed himself lived the teachings of the Quran, much like the Gospels are accounts of how Christ lived the teachings of the Old Testament. Is that not what you believe?

[جوري]

yup... what do hadiths have to do with the Qura'an though? you quoted a quranic verse in your query... then you switched to hadiths... which would you like to discuss?

[dougmusr]

yup... what do hadiths have to do with the Qura'an though? you quoted a quranic verse in your query... then you switched to hadiths... which would you like to discuss?

It was more of a follow on question, not meant to be related so I should post it elsewhere I guess. Sorry.

[جوري]

no harm done... may God guide you unto the path of the righteous ......

[Joe98]

may God guide you unto the path of the righteous ......

I am already on that path, thank you ;) :thumbs_up

[Trumble]

I believe the Bible is a better book in a better style, but that's what I would be expected to believe as a Christian.

Have you read both Qur'an and Bible in their original languages? If not, the only "style" it is possible to meaningfully comment on is that of the translators.

[lolwatever]

ive read parts of the old testement and i'm not sure if you pretty much treat prophets as being playboys as something particularly respectful.... and really the contradictions present in the bible just make the mind boggle as 2 how it could be anywhere near a divine book (in its current shape)...

and anyway.. the bible is just a collection of chaptes written by humans, there's chapter paul, mark, luke... but where's Allah's chapter :?

my comment about the Quran still holds alhamdulilah. salamz

[duskiness]

Week without "Bible corruption" thread is a week wasted, isn't it? ;)

(Encyclopedia Biblica (Vol. 4. p. 4980)

Wasn't "encyclpedia biblica" published in 1899? If so, then few things have changed since then. In Bible studies aslo. (for example: statement that "gospels were written for greeks by greeks" today is considered not exactly true..)

The oldest Bible we possess today, Codex Sinaiticus, which contains both Old and New Testaments does not conatin Mark 16:9-20 [it stops at Mark 16:8:

Oh...what a surprise! or maybe not....in my Bible this fact is mentioned as a footnote. Seems it's enough to read Bible to know this...If you would be interested why it's still there it's quite easy to find out. But i doubt you are, so let's leave it like that...

today we have more than 5500 manuscripts of New Testament. The oldest one is dated around 120AD. Codex Sinaticus (together with Codex Vaticanus) are the oldes manuscripts of whole Bible in one pice. But it is almost possible to make whole text of NT from manuscripts older than C.Sinaticus or Vaticanus.
In those 5500 manuscripts we have more than few hundred thousand variation in text (thats more than there are words in NT).
But those variation appear only in 20% of NT's text (= 80% of text is the same).
Variations that happen in those 20% are unimportant differences in grammar or word order in sentence. Only 200 (out of few hundred thousand variations) affect the meaning of sentence.
Thanks to text critic in case of 185 we know which one is the original. 15 are left and still discussed.
To save your time, I'll list the most famous of 15: Mk 16,9-20; L 22,43-44; J 7,53 - 8,11; 1J, 5,7.
none of this texts add or omit any dogmatic truth. Adding them or omitting wouldn't change christian doctrine.
today we have no original manuscripts of NT but thanks to other manuscripts and text critic we can quite precisely know how this original text look like.
1% of text is in doubt
All together it probably makes it the best preserved ancient text that we have (and please remember that not only time was against Bible but also it was being burned durnig prosecutions)
As a christian i can say i don't belong to any "ahl al-kitab". Our faith is not faith in the book. First christians didn't have any new testament. NT is testimony of their faith, which they based on something different.
So what's Bible for me? It's the most important book there is - book about God's relationship with us, by God inspired, inerrant in matters of faith.
Was (for example) J 7,53 - 8,11; in john's Gospel from the very start? I don't know and i don't care that much. Maybe it wasn't, maybe it was but while coping the text it was omitted in some copies, or maybe it was for longer time passed in oral tradition and later added, or maybe it was a pious fraud.
Whatever way this fragment got into NT i believe He wanted it to be there.
"If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." - I'm quite sure He is behind those words.

and anyway.. the bible is just a collection of chaptes written by humans, there's chapter paul, mark, luke...

that's exactly what Bible is.

but where's Allah's chapter :?

our God doesn't write books...


If you are still reading this, then have a little more patience and read a bit more.
I'm tired of this threads.
Sometimes it seems this forum should be renamed from"comparative religion" into "lets prove that christianity is wrong". What's the aim of searching web for article that "prove" how silly christianity is, and copy-pasting them here? Do you understand us better, know more about different faith?
Or maybe it helps you to understand why there are people who stick to christianity and don't convert to islam? For you answer is simple, isn't it? We are bunch of idiots who don't know history, don't read bible and can't count to 3.
To compare you have to understand (or at least try to..). To understand others you have to try to see world through their lances.
n.
edit:word order :)

[glo]

Week without "Bible corruption" thread is a week wasted, isn't it? ;)
[...]
I'm tired of this threads.
Sometimes it seems this forum should be renamed from"comparative religion" into "lets prove that christianity is wrong". What's the aim of searching web for article that "prove" how silly christianity is, and copy-pasting them here? You understand us better, know more about different faith?
Or maybe you understand why people stick to christianity and not convert to islam? For you answer is simple, isn't it? We are bunch of idiots who don't know history, don't read bible and can't count to 3.
To compare you have to understand (or at least try to..). To understand others you have to try to see world through their lances.
n.

Hi duskiness

Bless you! :)
That's exactly how I feel.

Actually, I am always a little suspicious when people display such a strong desire to undermine and destroy other people's faiths, beliefs, and holy books.
I mean, why do people do that???
I wonder if for some there is an element of needing to fight against other faiths in order to strengthen their own faith. :rollseyes

Sharing your faith with people is one thing, trying to undermine and ridicule their faith is another!

Besides, as Trumble is always very good at pointing out, these arguments are rather pointless, and never provide the 'proof' they claim to provide. :?

Peace.

[QuranStudy]

Let's see:

1.) Bible does not go along with science AT ALL.
2.) Hundreds of contradictions.
3.) Words changed over time by various "Christians." (ex. slave ---> servant)
4.) Unicorns, 4 legged spiders, flying serpants and other mythical creatures
5.) Contains information already disproved (ex. flat earth)
6.) "Morals" include subjugation of women, establishing institution of slavery, and killing of disobedient children.
7.) Absolutely incompatible with history (ex. Great Flood regarded as myth by most scientists). The Old testament may have a basis of facts, but the New Testament is regarded as purely mythical.
8.) Personification of animals (ex. lions killing via strangulation)

Source: Wikipedia

[dougmusr]

ive read parts of the old testement and i'm not sure if you pretty much treat prophets as being playboys as something particularly respectful.... and really the contradictions present in the bible just make the mind boggle as 2 how it could be anywhere near a divine book (in its current shape)...

The Bible tells the truth about the human condition, sinfulness. It does not attempt to hide the flaws of its characters, but makes them public as an example of the cost of sin on the individual and on society. It does not glamorize sin in any way.

and anyway.. the bible is just a collection of chaptes written by humans, there's chapter paul, mark, luke... but where's Allah's chapter

Since Muhammed was supposidly unlettered, the Quran was written by someone other than the person claiming to have received the revelation.

[QuranStudy]

I have yet to see the Bitter Water Test and the True Chistian Test to be passed successfully by any Christian

[*Hana*]

Hi duskiness

Bless you! :)
That's exactly how I feel.

Actually, I am always a little suspicious when people display such a strong desire to undermine and destroy other people's faiths, beliefs, and holy books.
I mean, why do people do that???
I wonder if for some there is an element of needing to fight against other faiths in order to strengthen their own faith. :rollseyes

Sharing your faith with people is one thing, trying to undermine and ridicule their faith is another!

Besides, as Trumble is always very good at pointing out, these arguments are rather pointless, and never provide the 'proof' they claim to provide. :?

Peace.

Peace to you Glo:

I agree in that I dislike out and out bible bashing, or faith bashing. But, for many of us when trying to show errors/additions to biblical script, it is necessary to provide the verses to support the claim. These, at least for us, are clear proofs that the biblical texts seen today are erroneous and therefore not the word of God.

Duskiness pointed out a few erros known and discovered....additions not in the oldest (not the original) manuscripts. For me, only these few things mentioned in her post, (and there are far more), is enough proof the text became corrupted over time and therefore the word of God has been destroyed. Whether this was intentional or copiest erros, translation errors, etc., makes absolutely no difference. The fact remains the bible contains additions by man and this leads to the obvious question: If these additions are being found and admitted to, how many more are there that you don't know.

Many Christians who truly believe their faith is correct will try to provide proofs to us from biblical text to support their claim. However, many Muslims can use their same source of "proofs" to refute what they claim. We don't have the luxury of using our Holy book because Christians don't believe anything about it and using it would be pointless.

So, I think sometimes it seems as though the bible is being bashed, when in fact we are only trying to show the problem we have with the texts provided to us as "proofs".

I hope this makes sense.

Personally, I love comparative religion, and I learn a lot when discussing it. There is a Jewish thread here that gave tons of information about Judaism that I wasn't aware of and thoroughly enjoyed reading the posts. It removed a lot of misconceptions I had about it. The thread was kept so respectful and the person answering the questions was so patient and thorough, it was impressive. That thread is the perfect example of how I, personally, prefer to discuss different faiths. Not as a tool to revert or convert but as a tool to teach us to be tolerant and to realize the numerous similarities rather than focus on the few differences.

It is only God that can guide others to truth. All we can do is provide the information and proofs, the rest is between the individual that hears it and God.

Take care and peace to you, :)

Hana

[glo]

Peace to you Glo:

Many Christians who truly believe their faith is correct will try to provide proofs to us from biblical text to support their claim. However, many Muslims can use their same source of "proofs" to refute what they claim. We don't have the luxury of using our Holy book because Christians don't believe anything about it and using it would be pointless.

So, I think sometimes it seems as though the bible is being bashed, when in fact we are only trying to show the problem we have with the texts provided to us as "proofs".

And peace to you, Hana :)

I might agree with you, if this thread was responding to a Christian making claims about the Bible, which you - from an Islamic point-of-view disgree with. That's what comparative religion is about, and that's what scolars and theologians have debated about for hundreds of years.
As it happens, that is not what this thread is about.
This thread is purely designed to disregard the Bible:

Well the reason I decided to make this topic is because whenever Muslims tell Christians that the Bible is changed, altered etc. Christians always demand proof, well here is the proof we've been waiting for:

Don't get me wrong.
I know Muslims don't believe the Bible to be the true word from God. They wouldn't, because if they did, they wouldn't be Muslims! :?
I understand that Muslims try to compare Bible and Qu'ran and end up confused. That's because - as Joe so patiently never tires to tell people - the two books are so different and never claimed to be anything else.

My personal question is 'Why feel so determined to undermine the Bible?'
As Trumble points out, there is no proof , not for one side or the other. There is no proof, and there never will be!
My conviction that the Qu'ran has no authority lies within my holy book.
Your conviction that the Bible has no authority lies within your holy book.

Why struggle? Why not call a peace?
You follow your book, I follow mine ... it seems so easy! :)

Personally, I love comparative religion, and I learn a lot when discussing it. There is a Jewish thread here that gave tons of information about Judaism that I wasn't aware of and thoroughly enjoyed reading the posts. It removed a lot of misconceptions I had about it. The thread was kept so respectful and the person answering the questions was so patient and thorough, it was impressive. That thread is the perfect example of how I, personally, prefer to discuss different faiths. Not as a tool to revert or convert but as a tool to teach us to be tolerant and to realize the numerous similarities rather than focus on the few differences.

It is only God that can guide others to truth. All we can do is provide the information and proofs, the rest is between the individual that hears it and God.

Amen to that! :)

peace, sister

[جوري]

I am already on that path, thank you ;) :thumbs_up

Why do you interject every post with these severely paraphasic neologisms? I don't think anyone addressed you (Joe) in this thread at all ... every day you remind me of Waldo more than the day before... I am not sure if you are being comical or in dire need of some counseling.…Glad to read you are on the right path ... more power to you....
as for the rest... How about we teach each other of our perspective religion cordially ... there is really no need for this my book is superior to your book as I have read it and have witnesses.... it is childish ... it doesn't address the particular content with which you want an explanation or a serious deep examination, it is myopic and subjective, and not conducive at least in my book to strong debates or interfaith dialogue ... we can go on practicing our faiths without resorting to tantrums.....
peace
:w:

[glo]

Hi Ambrosia

Joe does have a point, in the sense that we all are convinced that we are walking the path of truth ... no matter which religion we do or don't subscribe to. :rollseyes

All we can do, is to agree to disagree, I guess! :)

peace.

[`Abd al-Azeez]

:sl:

Some Internal proofs in the Bible that proves that is not what was revealed from Allah (swt) to the prophets.

Internal Proofs That the Torah in the Bible is Not From Moses (as)

How could Moses (as) write about his own death , but not only his death but about his burial and grave in the torah?

The 5th book of the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy is said to have been written by Moses (as) himself and is part of the Torah but it records info about Moses' (as) death, burial and grave:

And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is. (Deuteronomy 34 : 5-7)

This is irrefutable internal proof that Moses did not write the Pentateuch, it is the work of a later hand. This is the same case with the book of Job:

After this, Job lived a hundred and forty years; he saw his children and their children to the fourth generation. And so he died, old and full of years.(Job 42 : 16-17)

And similarly we read in the book of Joshua:

After these things, Joshua son of Nun, the servant of the LORD, died at the age of a hundred and ten. And they buried him in the land of his inheritance, at Timnath Serah in the hill country of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash. (Joshua 24 : 29-30)

[dougmusr]

How about we teach each other of our perspective religion cordially ... there is really no need for this my book is superior to your book as I have read it and have witnesses.... it is childish

I am assuming that you were addressing me with this quote since I seem to be the one that mentioned witnesses. Sorry you find it childish. Help me to understand your expectations for this website. Admittedly this forum degenerates into my book vs your book ping-pong all to frequently. It is true that ping-pong is a tad hard to play by oneself, unless you're the cartoon character Snoopy. Should Christians ignore attacks and refrain from attacking? Would this be the same rule for Muslims, athiests, agnostics, etc?

[جوري]

I don't see why either party has to resort to attacks? we can present points like a history book... with facts... not subjective views.... you bring something to the table... we bring something to the table... we discuss it... I see a thousand website... in fact I almost can't put in any search engine the word Islam or even Jilbab and not find something deragtory and down right disgusting written of Muslims our prophet or our religion... I can't go fighting with everyone... it is futile... it is really NOT PRODUCTIVE.... if a person thinks a particular way there is nothing you can do to get them to change... It is proven in psychology... people who do something habitually are bound to do it forever... a good example of that is any methadone clinic... only 5% of the people who actually seek treatment recover.... that is the honest truth to God... they are just there because it is a govt. subsidized program that provides them with a heroin analogue so they don't have to get it on the streets and actually pay for it... still some of them end up just putting it in their mouth, regurgitating it to sell it again on the streets... so more of your and my tax money has to go to test them for methadone metabolite hoping they would just stick to the program so we can have a tally of what is going on out there... if it seems like I am digressing I am really not... the point is... you do something for a long time... you are convinced it is right for you... you'll probably end up doing it for the rest of your life... .. So only civilized solution I can think of, is to bring a point by point debate and we can agree or disagree or write, why or why not.... correct me if I am wrong but have you converted to Islam from what was written here? has anyone converted to christinaity from the points you bring? if the answer is NO to both... then what we are doing here is not working... we have to find a method that does work... and if we can't convince each other, yet end up seeing each other's posts every day least we can do is be civilized about what we write.....I always like to think of posters as actual people I'd meet... do I want to get contentious with someone just because they sport a different outfit or worship differently than I do? it is ridiculous right? you don't walk around hateful to people all day do you? that is my view on the matter anyhow... with that being said it is my sincere hope that we have a civilized interfaith dialogue
peace

[QuranStudy]

You guys should post like me (#41 and 43).

[lolwatever]

I am already on that path, thank you ;) :thumbs_up

This fella is a typical uninterested bloke who just wants to play cat n mouse.

Quote:
ive read parts of the old testement and i'm not sure if you pretty much treat prophets as being playboys as something particularly respectful.... and really the contradictions present in the bible just make the mind boggle as 2 how it could be anywhere near a divine book (in its current shape)...

The Bible tells the truth about the human condition, sinfulness. It does not attempt to hide the flaws of its characters, but makes them public as an example of the cost of sin on the individual and on society. It does not glamorize sin in any way.

Quote:
and anyway.. the bible is just a collection of chaptes written by humans, there's chapter paul, mark, luke... but where's Allah's chapter

Since Muhammed was supposidly unlettered, the Quran was written by someone other than the person claiming to have received the revelation.

Let's be honest here, Would you trust your kids to live with such prophets if they where as the bible describes??

The fact is, those accounts are not true and fabricated, and anyway, how could christians be fooled into believing what the enemies of hteir own prophet have to say about other messengers and prophets, the Jews label jesus as a b*astard and his mother a wh*re and yet they're duped into listening to what htey have to say about the messengers? That's what the old testement pretty much is.

If the prophts where as you described, then they aren't righteous people at all, and what makes them so special, to commit things like incest and adultery and many other gruesome crimes!

The quran presents the truth about the prophets (how is it the truth? based on statistical evidence and deduction), and NO other religion has respect for the prophets as much as we do, including Jesus PBUH and his blessed mother, read his story in chapter of Mary for example.

our God doesn't write books...


Sometimes it seems this forum should be renamed from"comparative religion" into "lets prove that christianity is wrong". What's the aim of searching web for article that "prove" how silly christianity is, and copy-pasting them here? Do you understand us better, know more about different faith?

We do the pasting, and then we both do the debating ;)

To be quite frank, it's simple, the fact that your bible was writtenby humans, the fact that the bible is more about what paul thinks than it is about what was revealed to jesus, is the very reasonw hy Michael heart for example ranked paul higher than jesus in his "100 men" book.

Or maybe it helps you to understand why there are people who stick to christianity and don't convert to islam? For you answer is simple, isn't it? We are bunch of idiots who don't know history, don't read bible and can't count to 3.

There's alot of people who do revert to Islam, others don't, but it's for a whole host of reasons, parents, laziness, not sincere in seraching for the truth

point is, there seems to be something fundamentally different, you seem to think that the messengers come with a message they don't follow themselves, and, god can contradict himself.

we're a bit more logical than that, the messengers are the best of creation because of the very fact they adhered to their message even though very few people followed them, and, by definition, "god" is not god if he's nto perfect. How could the god who created this complicated and advanced universe be a true god if he's comitting mistakes and contradictions in his revelations to mankind.

To compare you have to understand (or at least try to..). To understand others you have to try to see world through their lances.

you mean 'lenses'? (sorry srsly not trying 2b pedantic)..

Quote:
and anyway.. the bible is just a collection of chaptes written by humans, there's chapter paul, mark, luke... but where's Allah's chapter

Since Muhammed was supposidly unlettered, the Quran was written by someone other than the person claiming to have received the revelation.

The quran was revealed to Muhammad directly through gabriel who who memorised it, and his scribe (Ali, Zayd ibn thabit and a few others), would write it down after the revelation session was completed.

The question is, if you really believe that, prove it. And that's what it is, a miracle. Every prophet came with a miracle, the prophets biggest miracle was the quran.

This verse would be a pretty untrustworthy test of the Quran's divine origin for several reasons. There is no criteria provided by which the produced work can be evaluated, nor is there any qualifications given to the witnesses. I have read the entire Bible and much of the Quran. I find the Bible to be a superior piece of work, and I have many witnesses who agree. Therefore I would have to say the Bible has met the challenge of this verse and has won the challenge.

What you're reading is a translation of the quran, not the quran itself. And very few people will try to hide teh fact that the translation is AWFUL. Hence why we're commanded to learn quran in the arabic form.

The challenge is to bring about a single chapter like it in terms of linguistic style, and with some sort of beneficial meaning.

The people of quraysh who where the best in arabic pretty much in history, where dumbfounded because this style of arabic was completely knew to them, it was neither poetry nor prose, something unique which they where unable to match.

The challenge is open till the day of judgement.


finally, no1's replied to what i said in that post, it's teh crux of the matter, because baed on these miracles, we can mathematically prove that what's narrated about the propehts is the truth in the quran. Ofcourse you can't prove it historically becasue history was barely written, but its only when prophecies and things that are beyond human capabilties are done, only then we knwo that it could not have been Muhammad PBUh who wrote up the quran, and it must have been from Allah.

tc all the ebst :)

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you all,

Despite all that has been said, I still feel that we should strive towards a greater interfaith understanding, tolerance, and friendship.:)

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

diss each other in a nice way...if u really want too...cuz ppl cant seem to stay away from it...

[lavikor201]

How could Moses (as) write about his own death , but not only his death but about his burial and grave in the torah?

G-d told Moshe how he was going to die. G-d is all knowing. Do you suggest that G-d does not have the power to see the future???? :heated:

The 5th book of the Pentateuch, Deuteronomy is said to have been written by Moses (as) himself and is part of the Torah but it records info about Moses' (as) death, burial and grave:

And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said. He buried him in Moab, in the valley opposite Beth Peor, but to this day no one knows where his grave is. (Deuteronomy 34 : 5-7)

Your right... G-d told him what to write! Moshe did not make up the Torah. G-d did! You have no understanding of anything.

This is irrefutable internal proof that Moses did not write the Pentateuch, it is the work of a later hand. This is the same case with the book of Job:

After this, Job lived a hundred and forty years; he saw his children and their children to the fourth generation. And so he died, old and full of years.(Job 42 : 16-17)

And similarly we read in the book of Joshua:

After these things, Joshua son of Nun, the servant of the LORD, died at the age of a hundred and ten. And they buried him in the land of his inheritance, at Timnath Serah in the hill country of Ephraim, north of Mount Gaash. (Joshua 24 : 29-30)

Wow, Are you kidding? G-d told his messangers of there deaths. :rant:

Do not attack the Torah without proof or knowledge. Your ignorance and patheticness shows valiantly!!!!:heated:


I have one simple request for all members of this forum. Use your own knowledge. The copy and pasting of lies is a pathetic way to spread untruth. Either actually read the torah, or don't talk about it.

[*Hana*]

And peace to you, Hana :)

My personal question is 'Why feel so determined to undermine the Bible?'

Peace to you, Glo:

I don't think the main purpose of most is to undermine or bash the bible. However, as Muslims, some of us can be very enthusiastic about trying to show non muslims errors with the hopes they will understand and submit only to Allah, swt. Just as many Christians are concerned about our salvation and want us to see truth, we are also concerned and care about the salvation of non muslims and want them to see, what we believe to be, the true, uncorrupted words of God.

As Trumble points out, there is no proof , not for one side or the other. There is no proof, and there never will be!

See, Glo, the problem is that we do believe there are clear proofs in the inaccuracy of biblical text. These proofs are what led me and many other reverts to Islam. I've heard many christians say, "Oh, but they are just insignifcant, minor errors." For some of us, there is no such thing as errors to any degree in God's word. Errors, for whatever reason, means corrupted text.

For a Christian, they may choose to believe there are absolutely no errors in text, or understand errors do exist and accept it anyway.

My conviction that the Qu'ran has no authority lies within my holy book.
Your conviction that the Bible has no authority lies within your holy book.

This is the other problem. :) The Qur'an doesn't tell us the bible has no authority. It recognizes the Bible does still contain some words of God, however, our way of determining which text is not corrupt is by comparing it to the Qur'an. Where they are the same is the word of God, where they differ is not. (That's a very basic explanation, but I think you understand the Islamic belief about this. If not, please let me know and I will explain in further detail.)

And, the Bible doesn't say anything at all about the Qur'an. But, it does speak of another comforter that will come...and we believe this promised comforter is Prophet Muhammed, pbuh.

Why struggle? Why not call a peace?
You follow your book, I follow mine ... it seems so easy! :)

I agree, no need to struggle and argue....best to maintain peace and learn tolerance. As Prophet Muhammed, pbuh, said, "To you be your religion, to me be mine." We can teach other our beliefs and discuss them respectfully with the knowledge Allah, swt, will guide whom He wills.

With peace :)
Hana

[dougmusr]

And, the Bible doesn't say anything at all about the Qur'an. But, it does speak of another comforter that will come...and we believe this promised comforter is Prophet Muhammed, pbuh.

The scriptures related to the sending of the comforter refer to the Holy Spirit of God. These verses couldn't refer to Muhammed because the comforter dwelt with the disciples prior to Christs death, and in them following it.

Jn 14:15 "If you love Me, keep My commandments. 16 "And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever-- 17 "the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. 18 "I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you. 19 "A little while longer and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live also. 20 "At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. 21 "He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him." 22 Judas (not Iscariot) said to Him, "Lord, how is it that You will manifest Yourself to us, and not to the world?" 23 Jesus answered and said to him, "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him. 24 "He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me. 25 "These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. 26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

Acts 9:31 Then the churches throughout all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria had peace and were edified. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, they were multiplied.

[*Hana*]

Peace to you Doug:

Actually, it can't be referring to the Holy Spirit, because it says ANOTHER comforter. The Holy Spirit, according to biblical text, was already here, long before Jesus, pbuh.

So, this comforter (helper) would have to be one that hasn't been here yet.

With peace,
Hana

[dougmusr]

Peace to you Doug:

Actually, it can't be referring to the Holy Spirit, because it says ANOTHER comforter. The Holy Spirit, according to biblical text, was already here, long before Jesus, pbuh.

So, this comforter (helper) would have to be one that hasn't been here yet.

With peace,
Hana

In interpret the first Helper to be Christ Himself. Verse 17 makes it clear that the second helper or comforter is present externally while Christ is speaking, and will indwell them after He leaves. Verse 23 makes it clear that there will be an indwelling presence.

[*Hana*]

In interpret the first Helper to be Christ Himself. Verse 17 makes it clear that the second helper or comforter is present externally while Christ is speaking, and will indwell them after He leaves. Verse 23 makes it clear that there will be an indwelling presence.

Peace Doug:

Can you elaborate on that. I'm not seeing what you're seeing. To me it clearly says ANOTHER comforter. It means a new one, one that hasn't been here but will come.

Peace,
Hana

[dougmusr]

Peace Doug:

Can you elaborate on that. I'm not seeing what you're seeing. To me it clearly says ANOTHER comforter. It means a new one, one that hasn't been here but will come.

Peace,
Hana

Verse 17 says the identity of the "another helper" will be "The Spirit of Truth", that he is currently present in that "He dwells with you" and that he "will be in you" following Christs return to the Father. Another helper does not have to mean a new helper. Verse 26 says the indwelling helper has no come yet.

This is reiterated in chapter 15.

Jn 15:26 "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.

[*Hana*]

Verse 17 says the identity of the "another helper" will be "The Spirit of Truth", that he is currently present in that "He dwells with you" and that he "will be in you" following Christs return to the Father. Another helper does not have to mean a new helper. Verse 26 says the indwelling helper has no come yet.

This is reiterated in chapter 15.

Jn 15:26 "But when the Helper comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who proceeds from the Father, He will testify of Me.

Peace Doug:

To me those verses clearly say another will be sent, not another will return or one that is here will show himself. When speaking of the spirit of truth, it means this person will speak the same truths that Jesus, pbuh, taught and he will reiterate what Jesus, pbuh, taught and you will know it is truth. It can't mean the Holy Spirit, as the Holy Spirit was already present long before and during Jesus, pbuh, so there would be no need to send him. Jesus, pbuh, is speaking in future tenses not present or past.

Peace to you,
Hana

[dougmusr]

We will just have to accept the fact that both of us see the verse through the lense filters of different faiths. Outside of diagramming the sentences in the passage, I can't do any better. The verse is quite clear to me.

[*Hana*]

We will just have to accept the fact that both of us see the verse through the lense filters of different faiths. Outside of diagramming the sentences in the passage, I can't do any better. The verse is quite clear to me.

Peace Doug:

I appreciate you trying to explain your understanding of the verses. I agree, we will have to accept the fact we see it differently, as it also seems just as clear for me as well. lol

Take care and peace to you, :)
Hana

[duskiness]

Bless you! :)
That's exactly how I feel.

Thanks Glo, good to know it's not only me!
after reading Lavikor's post, it's seems it's not only "a christian pov":

Do not attack the Torah without proof or knowledge. Your ignorance and patheticness shows valiantly!!!!:heated:
I have one simple request for all members of this forum. Use your own knowledge. The copy and pasting of lies is a pathetic way to spread untruth. Either actually read the torah, or don't talk about it.

quite emotional. but i understand :D

we can present points like a history book... with facts... not subjective views.... you bring something to the table... we bring something to the table... we discuss it...

if it was so easy!! problem is that we both feel emotional about our beliefs.

I see a thousand website... in fact I almost can't put in any search engine the word Islam or even Jilbab and not find something deragtory and down right disgusting written of Muslims our prophet or our religion...

true, but the longer i'm on this board the more antichristian sites i know..

I can't go fighting with everyone... it is futile... it is really NOT PRODUCTIVE....

- we say in poland that avalanche changes the way it's falling because of little stones beneath it. We should be like those stones..

correct me if I am wrong but have you converted to Islam from what was written here? has anyone converted to christinaity from the points you bring? if the answer is NO to both... then what we are doing here is not working...

I not trying to convert you here! I'm not that ambtious! ;) I'm tring to understand you, and when i write about my faith (usually) i hope you'll understand something about us. And it's working! for me at least :) ! i know islam better than i did..
Look at your posts and Hana_Aku's (just as an example). Then compare it with this one:

I have yet to see the Bitter Water Test and the True Chistian Test to be passed successfully by any Christian

(not to mention that i have no idea why he is speaking about ordeals and exchristian site present our faith in the same light that any exmuslim site presents Islam.)
...or....

Let's see:

1.) Bible does not go along with science AT ALL.
2.) Hundreds of contradictions.
3.) Words changed over time by various "Christians." (ex. slave ---> servant)
4.) Unicorns, 4 legged spiders, flying serpants and other mythical creatures
5.) Contains information already disproved (ex. flat earth)
6.) "Morals" include subjugation of women, establishing institution of slavery, and killing of disobedient children.
7.) Absolutely incompatible with history (ex. Great Flood regarded as myth by most scientists). The Old testament may have a basis of facts, but the New Testament is regarded as purely mythical.
8.) Personification of animals (ex. lions killing via strangulation)

Source: Wikipedia

Hymmm....i don't want to be offensive but i'm quite sure most Christian read bible more often than QuranStudy and probably know more about it's history. So for who this post is..?.Because it's not a question, nor invitation to discussion....

and if we can't convince each other, yet end up seeing each other's posts every day least we can do is be civilized about what we write.....I always like to think of posters as actual people I'd meet... do I want to get contentious with someone just because they sport a different outfit or worship differently than I do? it is ridiculous right?

Right :D

So, I think sometimes it seems as though the bible is being bashed, when in fact we are only trying to show the problem we have with the texts provided to us as "proofs".

The only thing that is being shown s that Muslim don't understand what Bible is. Joe quite often is writing about this...We don't think about Bible in the way you think about Quran.

To be quite frank, it's simple, the fact that your bible was writtenby humans, the fact that the bible is more about what paul thinks than it is about what was revealed to jesus.

There are some Paul's letters in NT. but thats just A LITTLE part of Bible...

There's alot of people who do revert to Islam, others don't, but it's for a whole host of reasons, parents, laziness, not sincere in seraching for the truth

Then in your eyes I'm lazy or insincere? ;)

point is, there seems to be something fundamentally different

...in the way we (Muslims & Christians) think about revelation....At least that's my thought after spending some time here....

How could the god who created this complicated and advanced universe be a true god if he's comitting mistakes and contradictions in his revelations to mankind

it's a mankind that is comitting mistakes when tring to understand revelation

you mean 'lenses'? (sorry srsly not trying 2b pedantic)..

sorry for spelling. i meant: "soczewki". :)

we can mathematically prove that what's narrated about the propehts is the truth in the quran.

"mathematically prove"? Sorry but i doubt that you can prove anything in faith..
PurestAmbrosia, Hana_Aku, lolwatever, Tayyaba - thanks for your answers here :)
I'm on my way to bed, so "good night" all!

[QuranStudy]

(not to mention that i have no idea why he is speaking about ordeals and exchristian site present our faith in the same light that any exmuslim site presents Islam.)
...or....

So are you saying the Bitter water test and the True Christian test as said is the Bible is false??

Hymmm....i don't want to be offensive but i'm quite sure most Christian read bible more often than QuranStudy and probably know more about it's history. So for who this post is..?.Because it's not a question, nor invitation to discussion....

If you belive the world is flat and there are unicorns and animals with abilities of a human, then that's your problem. I get my sources from Zakir Naik who memorized the entire Bible and has been debating with real Christians,

[ManchesterFolk]

world is flat

The easiest way to tell you have never read the bible, do not understand its context and obviously the translation and words there are none for in the english language.

[جوري]

duskiness... I truly appreciate how much time it must have taken you to type up all that.... yes I believe this forum is for the purpose of abridging the gaps and clarify differences.... I don't write the same way now as I did when I was 15, or even 25... there are things to be learned of religion of politics, of human psychology and the human condition with more abstract understanding as one grows... I think you and the more discerning readers should not only know but appreciate that, this shouldnt be about making someone feel bad or rotten... It is disheartening to feel/be attacked with something with which you hold so dear especially that most decent people and I love to believe in that decency think that they are who they are after deep reflection and conviction... Yes we are here to learn... I love theology... by the way I have spent a great deal of my life in catholic schools, I tried to learn as much as I could of christinity then... I don't think you can learn much about a religion from novices or hate blogs... it is good to interact with people of a particular faith if you wish to learn how they practice... but memebers of the same family aren't the same let alone the entire community... good books are always a great start, interacting with others is also great, having a level head to be able to distinguish between what is meant to be practised, what is practised, attitudes, cultural diversity, and psychological assessment the variables of a very complex formula, is always considered a great blessing... I don't think the prophet (PBUH) engaged in senseless wrangling... and in the quran it states Do not dispute with the people of the Book [Jews, Christians, Sabeans], unless it be in a way that is better, save with such of them as do wrong; and say: We believe in that which has been revealed unto us, and revealed unto you; our God and your God is One, and unto Him we surrender. -- 29:46

I certainly wouldn't want any members to feel less than welcome unless they are here just to harass others.... but would like for them if not learn of Islam at least appreciate that the negative incessant portryal in the media is a far cry from the truth

peace :smile:

[QuranStudy]

The easiest way to tell you have never read the bible, do not understand its context and obviously the translation and words there are none for in the english language.

Let's see:

Isaiah 11:12
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH. (KJV)

Revelation 7:1
1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree. (KJV)

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. (KJV)

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH: (KJV)

Matthew 4:8
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them; (KJV)

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

It might not be meaning it literally. I wouldnt know tho...

[QuranStudy]

It might not be meaning it literally. I wouldnt know tho...

Christians believe Bible is the literal word of God.

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

lol ok then i guess some would change their mind...:?

[ManchesterFolk]

Christians believe Bible is the literal word of God.

Have you ever heard of a metaphor? :uhwhat

[جوري]

"الحقيقه سيضع لك مجانا " what does this mean to you? I am fluent in Arabic and that is nonsensical at best.........

[lolwatever]

Thanks Glo, good to know it's not only me!
after reading Lavikor's post, it's seems it's not only "a christian pov":

quite emotional. but i understand :D
if it was so easy!! problem is that we both feel emotional about our beliefs.
true, but the longer i'm on this board the more antichristian sites i know..
- we say in poland that avalanche changes the way it's falling because of little stones beneath it. We should be like those stones..
I not trying to convert you here! I'm not that ambtious! ;) I'm tring to understand you, and when i write about my faith (usually) i hope you'll understand something about us. And it's working! for me at least :) ! i know islam better than i did..
Look at your posts and Hana_Aku's (just as an example). Then compare it with this one: (not to mention that i have no idea why he is speaking about ordeals and exchristian site present our faith in the same light that any exmuslim site presents Islam.)
...or....
Hymmm....i don't want to be offensive but i'm quite sure most Christian read bible more often than QuranStudy and probably know more about it's history. So for who this post is..?.Because it's not a question, nor invitation to discussion....

Right :D
The only thing that is being shown s that Muslim don't understand what Bible is. Joe quite often is writing about this...We don't think about Bible in the way you think about Quran.
There are some Paul's letters in NT. but thats just A LITTLE part of Bible...
Then in your eyes I'm lazy or insincere? ;)
...in the way we (Muslims & Christians) think about revelation....At least that's my thought after spending some time here....
it's a mankind that is comitting mistakes when tring to understand revelation
sorry for spelling. i meant: "soczewki". :)
"mathematically prove"? Sorry but i doubt that you can prove anything in faith..
PurestAmbrosia, Hana_Aku, lolwatever, Tayyaba - thanks for your answers here :)
I'm on my way to bed, so "good night" all!

That's very unfair of you to just pick and choose and make comments about bits dislocated from the rest of their context... y dont u do a line by line response to what i said.

regarding the math thing, there's something in math we call 'limits', as x approaches infinity, a function may approach a limiting value.... that's got applications here as well, the more miraculous predictions and facts presented by the quran, the greater the likelihood that it could not have been written by man (especially, in our case, a man who was illiterate).

math applies everywehre, as one of from a stat point of view,
That is why George Gallup, the American statistician says: "I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity."

Same goes when it comes to quran and things like that. I'll reply to your comments only after u do a line by line response to what i said.

but anyway, reply to what i said before we go on about that.

http://www.islamicboard.com/473718-post52.html

[QuranStudy]

Have you ever heard of a metaphor? :uhwhat

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-literal.html

[dougmusr]

http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-literal.html

Isaiah 40:22 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? 22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

[QuranStudy]

LOL:

Isaiah 40:22 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? 22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

[dougmusr]

LOL:

Isaiah 40:22 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? 22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

Get back to me after you find the corners of the circle.

[QuranStudy]

Get back to me after you find the corners of the circle.

The thing is ....I DONT BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE.

Why dont you show me the corners of the earth since you're Christian??

[*Hana*]

Originally Posted by Hana_Aku

So, I think sometimes it seems as though the bible is being bashed, when in fact we are only trying to show the problem we have with the texts provided to us as "proofs".

The only thing that is being shown s that Muslim don't understand what Bible is. Joe quite often is writing about this...We don't think about Bible in the way you think about Quran.

Peace Duskiness:

I've quoted your statement in red for clarity.

I wanted to respond to this so you understand that I don't copy/paste responses regarding biblical text unless there is an article that explains something better than I can, but usually, I try to avoid it. I know the bible very well as I was a Christian most of my life and have spent years learning biblical text. It is through this learning process that brought me to Islam, Alhamdulillah. There are many of us who have a very good understanding of the bible and know exactly what it is.

I don't agree with what you said about Christians not thinking of the bible the same way we think about the Qur'an. We both believe these books are words of God. The difference is, as Muslims, we don't believe the Biblical text, as it is written today, is the accurate word of God. The basis of what we believe may differ because of our understanding of our Holy Books, but that doesn't mean we lack understanding of what Christians believe and vice versa. I know very well why Christians accept the Bible as the word of God and I can respect them for their choice, but it doesn't mean I agree with it. Should you continue to learn more about Islam, you will probably understand, if you don't already, why we accept the Qur'an as the word of God, but it doesn't mean you will accept it for yourself.

I sincerely hope you can understand the point I'm trying to make. :) I have a tendency to babble. :embarrass

Take care and peace,
Hana

[ManchesterFolk]

"الحقيقه سيضع لك مجانا " what does this mean to you? I am fluent in Arabic and that is nonsensical at best.........

i am trying to learn arabic and i thought it meant the truth will set you free... lol :giggling:

[جوري]

well الحقيقه part means the truth so that part is ok... مجانا can be used as like a bonus... when you get 33% more free with your shampoo... but it can't be used in the sense you mean.... I don't have an arabic key pad here to put appropriate words for you.... the rest is just terribly conjugated I am not sure how to begin correct it? you should get your money back from whomever is teaching you arabic unless they are pranksters and just teaching you improper words for laughs.... thankfully they are not teaching you dirty ones.......... we hope :laugh:

[lolwatever]

how come my statemetns are just being ignored :?

[جوري]

math applies everywehre, as one of from a stat point of view,
That is why George Gallup, the American statistician says: "I could prove God statistically. Take the human body alone - chance that all the functions of the individual would just happen is a statistical monstrosity."

well that is just impressive....... thank you :)

[lolwatever]

thx sis, sorry if it sounded like my question was directed at u... i was referring to the christians who just seem to either totally ignore me or pick n choose individual lines

tc salamz :)

[`Abd al-Azeez]

:sl:

Guys I'm pretty sure that corners of the Earth is metaphorical I mean people still use that phrase today even tho we know the earth is round.

:w:

[duskiness]

I'll reply to your comments only after u do a line by line response to what i said.

line by line? :uuh: aren't you asking too much? Can't you make this punishment a little lighter and pick some line you find important? ;) But if you are referring to "lines" about Quran, than sorry i doubt i'll respond. As a Christian on Muslim board i don't feel it's a place for me to comment on Quran. you will quickly disargree with me...

I wanted to respond to this so you understand that I don't copy/paste responses regarding biblical text.

- I know this already :)

I don't agree with what you said about Christians not thinking of the bible the same way we think about the Qur'an. We both believe these books are words of God.

yes, we both call our Books "word of God" but then we mean something different behind this term. Muslims say that Quran is literal word of God. Word by word - all "spoken" by Him. In Christian view (ok...Christian DO vary, so let's say "catholic") Bible was written by men. We think that there is nothing like "direct word of God", there is always "human factor" refelected in revelation (human emotion, knowlegde...so on..). And if i understand your faith correctly Quran is a "pure" word of God without this "human factor"

I sincerely hope you can understand the point I'm trying to make. :) I have a tendency to babble. :embarrass

and i have tendency to make spelling mistakes so let's call it a draw ;)

Take care and peace

Take care aslo, Hana :)

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

And if i understand your faith correctly Quran is a "pure" word of God without this "human factor"

yes ur right :D theres only been one version, unchanged.

[QuranStudy]

Guys I'm pretty sure that corners of the Earth is metaphorical I mean people still use that phrase today even tho we know the earth is round.

Do you know that the Pope killed plenty for believing the world is round?? It was meant literally. You cannot adjust the sayings of the Bible just because some stuff says has been debunked.

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Did Anyone See God?


"And Jacob called the name of the place Pe-ni'el: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
Genesis 32:30

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."
John 1:18

2 or 1 Sons?

"For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman."
Galatians 4:22

"By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son,"
Hebrews 11:17

What did Jesus Drink on the Cross?

"They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink."
Matthew 27:34

"And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not."
Mark 15:23

[dougmusr]

I presume you have posted these references because you feel they are contradictions, although you did not comment on them.

Did Anyone See God?

"And Jacob called the name of the place Pe-ni'el: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved."
Genesis 32:30

You do not understand these because you deny the fact that an all powerful God is capable of appearing to man in human form for the purpose of communicating His will. It is of course true that no man has seen God in His fullness because to do so would mean certain death. Since I believe in the Trinity, I believe when God appears in Human form He appears as Christ, and thus Jacob struggled with God, yet He did not die.

Ge 18:1 Then the LORD appeared to him by the terebinth trees of Mamre,[a] as he was sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day. 2 So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing by him;

Ge 18:22 Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD.

Ge 19:1 Now the two angels came to Sodom in the evening, and Lot was sitting in the gate of Sodom. When Lot saw them, he rose to meet them, and he bowed himself with his face toward the ground.

Note that there were three men, two were angels, one was the Lord in human form.

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."
John 1:18

Of course only Christ knows what God looks like in His fullness.

2 or 1 Sons?

"For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman."
Galatians 4:22

This is of course true. Even Islam believes this.

"By faith Abraham, when God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son,"
Hebrews 11:17

Ge 17:17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed, and said in his heart, “Shall a child be born to a man who is one hundred years old? And shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?” 18 And Abraham said to God, “Oh, that Ishmael might live before You!” 19 Then God said: “No, Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac; I will establish My covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his descendants after him. 20 And as for Ishmael, I have heard you. Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly. He shall beget twelve princes, and I will make him a great nation. 21 But My covenant I will establish with Isaac, whom Sarah shall bear to you at this set time next year.” 22 Then He finished talking with him, and God went up from Abraham.

It is quite clear that God told Abraham that the covenant would be established through Sarah's son, Issac. So it is true that there was only one son as far as the covenant was concerned.

What did Jesus Drink on the Cross?

"They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink."
Matthew 27:34

Christ tasted the drink, and refused it when He found out it's contents.

"And they gave him to drink wine mingled with myrrh: but he received it not."
Mark 15:23

If someone hands something to you, and you look at it, determine that you do not want it, and hand it back, have you received it?

[*Hana*]

Peace Doug:

With regards to the verses about seeing God, is there a verse that specifies what is meant. I don't recall one that says, "If anyone sees God in His fullness, they will die." The only verses I remember say things like, "no one has seen God at any time." If that verse is available would you mind giving me the chapter and verse so I can look it up. Thanks.

Also, with regards to Abraham's sons, I think the point the sister was trying to make is that the verse claims a "one and only son", when he did have 2, and according to a verse, hmmmmm, in Deuteronomy I believe, it specifically says that if a man's first child is by one woman and the 2nd born to another, there is no difference between the two children. If the firstborn was born from the wife who is not his favourite, that child still holds first-born status. (Of course the bible words it far more eloquently than I just did. lol) I'm too tired to look it up, but if you're not familiar with this verse I would be more than happy to do that.

Peace to you,
Hana

[Joe98]

.
Why dont you show me the corners of the earth since you're Christian??

The phrase "the 4 corners of the earth" is a common phrase in english.

It does not mean the eath is flat. It means "everywhere on earth including remote places".

"Knock on wood" is another phrase. But has nothing to do with wood.

[dougmusr]

Peace Doug:

With regards to the verses about seeing God, is there a verse that specifies what is meant. I don't recall one that says, "If anyone sees God in His fullness, they will die." The only verses I remember say things like, "no one has seen God at any time." If that verse is available would you mind giving me the chapter and verse so I can look it up. Thanks.

Also, with regards to Abraham's sons, I think the point the sister was trying to make is that the verse claims a "one and only son", when he did have 2, and according to a verse, hmmmmm, in Deuteronomy I believe, it specifically says that if a man's first child is by one woman and the 2nd born to another, there is no difference between the two children. If the firstborn was born from the wife who is not his favourite, that child still holds first-born status. (Of course the bible words it far more eloquently than I just did. lol) I'm too tired to look it up, but if you're not familiar with this verse I would be more than happy to do that.

Peace to you,
Hana

I can't think of a specific verse. It is more like a general principle from multiple verses to numerous to post here.

Ge 19:11 "And let them be ready for the third day. For on the third day the LORD will come down upon Mount Sinai in the sight of all the people.
12 "You shall set bounds for the people all around, saying, 'Take heed to yourselves that you do not go up to the mountain or touch its base. Whoever touches the mountain shall surely be put to death.
13 'Not a hand shall touch him, but he shall surely be stoned or shot with an arrow; whether man or beast, he shall not live.' When the trumpet sounds long, they shall come near the mountain."

Ex 28:33 "And upon its hem you shall make pomegranates of blue, purple, and scarlet, all around its hem, and bells of gold between them all around:
34 "a golden bell and a pomegranate, a golden bell and a pomegranate, upon the hem of the robe all around.
35 "And it shall be upon Aaron when he ministers, and its sound will be heard when he goes into the holy place before the LORD and when he comes out, that he may not die.

Ex 29:35 "Thus you shall do to Aaron and his sons, according to all that I have commanded you. Seven days you shall consecrate them.
36 "And you shall offer a bull every day as a sin offering for atonement. You shall cleanse the altar when you make atonement for it, and you shall anoint it to sanctify it.
37 "Seven days you shall make atonement for the altar and sanctify it. And the altar shall be most holy. Whatever touches the altar must be holy.

[Umar001]

The phrase "the 4 corners of the earth" is a common phrase in english.

It does not mean the eath is flat. It means "everywhere on earth including remote places".

"Knock on wood" is another phrase. But has nothing to do with wood.

Maybe that Expression came from the Bible :p doesnt make it right.

Just wondering, if what is meant is God in fullness, then John1:18 didnt write that properly?

[dougmusr]

Maybe that Expression came from the Bible :p doesnt make it right.

One site I found believes this means North, South, East, and West, from all directions.

Just wondering, if what is meant is God in fullness, then John1:18 didnt write that properly?

Jesus came down from Heaven. He therefore has seen God.

n 6:41 The Jews then complained about Him, because He said, "I am the bread which came down from heaven." 42 And they said, "Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How is it then that He says, 'I have come down from heaven'?" 43 Jesus therefore answered and said to them, "Do not murmur among yourselves. 44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 "It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.
46 "Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father. 47 "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.

[Keltoi]

On the 4 corners discussion. Doug is correct, it was a metaphor. The 4 corners of the earth, the 4 winds, etc are all metaphors for directions. As I could say "People from all four corners of America gathered in Possum Hollow, Alabama"...for example. As far as I know there isn't a Possum Hollow, Alabama.

[QuranStudy]

On the 4 corners discussion. Doug is correct, it was a metaphor.

No, it's not. Christians literally believed that the world was flat before it got debunked during the Renaissance. The metaphorical use of the the earth having corners was not evident during pre-Christ era. People were prosecuted for believing the earth was round, solely for the reason that the Church found the "round earth" idea outrageous due to it's contradiction with the Bible.

[lavikor201]

Except '4 corners of the earth' in Hebrew means coming from all sides... maybe you all have gotten lost in the translation.

[QuranStudy]

Except '4 corners of the earth' in Hebrew means coming from all sides... maybe you all have gotten lost in the translation.

The Bible also described the Earth as a "circle." As you know, a "circle" is not a sphere.

[lolwatever]

salams bro quran.. personally i dont think we should get bogged down in these lil things, there's a fair bit of other inaccuracies that exist... the biggest being the treatment the bible gives to the prophets.

salamz

[therebbe]

The Bible also described the Earth as a "circle." As you know, a "circle" is not a sphere.

Post the verse where it refers to a 'circle' and I will look up the hebrew of the verse and see.

[dougmusr]

Post the verse where it refers to a 'circle' and I will look up the hebrew of the verse and see.

Isaiah 40:22 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? 22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

[therebbe]

Isaiah 40:22 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth? 22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

The word for circle here is Galgal. This can also be translated as 'sphere' or 'cycle' but in reality there is no definition for what it means in english. I will try to explain it, but I am not a native born Hebrew speaker therefore I am sometimes lost because I identify things as English first. Maybe Lavi can help us.

But the word closest to it is Gilgel which means to "revolve".

Go look it up in a Hebrew Dictionary.

[MuslimCONVERT]

The phrase "the 4 corners of the earth" is a common phrase in english.

It does not mean the eath is flat. It means "everywhere on earth including remote places".

"Knock on wood" is another phrase. But has nothing to do with wood.

the Bible wasn't originally written in modern English. It was translated from Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, which of course you know as well as I do. In Ancient Greek and Hebrew, it is quite probable that this is literal.

[Woodrow]

Both the Ancient Egyptians and Greeks were well advanced in Astronomy and all indictions the math they used was based on knowledge that the Earth was a sphere. Much of that knowledge was lost during the fall of both civilizations.

We do believe that both the Torah and the Bible were changed, but that does not mean that they are totaly devoid of truth. There are things in both that the Qur'an is in agreement with. We should not be surprised that some things in them are true. They both contain some of the truth, just not the entire truth.

[QuranStudy]

Post the verse where it refers to a 'circle' and I will look up the hebrew of the verse and see.

First of all, the Bible says that the Earth had "edges," which is complete plagiarization of Greek astronomers (Notice I'm not referring to Torah since I do not know Hebrew).

take the earth by the edges and shake the wicked out of it (Job 38:12-13)

The earth takes shape like clay under a seal." (Job 38:14)

Job 38:13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?

The tree grew large and strong and its top touched the sky; it was visible to the ends of the earth. Daniel 4:11

http://www.kingjamesversionofthebible.com/18-job.html

Now, to answer your question, here are the verses:

Is. 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in...

The Bible also promotes the idea of a geocentric universe, but I'll get to that later :)

[therebbe]

the Bible wasn't originally written in modern English. It was translated from Ancient Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic, which of course you know as well as I do. In Ancient Greek and Hebrew, it is quite probable that this is literal.

Actually that is wrong. Refering to the 4 sides of the earth in hebrew means to come from all angles and all sides. (north, south, east, west) but nice try. :)

[lolwatever]

my posts got totally ignored :offended:

[Umar001]

Peace be upon those who Follow the path of the God of Moses.

One site I found believes this means North, South, East, and West, from all directions.

WOuld be nice to know what their reasoning behind that is. i.e. how they arrived to that conclusion.

Jesus came down from Heaven. He therefore has seen God.

So someone has seen G-d in his fullness? right?

[Umar001]

Assalamu Aleykum Wa Rhametulah

my posts got totally ignored :offended:

I don't think you can say to a person, 'your Bible is curropt because your Prophet slept with his daughters'

They will just tell you, nah the Bible is right, it really happend.

[Umar001]

Peace be upon those who follow Truth when it is Shown.

My Humble proof that the Bible has been changed altarted, but more over, my proof that God is not protecting it, thus any change big or small can happen is that:

Jehoiachin the 8 or 18 year old King?

2 Kings 24:8
8Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

2 Chronicles 36:9
9Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

Source

The NIV has a footnote which states:

1. 2 Chronicles 36:9 One Hebrew manuscript, some Septuagint manuscripts and Syriac (see also 2 Kings 24:8 most Hebrew manuscripts eight

Source

Emphasis was mine, now there are things like this in a couple of places, which shows the Bible was not and is not Protected by God.

I have gone into a little more detail about this before in previous posts, also:

Mark – The earliest manuscripts and some other ancient authorities do not have Mark 16: 9-20, According to NIV (New International Version) Bible.

Source

[lolwatever]

Assalamu Aleykum Wa Rhametulah



I don't think you can say to a person, 'your Bible is curropt because your Prophet slept with his daughters'

They will just tell you, nah the Bible is right, it really happend.

the question is, why would anyone in their rightmind follow such people if that really happened! seriously, would you let your kids hangout with a pedophile just because he claims his a prophet :offended:

[*Hana*]

Actually that is wrong. Refering to the 4 sides of the earth in hebrew means to come from all angles and all sides. (north, south, east, west) but nice try. :)

Peace to you:

Actually, then it would make more sense to say in all directions....not sides, as the term "sides" does not imply a round or oval shape...quite the contrary. The use of these words, "sides", "flat", etc., in the bible would make sense as that was the belief of the people in those times....and for many centuries later. When using the term "like a tent", it also implies a flat surface...ie: the floor of the tent which signifies the earth, is flat, with sides that go up so you don't fall off. Reminds me of a dome shape object with a flat bottom and a lid. In any case...in my opinion, it reflects what man believed then and wrote about rather than what God actually created.

Peace,
Hana

[Ninth_Scribe]

Muslim mistake: That God’s approach with Jesus and God’s approach with Mohammad was the same.

Spot on! God speaks every language and to all people. The trouble appears to be with humanity. For some odd reason HUMANS prefer to see themselves differently... they're not very hot on the idea of oneness. This is obvious in the lineage of Abraham. All the different books order the people to honor their parents and ancestors. What Adam saw, if you will, can only be seen by looking back through the eyes of the generations before us, all of them.

This law however, is seldom obeyed. The consequence? I've read on this forum that Jews don't consider themselves as related to Muslims because they identify with Moses who founded Judaism. I HATED hearing that! Without Abraham, there would be no Moses. Without Abraham, there would be no Mohammed. And finally, without Babylon, there would be no Abraham.

I don't give a rats tail about how people practice their different traditions. If they ALL worship God and they all follow the same laws, the differences are nothing more than window dressing. Some people like blue curtains in their holy places and some people like purple. Some people talk in different languages and use different names. So what? They all MEAN the same thing!

Think of what it takes to build a working community. You have to have a variety of different talents. You'd need doctors and lawyers. But you'd also need butchers and sanitation workers. To have a perfect community, there has to be mutual respect for each other's place and position in the whole of the community. Doctors are important, sure. But they're not more important that butchers because without them, people would starve to death. My point is, they ALL contribute to the whole. Doctors aren't "better-than" butchers and if the community makes them feel they aren't appreciated, they'll leave and that community will go hungry.

On the level of the spirit, it is no different. The books were corrupted because of the above. I remember, from somewhere in my mind, that there was only one book to start with. But there was a big fight (like above) over what words were more important and the book has been torn to shreds. Each of you have what you feel are the more important pieces of it. Parts that were important to different people in different ways, or maybe just all they could remember of it. To me, it looks like a giant jig-saw puzzle now with all it's different pieces scattered all around me. When I see a conflict, that just tells me those two pieces don't fit together. But they each belong somewhere. You can't just throw one of them away. If you keep doing that, we'll never see the pretty picture those puzzle pieces make up in the end.

The trick is to remember where we all came from. Every generation is equally important. It's OK to have favorites... so long as you keep in mind those favorites came from other generations before them (they didn't just fall from the sky), and those generatons are every bit as important. The book can be repaired... but only if the people want to see it. So far, that's the part that's giving me a real nasty head-ache.

Ninth Scribe

[MuslimCONVERT]

Actually that is wrong. Refering to the 4 sides of the earth in hebrew means to come from all angles and all sides. (north, south, east, west) but nice try. :)

I wasn't "trying" anything. Just pointing out that we cannot basic a semantical arguement off of a translation. And that may be true, but there are "4 corner" references in the New Testament as well, which is in Greek and Aramaic. Not Hebrew. Salaam.

[ManchesterFolk]

I wasn't "trying" anything. Just pointing out that we cannot basic a semantical arguement off of a translation. And that may be true, but there are "4 corner" references in the New Testament as well, which is in Greek and Aramaic. Not Hebrew. Salaam.

Hebrew is based on Aramaic. Therefore the meaning of the language is very similar.