New Testament Criticism, Quran Criticism, the Bahai's and their divine inspiration

[InvestigateTruth]

For the umpteenth time, this thread was opened to expose the hypocrisy of the Bahai's who keep making the same lame Tu Quoque. When asked about the Bible, they say "Just like the Quran", that's the hypocrisy. Its a logical fallacy called "Tu Quoque".

Ask again.

When did the Bahais say, "just like the Quran?" This is what you say in your OP.

Bahais already said, according to Bahai Scriptures, the Bible has some inaccuracies whereas the Quran is fully authentic. So, no, they are not exactly same authentic.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

That is already explained in the OP. Ill tell you what. Since you will probably ask this question again, I shall cut and paste it once more. \
\
"That is already explained in the OP"



Is that all you cherry picked from this thread?

 

[firedragon]

When did the Bahais say, "just like the Quran?" This is what you say in your OP.

Bahais already said, according to Bahai Scriptures, the Bible has some inaccuracies whereas the Quran is fully authentic. So, no, they are not exactly same authentic.

But that's not what you said here. And not all Bahais said that. Read through.

So tell me. Why do you think the New Testament, which is not written by a single person who ever met Jesus within the text, claimed by none of the books in it, is the same as the Quran for you to question its authenticity and even go to the length of asking for Muhammeds signature, or that he wrote it himself like a movie, which is a hypocritical position.

Please show me if there anything like that in the NT. Like an Signature of Jesus, or evidence that he himself wrote it. Please provide that, then ask the question about the Chapter Al Fathihah.

Go ahead.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

@firedragon

I believe we need to be fair in our judgement. It is an unfair conclusion, to say, the Quran is word of God, because there are manuscripts dating back to Muhammad, but the Bible is not the Word of God, because there is not a manuscript dating back to Jesus's time.
I am not saying you make this conclusion, but I have seen this is how the mainstream Muslims say. We have to be fair and honest with our own conclusion.


As regards to what Bahai scriptures says about anything, it is open to investigate them. No body says, a non-bahai is to accept them as they are. Bahais welcome any discussion. So, if with all honesty you ever felt there is any untrue statement or mistakes in Bahai scriptures, feel free to discuss. Bahais are open minded.

 

[firedragon]

Bahais already said, according to Bahai Scriptures, the Bible has some inaccuracies whereas the Quran is fully authentic. So, no, they are not exactly same authentic.

It is me who said this to some of the Bahai's. They didnt even know about what the Bahai elders say. Thus, the reason for me to keep repeat some that they are against the Bahai elders themselves.

Strange.

 

[firedragon]

I believe we need to be fair in our judgement. It is an unfair conclusion, to say, the Quran is word of God,

I didnt say that. So this is a strawman. I dont really expect much better.

I believe we need to be fair in our judgement. It is an unfair conclusion, to say, the Quran is word of God, because there are manuscripts dating back to Muhammad,

 

[InvestigateTruth]

But that's not what you said here. And not all Bahais said that. Read through.

So tell me. Why do you think the New Testament, which is not written by a single person who ever met Jesus within the text, claimed by none of the books in it, is the same as the Quran for you to question its authenticity and even go to the length of asking for Muhammeds signature, or that he wrote it himself like a movie, which is a hypocritical position.

Please show me if there anything like that in the NT. Like an Signature of Jesus, or evidence that he himself wrote it. Please provide that, then ask the question about the Chapter Al Fathihah.

Go ahead.

What I mean is, in reality to know if the Quran was authored by Muhammad and the Gospels authored by Jesus, we ultimately need their signatures on them.
But this is not available obviously for both.

 

[firedragon]

As regards to what Bahai scriptures says about anything, it is open to investigate them. No body says, a non-bahai is to accept them as they are. Bahais welcome any discussion. So, if with all honesty you ever felt there is any untrue statement or mistakes in Bahai scriptures, feel free to discuss. Bahais are open minded.

Lol.

I will refrain from this kind of tribalistic rhetoric. It shows your character.

 

[firedragon]

What I mean is, in reality to know if the Quran was authored by Muhammad and the Gospels authored by Jesus, we ultimately need their signatures on them.

Okay. So provide the signatures. Please go ahead. If not with this standard of yours, reject both books.

I would like to see you make that statement.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Okay. So provide the signatures. Please go ahead. If not with this standard of yours, reject both books.

I would like to see you make that statement.

This is not my standard. It is a modern day standard. This is why today, you must sign anything you agree with. For example today When you apply for something, or agree with a document, legally you must sign it. Are you saying this is invalid?

If in the past people just accepted authenticity of Bible or Quran, many of them did that blindly

 

[InvestigateTruth]

This is not my standard. It is a modern day standard. This is why today, you must sign anything you agree with. For example today When you apply for something, or agree with a document, legally you must sign it. Are you saying this is invalid?

If in the past people just accepted authenticity of Bible or Quran, many of them did that blindly

@firedragon

I dont say, I believe that all people accepted authenticity of the Quran or Bible blindly. But most of them did, as they had no proofs.
But I believe there were a number of people who considered the Bible word of God, because after reading it, their own judgement told them, this Book is too complex to be the work of Man, so it must be work of God. Likewise with the Quran. For some believers, its knowledge and complexity was a proof of its divinity. Now, I dont call this reason blind faith.

 

[firedragon]

This is not my standard. It is a modern day standard. This is why today, you must sign anything you agree with. For example today When you apply for something, or agree with a document, legally you must sign it. Are you saying this is invalid?

If in the past people just accepted authenticity of Bible or Quran, many of them did that blindly

Nope. Its your standard that you are setting because you cannot answer simple questions. It is no ones standard and is nonsensical. No one with their right mind would make such a nonsensical ask. No scholar, no one, but someone who does not wish to address a point with reason but defy it by bringing in a new false dilemma.

Thats what you are doing.

1. Palaeographic dating Quran shows that it is dated to Muhammed time with the right Hijazi script and the right Mail.
2. Palaeographic dating of the New Testament manuscripts show that the earliest manuscript is a scrap of 2 to 3 inches called P52 dating to the 2nd century.

Address that point.

1. Internal evidence within the Bible shows that the earliest Gospel, Mark, with its Markan Priority is dated to 30 years after Jesus.
2. Internal evidence within the Quran shows that the whole book was written by one person, one writing style, dating to Muhammeds time.

Address that.

Dont bring some false dilemmas because you simply cannot address any point objectively.

 

[firedragon]

But I believe there were a number of people who considered the Bible word of God,

When?
Which Bible?
Is it with the Epistle of Barnabas and Shepard of Hermas, or the KJV?

 

[InvestigateTruth]

Nope. Its your standard that you are setting because you cannot answer simple questions. It is no ones standard and is nonsensical. No one with their right mind would make such a nonsensical ask. No scholar, no one, but someone who does not wish to address a point with reason but defy it by bringing in a new false dilemma.

Ok, the scholars are not looking for signatures on Quran manuscripts simply because it does not exist. If the signatures was on them, and if they were in the hand writing of Muhammad, we would not ask about their authenticity.

But my question is, how could the scholars find out, with certainly that all verses of the Quran are word for word authored by Muhammad.

Do you know?

Thats what you are doing.

1. Palaeographic dating Quran shows that it is dated to Muhammed time with the right Hijazi script and the right Mail.
2. Palaeographic dating of the New Testament manuscripts show that the earliest manuscript is a scrap of 2 to 3 inches called P52 dating to the 2nd century.

Address that point.

1. Internal evidence within the Bible shows that the earliest Gospel, Mark, with its Markan Priority is dated to 30 years after Jesus.
2. Internal evidence within the Quran shows that the whole book was written by one person, one writing style, dating to Muhammeds time.

Address that.

Dont bring some false dilemmas because you simply cannot address any point objectively.

Your point one and two are fine. The only question I have, is, how did the scholars find out that the whole Quran was authored by one person? I understand that is what the Quran claims, but should we just accept this blindly or look for proofs?

Also, what do you want to conclude from those two points? I am asking clear questions, Lets see what you reply.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

When?
Which Bible?
Is it with the Epistle of Barnabas and Shepard of Hermas, or the KJV?

Does the epistle of Barnabas or Shepard of Hermas claim to be inspired by God, or does it include the Words of Jesus?

I haven't read them. But if you did, please inform me.

When I ask do they claim to be inspired by God, that can include, if the author claims he has received visions or spoke with an angel of the Lord. It does not have to literally say, this Book is inspired by God. Now, consider, Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, sent by God. This means His words and actions are claimed to be Godley.
The Bible collected as a Holy Book, meaning whatever was words of God, visions of prophets, sayings of angels to be included. Anything else, could still have value to understand theology and history but it is not Holy.

.

 

[loverofhumanity]

By saying "Both are word of God" you are honestly condemning the Quran to the level of the Bible.

Anyway, criticism is not making a mockery out of things. Do you think a Christian pastor engaging in bible criticism is making a mockery out of the Bible?

Please, at least do some google searches on it. You have misunderstood.

Quran and the Bible are not the same. Even your Bahai elders say the same. So it seems like you and the Bahai elders are at loggerheads in this matter.

And you are no authority to tell me brother that "I have to be content" with anything.

Peace.

Two things should be mentioned.

Yes, we know that the authenticity of the Quran can be proven and so it is more accurate than the Bible that had many authors. But the second point is that regardless, Christians have been provided with enough divine guidance to enable them to know the truth because God’s Revelations are under His care and protection.

This means that we can refer to the Quran or Bahá’í Writings as an alternative source but it does not mean we are free to criticise the Bible as it is the Word of God though not as authentic as the Quran and Bahá’í Writings.


The Bible is not wholly authentic, and in this respect is not to be compared with the Qur'an, and should be wholly subordinated to the authentic writings of Bahá'u'lláh
. (28 July 1936 to a National Spiritual Assembly)

The Bahá'ís believe that God's Revelation is under His care and protection and that the essence, or essential elements, of what His Manifestations intended to convey has been recorded and preserved in Their Holy Books. However, as the sayings of the ancient Prophets were written down some time later, we cannot categorically state, as we do in the case of the Writings of Bahá'u'lláh, that the words and phrases attributed to Them are Their exact words
(9 August 1984 to an individual believer)