Quran VS Bible , a thoroughly comparative study,arranged by items

[Hiroshi]

you know ,I won't blame you for your obsession with such issue (does the Quran validate the bible) , neither for skipping my quranic quotations related to the topic,in previous posts .....

I only blame you for narrowing the meaning of textual truthfulness to mere the Question of Transmission....

1- Does proving a written work as transmitted perfectly through the ages ,validate its entire content as facts ?

I don't think so...

I didn't come to accept the Bible as reliable and truthful simply by studying manuscripts and textual transmission. I came to realise that the Bible is a book of prophecy and could only have come from God who knows what the future will bring. Approximately one third of the Bible is prophecy. And these never fail to come true. Often the Bible foretells what will happen with great nations and world powers that dominate the international scene centuries in advance. Just to cite one example, it was foretold that the Jews would be exiled to Babylon but that they would afterwards be liberated by Cyrus the Persian king. Cyrus is named in prophecy some 200 years before he acted as liberator -- so even before he was born. The prophecy stated that Babylon's waters would be dried up (Isaiah 44:27-28). And that is exactly what Cyrus did. History records that he diverted the waters of the river Euphrates by digging a channel. Then when the waters were gone his soldiers invaded the city of Babylon by marching through the muddy river bed.

There are prophecies that have come true and we have historical records to prove it. There are prophecies that are coming true today and we can witness them unfolding. And there are prophecies still to occur in which we have absolute confidence that God will fulfill his promises.

 

[جوري]

Approximately one third of the Bible is prophecy.

you'll find that in any religion.. even Nostradamus' predictions have come true.. if you base your entire belief system on fulfilled or unfulfilled 'prophecies' you're bound to be of the losers on the day of recompense!

all the best

 

[IAmZamzam]

I didn't come to accept the Bible as reliable and truthful simply by studying manuscripts and textual transmission. I came to realise that the Bible is a book of prophecy and could only have come from God who knows what the future will bring. Approximately one third of the Bible is prophecy. And these never fail to come true. Often the Bible foretells what will happen with great nations and world powers that dominate the international scene centuries in advance. Just to cite one example, it was foretold that the Jews would be exiled to Babylon but that they would afterwards be liberated by Cyrus the Persian king. Cyrus is named in prophecy some 200 years before he acted as liberator -- so even before he was born. The prophecy stated that Babylon's waters would be dried up (Isaiah 44:27-28). And that is exactly what Cyrus did. History records that he diverted the waters of the river Euphrates by digging a channel. Then when the waters were gone his soldiers invaded the city of Babylon by marching through the muddy river bed.

There are prophecies that have come true and we have historical records to prove it. There are prophecies that are coming true today and we can witness them unfolding. And there are prophecies still to occur in which we have absolute confidence that God will fulfill his promises.

Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken; then will appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory; and he will send out his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates. Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all these things take place. (Matthew 24:29-34)

 

[gmcbroom]

The Vales Lily,
I watched the video you posted. First, i have to say their right that scribes had to copy it by hand. Now, this isn't anything new. The scribes in question were ordained clergy. Why clergy, simple their not going to want to deviate from the scriptures their copying from as that would be scrilegeous and dangerous. As for the defferent accounts not all who copied the scriptures would agree on doctrine so their copies would reflect this. That is how various heresies came about throughout history for example Nestorism, Arianism, and Monothelitism. The the first early councils brought together were to solidify the faith for all The Church. So that heresies would stop ripping apart the faith and causing persecutions.The Church voting on a dogma or doctrine isn't new. Infact drawing lots was how an Apostle was chosen when Judas Iscariot vacated his postion. As for the content of the video. the keynote speaker is from the Bible belt in the US and no doubt highly academically accredited yet I don't put much faith in what a college says as the scholastic attitude of late is extremely atheistic thus lacking faith and just embracing logic and reason. If I'm going to trust a source it would be ordained catholic , and apostolic as that is The Church. The four marks of the Church are One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church. Without that, all the degrees in the world amount to nothing concerning the Catholic Church. There just opinions nothing else.
If the Koran confirms what the scriptures say as Sura 10:37 seems to indicate then why would I follow a anything else as a Christian. I will stay with the Torah and Gospels.

Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[Hiroshi]

Did you not read anything at all Al-Manar wrote? your religion was voted on by a council not dictated by God as for variant readings that would be rejected or accepted I really recommend you some

for starters..

all the best

The speaker said that all of the manuscripts of the gospels are different from one another "in lots of little ways". To get that in perspective, when obviously spurious texts (such as Mark 16:9-20) have been eliminated, the count is about one word in a thousand where there is any variance. Almost always this is inconsequencial or causes hardly any change in the meaning. There are admittedly some cases where there are difficulties. John 1:18 in some manuscripts reads: "only begotten Son" and in others "only begotten god". The latter reading (the most likely correct) causes a problem for trinitarians. But I don't see even these as major issues that should make us cause us to reject the gospels as worthless.

 

[IAmZamzam]

The speaker said that all of the manuscripts of the gospels are different from one another "in lots of little ways". To get that in perspective, when obviously spurious texts (such as Mark 16:9-20) have been eliminated, the count is about one word in a thousand where there is any variance. Almost always this is inconsequencial or causes hardly any change in the meaning.

From one of my articles:

What I’m going to point out here is a series of verses with their text notes from the New Living Translation of the Bible, Gift & Award edition...

“However, no one knows the day or the hour when these things will happen, not even the angels in heaven or the Son himself. Only the Father knows." (Matthew 24:36)

Some manuscripts omit the phrase “or the Son himself.”

"Here begins the Good News about Jesus the Messiah, the son of God." (Mark 1:1)

Some manuscripts do not include “the son of God.”

“I saw this happen to Jesus, so I testify that he is the Son of God.” (John 1:34)

Some manuscripts read “the chosen One of God.”

"Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard, Jesus is baptizing and making more disciples than John.'” (John 4:1)

Some manuscripts read “The Lord.”...

"Then Jesus led them to Bethany, and lifting his hands to heaven, he blessed them. While he was blessing them, he left them and was taken up to heaven. They worshiped him and then returned to Jerusalem filled with great joy. And they spent all of their time in the Temple praising God." (Luke 24:50-53)

Some manuscripts do not include “and was taken up to heaven”. Some manuscripts do not include “worshiped him and”.

"The women fled from the tomb, trembling and bewildered, saying nothing to anyone because they were too frightened to talk.”

The most reliable early manuscripts conclude the Gospel of Mark at verse 8. Other manuscripts include various endings to the Gospel. Two of the more noteworthy endings are printed here.

 

[جوري]

were to solidify the faith for all The Church

I know to solidify it on Greek mythology!
you should listen to his entire lectures btw not just ten mins~!

If the Koran confirms what the scriptures say as Sura 10:37 seems to indicate then why would I follow a anything else as a Christian. I will stay with the Torah and Gospels.

The Quran doesn't state that the corrupt books you've in your hands are from God, and I'd urge you as to not perpetuate foolish notions that are started by some and never verified to read the Quran in totality.. you'd be surprised of how just how corrupt the lying hands of your scribes are the making of the fuels of hell!

The speaker said that all of the manuscripts of the gospels are different from one another "in lots of little ways". To get that in perspective, when obviously spurious texts (such as Mark 16:9-20) have been eliminated, the count is about one word in a thousand where there is any variance. Almost always this is inconsequencial or causes hardly any change in the meaning. There are admittedly some cases where there are difficulties. John 1:18 in some manuscripts reads: "only begotten Son" and in others "only begotten god". The latter reading (the most likely correct) causes a problem for trinitarians. But I don't see even these as major issues that should make us cause us to reject the gospels as worthless.

It isn't considered it 'little ways' when you turn man into a God, his messengers into lecherous perverts, apostles unable to bear a message, or for this alleged god himself to self-immolate.. I mean believe me I understand your monumental effort in deflecting focus from the big errors, the addendum of entire passages and corruption of the very being of God, but it is the sort of thing you can get away in trailer parks perhaps door to door not to schooled individuals even if on a most basic level!

all the best

 

[gmcbroom]

The Vales Lily,
Only time will tell my friend whether the muslim or christian perspective is correct. Personally, I don't put much credence in the Koran, just as you don't put much credence in the Bible. Our viewpoints are at odds. I'm aware that Islam doesn't condone an ordained priesthood. So your entiltled to your opinion of lecherous perverts. I, however, as a catholic disagree. Your arguments have been made before and will be again throughout time by both muslims and even christians who do not know their faith. However, to catholics and even any christian faith that has apostolic succession your arguments will fall on deaf ears.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[جوري]

The Vales Lily, Only time will tell my friend whether the muslim or christian perspective is correct. Personally, I don't put much credence in the Koran, just as you don't put much credence in the Bible. Our viewpoints are at odds. I'm aware that Islam doesn't condone an ordained priesthood. So your entiltled to your opinion of lecherous perverts. I, however, as a catholic disagree. Your arguments have been made before and will be again throughout time by both muslims and even christians who do not know their faith. However, to catholics and even any christian faith that has apostolic succession your arguments will fall on deaf ears. Peace be with you gmcbroom

GMCbroom,

you wish my comments were about lecherous priests.. in fact they're about what is written in your book!

Lot had sex with his two daughters. One might even conclude that he had God's help in this, as he was both very old and very drunk at the time. There was no punishment for any of them. On the contrary, both daughters were rewarded with sons who founded nations (Gen 19:33-38). Earlier (Gen 19:8), Lot had offered his daughters to be used by a mob. And Peter said that Lot was a "righteous man" (2Peter 2:8).



​

Just to mention one in passing.. your lack of trust in the Quran is meaningless to me and the other 1.86 billion Muslims. A word of God, outside of not being adulterated, or at odds with 'Godliness' should have some textual and logical integrity... Lecherous priests can't be faulted for their lusts, after all they're simply following in the footsteps of 'Holy people' from the bible. Imagine that, Lut sent to folks to warn them against sins of the flesh only to sleep with his own daughters and father his own grandchildren.. and you expect that we should take that as credible or good? give me a break and do me a favor and stop quoting me from the Quran that which you obviously haven't a clue of!

all the best

 

[Perseveranze]

Asalaamu Alaikum,

I miss Ahmad Deedat...

 

[جوري]

I miss Ahmad Deedat...

Allah yer7mao.. he was one of the best bar none!

 

[gmcbroom]

The Vales Lily,

I'll take your suggestion under advisement but I can't guaranty that I won't respond. Either way you can render your opinion and I'll render mine. As for Lot it was the daughters who seduced their father not the other way around. As for the two men lot was protecting they were angels and they were guests under his roof and hospitality meant everything back then as it does even today in some cultures. What Lot did is deploreable to us in this day and age (offering his daughters in exchange) but back then women weren't on equal footing socially. It doesn't make it right just the societal standards of that time.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[جوري]

The Vales Lily, I'll take your suggestion under advisement but I can't guaranty that I won't respond. Either way you can render your opinion and I'll render mine. As for Lot it was the daughters who seduced their father not the other way around. As for the two men lot was protecting they were angels and they were guests under his roof and hospitality meant everything back then as it does even today in some cultures. What Lot did is deploreable to us in this day and age (offering his daughters in exchange) but back then women weren't on equal footing socially. It doesn't make it right just the societal standards of that time. Peace be with you gmcbroom

I am not rendering an opinion I am listing the undeniable facts!
God wouldn't send a messenger to a people to warn them about lewd acts of the flesh only to have him commit incest and lewd acts on top of drunkenness and prostitution .. what credibility exists in that? God's law should be a constant not made to fit the tides-- do you read what you write? you suggest that God changes his mind because people were silly ad immature then?. perhaps if Jeremiah 8:8 "'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?

wasn't so rampant in the bible, we wouldn't take its contents and adherents with such a grain of salt..

all the best

 

[Ramadhan]

The speaker said that all of the manuscripts of the gospels are different from one another "in lots of little ways". To get that in perspective, when obviously spurious texts (such as Mark 16:9-20) have been eliminated, the count is about one word in a thousand where there is any variance. Almost always this is inconsequencial or causes hardly any change in the meaning. There are admittedly some cases where there are difficulties. John 1:18 in some manuscripts reads: "only begotten Son" and in others "only begotten god". The latter reading (the most likely correct) causes a problem for trinitarians. But I don't see even these as major issues that should make us cause us to reject the gospels as worthless.

you dont even have the original gospels to begin with, and you dont have oral tradition where everything is recorded and memorised, so how do you make certain that gospels that you have now is 100% record of jesus (as) sayings and actions without any embellishments?

also, if you have no problem with all those thousands versions of bible, why were jehova witness founders NOT happy with KJV, and proceeded to make his own versions?
Clearly, even your founders thought that bible has been corrupted.

 

[gmcbroom]

The Vales Lily,
Genesis 19 is simply explaining how the Moabites and Ammonites came into being through the 2 daughters of Lot. As for 2 Peter 2:8 He is simply stating how God saved Lot a righteous man oppressed by the licentious conduct of unprincipled people. and that if God can do that then the Lord knows how to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgement.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[جوري]

The Vales Lily, Genesis 19 is simply explaining how the Moabites and Ammonites came into being through the 2 daughters of Lot. As for 2 Peter 2:8 He is simply stating how God saved Lot a righteous man oppressed by the licentious conduct of unprincipled people. and that if God can do that then the Lord knows how to keep the unrighteous under punishment for the day of judgement. Peace be with you gmcbroom

gmcbroom

if biblical content is trustworthy for you to wager your eternity then be my guest, we have merely listed our endless list of reservations which no christian has been able to substantiate with some dexterity!

all the best

 

[gmcbroom]

The Vales Lily,
It's not just Sacred Scripture. It's also Sacred Tradition that guides me to the Church. I know you don't share that belief. But then that's why this forum is here is it not? Its called comparative religion for a reason. It brings together various faiths from across the world. True this is a Muslim Forum and it makes sense that the dominant position here is Islam. Just like the dominant position on Catholic Answers Forum is Catholic. The presence of the comparative religions section here is similiar to the Non-Catholic religions section there, its to find out our similiarities and our differences.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[جوري]

The Vales Lily, It's not just Sacred Scripture. It's also Sacred Tradition that guides me to the Church. I know you don't share that belief. But then that's why this forum is here is it not? Its called comparative religion for a reason. It brings together various faiths from across the world. True this is a Muslim Forum and it makes sense that the dominant position here is Islam. Just like the dominant position on Catholic Answers Forum is Catholic. The presence of the comparative religions section here is similiar to the Non-Catholic religions section there, its to find out our similiarities and our differences. Peace be with you gmcbroom

What is your point? Comparative religion is meant to elucidate concepts and expose prevarications and fabrications. You seem unwilling or unable to defend these very grave erroneous beliefs per your bible, reconcile them with common sense, logic and the being of the divine. You seem to be pulling words out of a hat and adhering to logical fallacies of numbers and denominations rather than a very basic need that can't be denied and the one that has to do with salvation for God's creed for the world to satisfy both the heart and the mind and the human condition in all its facets!

all the best

 

[gmcbroom]

The Vales Lily,
My point is that our religious views are different as we come from different faiths. You believe what you believe and I believe what I believe. I didn't come here to convert anyone; just to share a catholic perspective because thats what I thought this section is for.
peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[جوري]

The Vales Lily, My point is that our religious views are different as we come from different faiths. You believe what you believe and I believe what I believe. I didn't come here to convert anyone; just to share a catholic perspective because thats what I thought this section is for. peace be with you gmcbroom

I don't think you're capable of converting anyone.. my point is that beliefs should be based on something more substantial than what you're presenting here..
have a great evening