The Holy Gospel did not evolve!

Larry wrote: Hasan,    You are the one who brought up the "Santa Claus thingy," so don't act like that I am trying to "divert" attention from other things.    And yes, the Bible was written by 66 different authors, you seem to think that because the Qur'an was "written" by one person, that that is what makes it the "true" holy text. But there are no source materials for the Qur'an because any previous writings and sources that were in it prior to Uthman's "standardized" copy were completely destroyed by Muslim authorities, which made authenticating the text impossible.    The Bible has a coherent form, that moves from the beginning to the end that is logical, historically accurate (There are many ancient sources that back up the Bible's historical writings), contains extensive geneaologies of Old Testament Patriarchs and prophets, etc. The amazing thing about the Bible is that with 66 different writers the form, cohesiveness and linear structure, along with a high degree of accuracy and agreement between the different writers is remarkable.    The Qur'an has no logical form or commentary, it is simply put together by using the lengths of the various "chapters" to determine its form and it is repetitive, has many discrepancies (one, in particular, the different number of days that God used to create the world), is verbose and the style and content changes from Muhammad's time in Mecca and then later in Medina, and includes in many places, Muhammad, his immmediate family, his allies, his enemies, etc. Why would revelations from God Himself concern Muhammad, his personal life, his actions, family and financial details that say how much money the "prophet" and his family are entitled to from any spoils of war or other "income."    There are also variant copies of the Qur'an, namely, those of Ibn Masud, who does not include Chapters 1, 113 and 114, and Ubay B Ka'ab who has two additional chapters, Surah al-Khal and Surah al-Afd, not found in Uthman's astandardized version.    Sorry, but I simply don't buy it. I am very happy to say that I have complete faith in the Bible and in it's prophecies, histories, geneaologies, poetry, musical forms, and message. Whether or not you accept that is irrelevant to me.    There is an interesting article concerning the contents, histories, stories, form, etc. of the Qur'an at;    http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/quran.htm Larry

Larry,
there is nothing accurate in the Bible, at least that's what we have seen so far through the Biblical quotes we have studied.
Also, what really fascinating is the fact that its contents do not agree within itself. That bring us to the hard reality that if the All Knowing was behind it, it would not have those problems. So the conclusion and only thing left is to admit that humans without divine guidance tempered with it's contents. Since humans are not all knowing and can be inconsistent, only they can be behind Bible's current inaccurate and inconsistent state.
To admit that fact will leave us in the middle of nowhere, and Godless? No, of course not, and don't believe if anyone who tells you that it does.
God is God of truth, who does not compromise on truth.
Admitting that fact will only bring us closer to God, and closer to His pure word, the Final Testament, The Quran, not to mention, bring us our salvation.
We accept it, we benefit from it. If we reject it, we have ourselves to blame for covering up the falsehood and keeping ourselves and others from truth.
Hasan



Edited by honeto - 12 September 2012 at 2:47pm

Assalamu alaika Larry.

Yes indeed, the source of Qur'an meaning to 'read' and to 'compare' is derived from the languages of Jurhum and that spoken in Palestine up to the time the mother of Ishmael left Palestine. Let us learn from the philologists. There are words that are spoken from the neighbouring countries like Muhsanat, Kahanama Iranian word changed to Jahannama, Ra'ina a Hebraic word changed to 'unzurna' etc. I do not speak Hebrew but there are a lot of words that have a common root with Arabic.
All verses starting with prophetic say, are Arabiciseds. The medinan Arabs did not know the meaning of the abbreviated alphabets unlike the Levi clan. So when the alphabets for example  A-L-M were revealed, their leader came to the holy Apostle and said your kingdom is going to last for 41 years for A=30, L=10, M=1 (or in a reverse form). Muhammad did not argue with him.  Understand that whenever the holy Apostle addressed those with Islam before him, they never disputed with him.
Larry! There is inconsistency between what you claim to profess with that in the time of Muhammad. Those Christians and Jews in his time never denied his Message. Now you cannot say today their Torah and Bible were adulterated and that what is with you today is the authentic one. Don't be biased please and use your faculty to understand Allah. Be independent and a slave!
I hope I have answered you. I am waiting for your answer also.

Friendship.

Friendship,

   You did not comment on my post that showed that there are non-Arabic words in the Qur'an. Do you have an answer as to why, since supposedly there is a pure Arabic Qur'an in heaven that is identical to the Qur'an here on earth?

Larry

Hasan,

   You are the one who brought up the "Santa Claus thingy," so don't act like that I am trying to "divert" attention from other things.

   And yes, the Bible was written by 66 different authors, you seem to think that because the Qur'an was "written" by one person, that that is what makes it the "true" holy text. But there are no source materials for the Qur'an because any previous writings and sources that were in it prior to Uthman's "standardized" copy were completely destroyed by Muslim authorities, which made authenticating the text impossible.

   The Bible has a coherent form, that moves from the beginning to the end that is logical, historically accurate (There are many ancient sources that back up the Bible's historical writings), contains extensive geneaologies of Old Testament Patriarchs and prophets, etc. The amazing thing about the Bible is that with 66 different writers the form, cohesiveness and linear structure, along with a high degree of accuracy and agreement between the different writers is remarkable.

   The Qur'an has no logical form or commentary, it is simply put together by using the lengths of the various "chapters" to determine its form and it is repetitive, has many discrepancies (one, in particular, the different number of days that God used to create the world), is verbose and the style and content changes from Muhammad's time in Mecca and then later in Medina, and includes in many places, Muhammad, his immmediate family, his allies, his enemies, etc. Why would revelations from God Himself concern Muhammad, his personal life, his actions, family and financial details that say how much money the "prophet" and his family are entitled to from any spoils of war or other "income."

   There are also variant copies of the Qur'an, namely, those of Ibn Masud, who does not include Chapters 1, 113 and 114, and Ubay B Ka'ab who has two additional chapters, Surah al-Khal and Surah al-Afd, not found in Uthman's astandardized version.

   Sorry, but I simply don't buy it. I am very happy to say that I have complete faith in the Bible and in it's prophecies, histories, geneaologies, poetry, musical forms, and message. Whether or not you accept that is irrelevant to me.

   There is an interesting article concerning the contents, histories, stories, form, etc. of the Qur'an at;

   http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/quran.htm

Larry

Edited by Larry - 12 September 2012 at 2:36am