Jump to content
Islamic Forum
gentle giant

So, Who Then Created The Qur’An?!

Recommended Posts

Historical Research on Islam and the Earliest Qur'anic Manuscripts


 

The newest Historical material we now have on the dating of the earliest Qur'anic Manuscripts (Mushafs) is breaking new historical ground. These findings have an impact on not only the authenticity of the earliest Qur'ans, but also on who Muhammad was, as well as the whole scope concerning how Islam emerged. This new material has just come to light in the last two years (2012 - 2014) and is proving to be a real 'game changer' for those of us engaging publicly with Islam, especially within the academic environment, where the significance of these findings will have the greatest impact.

 

Concolusions of this new research is summarised as follows :-

“Islam, as we know it, did not exist in the 7th century, but evolved over a period of 200-300 years” (Humphreys 1991:71,83-89)

“The Qur’an probably was not revealed to one man in 22 years, but likely evolved over a period of 50-100 years” (Rippin 1985:155;1990:3,25,60; Lester 99:44-45; Wansbrough 1977:160-163) 

The history of Islam, at least from the time of the caliph Abd al-Malik (685-705 AD) and before, is a later fabrication (Cook 1983:65,

Robinson 1996:47)

 

These are extremely direct and damaging conclusions by the respective scholars, and no doubt our Muslim friends will reject this however the evidence is there and one must then consider the Islamic scholars research and add their comments into the mix to balance the argument. Yet when we do this it is more damaging to Islam and suddenly our Muslim friends are silenced
with no answer.


 

Before we look at the new evidence four questions need to be asked!

Is the Qur'an eternal? (see Sura 85:22, which says so)

Was it written down complete by Uthman in 650 AD, and were four copies sent to Medina, Basra, Baghdad and Damascus by him (al Bukhari says so in Vol.6:509-510)?

Has the Qur’an changed since 650 AD (i.e. the 1989 Ibn Fahd canon)?

Do they have complete Manuscripts from the time of Uthman to prove it was complete, and that it has never changed in 1400 years (i.e. the Topkapi/Sammarkand)?


Our Muslim friends will answer yes to all these questions, yet the evidence of the quranic manuscripts say something else. Two Islamic scholars (Tayyar Altıkulaç and Prof. Dr. Ekmeleddin) have been studding the six major Quranic manuscripts over a five year period (2002 -2007) and there published works have now been translated into English (2014) and the results are somewhat damaging to Islamic.


TOPKAPI MUSHAF

(Topkapi Museum, Istanbul, Turkey) (Early – Mid 8th c.)

Prof. Dr. Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu: (Founding Director General of IRCICA (1980-2004) & Secretary General of the Organisation of

the Islamic Conference Research Centre)   

 

‘We have none of Uthman’s Mushafs’ (manuscripts)   

‘Nor do we have any of the copies from those Mushafs’   

‘These Mushafs date from the later ‘Umayyad period’


Dr. Tayyar Altıkulaç: (Leading scholar in Qur’anic studies, Ex-president of Turkish religious affairs, deputy in the Turkish parliament)   

‘No serious scholarly work has been done on them’   

‘These Mushafs date from the early – mid 8th cent.’   

‘They are not Uthmanic, nor copies sent by him’   

‘The Topkapi has 2,270 consonantal differences’   

22% of the Qur’an is missing


The SAMMARQAND MANUSCRIPT (TASHKENT): (EARLY – MID 8TH C.)  

 

Dr. Tayyar Altıkulaç: ‘It is not Uthmanic, as it dates from mid 8th c.’;

Undisciplined spelling   

Different writing styles   

Scribal mistakes   

Copyist mistakes   

Written by someone with little experience   

With later additions (only goes to Sura 43)   that is 66% of the Qur’an is missing


The AL HUSSEINI CAIRO MANUSCRIPT [Located: ‘al-Mashhad al-Husayni’ – Cairo, Egypt] 

 

Dr. Tayyar Altıkulaç:   

‘This is not Uthmanic’  

’It is dated from early to mid 8th century’  

 

The PARIS PETROPOLITANUS – (Early 8th c.)  

Francois Deroche (Deroche 2009:172-177):    

Corrections to the text  

Disagrees with the Caireen Mushaf in 93 places   

“Five different copyists”    

“Later modified with erasures and additions”   

74% of the Qur’an is missing

 

The MA’IL MANUSCRIPT (2165 MS, British Library) (Late 8thCentury [790 AD]) 

Written in an early Hijazi Script, Dated to the late 8thc.

Only goes up to Sura 43, thus it is not complete 

25% of the Qur’an is missing

 

The SANA’A MANUSCRIPT (Located in Sana’a, Yemen; Late 7th – Early 8th Century)  

 

Dr. Gerd Puin (1981-Present):  

“Oldest parchments & papers of any Qur’anic Manuscript.” 

Yet, more than half of the text is ambiguous letters which need diacritical marks for understanding.

Adding vowels helped correct mistakes.

It includes orthographical changes found in geographical tradition schools.  

Many deviations are not mentioned in later literature. 

 

SANA’A PALIMPSESTS (writing under the text):

Using Ultra-Violet light, we find a ‘Qur’anic’ script written and washed below that of the existing script (‘Script Defecto’). This

is the first evidence we have of an evolution in the Qur’anic text in one manuscript.

 

QUR’ANIC CONCLUSIONS

Western Scholars (Deroche, Böwering, Conrad, Peters, Stein, Shoemaker, etc…) conclude that the earliest Mushaf’s begin to appear in the 8th c.

Muslim Scholars (Prof. Dr. Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu & Dr. Tayyar Altıkulaç) conclude that the earliest Mushaf’s begin to appear in the

8th c.

‘Islamic Awareness’ (IA) concludes there are no Uthmanic Mushafs, and that all the early Mushafs date from the 8th c., or later


Since there are NO COMPLETE MANUSCRIPTS:-

The Qur'an is NOT ETERNAL! (Despite Sura 85:22)

It was NOT COMPLETE in 650 AD (despite al Bukhari Vol.6:509510)

The Qur’an HAS CHANGED since 650 AD (despite the 1984 Ibn Fahd canon)

Thus, Muhammad had little to do with the Qur’an!  


SO, WHO THEN CREATED THE QUR’AN?!!

If at all any of our Muslim friends do respond to this, take note they will change the topic and point to the Bible and miss the point been made. As a Christian we do not claim the bible is Eternal, without error or complete. Yet Islam make these claims about the Quran, we have simple accepted the Islamic tradition and chains of narration, while access was denied to the source material as noted above. Thus one must keep in mind one error, one contradiction, one change or one word missing by Quranic standards proves Islam to be false.


 

Thus it is extremely important for the Christian community to be ready to handle the influx of Muslim into the Christian culture in the coming years, in an honest understanding of their background, needs and proper discipleship into the Kingdom.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 Hi and thank you for the links offered. Having read these two discussion my question is this.

 

To believe the Quran is un-created means that it pre-existed creation and was therefore with Allah in eternity passed and therefore will always exist in the future with Allah.

Thus following 9:6 of the Quran allahas word is the Quran, this then by implication means we have two untreated begins the Quran and Allah.

Thus Allah has a partner or His word which is the Quran.

Now the Islamic teaching is Allah has no partners. 25:2 & 17:111

 

Thus we have two choices:

The Quran is un-created and Allah therefore has a partner = Shirk

The Quran is created and Allah has no partners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

gentle giant, on 13 Apr 2017 - 16:13, said:

Hi and thank you for the links offered. Having read these two discussion my question is this.

 

To believe the Quran is un-created means that it pre-existed creation and was therefore with Allah in eternity passed and therefore will always exist in the future with Allah.

Thus following 9:6 of the Quran allahas word is the Quran, this then by implication means we have two untreated begins the Quran and Allah.

Thus Allah has a partner or His word which is the Quran.

Now the Islamic teaching is Allah has no partners. 25:2 & 17:111

 

Thus we have two choices:

The Quran is un-created and Allah therefore has a partner = Shirk

The Quran is created and Allah has no partners.

"kalam Allah" is kalam Allah ... it's a feature of his "thaat" which can be translated with approximation to "physical features" which we have no idea about, because of our limited capabilities, except what he did said about himself swbhanuh wa ta'ala without simulation or imagination.

 

The feature "created" is non-applicable on "Kalam" which can be translated with approximation to "speech". Some questions are misleading, For example if I asked "has your mom got out of Jail?" the answer will never be either Yes nor No.

 

The same question can be asked about your god(s); the speech of the god (the father) to the god (the son) and vise versa ..for example "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." or "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" was these speeches created or non-created?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then what is the difference in the Qur'an being the uncreated word of Allah and Jesus being the uncreated word of God in the Bible? Why is it shirk when Christians claim (as the Bible says) Jesus is word of God but not shirk for you? Do you consider if God is divine then His word being an intrinsic "part" of God is also divine? If not why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"kalam Allah" is kalam Allah ... it's a feature of his "thaat" which can be translated with approximation to "physical features" which we have no idea about, because of our limited capabilities, except what he did said about himself swbhanuh wa ta'ala without simulation or imagination.

 

The feature "created" is non-applicable on "Kalam" which can be translated with approximation to "speech". Some questions are misleading, For example if I asked "has your mom got out of Jail?" the answer will never be either Yes nor No.

 

The same question can be asked about your god(s); the speech of the god (the father) to the god (the son) and vise versa ..for example "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." or "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" was these speeches created or non-created?!

 

This is typical Islamic gymnastic- 

 

You said the Quran was un created  - now you say the question is misleading - What dribble & Taqiyya.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T

 

You said the Quran was un created 

 

where did I said so?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then what is the difference in the Qur'an being the uncreated word of Allah and Jesus being the uncreated word of God in the Bible? Why is it shirk when Christians claim (as the Bible says) Jesus is word of God but not shirk for you? Do you consider if God is divine then His word being an intrinsic "part" of God is also divine? If not why not?

 

Essa ibn Maryam is made into being by the word of Allah "be" just like many other things in universe. Every thing in this universe is made into being initially and lastly by the well of Allah and the word of Allah. you guys have it in the beginning of creation  in the OT Allah said " let be a light" ...."let be a...." and it is..... done.

 

The difference between some things and others is the intermediate (earthly) reasons which happens also by the well, laws and permission of Allah. For example to get a son, Allah set the law that a man have to get into a woman,  and then if what should happen by the laws of Allah happens they will have a son.  although, the well of Allah is present in every stage of the process, while some may think that they did it. Some other things, Allah just did it without any earthly reason or whomever intervention. just like the creation of earth and sun, also the great prophet Essa ibn Maryam is created directly by the word of god "be" out of the earthly laws. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Essa ibn Maryam is made into being by the word of Allah "be" just like many other things in universe. Every thing in this universe is made into being initially and lastly by the well of Allah and the word of Allah. you guys have it in the beginning of creation  in the OT Allah said " let be a light" ...."let be a...." and it is..... done.

 

The difference between some things and others is the intermediate (earthly) reasons which happens also by the well, laws and permission of Allah. For example to get a son, Allah set the law that a man have to get into a woman,  and then if what should happen by the laws of Allah happens they will have a son.  although, the well of Allah is present in every stage of the process, while some may think that they did it. Some other things, Allah just did it without any earthly reason or whomever intervention. just like the creation of earth and sun, also the great prophet Essa ibn Maryam is created directly by the word of god "be" out of the earthly laws. 

Ah yes, but you are obviously seeing it from your Islamic perspective. To understand what Jesus taught about Himself you need to read the gospels. You are mistaking the physical man Jesus as a creation of God. The Bible teaches and Jesus Himself confirms that He existed with God BEFORE creation. Jesus IS the word by which God brought everything into creation. As the WORD Jesus is eternal. That's also clear in the Bible. As a matter of interest why do you believe the human Jesus was created through a virgin birth? What reason can you give for the Qur'ans apparent misinterpretation of Jesus as the Son?

 

John 1New International Version (NIV)

 

The Word Became Flesh

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 4 In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

 

6 There was a man sent from God whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. 8 He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

 

9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

 

14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

 

15 (John testified concerning him. He cried out, saying, “This is the one I spoke about when I said, ‘He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.’”) 16 Out of his fullness we have all received grace in place of grace already given. 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

where did I said so?!

Absolute truth said it in post #2. Do you disagree with him then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute truth said it in post #2. Do you disagree with him then?

I don't dis-agree nor agree, i never thought about the issue. for me what I said is what I believe in Kalam Allah is Kalam Allah ...  that's it, I won't go further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, What reason can you give for the Qur'ans apparent misinterpretation of Jesus as the Son?

 

n.

apparently, to remind the Jews who gone too far in materialistic life that I'm (Allah) the one who set reasons and can stop every reason any time I like. To reduce their materialistic view of the life and reasons worshiping; to have some spiritual relation and go back nearer to Allah.

 

You, tell us some more proofs that Jews has gone so far in their materialistism before Jesus.

 

BTW, the authenticity of the bible is very questionable. who wrote it, what is their relation to Jesus, where are the original languages manuscripts, who translate it between three four languages. It have many different translations. it changes every couple of years. the bible your dad's had is different than yours and much different than the 18th, 15th, 12th, 4th centuries ones. you may need to read the introduction of the 1970s NIV which conclude that there are grave mistakes in the bibles before it. Generations from the time of Nicea cree tell the 15th century has been raised without bibles and the next-generation s tell the 2000s with grave mistakes ones.....and more is coming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

apparently, to remind the Jews who gone too far in materialistic life that I'm (Allah) the one who set reasons and can stop every reason any time I like. To reduce their materialistic view of the life and reasons worshiping; to have some spiritual relation and go back nearer to Allah.

You, tell us some more proofs that Jews has gone so far in their materialistism before Jesus.

BTW, the authenticity of the bible is very questionable. who wrote it, what is their relation to Jesus, where are the original languages manuscripts, who translate it between three four languages. It have many different translations. it changes every couple of years. the bible your dad's had is different than yours and much different than the 18th, 15th, 12th, 4th centuries ones. you may need to read the introduction of the 1970s NIV which conclude that there are grave mistakes in the bibles before it. Generations from the time of Nicea cree tell the 15th century has been raised without bibles and the next-generation s tell the 2000s with grave mistakes ones.....and more is coming.

Not quite sure I get your meaning here. Remind the Jews of what?? Materialism? What has that to do with Jesus as the Son? I was asking why the Qur'an misrepresents Jesus as Son, implying as it does a physical relationship. I'm sure you know the suras I refer to. The Jews never took Jesus as Gods son, they never believed Him to be a prophet either. They never took anyone as Gods son.. Not even Ezra.

 

You introduce a straw man with your BTW remarks on the Bibles authenticity. Is that to serve as a deflection? But anyway.. There is only ONE Bible, there are many translations (as there are of the Qur'an also) translations may differ as to language and syntax but no where does it effect the core Bible message. Grave mistakes .. Not. That remains consistant because, and this is the really simple bit... None can change Gods words. :) language changes and evolves Gods message remains consistant. The Qur'ans message is not the same as the Bibles neither is it consistant with it. I think you are confused about the Bible and compare it to the Qur'an.. Not possible, by nature they are not the same, the Qur'an does not have the breath and scope of the Bible. As the Bible is clear on the point that God is unchanging I'm not sure where that leaves you.

 

Blessings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

what I meant is that, Jews were very strict in following the mere solid lows. They don't care about mercy, love and spirituals. for example, if Allah asked them to rest on Saturdays, does it mean not to help others or cure sick people?! that what they did they stick to the materialistic low and forget about spirituals.

 

Now, the god changed the earthly laws by allowing the virgin to be pregnant and the infant to talk in wisdom and defend his mom. that should retrieve the spirituals in their hearts. 

that's the Islamic view why the Jews didn't accuse Mary with adultery, her son speech and defend. 

 

 

No

. There is only ONE Bible,

 

Blessings

 

where is it? in what language? how it was found?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what I meant is that, Jews were very strict in following the mere solid lows. They don't care about mercy, love and spirituals. for example, if Allah asked them to rest on Saturdays, does it mean not to help others or cure sick people?! that what they did they stick to the materialistic low and forget about spirituals.

I can relate to this to some extent. The Jews of Jesus' time (Pharisees) did put too much of their faith in the law, believing if they followed the law to the letter that they would be made righteous. However, God meant the law to be the means by which man was convicted of sin, a means to reveal mans sinful nature and need for redemption. No one can follow the law perfectly. God knew that and that's why Jesus came to fulfil the law. Through Him we are made righteous. It was Gods plan from the beginning and beautiful in its fruition and execution.

 

Now, the god changed the earthly laws by allowing the virgin to be pregnant and the infant to talk in wisdom and defend his mom. that should retrieve the spirituals in their hearts. 

that's the Islamic view why the Jews didn't accuse Mary with adultery, her son speech and defend. 

 

As you say it's the Islamic version. Why would God need to "change" the natural law he set in place to allow the birth of Jesus? The Qur'an confirms the virgin birth but shows no understanding of why it was necessary. You are left with scholars interpretations like it was to show Gods miraculous powers.. Like creation itself wasn't testimony enough! Unlike the Bible... It gives clear reason why Jesus was to be born of woman and not created like Adam was created. Do you know where the original story of Jesus talking in the cradle came from? It's from the Infancy Gospel of Thomas.. A 2nd century Arabic apocryphal fable from Egypt. It had no provenance or connection to any of the Gospel / New Testament writers so it was never included in the Bible canon. Same goes for the story of Jesus with the clay birds.. How is it that these fables from the minds of men find their way into the Qur'an?

 

 

where is it? in what language? how it was found?

 

 

 

Apologies, that was a rather misleading statement of mine. The Bible was never One book from its inception, it's very nature would not allow for that. It is a collection of books revealed over a period of over 2000 years by 40 various authors who bore no relation to each other, in 3 different languages, Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek. These facts alone stand testimony about its truth, authenticity and divine inspiration. Because it's just not possible for a work of this magnitude, depth and breadth to exist without divine intervention. All Bible translations we have today stem from the manuscripts in existence, even if the originals have perished with age there is no reason to assume that the copies that were made were truth and faithful to the original autographs. You can't prove otherwise. A Christian will never be swayed by faulty Islamic reasoning as to the corruptions of the Bible texts, as in the hundreds of years you've been trying you've never been able to prove diddley. The Bible stands as it always has .. A testimony to Gods truth.

 

Blessings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I  Why would God need to "change" the natural law he set in place to allow the birth of Jesus? The Qur'an confirms the virgin birth but shows no understanding of why it was necessary. 

Blessings

So,

which is more un-usual in your opinion to stop the physical laws for one time to remind people that the laws are in the hands of god (BTW, he did it many times by specialy punishing the people of Lot, allowing the donkey to stop some prophet, sending the spirit to the Babylonian people and making them speak in different languages......) 

 

or  Luke 1:35New International Version (NIV)  35 , “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[a] the Son of God.

and the father god (who kept describing himself as not a man nor like a man) gets his first born god to be insulted, tortured, humulated , forsaken by his bosom friends and his father and finally assassinated by plan of his father.......although he can simply forgive every one without forsaken and killing innocent god/man

 

which is less unusual?!

 

 

 

Apologies, that was a rather misleading statement of mine. The Bible was never One book from its inception, i

 

Blessings

 

in your opinion which would be more comfortable to you, to have the bible of Jesus that he breached with and talked about in his tongue language [MAT 26-13 Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”] or to be as you were, are and will be?! struggling to find pieces of manuscripts that are written by un-knowns here or there?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So,

which is more un-usual in your opinion to stop the physical laws for one time to remind people that the laws are in the hands of god (BTW, he did it many times by specialy punishing the people of Lot, allowing the donkey to stop some prophet, sending the spirit to the Babylonian people and making them speak in different languages......) 

 

or  Luke 1:35New International Version (NIV)  35 , “The Holy Spirit will come on you,[/size] [/size]and the power of the Most High[/size] [/size]will overshadow you. So the holy one[/size] [/size]to be born will be called[/size][a][/size] [/size]the Son of God.[/size]

and the father god (who kept describing himself as not a man nor like a man) gets his first born god to be insulted, tortured, humulated , forsaken by his bosom friends and his father and finally assassinated by plan of his father.......although he can simply forgive every one without forsaken and killing innocent god/man

 

which is less unusual?!

Less unusual? Or more acceptable? Firstly God stopping the physical law in the case of the virgin birth, serves little purpose as a reminder of Gods power. Every believer is in no doubt as to Gods power. God didn't bless certain prophets with miracles as a sign of His power, but as a sign they were sent by Him. It would have a greater effect if God had chosen to create Jesus as a fully grown man in the manner of Adam. But YHWH God of the Bible is not a God of party tricks and pleasing the will of man. His ways are above our ways and nothing is done without reason. The Bible gives the reason why Jesus had to be virgin born. The Qur'an leaves you to ponder on it and invent your own reason.

 

Assassinated by the plan of His father? My goodness what are you talking about! Do you understand the concept of personal sacrifice? Example, as a parent I would willing die for me child if I had to, because my love for my child is so strong. Do you believe Gods love for us His children is any less than human love? How can that be.. Gods divine love can only be greater than the love we show each other, as God is perfect so His love must be perfect. Jesus' offering Himself up to death is the greatest act of agape love shown by God to mankind. The very fact Jesus was innocent or sinless is crucial to His mission.

 

It's your Islamic belief that God simply forgives any sin, just like that repent and you shall be forgiven. Which is all very nice and cosy but YHWH sets a standard on His divine Holiness, which is only right and proper. YHWH's holiness demands a penalty for sin against His person. YHWH is a God sized God, your Allah of the Qur'an does not place any value on His holiness. I know which makes logical sense to me.

 

in your opinion which would be more comfortable to you, to have the bible of Jesus that he breached with and talked about in his tongue language [MAT 26-13 Truly I tell you, wherever this gospel is preached throughout the world, what she has done will also be told, in memory of her.”[/size]] or to be as you were, are and will be?! struggling to find pieces of manuscripts that are written by un-knowns here or there?!

By Bible I think you mean Gospel. So where is it then? This Gospel Injil Jesus was entrusted with? Not a trace of it exists, what kind of prophet would that make Jesus if He was given a gospel and it disappeared without trace within a generation of His earthly death? Only in Islam is this belief that Jesus was given a gospel. It never was so, Jesus IS the gospel, Jesus is not the messenger He IS the message. The message does not write of itself others write of it. Ergo we have the Gospels.. True accounts of the life, teachings, death and resurrection of Jesus. We have thousands of Greek manuscripts the original language they were written in which show the Gospel translations we have today are the same message we were meant to have. So what do I prefer... There is only one Gospel truth and that's found in the Bible. Jesus or His teachings are not in the Qur'an, they are found in the Gospels. Maybe you should read them. ;)

 

Blessings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

L

Assassinated by the plan of His father? My goodness what are you talking about! Do you understand the concept of personal sacrifice? Example, as a parent I would willing die for me child if I had to, because my love for my child is so strong. . ;)

 

Blessings

Then, what do you say about the father who kills his son to be himself safe? or to choose to kill, betray and forsake his son to be insulted and killed, and not use his authority to forgive?

 

here is an example, let me know what do you think.....

if you have have a son (we will not get in the point that you were hiding your son and, non have any idea about him) and punch of dogs in your house, and as known you are a very merciful lady. now, these stupid dogs are missing around and don't obey you. ......... you promised to punish the bad dogs and reward the good ones, guess what, lately, you got a better plan ......! you decided to kill your son, not even that, you decided to submit him to the bad dogs to kill him for you, not satisfied yet!!, those dogs have to insult him, kick his body, spit in his face, make him naked, torture him, let's say they did every stupid action thay can do to this little innocent son ..........etc(I'm not sure why the plan should contain this torture, wasn't honored killing enough?!!). before killing him. Guess what, your little young son, is crying and switting blood all the night for you to help him. guess what, you didn't even reply him back. ........... at last minutes of his life he was screaming and charging you that you did forsake him, you are betrayed him...... your are a betrayal lady, as your son named you.

 

now, your mercy goes some more further, you had a new plan......."whomever believe that you killed your son for the dogs, he will be safe, and whomever not he will end up to the hill fire and the melting sulfur" .......... including those who never see, nor hear from those who see, they came 1000s of years after and 1000s of miles away from the place

 

(that seems real mercy, isn't it?!)

 

I have a suggested plan for this lady, she have to repeat the previous logic and merciful plan, now a days and ask for the presence of all media means, she have to allow the broadcasting and video recording of all the procedures ( capturing, to insult him, kick his body, spit in his face, make him naked, torturing .......... etc. before killing him) once again to be witnessed by everyone. now no one have any excuse and deserve to be melted if he didn't believe.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

L.

YHWH's holiness demands a penalty for sin against His person. YHWH is a God sized God, ;)

 

Blessings

 

from this perspective, i can say that, the son killing is not enough, then. since the father is in higher rank than the son, he is #1. you guys have to say father, son and spirit. If someone said son, spirit and father, he will be charged of doing a big mistake.

 

then again I have another suggestion, the father have to kill (put and supervise the killing plan) of not only the son, but the mother and the spirit as well. I believe that may satisfy his holiness. I would go further and suggest the killing of every form god incarnated into,  Melchizedek, the three persons met Ibrahim and the tree, god Vishnu in Hidu, and mother caw, as well......

 

I'm trying to size the god more than you for more holiness!! is that OK or his holiness deserves only the son?!

 

one more question for you, is it OK for god to be incarnated in a caw? and why?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tunisia, on 20 Apr 2017 - 23:14, said:

L

We have thousands of Greek manuscripts the original language ;)

 

Blessings

1- is Jesus original language is Greek?

2-do you know that, not two of these manuscripts for the same chapter are identical? they are different?

3- which version among those, translators adopted? sure, not the one that satisfies their and their kings desires !!!

4- do you know that one of the oldest and completest manuscripts is the Sainitacus codex; almost written just after Nicaea Cree (clearly, to document the bible accepted in this political summit not any others)... has subjected to 4 big series of correction, as the explorer of it said?! corrections occur after every big political change (guess why?!) one of them occurred in the 7th century (guess why?!) (sure, it has no relation to the appearance of the prophet of Islam who came in the beginning of 7th century, opening of Sinai and Egypt 641!!!

 

sadly, that what they have done to your original book.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then, what do you say about the father who kills his son to be himself safe? or to choose to kill, betray and forsake his son to be insulted and killed, and not use his authority to forgive?

here is an example, let me know what do you think.....

if you have have a son (we will not get in the point that you were hiding your son and, non have any idea about him) and punch of dogs in your house, and as known you are a very merciful lady. now, these stupid dogs are missing around and don't obey you. ......... you promised to punish the bad dogs and reward the good ones, guess what, lately, you got a better plan ......! you decided to kill your son, not even that, you decided to submit him to the bad dogs to kill him for you, not satisfied yet!!, those dogs have to insult him, kick his body, spit in his face, make him naked, torture him, let's say they did every stupid action thay can do to this little innocent son ..........etc(I'm not sure why the plan should contain this torture, wasn't honored killing enough?!!). before killing him. Guess what, your little young son, is crying and switting blood all the night for you to help him. guess what, you didn't even reply him back. ........... at last minutes of his life he was screaming and charging you that you did forsake him, you are betrayed him...... your are a betrayal lady, as your son named you.

now, your mercy goes some more further, you had a new plan......."whomever believe that you killed your son for the dogs, he will be safe, and whomever not he will end up to the hill fire and the melting sulfur" .......... including those who never see, nor hear from those who see, they came 1000s of years after and 1000s of miles away from the place

(that seems real mercy, isn't it?!)

I have a suggested plan for this lady, she have to repeat the previous logic and merciful plan, now a days and ask for the presence of all media means, she have to allow the broadcasting and video recording of all the procedures ( capturing, to insult him, kick his body, spit in his face, make him naked, torturing .......... etc. before killing him) once again to be witnessed by everyone. now no one have any excuse and deserve to be melted if he didn't believe.....

I'm sorry I don't understand your reasoning in your post. You are trying to compare Gods will with mankind's will. Surely you know Gods ways are not our ways and to compare Gods actions by our own is doing God a great miss service. It was the Jesus Himself who used the following words, when addressing a man called Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews,

 

‘And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life’ (John 3:14-15).

 

Jesus used a story from the Old Testament concerning a bronze serpent lifted up on a pole as a means of life to dying israelites, who had been bitten by poisonous snakes, which were sent by God as a judgment upon their sin. The Lord was telling Nicodemus, who knew the story very well, that He too must be ‘lifted up’ upon a cross, to ensure the gift of salvation and eternal life to all who believe in Him.

 

The crucifixion happened because it was in the plan of God. This is what the apostle Peter preached, sometime after the event, to a Jewish audience, “Men of israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did through Him in your midst, as you yourselves also know— Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it” (Acts 2:22-24).

 

The crucifixion was not only in the will of God but the reason why God purposed that Jesus should die, are found in these words from the Bible; ‘He (Jesus) has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself’ (Hebrews 9:26). LJesus was on the cross to deal with the problem of sin and satisfy divine justice. God is holy, that means He is absolutely pure and separate from sin. The nature of God sets the standard of His justice; He is unerringly, unchangingly and uncompromisingly righteous. He did not make man to become a sinner. The glory of humanity’s creation was their God given ability to reflect the nature of God and represent Him uniquely in this world. In man and woman, originally created, there was a perfect dignity, majesty and beauty along with the ability to enjoy relationship with God. Man chose to sin. Should God have forgotten, ignored or compromised with Adam’s rebellion? Natural and legal justice today does none of these things. Breaking, entering and stealing someone else’s property is universally wrong. Murder is a crime against all humanity. God said to Adam, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:16-17). Death was the sentence pronounced and death was the sentence passed upon mankind (Romans 5:12).

 

You may belive this is unfair the fact that ‘death passed upon all men’ because the first man sinned. Howevef, we must remember that God holds us accountable for our own sin, not Adam’s. God’s answer to man’s plight was to provide one who could be his saviour and substitute. Out of His ‘mercy’ and because of His ‘great love’, God sent His Son to sacrifice His life for us. Therefore on the cross the Jesus was answering to God for sin, and bearing in Himself the totality of God’s judgment against sin – ‘For He [God] made Him [Christ] who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him’ (2 Corinthians 5:21). At the end of His experience the Lord Jesus said in triumph, ‘It is finished!’ (John 19:30). He satisfied God’s justice. On the third day after His crucifixion, God raised His Son from death to demonstrate His satisfaction. What else is needed? It started with Jesus it ended with Jesus. No need for further prophets to come with a different message. God does not change His mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from this perspective, i can say that, the son killing is not enough, then. since the father is in higher rank than the son, he is #1. you guys have to say father, son and spirit. If someone said son, spirit and father, he will be charged of doing a big mistake.

 

then again I have another suggestion, the father have to kill (put and supervise the killing plan) of not only the son, but the mother and the spirit as well. I believe that may satisfy his holiness. I would go further and suggest the killing of every form god incarnated into,  Melchizedek, the three persons met Ibrahim and the tree, god Vishnu in Hidu, and mother caw, as well......

 

I'm trying to size the god more than you for more holiness!! is that OK or his holiness deserves only the son?!

 

one more question for you, is it OK for god to be incarnated in a caw? and why?!

You're doing it again, trying to measure a infinite God by his finite creation .. Us. It won't work. And what do you mean by mother and the spirit? And what is a caw please?

 

Thanks ... blessings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1- is Jesus original language is Greek?

2-do you know that, not two of these manuscripts for the same chapter are identical? they are different?

3- which version among those, translators adopted? sure, not the one that satisfies their and their kings desires !!!

4- do you know that one of the oldest and completest manuscripts is the Sainitacus codex; almost written just after Nicaea Cree (clearly, to document the bible accepted in this political summit not any others)... has subjected to 4 big series of correction, as the explorer of it said?! corrections occur after every big political change (guess why?!) one of them occurred in the 7th century (guess why?!) (sure, it has no relation to the appearance of the prophet of Islam who came in the beginning of 7th century, opening of Sinai and Egypt 641!!!

sadly, that what they have done to your original book.....

1. Jesus language was Hebrew and Aramaic I belief. He probably also know koine Greek as it was a language in use at the time. Although why that is important, I'm not sure.

 

2. How different? Give your evidence of which manuscript differs from which and do these differences make any difference to the core message.

 

3. You mean which manuscripts were used for the Bible canon? Kings desires? Are you referring to King James?

 

4. Yes, I know what manuscripts exist. It's open knowledge for Christians. I can categorically say with some certainty the Bible canon was not altered because of the birth of your prophet. Your prophet was not considered a prophet by the majority of Jews or Christians, they probably did not believe the message he brought had any impact what so ever on Bible scripture. That's just wishful thinking on your part. There is proof (Dead Sea Scrolls) that the Bible we have today is the same in content that existed centuries before Muhammad.

 

If you think you'll sway me to your way of thinking trying to disprove the Bible it won't work. :) but I don't mind if you try.

 

Blessings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Jesus language was Hebrew and Aramaic I belief. 

 

Blessings

 

you mentioned earlier that you have the original languages (Greek) manuscripts, which is wrong, since you just mentioned that Jesus language which he spoke and transfer his original message with was Aramaic/Hebrew. Now here is a question, why Christian have nothing (zero) written in the original language? do you think Jesus' followers including the 12 disciples were illustrate? or what they did write wasn't accepted by the new comers to Christianity from Greek, so they destroyed it?

 

Now, what you have is the accepted/translated version to the Greek people.  which is mostly conveyed to them by Paul (previously known as Shawel) and his followers like Luke. Paul story and biography is mentioned and supported only by him!!, we didn't receive the opinion of the real disciple opinion about him (except what he claimed himself). He claimed that he converted through a miracle (BTW, he repeated the same story in three contradictory ways, in three different places in the bible). He mentioned that he had a dispute with Bernabus, and he was punished for that by the disciples. as a conclusion, you follow the Paulian version of Christianity which he founded and spread out in the Greek towns (and not Palestinian) as the writer of the "the most influential 100 persons in history". let me complete to you, Paulian Greek version of Christianity was in contradiction with the original Palestinian version. the stronger people who are supported by the Greek and later by the Roman political and military forces oppressed and get ride of the others along with their manuscripts. 

 

    

1. 

 

2. How different? Give your evidence of which manuscript differs from which and do these differences make any difference to the core message.

 

Blessings

 

    How different, we are taking here about the Greek version of Christianity which has gone fare in magnifying and explaining the position of Jesus from generation to other. as an evidence, the very first manuscripts didn't contain the verses that talk about three witnesses, the miracles of the bishops, the adulterer woman ........ all of these modifications were added later to justify the new developed belief. plz refer to "Misquoting Jesus" by B. Ehrman

 

 

1. 

 There is proof (Dead Sea Scrolls) that the Bible we have today is the same in content that existed centuries before Muhammad.

Blessings

    

I believe, You mean the Jews OT, only?! But nothing about the NT!!!

would you plz tell me, what the  (Dead Sea Scrolls) tell about the crucified god? those people lived at the time of Jesus and continued 40 years after him tell 71AD. what did they say about Jesus (other than teacher of light)? and why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you mentioned earlier that you have the original languages (Greek) manuscripts, which is wrong, since you just mentioned that Jesus language which he spoke and transfer his original message with was Aramaic/Hebrew. Now here is a question, why Christian have nothing (zero) written in the original language? do you think Jesus' followers including the 12 disciples were illustrate? or what they did write wasn't accepted by the new comers to Christianity from Greek, so they destroyed it?

We have, manuscripts in koine Greek. Jesus never wrote any Gospel because He Himself is the Gospel. There was never any Injil such as you believe, if there were there would be evidence of its existence. There is no such evidence however, there are thousands of Greek manuscripts. The language of the New Testament. In addition to the manuscripts in the original languages, Bibles have also been translated into Greek, Aramaic, Coptic, Armenian, Gothic and Ethiopian all before the birth of Mohammad, these translations confirm both the Hebrew OT and Greek NT manuscripts. The translations make it impossible for the Bible to be changed after Mohammad, because the scriptures were widespread even before Mohammad was born.

 

We have ~

 

1. The Septuagint (Greek), which 250 B.C.

2. Three versions of the New Testament and one of the Old into Syriac. Of these, two are of especial value. The first of these is called the Curetonian, from the name of the discoverer of the ancient MS. which contains it. This version was made at latest in the second century after Christ: the MS.1 was written in the fifth century. The second is the Peshiþþå, made at latest in the third century: the oldest MS. of it which we have was written in the fifth century. Even the third, or Philoxenian version, was made long before Muhammad's time, in 508 A.D.

3. Three Coptic versions: the Buøairic , made in the second or third century; the Sahidic, and the Bashmuric or Middle Egyptian, both probably of the same date. The oldest Coptic MSS. belong to the fourth or fifth century. These three Coptic versions are in the three chief dialects of ancient Egypt.

4. Two Latin versions; one the Old Latin, made in the second century. We have MSS. of its remains which date from the fourth and fifth centuries. The other is the Vulgate, a more correct translation made by Jerome A.D. 383-5. He translated the Old Testament from the Hebrew, whereas the Old Latin was translated from the Greek version. The oldest MS. of the Vulgate was written before A.D. 5464.

5. The Ancient Armenian, made by Mesrob and published in A.D. 436.

6. The Gothic, made by Ulphilas, who died A.D. 381. The MSS.2 of it date from the end of the fifth to the middle of the sixth century.

7. The Ethiopic, made by Frumentius in the fourth century .

8. Several Aramaic versions of the Old Testament made by Jews in the second and third centuries.

 

So when it comes to evidence for the Bible and Muslim claims of its unreliability or corruption we have plenty for proof of its truth and you have nothing except conjecture and supposition against it. Except of course for your burning need to prove the Bible wrong because it brings a different message to the Qur'an, and both can't be true when it comes to the core message.

 

Now, what you have is the accepted/translated version to the Greek people.  which is mostly conveyed to them by Paul (previously known as Shawel) and his followers like Luke. Paul story and biography is mentioned and supported only by him!!, we didn't receive the opinion of the real disciple opinion about him (except what he claimed himself). He claimed that he converted through a miracle (BTW, he repeated the same story in three contradictory ways, in three different places in the bible). He mentioned that he had a dispute with Bernabus, and he was punished for that by the disciples. as a conclusion, you follow the Paulian version of Christianity which he founded and spread out in the Greek towns (and not Palestinian) as the writer of the "the most influential 100 persons in history". let me complete to you, Paulian Greek version of Christianity was in contradiction with the original Palestinian version. the stronger people who are supported by the Greek and later by the Roman political and military forces oppressed and get ride of the others along with their manuscripts. 

 

Muslims are always very anti Paul, mainly because you don't understand his mission. He was chosen by the Christ to take the Gospel to the Gentiles. There is no contradiction in the story of his calling, just your misinterpretation. BTW I find it ironic that Muslims scoff at the fact Paul claimed to to be converted by a spirit (Jesus) whilst at the same time believing that Muhammed received his revelation from a spirit claiming to be the Angel Gabriel! Paul was transformed for the better by the encounter, so I don't know why the doubt on your part.

 

 

 

  How different, we are taking here about the Greek version of Christianity which has gone fare in magnifying and explaining the position of Jesus from generation to other. as an evidence, the very first manuscripts didn't contain the verses that talk about three witnesses, the miracles of the bishops, the adulterer woman ........ all of these modifications were added later to justify the new developed belief. plz refer to "Misquoting Jesus" by B. Ehrman

 

 Oh Mr Erhman.. And I should take the opinion of an atheist on scripture because? None of the interpolations (which all Christendom knows about) change the core message of the gospels.

 

    

I believe, You mean the Jews OT, only?! But nothing about the NT!!!

I said the Bible did I not? However, the Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in the New Testament, so it is kind of relevant.

 

would you plz tell me, what the  (Dead Sea Scrolls) tell about the crucified god? those people lived at the time of Jesus and continued 40 years after him tell 71AD. what did they say about Jesus (other than teacher of light)? and why?

The Book of Isaiah. It's full of messianic prophecies and is intact in the Dead Sea Scrolls. I understand Isaiah is not mentioned as a prophet in the Qur'an, this I find rather strange given the fact he was a major prophet. Do you want verses? If so showing what aspect?

 

Blessings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×