• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Koran v. Bible

Desfox

Member
The Koran does not perfectly represent the original, Muslim scholars are unable to take the stance that the Bible is corrupted, and the Koran in not more theologically unified then the Bible.

For these reasons, the accusation that the Bible has been corrupted and standards that set the Koran higher must be ignored when comparing both books. They have to be treated minimally as equals in terms of historical accuracy and authenticity.
 

McBell

Resident Sourpuss
The Koran does not perfectly represent the original,
The original what?

Muslim scholars are unable to take the stance that the Bible is corrupted,
Really?
Based on what?
Now since the currently accepted 66 books of the holy Bible are corruptions of the originals...

and the Koran in not more theologically unified then the Bible.
define "theologically unified"...

For these reasons, the accusation that the Bible has been corrupted and standards that set the Koran higher must be ignored when comparing both books. They have to be treated minimally as equals in terms of historical accuracy and authenticity.
Really?
Says who?
 

Desfox

Member
-The original Koran as in the revelations spoken by Muhammad as revealed by Allah

-Muslim scholars can't (or I could say shouldn't) due to the teachings of the Koran which explicitly say that the previous revelations (the Old and New Testament) are still divine and unchanged and contain Allah's words, of which no mistake can be found. To do so would contradict the Koran, and thus Allah. Muslims cannot do this.

-Theologically unified as in the teachings of the Koran do not contradict each other in any way and combine together in a coherent and consistent manner. I find many Muslims telling me the Bible does not contain this characteristic.

-You got me, thats my own little statement I made to express the view that I want to argue with Muslims on grounds where their primary source can be taken just a seriously as mine. It is an opinion supported by the above arguments.
 

Vultar

Active Member
So everyone agrees then. the world is 5805 years old and flat...

Does the Koran state that too?
 

Desfox

Member
So everyone agrees then. the world is 5805 years old and flat...

Does the Koran state that too?

Sorry, the Bible does not state the earth is flat, and young earth view is widely debated among the Christian community (so you are right there, people don't agree)

Ummm... I don't know if the Koran states that explicitly (I don't think it says the earth is flat, not sure about age), but the Bible doesn't say that earth is flat, and does not explicitly state that the earth is around 6,000 years old. So the point is moot

Could you make it more clear to me what the core of that statement was? What was you general argument, or do you have more evidence?
 

F0uad

Well-Known Member
The original Koran as in the revelations spoken by Muhammad as revealed by Allah

Yeah and Memorized by over 1000 people and written down according to historical evidence, we cannot find anything from the 1st century even mentioning Jesus(p).

-Muslim scholars can't (or I could say shouldn't) due to the teachings of the Koran which explicitly say that the previous revelations (the Old and New Testament) are still divine and unchanged and contain Allah's words, of which no mistake can be found. To do so would contradict the Koran, and thus Allah. Muslims cannot do this.

Wrong, it doesn't say its ''Unchanged'' it says it is ''CHANGED'' and it wouldn't contradict false statements again, there are many Islamic scholars/debaters who ''refuted'' the bible from A to Z.

-Theologically unified as in the teachings of the Koran do not contradict each other in any way and combine together in a coherent and consistent manner. I find many Muslims telling me the Bible does not contain this characteristic.

I agree?

-You got me, thats my own little statement I made to express the view that I want to argue with Muslims on grounds where their primary source can be taken just a seriously as mine. It is an opinion supported by the above arguments.

Question what do you belief that the bible is the dictated words of god, inspired writings, eye-witness testimony? You have to pick one, two or all of them to even ''start'' this kind of debate.
 

F0uad

Well-Known Member
Sorry, the Bible does not state the earth is flat, and young earth view is widely debated among the Christian community (so you are right there, people don't agree)

Ummm... I don't know if the Koran states that explicitly (I don't think it says the earth is flat, not sure about age), but the Bible doesn't say that earth is flat, and does not explicitly state that the earth is around 6,000 years old. So the point is moot

Could you make it more clear to me what the core of that statement was? What was you general argument, or do you have more evidence?

The Quran does not say that the Earth is Flat:

A hadith about Mohammed(saws): "we have people standing on the other side of the world (under our feet), and all humans are actually standing on the side of the earth not on its top or back."


And the Quran itself tell us its Round or spherical i am not sure which one and i am to tired to look it up :eek:
 

Desfox

Member
The Quran does not say that the Earth is Flat:

A hadith about Mohammed(saws): "we have people standing on the other side of the world (under our feet), and all humans are actually standing on the side of the earth not on its top or back."


And the Quran itself tell us its Round or spherical i am not sure which one and i am to tired to look it up :eek:

I believe, but most people don't accept "round" as proof that the people believed the earth was not flat.

But if the Hadith says it, then that point is mostly moot.

The conflict comes from many verses in the Bible saying the earth is round, and arguments whether that can be interpreted as a flat or spherical earth, due to the fact that ancient Hebrew does not have a word for "sphere" thus this word could describe a ball or describe a 2d circle.

The arguments get much more specific, but with my limited research I don't see any clear winner.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
The conflict comes from many verses in the Bible saying the earth is round, ...
There are none - zero - of which I am aware.

..., and arguments whether that can be interpreted as a flat or spherical earth, due to the fact that ancient Hebrew does not have a word for "sphere" thus this word could describe a ball or describe a 2d circle.
No, that is simply what you would wish the argument to be. The argument is whether there is any reason (other than embarrassment) to coerce the the term to mean sphere.

The arguments get much more specific, but with my limited research I don't see any clear winner.
You may wish to consult the Septuagint.
 

Desfox

Member
Yeah and Memorized by over 1000 people and written down according to historical evidence, we cannot find anything from the 1st century even mentioning Jesus(p).
Well my evidence comes from what i understand to be a respected and revered companion of the Prophet, Zayd ibn Thabit, and another respected Muslim scholar who lived during this time Imam Zuhri (born 50 H.)

Zuhri reports, 'We have heard that many Qur'an passages were revealed but that those who had memorised them fell in the Yemama fighting. Those passages had not been written down, and following the deaths of those who knew them, were no longer known;"
-This is a clear statement the entire portions of the Koran have been simply lost.

aid b. Thabit says “The Prophet died and the Qur’an had not been assembled into a single place.”
Another statement demonstrating that the compiling of the Koran did not happen until after the Prhophet.

Zaid b. Thabit then record that
'Hudaifa b. al Yeman came to `Uthman direct from the Aderbaijan and Armenian frontier where, uniting the forces from Iraq and those from Syria, he had had an opportunity to observe regional differences over the Qur'an. "Commander of the faithful," he advised, "take this umma in hand before they differ about the Book like Christians and Jews."

When they had copied the sheets, `Uthman sent a copy to each of the main centers of the empire with the command that all other Qur'an materials, whether in single sheet form, or in whole volumes, WERE TO BE BURNED
This is what lead to the single codification of the Koran,
however, there where problems and discrepancies with this text in comparison to other versions.

Uthman’s text omitted chapters and verses that the other texts included:

According to Ibn Umar and Aisha, Muhammad’s wife, one chapter, Surah al-Ahzab [33] had 200 verses in Muhammad’s time. Yet, once Uthman was finished only 73 verses remained, eliminating nearly 140 verses. This tradition is also confirmed by Ubay b. Kabb. (True Guidance, p. 61– citing Al-Suyuti’s al-Itqan fii ulum al-Qur'an on nasikh wa mansukh and Darwaza’s al-Qur'an Al-Majid)


So in summary, respected Muslim scholars who lived during and shortly after Muhammad's death recored confusion in the texts and the loss of Koranic verses/surahs.

Wrong, it doesn't say its ''Unchanged'' it says it is ''CHANGED'' and it wouldn't contradict false statements again, there are many Islamic scholars/debaters who ''refuted'' the bible from A to Z.

Sahih International
[2:89]And when there came to them a Book from Allah confirming that which was with them - although before they used to pray for victory against those who disbelieved - but [then] when there came to them that which they recognized, they disbelieved in it; so the curse of Allah will be upon the disbelievers.

This Surah says that the Book from Allah confirms that which was with them.

[2:101] Now that a messenger from GOD has come to them,* and even though he proves and confirms their own scripture, some followers of the scripture (Jews, Christians, and Muslims) disregard GOD's scripture behind their backs, as if they never had any scripture.

This Surah says that a messenger from God (Muhammad) proves and confirms their own scriptures, and goes further to say that some disregard GOD's scripture by ignoring what they already had.

I have 14 other verses that use same phrasings and wordings that all mean the same thing.
-Sura 2:97 -Sura 2:42 -Sura 3:81 -Sura 4:47 -Sura 5:47 -Sura 5:48 -Sura 6:92 -Sura 10:37 -Sura 10:94 -Sura 12:111 -Sura 35:31 -Sura 37:37 -Sura 46:12 -Sura 46:30

Sura 10:64 says "Theirs are good tidings in the life of the world and in the Hereafter - There is no changing the Words of Allah - that is the Supreme Triumph. "

This verse states that there is no changing the Words of Allah.

The point of this is that all these verses state that the Koran confirms the previous scriptures that the Jews and Christians already have. If one makes the claim that they were already corrupted at this point, the Koran is now stating that these books are still the words of Allah and the truth. Allah cannot be confirming corrupted books.
Furthermore, the Koran states that the words of Allah cannot be changed. This would apply to all of his revelations, not just the Koran, but also both Testaments.



I agree?



Question what do you belief that the bible is the dictated words of god, inspired writings, eye-witness testimony? You have to pick one, two or all of them to even ''start'' this kind of debate.

I believe the Bible is inspired by God.
 

Harmonious

Well-Known Member
...due to the fact that ancient Hebrew does not have a word for "sphere" thus this word could describe a ball or describe a 2d circle.
Actually, it does.

And, oddly enough, the word is Sefira.

Even if I was inclined to agree with your argument, it would help to get your facts straight before you present your arguments.
 

Harmonious

Well-Known Member
Interesting. I'd appreciate a reference to its use in the Torah. Thanks.
I don't know that it is there. But the fact is that the word DOES exist in Hebrew, and is used in Kaballah. There are either 7 or 10, depending on how they are counted and for what purpose.

Jews keeping count of the Omer are also counting, Sefira, whereby we mention at least seven Sefirot: Chesed, G'vurot, Tiferet, Netzach, Hod, Yesod, and Malchut. This is made mention to in Oral Law, and I wouldn't know where to look. But I know that it is in Hebrew, if not Aramaic.
 

Dirty Penguin

Master Of Ceremony
The Koran does not perfectly represent the original

What original would that be??



Muslim scholars are unable to take the stance that the Bible is corrupted
I can with a simple web search....(PLEASE..!!!!)


and the Koran in not more theologically unified then the Bible.
Who cares.....The BIBLE in itself is not theologically unified. It's without a doubt the four gospels aren't consistent with each other.



For these reasons
Which are baseless...:rolleyes:



the accusation that the Bible has been corrupted and standards that set the Koran higher must be ignored when comparing both books.
Wrong. There is a nice list of bible interpolations. We're not talking about translation issues...we're talking about scribes intentionally inserting verses where they're not supposed to be when examined against an older manuscript.



They have to be treated minimally as equals in terms of historical accuracy and authenticity.
No they don't. Neither of them should be used as history books.
 
Last edited:

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
I don't know that it is there. But the fact is that the word DOES exist in Hebrew, and is used in Kaballah.
Actually...
sefira

Categories: Lag BaOmer

One of the customs during the period known as sefirat ha'omer - ספירת העומר - is not to get a haircut - להסתפר - l'histaper. Is there an etymological connection between the two terms that share the same three letters in their root - ספר?

Jastrow believes that they do, while Klein maintains that they do not. Let's look at various Hebrew words with the root ספר SFR - and see where from where they derive:
  1. Throughout the Bible, the root ספר means "to count, number, to recount, tell, narrate". From this root come such basic words as sefer - book, sofer - scribe, mispar - number and sippur - story. Jastrow explains the development of the word as "to cut, to mark, -> to write, to count". We'll see the significance of that order in the following paragraphs. Klein however gives a different explanation. He writes that sefer comes from the Akkadian shipru, meaning letter, which in turn comes from shaparu, meaning "to send." This Semitic root is related to the Arabic word safar - journey, which later gave the Swahili word safari.
  2. As I mentioned before, the root ספר can also mean "to cut". Tisporet תספורת - haircut, and misparaim מספריים - scissors are derivatives. Naturally, this fits in rather well with Jastrow's theory above, but Klein says it is related to the word shafra(h) - meaning "large knife, blade of a sword" (he doesn't say which Semitic language.)
  3. The word sfar in Hebrew means border, frontier. Jastrow connects it with the previous terms by pointing out that a boundary is marked. (However, he also includes a definition of צפירה as "border", and certainly the tsade and samech could have switched place over time.) Klein says it is related to the Akkadian supuru, meaning "wall, fence" and the Aramaic ספרא meaning "shore".
  4. The kabbalistic term "sefira" (meaning "the ten creative divine forces") does not derive from Hebrew, but rather from the Greek sphaira, meaning "ball, globe", and besides giving the English word sphere, is also the second element of such words as atmosphere and stratosphere.
  5. In English the noun "super" usually refers to a superintendent of an apartment building, but in Hebrew the noun סופר - super indicates a supermarket.
  6. Lastly, the English words cipher and zero derive from from an Arabic root - safira - meaning "void" or "empty". From here it would appear that there is no connection from that root to an existing Hebrew word, but maybe one of the readers here has an idea?
[source]
It has nothing to do with Torah or Biblical Hebrew.
 

F0uad

Well-Known Member
Note: removed your text its to big to fit.

You didn't even reply on my message you simply
copied/pasted some articles together :facepalm:

A false statement he reported that some companions died in battle (around 450 citing Ibn Kathir's Al-Bidaya Wa al-Nibaya, Chapter on battle of Yamam) so not all of them remember there were over 10,000 companions in Mecca alone. You forget to mention that after some companions died they were already writing things down before, next time mention the reference of the hadith.


Wrong the ''Compiling'' was not
complete but Abu Bakr was already compiling the things he needed to, we never said that the entire Quran was compiled in the time of Mohammed(saws) but after he died when Abu Bakr with the committee of companions was done compiling Uthman copied and standardised Abu Bakr's Quran with the committee and removed all other ones that were out there.

Yes the Quran was revealed in
seven harfs and its mentioned over and over so just a little face-palm :facepalm: that you didn't take a little time to even search things up before claiming things.

Here is some information regarding the harfs and some hadiths mentioning it:


Site


Yes the Quran was standardized 20Years after Mohammed(saws) great for agreeing. Where the bible was standardized by some Romans who never met Jesus(p) in the first place and 200/300 years after him.. I would prefer the first choice
.

This reference to the
Itqan is untraceable as no edition of it is in less than two volumes to my knowledge.

The above refers to a famous saying of Ibn `Umar, once again deceptively/ignorantly mistranslated so as to mislead readers to think it means other than its actual meaning.
The words used by Ibn `Umar for the terms given as "acquired," "disappeared," and "what has survived" above were -- I am quoting from memory -- respectively "ahattu" (I have encompassed), "faatahu" (escapes him), and "ma tayassara minhu" (whatever amount of it has been facilitated).

The actual meaning of Ibn `Umar's words is:

"Let no one say: I have encompassed the whole of the Qur'an [= its meanings]. How does he know what all of it is when much of the Qur'an escapes him? Rather, let him say: I have encompassed whatever amount of it has been facilitated [for me to know]."

Ibn `Umar was famous for his strictness in refraining from interpreting the Qur'an, even criticizing Ibn `Abbas's interpretive zeal in the beginning, then accepting its authority. He was not referring to the collection of the Qur'an! But only to the ethics of the exegete, in the same line as Ibn `Abbas's saying narrated by al-Tabari and cited by al-Suyuti and al-Zarkashi: "There are ambiguous verses in the Qur'an which no one knows besides Allah. Whoever claims that he knows them, is a liar."
So, Quran is complete, perfect, error free and this is proven in every way.


You made that summary by coping some text? Great Job :areyoucra

These days argument is that the Quran affirms the authenticity, and authority of the Bible. They claim that Muslims should not attack the Bible's authority nor authenticity, because to do so would be acting against the Quran which supposedly affirms the present day Bible held by the Christians and Jews. :sleep:

Ibn 'Abbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!"


Abdullah bin Abbas was the son of Abbas, the uncle of Muhammad, thus Ibn Abbas was Muhammad's cousin and also the cousin of Ali bin Abi Talib.
He was born in Mecca three years before Muhammad fled to Madinah (619 A.D.) and was about 13 years old when Muhammad died.
Ibn Abbas grew up as a Muslim and had a good relationship with his cousin Muhammad the prophet of Islam. He memorized a great number of hadiths at that time.
One of the stories told about him states that Muhammad prayed for him: "Allah, give him wisdom, and teach him the interpretation (of the Qur'an)." Then Muhammad looked at him and said: "You are a good Qur'an interpreter."
After Muhammad's death he was considered one of the highest authorities in interpretation of the Qur'an and narration of correct hadiths. He has been called Baher ("sea"), because of his wide knowledge about Islam, and was also called Heber al-Ummah ("the scholar of the Ummah").

Surah 3:78:
There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!

Surah 5:46:
And in there footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.


Notice the Quran says that a Gospel was given to Jesus, so we know from the Quran that Jesus had a Gospel with him, in fact the Bible even testifies to this in Matthew 4:23, Mark 16:15, Luke 9:6 if i am correct..

So as you can see, Jesus was given a Gospel, however so WHERE IS THIS GOSPEL TODAY? What we have today is not a Gospel but GospelS, we do not have the Gospel of Jesus, rather we have the Gospel of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John! Hence the Christians have invented their own books with their hands and claim that these books that were written by men such as Mark and Matthew are from God! Yet we know they are not from God, and we know they are a corrupted distorted version of the true Gospel which was the Gospel of Jesus. The four Gospels we have today were written after Jesus, which were based on many false interpretations and guess-work, which was then written down in ink, and then many claimed that these Gospels were from God.

I challenge You to show me where the Quran says we revealed The old-testament, 4 Gospels, or specifically the Gospel of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John. You will NEVER be able to meet this challenge; all you will find in the Quran is the affirmation of the GOSPEL OF JESUS which we don't have today.

Can you explain what you mean by inspired?
 
Last edited:

F0uad

Well-Known Member
Conclusion:

All the companions agreed according to the Hadiths that Uthman's standardised Quran is the same as that what was revealed so in the end that is all what matter to us. Can you say the same or do you have anything from the 1st century that talks about Jesus(p)?
 

1robin

Christian/Baptist
Conclusion:

All the companions agreed according to the Hadiths that Uthman's standardised Quran is the same as that what was revealed so in the end that is all what matter to us. Can you say the same or do you have anything from the 1st century that talks about Jesus(p)?
F0uad I have been meaning to ask you what books, ie....Hadith, Sira, Ta’rikh etc.... Are exceptable to you and why? Are your standards consistent with Islam in general? I find it frustrating when muslims reject this book or that or this part of this one and that part of that one, without them telling me so and/or why upfront. I decided to get it out of the way first.
 
Top