Bible vs Qur'an, authenticity

[Ahmad]

it's all fake..there is no god

Does that make any sense to you ?

 

[irosie91]

While Christians are advised that lies are a sin. Lies are in violation of the Ten Commandments, the holiest commandments of all. Yet Islam encourages and allows people to lie, especially to the Infidels. It is not only permissible, but encouraged.

Islam holds it absolutely forbidden to lie. Ask Sharia specialists of the 4 schools: Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi, Hanbali. The mistake you make: applying stuff that was done during the wars between Muhammad's people -during his time- and Muhammad's arch-enemies (be they Jews or polytheists), to the present time. This does not apply to the present time, to that time of the early wars only (and subsequently other wars, later, but nothing like regular context). There is like government shutdown comes special times, but that's not like regular times.

huh? have you ever met any muslims?

 

[irosie91]

it's all fake..there is no god

Does that make any sense to you ?

does the kharahan make sense to you?

 

[Ahmad]

Hello.

This was prompted to me by people quoting me Bible verses, in their attempt to convince me of some elements. My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Muhammad (peace be upon him) was given a book by God, The Qur'an. In it, God talks to him. It is the word of God. That was about 1500 years ago. However, the Qur'an was memorized from the beginning, as an obligation to the Muslim community, and it was done as it had to be. From generations to generations, it was memorized, all over the Muslim world, until today, and it continues. This is how we know the Qur'an is authentic, the very same that it was 1500 years ago.

1500 years ago, when Muhammad recited this Qur'an to people, everyone was amazed by such a speech, such words, such extraordinary and beautiful words of light. It is the same today, when someone reads a verse of the Qur'an, or many verses, or a Chapter, or many Chapters; he is overwhelmed by such extraodinary, magnificent and amazing words. This is because it is the word of God Almighty.

"So all the praises and thanks be to God, the Lord of the heavens and the Lord of the earth, and the Lord of the Alamin (mankind, jinn and all that exists). And His (Alone) is the Majesty in the heavens and the earth, and He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise." (45:36-37)

"But those who believe and do righteous good deeds, and believe in that which is sent down to Muhammad - for it is the truth from their Lord - He will expiate from them their sins, and will make good their state." (47:1)

you shit for brains, the Quran was taking from the bible

Wrong. It wasn't taken from the Bible.

https://www.quora.com/According-to-Islam-when-was-the-first-Quran-written


What is recorded in the Quran is what Mohammed recited or at least what is claimed he recited. Then some 20 years after the death of Mohammed so many people who had memorized what Mohammed had recited had been killed in the battles that Muslims fought, that the third caliph Othman decided to compile a Quran. He appointed people to find any verses that had been written down and what people had memorized and put them together in a book that was called the Quran. After he had compiled the Quran he had all other written verses burnt. It is recorded in the Hadiths that some people were not very happy about this as the way they had memorized some verses differed from what was recorded in the Quran. From very early Quran fragments found in Sana'a in 1972 it can be shown that earlier Quran verses were erased and replaced with Othman's version of the Quran. It is claimed that we today have this Othman version of the Quran even though not one of the originals Qurans he had written and distributed exists any longer.

So when was the Quran made? Most probably some 20 to 30 years after the death of Mohammed by the writers brought together by Othman. Are the Qurans today the same as what Othman compiled, nobody knows as we have no originals left. More important those is the fact that we have proof that early versions of the Quran were changed to comply with Othman's version of the Quran.

That's quite a perverted thinking. Simple as this: Muhammad (peace be upon him) was given words by God, revelations, and he would recite them, and the people would learn it from him. Then after his time, the people that came later learnt it from the people who were here before them. Then it's easy one day to say "let's write it down on paper, and if there is some revelation that only 2 or 3 people know, and no one else apart from them, let's destroy that to make sure no error or mistake creeps its way in this Qur'an". Period.

 

[Ahmad]

If you want authenticity, you go to the source ...

Please reply to my question and the thread.

 

[Ahmad]

Well, considering that Mohammed was illiterate, he couldn't have read any book given to him.

And, there is also the little fact that the Quaran wasn't composed until AFTER Mohammed's death. And, it was done by committee. If 2 or more people heard what was being attributed to Mohammed, it was included in the Quaran.

Sorry..................but writing a "holy book" by committee makes me question it's authenticity.

what's-his-name has a sense of humor-------he gave a book to an illiterate

Please reply to my question.

your "question" is silly-------the KHARAHAN started out as a scramble
of nonsense and remains so. -----I read it ----after I has already read
the bible (new and old) the odyssey, the iliad, the baghavad gita ,
lots of the classical greek plays, the divine comedy, the Ramayana
and the kama sudtra, Beowulf. Even the least of all that classical
stuff (Beowulf) was better than the kharahan. I had lots of
jingles memorized by age five------' jack be nimble, jack be quick..... '
etc----------memorizing nonsense does not make it less nonsensical

"In the Name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful", "God loves those who are kind", "God's bear witness that they are liars", "you (Muhammad) stand on an exalted standard of character", does this sound like nonsense to you ?

 

[fncceo]

If you want authenticity, you go to the source ...

Please reply to my question and the thread.

I did ... you're arguing over which of two copies is most authentic ... my answer is neither.

Only an original can be authentic.

 

[Ahmad]

My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Why do you think the oral history that became the Bible is any less accurate than the oral history that became the Quran?

Please read the OP.

 

[irosie91]

Well, considering that Mohammed was illiterate, he couldn't have read any book given to him.

And, there is also the little fact that the Quaran wasn't composed until AFTER Mohammed's death. And, it was done by committee. If 2 or more people heard what was being attributed to Mohammed, it was included in the Quaran.

Sorry..................but writing a "holy book" by committee makes me question it's authenticity.

what's-his-name has a sense of humor-------he gave a book to an illiterate

Please reply to my question.

your "question" is silly-------the KHARAHAN started out as a scramble
of nonsense and remains so. -----I read it ----after I has already read
the bible (new and old) the odyssey, the iliad, the baghavad gita ,
lots of the classical greek plays, the divine comedy, the Ramayana
and the kama sudtra, Beowulf. Even the least of all that classical
stuff (Beowulf) was better than the kharahan. I had lots of
jingles memorized by age five------' jack be nimble, jack be quick..... '
etc----------memorizing nonsense does not make it less nonsensical

"In the Name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful", "God loves those who are kind", "God's bear witness that they are liars", "you (Muhammad) stand on an exalted standard of character", does this sound like nonsense to you ?

it is a pile of platitudes that exist as such in every culture in the world---including those that existed long before Arabic was a written language.
(PS there is nothing about the muhummad which was the son
of amina and murderer of many to EXALT) "mary had a little
lamb..." is just as valid

 

[Ahmad]

If you want authenticity, you go to the source ...

Please reply to my question and the thread.

I did ... you're arguing over which of two copies is most authentic ... my answer is neither.

Only an original can be authentic.

No. I am asking for proofs of the authenticity of the Bible as Prophet Jesus's actual words, just as I gave the proofs for the authenticity of today's Qur'an (found everywhere on the internet without any wording differences) in respect of the Qur'an of 1500 years ago.

Of course, it is even worse for Judaism scriptures, being older by far than Christianity.

 

[irosie91]

My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Why do you think the oral history that became the Bible is any less accurate than the oral history that became the Quran?

Please read the OP.

I read it. The claim is that muhummad RECITED his stuff to a bunch of people------who were SO ILLITERATE that not one of them wrote
his stuff out. The fact is that Jesus spoke to lots of very LITERATE
PEOPLE. The chances that the words of Jesus were preserved INTACT is far more likely

 

[irosie91]

If you want authenticity, you go to the source ...

Please reply to my question and the thread.

I did ... you're arguing over which of two copies is most authentic ... my answer is neither.

Only an original can be authentic.

No. I am asking for proofs of the authenticity of the Bible as Prophet Jesus's actual words, just as I gave the proofs for the authenticity of today's Qur'an (found everywhere on the internet without any wording differences) in respect of the Qur'an of 1500 years ago.

Of course, it is even worse for Judaism scriptures, being older by far than Christianity.

wrong again------the jewish scriptures came from LITERATE people

 

[fncceo]

If you want authenticity, you go to the source ...

Please reply to my question and the thread.

I did ... you're arguing over which of two copies is most authentic ... my answer is neither.

Only an original can be authentic.

No. I am asking for proofs of the authenticity of the Bible as Prophet Jesus's actual words, just as I gave the proofs for the authenticity of today's Qur'an (found everywhere on the internet without any wording differences) in respect of the Qur'an of 1500 years ago.

Of course, it is even worse for Judaism scriptures, being older by far than Christianity.

So, if freshness is the measure of authenticity in religious text ... I'm going with ...

First published in 1950

 

[Ahmad]

My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Why do you think the oral history that became the Bible is any less accurate than the oral history that became the Quran?

Please read the OP.

I read it. The claim is that muhummad RECITED his stuff to a bunch of people------who were SO ILLITERATE that not one of them wrote
his stuff out. The fact is that Jesus spoke to lots of very LITERATE
PEOPLE. The chances that the words of Jesus were preserved INTACT is far more likely

That sounds like a joke. Very funny.

 

[irosie91]

My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Why do you think the oral history that became the Bible is any less accurate than the oral history that became the Quran?

Please read the OP.

I read it. The claim is that muhummad RECITED his stuff to a bunch of people------who were SO ILLITERATE that not one of them wrote
his stuff out. The fact is that Jesus spoke to lots of very LITERATE
PEOPLE. The chances that the words of Jesus were preserved INTACT is far more likely

ahmad giggled. I had trouble NOT GIGGLING when I visited
a mosque (I also had trouble not vomiting)

 

[Ahmad]

If you want authenticity, you go to the source ...

Please reply to my question and the thread.

I did ... you're arguing over which of two copies is most authentic ... my answer is neither.

Only an original can be authentic.

No. I am asking for proofs of the authenticity of the Bible as Prophet Jesus's actual words, just as I gave the proofs for the authenticity of today's Qur'an (found everywhere on the internet without any wording differences) in respect of the Qur'an of 1500 years ago.

Of course, it is even worse for Judaism scriptures, being older by far than Christianity.

So, if freshness is the measure of authenticity in religious text ... I'm going with ...

First published in 1950

You know religion is power. It is government and politics. Imagine the Mueller report, if it is not filed and locked away as top secret (just giving an example), needing high level of clearance to be able to access it; you can be assured that before the end of the week it will become a report on March Madness, and on which players and which coach did the best performances. That's just common sense.

 

[irosie91]

My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Why do you think the oral history that became the Bible is any less accurate than the oral history that became the Quran?

Please read the OP.

I read it. The claim is that muhummad RECITED his stuff to a bunch of people------who were SO ILLITERATE that not one of them wrote
his stuff out. The fact is that Jesus spoke to lots of very LITERATE
PEOPLE. The chances that the words of Jesus were preserved INTACT is far more likely

That sounds like a joke. Very funny.

what is "funny" about it? sing-song recitations of the
Koran are much funnier-------especially when done by Iranians
who do not know a word of Arabic. .....jack be nimble, jack
be quick ........ <<< I knew that one long before I understood the
word "nimble"

 

[irosie91]

If you want authenticity, you go to the source ...

Please reply to my question and the thread.

I did ... you're arguing over which of two copies is most authentic ... my answer is neither.

Only an original can be authentic.

No. I am asking for proofs of the authenticity of the Bible as Prophet Jesus's actual words, just as I gave the proofs for the authenticity of today's Qur'an (found everywhere on the internet without any wording differences) in respect of the Qur'an of 1500 years ago.

Of course, it is even worse for Judaism scriptures, being older by far than Christianity.

So, if freshness is the measure of authenticity in religious text ... I'm going with ...

First published in 1950

You know religion is power. It is government and politics. Imagine the Mueller report, if it is not filed and locked away as top secret (just giving an example), needing high level of clearance to be able to access it; you can be assured that before the end of the week it will become a report on March Madness, and on which players and which coach did the best performances. That's just common sense.

something like HOW THE KORAN WAS DONE--------cobbled
together from a pile of nonsense--------and LOCKED AWAY by
the cobblers

 

[Ahmad]

My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Why do you think the oral history that became the Bible is any less accurate than the oral history that became the Quran?

Please read the OP.

I read it. The claim is that muhummad RECITED his stuff to a bunch of people------who were SO ILLITERATE that not one of them wrote
his stuff out. The fact is that Jesus spoke to lots of very LITERATE
PEOPLE. The chances that the words of Jesus were preserved INTACT is far more likely

ahmad giggled. I had trouble NOT GIGGLING when I visited
a mosque (I also had trouble not vomiting)

A mosque is known as the house of God. When you are inside a mosque you are inside God's house, you came to visit Him (among others, also to praise Him, to worship Him, to respond to His invitation, to please Him and to seek His love). But also a guest to Him, because it is His house. In Islam, one takes good care of his guests -very important-, next time you enter a mosque, try to see God's great superb care to you at that time, and to all those around you. It is an extraordinary experience.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Hello.

This was prompted to me by people quoting me Bible verses, in their attempt to convince me of some elements. My question is, what evidence is there that the Bible's words, as known today are the actual words of the Prophet Jesus ? Jesus (peace be upon him) lived 2000 years ago. How would one expect, in all pure common sense, that his words are preserved up to this day ? Do you not think that these words are changed, modified, altered, arranged, and put up conveniently, voluntarily, and both with and without that very intent ?

Muhammad (peace be upon him) was given a book by God, The Qur'an. In it, God talks to him. It is the word of God. That was about 1500 years ago. However, the Qur'an was memorized from the beginning, as an obligation to the Muslim community, and it was done as it had to be. From generations to generations, it was memorized, all over the Muslim world, until today, and it continues. This is how we know the Qur'an is authentic, the very same that it was 1500 years ago.

1500 years ago, when Muhammad recited this Qur'an to people, everyone was amazed by such a speech, such words, such extraordinary and beautiful words of light. It is the same today, when someone reads a verse of the Qur'an, or many verses, or a Chapter, or many Chapters; he is overwhelmed by such extraodinary, magnificent and amazing words. This is because it is the word of God Almighty.

"So all the praises and thanks be to God, the Lord of the heavens and the Lord of the earth, and the Lord of the Alamin (mankind, jinn and all that exists). And His (Alone) is the Majesty in the heavens and the earth, and He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise." (45:36-37)

"But those who believe and do righteous good deeds, and believe in that which is sent down to Muhammad - for it is the truth from their Lord - He will expiate from them their sins, and will make good their state." (47:1)

Both are equally inauthentic as there is no ‘god’ as perceived by theists.