prove the truth

==========

Delta, you did not try to understand. If your bible is not good then does not matter. I will not use the bible. It is you who will be asked to present the material from the bible. Not from your mind only.

===========

You don't use, it is you and only you, because a lot of muslims like to trace Mohammad's advent by the bible and then they quote a buch of verses from the bible out of context

Delta wrote: minuteman wrote:  By the books is meant the Torah and the Bible Ot and NT and the Quran etc. Same for other religions that they may have their books.  One should not use his mind or try to advocate something which is not in the book of his belief. That will be overdoing it. I had stated that every one should present the good points of their books and not to attack the other faiths. Now I add another one here. No one should try to attack the others faith with something bad that may be present in his own faith too. You're allegations are based in the fact that the QuRan and Bible are compatible, or Islam and Christianity, which they are not. They are the opposites FIRST : Nowhere in the Quran or Hadiths is saying which Bible's verses are trustful So you cannot quote nothing from the Bible

This is a fallacy called a non sequitur. The Quran nor the hadiths do not need to say which verses, specifically, are erroneous, in order for a Muslim to find a verse in the bible that they agree with, and verses they disagree with. Your line of thinking would exclude any work by a secular scholar simply on the grounds that he has no way of knowing from a revelation perspective as to which verses are wrong, so therefore he cannot comment at all.

SECOND : You don't know how to interpret 90% of the Koran without Hadiths.

You imply desparity where it does not exist. The Hadiths themselves contain "unrecited revelation" which are of a sole purpose to particularize generalities where necessary. In other words, there simply is no "problem", just like your "Torah" was never meant to be interpreted on its own, and it always included the "oral traditions" which are what is left of the oral teachings of Moses.

I'm laughing every time some muslim asks : "Please can you put a hadith in these ?" "Please can you put a Hadith in that ?" That's nonsense, illogic

Your laughter is out of ignorance, since you need to show that a problem exists for the Quran due to the relationship between the scope of Prophetic authority and the Quran.

Furthermore, what does "put a hadith in that" mean exactly? Example?

It appears as if you are somehow convinced that you are lobbing daggers into the heart of Muslims, at least your attitude that can be concluded from your contributions says this, but it is in your ignorance that you cannot see that they are simply helium baloons.

Hope this helps.