Interesting find - Christians please comment

[Ramadhan]

I have a NT that has stood for t2,000 years and you denigrate without I suspect having read any of it or knowing the facts about it's history.

You KNOW very well that current NT is NOT 2,000 years.

That is a deliberate, OUTRIGHT LIE.

I am glad that you are getting more and more exposed and that the "truth" about bible is getting more exposed, which would convince the silent christian members that christianity is not founded on the pure unadulterated message brought by Jesus pbuh.


again, you are conveniently ignoring my previous question, which I will repeat again, in bold, just in case you cannot see properly:


how is it possible that there is only ONE qur'an existing in the world? This is after 1,400 years, and spread among 1.2 billion of muslims. how is it even possible?

Had there been just a single slight variation of the qur'an during the time of prophet Muhammad SAW or the shahaba/disciples, CERTAINLY that one single variation would have been multiplied, magnified and carried over to this day. And yet the deafening fact is: There is no variation found in the qur'an used today. A shia in Tehran recites exactly the same qur'an as a sunni in california.
so this totally destroys your argument that the qur'an had been changed after the prophet Muhammad SAW passing.

compared this with god knows how many bible versions out there today. which bible to use? which bible to trust?

so, which is more to be trusted?

a book whose chain of transmission is recorded all the way to the prophet?

or

countless versions of a book whose pedigree cannot be traced all the way to jesus pbuh and that even its authors are unknown?
and which has undergone god knows how many translations, retranslations, reinterpretations, re-reinterpreatations that result in christians today freely interpret BIBLES (in plural form) according their own desires?


And if you are still not seeing things clearly, this illustration might help:

Jesus pbuh said ABCDEFGHI -----> obeserved by the disciples 1, 2, and 3
oh, but the disciples were not asked to memorise ABCDEFGHIJKL by Jesus pbuh and the did not write it down. Trouble!
disciple 1 relayed to the person Z that Jesus said BCDEFGHI
disciple 2 relayed to the person y that Jesus said ABCDEFGH
disciple 3 relayed to the person x that Jesus said CDEFGHI
TROUBLE! message was distorted!
person z relayed to person greek 1 that Jesus said abcdefghi <------- BIG trouble, original message translated into different language, lost its exact meanings!
etc..
etc..
person greek 1 relayed the message to person greek w that the message was cdghiba <----- BIG OOOPSS!
person greek w relayed the message to UNKNOWN AUTHORS that the message was ghibcdae which was then written into the four gospels by UNKNOWN AUTHORS.

So, jesus originally said "ABCDEFGHI"

But, the four gospels which were written in koine greek told Jesus said "ghibcdae".

Oh but that is not the end.
The four gosples were then translated into latin. Per usual, translation NEVER retain 100% exact meaning, and this was compounded by the political nature of Latin.
So, the "ghibcdae" in koine greek were then further translated into "bghd3cbai" in latin.

And this is NOT the end.

further along, a certain king wanted to be religiously and politically independent from the vatican, so a more politically charged further translation into english was conducted, known as KJV.
god knows how much further was the original message distorted already with this new translation.

a few centuries later, KJV is deemed to be politically incorrect, so NIV was invented.

etc.
etc.

And All these do not take into account other bibles which are deeemed heretical bu protestants or roman catholics.


All that reminds of one thing:

Just few weeks ago, a certain member of this forum charged that the Qur'an is the product of a chinese whispers.
Judging by the illustration above and the fact about the state of the qur'an and the bibles today , which is more of the product of chinese whispers?

I hope you have time to ponder.

 

[Ramadhan]

Of course people invent stories and Islam is not immune is it, consider the various sects and the thousands upon thousands of Hadith that were created and later not accepted. But as usual in your thinking you can only look one way.

Are you suggesting that the "eye witnesses" invented stories of how Judas iscariot's died? and thus explaining the contradicting accounts of his manner of death?

 

[جوري]

so, which is more to be trusted?

The question beyond this and that, is what does the book actually offer? what have christians done with their lives on the basis of said book which they allege is from a self-immolating god? Absolutely nothing, they live, behave and act as the pagans do. So even in his outright lies, which has done all else but address on matters of logical consistency, textual integrity, upright characters for these are the folks we are to model our lives after, there is very little by way of religion. what do they do beyond celebrating Pagan holidays which Jesus (p) never of them requested? They celebrate winter solstice like the pagan, the Nawruz like the pagans, and do very little by way of anything to reflect their respect and adoration for the creator. And then neatly wrap it in this god's ability to eat their sins so that they are free to do just that.

does he have time to ponder? He doesn't even read.. what he does is stick the same crap on every new thread to tire the rest of us out and that to him will give him some semblance of credibility!

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings Hugo,

I note you quote from Mohammad's post but not my reply and if you had bothered to do that you would see he mistakes what Dr Al Azami said as a conclusion so who Is dissembling here?

I was not aware of any reply to my post. Anyhow, I am quite sure that the incident quoted is part of Dr Al Azami's conclusion. Even if for the sake of argument it is found elsewhere in the book, does it not sufficiently show that Dr. Al Azami's view is, as with the rest of the Muslim scholars, that there is only one Qur'an? I hope you will agree with this fundamental point.

I also notice you have raised the topic of Hadeeth. May I suggest you first complete the topic of the Qur'an, as it is pointless to start discussions if no answer or conclusion is desired from them.

 

[Hugo]

To Naidamair

To answer your question as to whether Jesus taught his disciples and had them memorise his teaching the answer is an unequivocal yes he did.

Firstly, Nazareth was a small town but it is located a few miles from Sepphoris, a major city and Nazareth is also near a major highway that connects Caesarea Maritima to Tiberias. Sepphoris, Caesarea and Tiberias were the three largest and most influential cities in Galilee and this is where Jesus grew up.*Archeological evidence shows without a shadow of doubt that Nazareth and Sepphoris were thoroughly Jewish communities while Jesus was growing up.

Secondly, the history of Jewish teaching and learning in the time of Jesus show that he followed early rabbinic teachers who expected their students to memorise and pass on faithfully what was taught. For example, the distinguished Swedish scholar of Jesus and the Gospels has concluded that these practices apply to Jesus and his disciples. What was taught could be adapted, even expanded, but not distorted. Similarly, Shermaryahu Talmon has reached the same conclusion on the founding teacher of Qumran sect and Talmon's findings are consistent with what is know Jewish teachers and teaching methods.

It may be that Mohammad copied these teaching and learning methods from the Jews or Christians as I know of no studies that show such methods were used anywhere by the Arabs themselves.*

 

[IAmZamzam]

Hugo, have you not realized you are always giving asterisks in reference to footnotes that you don't end up writing?

 

[جوري]

Hugo, have you not realized you are always giving asterisks in reference to footnotes that you don't end up writing?

That is because he is the source of the reference!

 

[Ramadhan]

To answer your question as to whether Jesus taught his disciples and had them memorise his teaching the answer is an unequivocal yes he did.

Do you also believe in Santa Claus?

Or that Jesus was born in 25 December?

 

[Hugo]

Hugo, have you not realized you are always giving asterisks in reference to footnotes that you don't end up writing?

Not sure what this means but if it a reference that might covers my summary remarks in post 145 then see professor Graig Evans book called "fabricating Jesus" which also contains many further refs or if you find the post in error then let us see what references you can find or perhaps the truth about Jesus' life and ministry upsets you?

 

[Hugo]

Do you also believe in Santa Claus? Or that Jesus was born in 25 December?

Does this mean you don't like the evidence for the life and teaching of Jesus?

 

[Hugo]

Taking Mohammed lead from post 144. Could I ask two connected questions.

1. There is theme that says the Qu'ran is unchanged over 1400 years but what exactly does that mean or prove? Does it mean for example that if I had all of the original verses written on stone or bone or leather or whatever that they would match exactly in every tiny detail what I would see in a printed Qu'ran today?

2. Showing that a book is unchanged is useful but such a book might contain errors or be untrue in hundreds of ways. For example, there are Egyptian inscriptions that have existed unchanged for 4,000 years that speak about various Gods so does that mean they are true? The Indian Vedas that are still recited unchanged today in Hindus rituals but also go back some 4,000 years.

So we need more that just the notion of unchanged. In Islam we hear about the perfection of the Qu'ran but how far does that extend: faultless spelling and grammar, every words, sentence and clause perfectly aligned with the language, every word can be understood perfectly, every meaning is unmistakable, perfect structure, perfect style, perfection of vocabulary, no errors, no contradictions, every verse fits perfectly into it's context, no hidden meaning, no spurious letters or words, nothing copied from elsewhere, every doctrine is perfect, every law is perfect, etc

So is it a limited or total perfection, what does perfection mean and if anyone can find one flaw what implication will it have?*

 

[Hugo]

That is because he is the source of the reference!

Well the world is open to you to find the evidence for yourself if you can face it

 

[Ramadhan]

Does this mean you don't like the evidence for the life and teaching of Jesus?

I see that you have been avoiding the problem I posed to, despite my repeated attempts to ask you how to explain it:


how is it possible that there is only ONE qur'an existing in the world? This is after 1,400 years, and spread among 1.2 billion of muslims. how is it even possible?

Had there been just a single slight variation of the qur'an during the time of prophet Muhammad SAW or the shahaba/disciples, CERTAINLY that one single variation would have been multiplied, magnified and carried over to this day. And yet the deafening fact is: There is no variation found in the qur'an used today. A shia in Tehran recites exactly the same qur'an as a sunni in california.
so this totally destroys your argument that the qur'an had been changed after the prophet Muhammad SAW passing.

compared this with god knows how many bible versions out there today. which bible to use? which bible to trust?

so, which is more to be trusted?

a book whose chain of transmission is recorded all the way to the prophet?

or

countless versions of a book whose pedigree cannot be traced all the way to jesus pbuh and that even its authors are unknown?
and which has undergone god knows how many translations, retranslations, reinterpretations, re-reinterpreatations that result in christians today freely interpret BIBLES (in plural form) according their own desires?

 

[IAmZamzam]

Well the world is open to you to find the evidence for yourself if you can face it

You sound like J.P. Holding, mouthing off that anyone who wants to know his sources is free to do a Google search--though even he doesn't stoop so low as to refer intentionally to nonexistent endnotes with invariably unused asterisks. Even on the off chance that there is no disingenuity involved the appearance of disingenuity is still quite unmistakable, and the very best that can be said is maybe it is only sloth or apathy. One way or another, you're being immature, thoroughly unconvincing, and quite possibly immoral.

 

[جوري]

Well the world is open to you to find the evidence for yourself if you can face it

I have indeed found ample evidence that you are an under-educated troll who can't seem to subject himself to that which he seeks of others ignoring a mountain of evidence against his faulty beliefs and deluding himself that by ignoring those difficult questions that often arise while misquoting and making up stories about other religions that it is actually going to deflect away from the Issues.. be that as it may we are neither discussing the Quran nor the hadith, can you read the thread title-- and do you understand the subject matter?

As my mentor from Medical school once said ''In your quest for knowledge find a trusted source and learn it well, and whittle yourself away on bull at the end of the day you'll have wasted your energy and gained nothing at all''.. sob7an Allah quite similar to a hadith by the prophet PBUH ''

إن هذا الدين متين؛ فأوغل فيه برفق، ولا تبغض إلى نفسك عبادة الله؛ فإن الْمُنْبَتَّ لا أرضا قطع ولا ظهرا أبقى» حديث جابر بن عبد الله عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أنه قال: «.

​

The Religion of Islam is strong so teach and tread with gentility, and don't begrudge the rituals of worship; He who is angry/obstinate, will not traverse the lands to reach his destination nor keep his mode of transport' i.e he who beats and bullies has achieved neither the attainment of his goal nor keeping the denizen he's riding from abusing it all throughout.

Al7mdlillah for the great blessing that is the religion of Islam.
if I were you I wouldn't worry about Islam nor Muslims. We are strong in faith00 we know our history and the preservation of our religious text! you are absolutely nothing in the scheme of things compared to what has faced the Muslim world from the days of old, Romans/crusaders/Mongol Invasions.. Islam has always been and will always be, a religion of the conquered and conqueror alike -- you'd think that after the carnage that the Mongols unleashed upon Muslim land and with crusaders conspiring with them that Islam would have perished.. Instead the Mongols themselves became Muslim and spread our great religion to all of southeast Asia by peaceful means.. and those are the means that will continue and Islam will continue to grow.. In spite of your puny insignificant efforts and I must admit that I pity the effort even if you repeat yourself often as it must be a great disappointment that Islam has entered your very home and accepted by your very submitting to the great and only religion of God.. and what of your meager means which you can't properly reference and for apparent reasons as we have caught you in the very act of deception and misquotes prior You come here misquoting books and authors in a futile efforts as if an ailing ant putting up its dukes against lions.

all the best

 

[Hugo]

I see that you have been avoiding the problem I posed to, despite my repeated attempts to ask you how to explain it:

See my post 151 but any honest look through this thread will show I have began a series answering your questions though you have not answered any one of mine so let me give you another chance. Let me state again there are lots of books that have remained unchanged so what if anything does it prove - can you say because whatever you say will apply to any book that remains unchanged. You say there is a chain all the way back to the prophet but it is not a written one is it and in any case we are supposed to go back to the author so please explain how you will do that if you claim the author is God?

And yet the deafening fact is: There is no variation found in the qur'an used today. A shia in Tehran recites exactly the same qur'an as a sunni in california. so this totally destroys your argument that the qur'an had been changed after the prophet Muhammad SAW passing.

I ask you again, the Qu'ran you have is likely based on the 1924 Cairo edition so what did the publishers use to get that, what 'original' did they use? I have not I think argued that the Qu'ran has changed only that it cannot be proved - what would you consider as proof of corruption - a spelling error, what level of unchangeableness are you talking about?

compared this with god knows how many bible versions out there today. which bible to use? which bible to trust? so, which is more to be trusted? Countless versions of a book whose pedigree cannot be traced all the way to jesus pbuh and that even its authors are unknown? and which has undergone god knows how many translations, retranslations, reinterpretations, re-reinterpreatations that result in christians today freely interpret BIBLES (in plural form) according their own desires?

There are not countless versions as if any two Bibles are completely different and as I have said before I can find exactly the same stories and teaching in my German Bible, my English Bible or my Klingon Bible so you are speaking nonsense. As to interpretation, then all scriptures have to be interpreted as both Jews and Christians say "to go from the text to application without interpretation is itself heresy" and surely God wants us to explore and learn his message not just ignorantly and passively accept without any effort what someone else tells us. Of course it is possible to 'freely' interpret and some have done that and in my view perverted the message but Islam is not immune from that is it and there are many sects and versions and I think you will find the prophet said there will be 73.

 

[IAmZamzam]

Go back and write out your phony footnotes before we give you the time of day again.

 

[Hugo]

Greetings Hugo, I was not aware of any reply to my post. Anyhow, I am quite sure that the incident quoted is part of Dr Al Azami's conclusion. Even if for the sake of argument it is found elsewhere in the book, does it not sufficiently show that Dr. Al Azami's view is, as with the rest of the Muslim scholars, that there is only one Qur'an? I hope you will agree with this fundamental point. I also notice you have raised the topic of Hadeeth. May I suggest you first complete the topic of the Qur'an, as it is pointless to start discussions if no answer or conclusion is desired from them.

For my replies please look through now closed thread "Is it possible to Prove the Qu'ran is the very Words of God"

If you read post 129 and my reply you will see I did not introduce the topic of Hadith. I only mentioned it to show that all religions have to decide what is legitimate and what is not in written works, plus all religions have sects. It is therefore disingenuous to suggest as was done in the post mentioned that Christians are not capable of careful selection whereas Islam is somehow exempt from such difficulties.

It follows that Hadith science is not superior in every way to the techniques used by let's call them Western scholars and no doubt they could and should learn from each other. Hadith science as I understand it tries to establish who said or did something but cannot as far as I can see always establish if what was said was itself true or false without invoking the supernatural and this perhaps is where Islamic and Western ideas must in my opinion diverge. So if an Isnad shows that Mohammed said he saw more women in Hell than men then I can accept that he probably said it without accepting the truth of the statement itself since it's truth or falsehood is impossible to prove so that aspect is one of faith not fact.

 

[Ramadhan]

Ah, finally Hugo has come out from his little hole to spew another round of misleading informations in his desperate attempt to cling to his very shaky belief that is founded on a house of sand. I was wondering where you were.

See my post 151 but any honest look through this thread will show I have began a series answering your questions though you have not answered any one of mine so let me give you another chance. Let me state again there are lots of books that have remained unchanged so what if anything does it prove - can you say because whatever you say will apply to any book that remains unchanged.

So is this your way in finally admitting that The Qur'an is indeed unchanged from the prophet till now?

1. There is theme that says the Qu'ran is unchanged over 1400 years but what exactly does that mean or prove? Does it mean for example that if I had all of the original verses written on stone or bone or leather or whatever that they would match exactly in every tiny detail what I would see in a printed Qu'ran today?

Ah. again you are being evasive and trying to overlook the thundering fact that I have been writing in bold several times:

Qur'an is not just a written. The name itself literary means "recitation".
There are currently millions of people on earth who fully memorise the Qur'an (several in this forum afaik), and more than a billion who memorise parts of the Qur'an.
How do you account for that fact alone.
In addition, how do you account for the fact that the qur'an recited and fully memorised by those millions is IN SYNC with the text?

Showing that a book is unchanged is useful but such a book might contain errors or be untrue in hundreds of ways.

Very true.
now, do you mind pondering over this fact:
which book is unchanged? Al Qur'an
which book is constantly changed? Bible
which book does not contain errors or untrue in hundred ways? Al Qur'an
which book contains God knows how many errors and contradictions in so many ways? Bible.

So, are you going to revert to your fitrah as a muslim, hugo?

For example, there are Egyptian inscriptions that have existed unchanged for 4,000 years that speak about various Gods so does that mean they are true? The Indian Vedas that are still recited unchanged today in Hindus rituals but also go back some 4,000 years.

Were those egyptian inscriptions in active use as a complete guide to life by millions and billions of people throughout 4,000 years?
So, I've heard wrong that those egyptian inscriptions buried in the sand for 4,000 years?

As for vedas, Are you claiming that the vedas are ACTUALLY unchanged for 4,000 years.
Because I've heard differently from my hindu friends, and from books that I've read.

Your dishonesty knows no bound, Hugo.
I hope it isn't a product of reading bible too much.

You say there is a chain all the way back to the prophet but it is not a written one is it and in any case we are supposed to go back to the author so please explain how you will do that if you claim the author is God?

In the confine of this debate, I have not actually asked you to believe that the Qur'an is from God. I am actually being merciful towards you.
Do you want to start a debate whether the Qur'an is from God and whether Bible is inspired by God?
Just a snippet here: you claim that bible is inspired by God, oh what kind of God that creates so much confusions by infusing so many errors and contradictions not to mention being so schizophrenic and revealing so many factual errors.

I ask you again, the Qu'ran you have is likely based on the 1924 Cairo edition so what did the publishers use to get that, what 'original' did they use? I have not I think argued that the Qu'ran has changed only that it cannot be proved - what would you consider as proof of corruption - a spelling error, what level of unchangeableness are you talking about?

So, the qur'an that is completely memorised in the minds of millions people is based on the 1924 cairo edition?
Does this mean my great great grandfather who was a hafiz who died in 1915 learned to memorise the qur'an based on the 1924 cairo edition?
Does this mean that my great great grandfather's qur'an text which is still in our family possession and printed in 1905 was based on the 1924 cairo edition?

wow. I never knew anyone could be as smart as you are, Hugo!

There are not countless versions as if any two Bibles are completely different and as I have said before I can find exactly the same stories and teaching in my German Bible, my English Bible or my Klingon Bible so you are speaking nonsense

Does this mean you accept the New World Translation bible as the truth?
Does this mean The pope in Vatican accept King James Version bible as the truth and used it in mass in vatican?

 

[جوري]

If you read post 129 and my reply you will see I did not introduce the topic of Hadith.

Interesting find - Christians please comment

do you always find it this difficult to concentrate on the topic at hand? avoiding the topic won't make it go away especially when you resort to your familiar desperation..
BTW br. Muhammad has more pressing matters to attend to,, I doubt even for the sake of amusement that he'd come and provide you with the desired attention you so often seek..

now, go buy a book, and actually read it!

all the best