Bible Compared to Quran

[Mansoor_ali]

THE BIBLE[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT]​

Old Testament
There exists today a number of different versions in the ancient Hebrew language of the Jewish Book called the Torah [Law] and this is usually referred to in Christianity as The Old Testament. Naturally, there have been many different translations to a great number of languages over the centuries and one could not expect them to be identical in text or meaning. What we have in English today still remains somewhat similar to large amounts of these older documents.
New Testament
There are also different versions of the Gospel or what is commonly called The New Testament in the Koine Greek language and Latin and these also have many translations to even other langugaes. Even amongst the English translations there are great differences. To mention two very clear differences for example; the Catholic Bible [c. 325 A.D] contains 73 books in total, while the Protestant Bible contains only 66 books, and although the newer (Protestant version) was taken from the Catholic Bible even then these books do not match completely with each other. There is no common denominator for any of the many different versions of the Bible.
Dead Sea Scrolls
There have been a number of scrolls and parchments found in places surrounding what we call the "Holy Land" over the centuries, not the least of which are those often referred to as the "Dead Sea Scrolls" or as they are known to the scholars "Wadi Qumran Scrolls." These were discovered in the last century around 1930 and have been proven to be very ancient and could well be older than any other extant manuscripts. Much of what has been translated from these scrolls is similar to some of the oldest manuscripts, but there are still very important differences worthy of note. We would like to recommend some important reading on this topic at the end of this paper.

THE QURAN[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[/FONT]​

Quran Means "Recitation"
The word "Quran" means "that which is recited; or that which is dictated in memory form." As such, it is not a book, nor is it something that reaches us only in written form. The documentation in writting about the Quran has been preserved in museums thoughout the world, including the Topekopi Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, the museum in Tashkent, Uzbekistan and also in England. Keep in mind also, the Quran is only considered "Quran" while it is in the recitation form, not in the written or the book form. The word for what is written and held in the hand to be read by the eye is called "mus-haf" (meaning script or that which is written down).
Only One Version - Arabic
There are no different versions of the Quran in the Arabic language, only different translations and of course, none of these would be considered to hold the value and authenticity of the original Arabic Recitation. The Quran is divided up into 30 equal parts, called "Juz'" (parts) in the Arabic language. These are learned by Muslims from their very early beginnings as children.
Memorized by Millions - Entirely
The important thing to keep in mind about the Quran is the memorization and transmission of the actual "Rectiation" just as it came to Muhammad, peace be upon him, from the Angel Gabriel and was learned and memorized by his companions and they in turn, passed it down to their followers and continued in this way until we see today, over 10,000,000 (ten million) Muslims who have committed the entire Quran to memory. This is not a small feat. After all, how many other works of literary value have been memorized and passed down through so many generations, in the original language, without a single change in even one sentence?
Each Muslim Has "Quran" Memorized
All Muslims have memorzied a portion of the Quran in the Arabic language, as this is an important part of their daily prayers. Many Muslims have memorized large portions of the Quran from one tenth to one half to all of the entire Quran, and all in the original Arabic language. It should be noted, there are over one and a half billion (1,500,000,000) Muslims worldwide and only about 10% are Arab, all the rest are learing the Quran in Arabic as a second language.
God Speaks in First Person to Mankind in Quran
The Quran contains clear statements from Almighty God (Allah) and it is Him speaking to all of us in the first person. He tells of us our own creation, the creation of all that is the universe and what has happened to those before us and what is to become of us if we do not take heed of the warnings clearly spelled out in His Revelation. He speaks also to Muhammad, peace be upon him, to show that Muhammad, peace be upon him, is not making this up himself and even chastises Muhammad, peace be upon him, for making human assumptions rather than waiting for revelation in matters (ie.; surah At-Tahreem and surah Abasa).
Quran Mentions Itself
The Quran refers to itself as "The Quran" (The Recitation) and mentions that it is to all mankind and jinn (another creation of Allah, similar to humans in that they could make choices as to whether or not they would obey God's Commandments, and they existed before humans).
Quran Describes God's Nature Exactly
The Quran is clear on who God is and who He is not. There is no room left for doubt after reading the Quran in the Arabic languge: God is One. He is the only Creator, Sustainer and Owner of the Universe. He has no partners. He has no relatives; wives, children or offspring. He is not like His creation and He does not need it for His existance, while all the time the creation is totally dependent on Him. His attributes are clearly spelled out as the epitome of each and every one. He is for instance, the All-Knowing; the All-Hearing; the All-Seeing; the All-Forgiving; the All- Loving; the All-Merciful; the Only One God. There is never a contradiction to this found anywhere in the Quran.
Quran Challanges Readers
The Quran makes the clear challange, that if you are in doubt about it - then bring a book like it. Also, to bring ten chapters like it and then finally, to bring one single chapter like it. 1,400 years - and no one has been able to duplicate it's beauty, recitation, miracles and ease of memorization. Another challange for the unbelievers to consider; "If this (Quran) were from other than Allah, you would find within it many contradictions." And yet, another challange offered by Allah in the Quran is for the unbelievers to look around for evidences. Allah says He will show them His signs within themselves and on the farthest horizons.
Scientific Miracles in Quran
The scientific miracles of the Quran could not have been understood at that time, yet today we take for granted the many things included in the revelation of the Quran. Some include mentioning: The formation of embryo in the womb of the mother (surah 98); deep seas partitions; waters that do not mix; clouds and how they make rain and how lightning is caused by ice crystals; formation of the earth's mountains deep underground; orbits of planets and stars and moons - and even the mention of space travel (surah 55:33).

 

[ebia]

The bible and the Koran are not similar sorts of things and don't claim to be the same sort of things (albeit that some Christians try to read the bible in the way Muslims read the Koran).

The bible is not supposed to be the ultimate revelation of God - that role in Christian thinking is Jesus. The bible is a record - inspired by God by written by people, with all the issues that raises - of God's working in the world to put it right. A record that, by telling us what has gone before, equips us to live in continuation and continuity with that, taking the story forward towards it's final fulfillment in the New Heavens and New Earth.

Comparing the bible and the Koran is comparing apples and oranges. That said,
1) some of the claims you make for the Koran can equally be made of the bible
2) the bible looks like that which it claims to be, the Koran (to my mind) does not.
3) The koran's consistancy is artificial, in the sense that it was harmonised from multiple versions after the event. Such was considered for the New Testament and firmly rejected.
4) The issue of translation is a bit of a red herring. Everyone knows that translation is an inherently flawed process - but if the text is to speak to a worldwide people something is necessary. The Christian community goes with the imperfect solution of translation, the Islamic community with the at least equally imperfect solution of trying to get everyone to read it in Arabic. Having spent some time in a non-Arabic speaking Islamic country I have to say that the latter is a heck of a lot more problematic than the former.

 

[Mansoor_ali]

The bible and the Koran are not similar sorts of things and don't claim to be the same sort of things (albeit that some Christians try to read the bible in the way Muslims read the Koran).

Yes there is a big difference between Quran and Bible on different issues e.g;divinity of Christ,crucifixion of Christ etc.But muslims believe that Torah was revealed to prophet Moses as well as Injeel(Gospel) was revealed to Christ.

Quran says in Surah 3:3

He(ALLAH) hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before it, even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.

But we believe in ORIGINAL Torah and Gospel which christians donot have.Even christian's theologians themselves claim that ORIGINAL manuscripts have been lost.

Some parts of Bible are very similar to Quran and some are not.We believe only those parts of Bible which goes hand in hand with Quran.There is some truth in Bible but most parts of Bible have been distorted according to christianity.

The bible is not supposed to be the ultimate revelation of God - that role in Christian thinking is Jesus. The bible is a record - inspired by God by written by people, with all the issues that raises - of God's working in the world to put it right. A record that, by telling us what has gone before, equips us to live in continuation and continuity with that, taking the story forward towards it's final fulfillment in the New Heavens and New Earth.

Do you know that most authors of Bible are UNKNOWN.How can you claim that these unknown authors were "inspired" by God.

Comparing the bible and the Koran is comparing apples and oranges.

Let's see when i will show you how today christians have number of DIFFERENT BIBLES not different translations.

That said,

1) some of the claims you make for the Koran can equally be made of the bible
2) the bible looks like that which it claims to be, the Koran (to my mind) does not.

I will see how?

3) The koran's consistancy is artificial, in the sense that it was harmonised from multiple versions after the event. Such was considered for the New Testament and firmly rejected.

Multiple versions?Explain it.

4) The issue of translation is a bit of a red herring. Everyone knows that translation is an inherently flawed process - but if the text is to speak to a worldwide people something is necessary. The Christian community goes with the imperfect solution of translation, the Islamic community with the at least equally imperfect solution of trying to get everyone to read it in Arabic. Having spent some time in a non-Arabic speaking Islamic country I have to say that the latter is a heck of a lot more problematic than the former.

It is not a matter of different translation but DIFFERENT BIBLES.

 

[Mansoor_ali]

Remaining part of "The Quran and the Bible"



"THREE GRADES OF EVIDENCE
We Muslims have no hesitation in acknowledging that in the Bible, there are three different kinds of witnessing recognizable without any need of specialized training. These are:
1. You will be able to recognize in the Bible what may be described as "The Word of God."
2. You will also be able to discern what can be described as the "Words of a Prophet of God."
3. And you will most readily observe that the bulk of the Bible is the records of eye witnessess or ear witnesses, or people writing from hearsay. As such they are the "Words of a Historian"
You do not have to hunt for examples of these different types of evidences in the Bible. The following quotations will make the position crystal clear:
The FIRST Type:
(a) I will raise them up a prophet . . . and I will put my words in ... and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." (Deuteronomy 18:18)
(b) I even, I am the Lord, and besideme there is no saviour." (Isaiah 43:11)
(c) "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the end of the earth: for I am God, and there is non else." (Isaiah 45:22)
Note the first person pronoun singular (highlighted in green) in the above references, and without any difficulty you will agree that the statements seem to have the sound of being GOD'S WORD.
The SECOND Type:
(a) "Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? . . ." (Matthew 27:46)
(b) "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)
(c) "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." (Mark 10:18).
Even a child will be able to affirm that: Jesus "cried" Jesus "answered" and Jesus "said" are the words of the one to whom they are attributed, i.e. the WORDS OF A PROPHET OF GOD.
The THIRD Type:
"And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he, (JESUS) came, if haply he (JESUS) might find anything thereon: and when he (JESUS) came to it, (Jesus) found nothing but leaves . . ." (Mark 11:13)
The bulk of the Bible is a witnessing of this THIRD kind. These are the words of a third person. Note the underlined pronouns. They are not the Words of God or of His prophet, but the WORDS OF A HISTORIAN.
For the Muslim it is quite easy to distinguish the above types of evidence, because he also has them in his own faith. But of the followers of the different religions, he is the most fortunate in this that his various records are contained in separate Books!
ONE: The first kind ? THE WORD OF GOD ? is found in a Book called The Holy Qur'an.
TWO: The second kind ? THE WORDS OF THE PROPHET OF GOD, (Muhummed, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are recorded in the Books of Tradition called The Hadith.
THREE: Evidence of the third kind abounds in different volume of Islamic history, written by some of high integrity and learning, and others of lesser trustworthiness, but the Muslim advisedly keeps his Books in separate volumes!
The Muslim keeps the above three types of evidence Jealously apart, in their proper gradations of authority. He never equates them. On the other hand, the "Holy Bible" contains a motley type of literature, which composes the embarrassing kind, the sordid, and the obscene ? all under the same cover ? A Christian is forced to concede equal spiritual import and authority to all, and is thus unfortunate in this regard."(Source: Ahmed Deedat, "Is the Bible Gods word» page 4-6)


Christians must realize that the Bible is not one book, but contains 66 different books (for Protestants) and 73 (for Catholics) so it is just a compilation. Easily Muslims can put Quran,hadith,Sira all together in one volume and claim one book, however as Shieh Ahmed Deedat explains we have different volumes in order the reader to know what he actually reads. In the Bible the reader is forced to accept the historian as the word of God, also the word of a Prophet as word of God, totally chaos.

 

[ebia]

Yes there is a big difference between Quran and Bible on different issues e.g;divinity of Christ,crucifixion of Christ etc.But muslims believe that Torah was revealed to prophet Moses as well as Injeel(Gospel) was revealed to Christ.

They are different at a more fundamental level than that. The Koran is a set of supposedly timeless, context free statements. The bible is a set of narratives within an overarching metanarrative, the story of God's involvement with his creation.

Quran says in Surah 3:3
He(ALLAH) hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before it, even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.

But we believe in ORIGINAL Torah and Gospel which christians donot have.Even christian's theologians themselves claim that ORIGINAL manuscripts have been lost.

Of course they have been. They are much older than the Koran, and papyrus (on which most of the NT was originally authored) is very fragile - it doesn't last more than a century or two if it is very carefully looked after. No more than a decade or two at most if it's being used. Only with the invention of paper could texts be preserved and duplicated with ease.

Some parts of Bible are very similar to Quran and some are not.We believe only those parts of Bible which goes hand in hand with Quran.There is some truth in Bible but most parts of Bible have been distorted according to christianity.
[/quote]

You can believe what you like, but unless you can give me some reason for taking it seriously it isn't going to cut much weight. "The Koran says so" isn't going to convince me if I think the Koran looks awfully much more like a book written by one man in the 7th century than an eternal book authored by God.

Do you know that most authors of Bible are UNKNOWN.How can you claim that these unknown authors were "inspired" by God.

I don't need to know the names of the authors. The books were authored from within the community of Israel (the OT) and the community of the Church (the NT). Knowing individual author's names wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

Let's see when i will show you how today christians have number of DIFFERENT BIBLES not different translations.

Feel free, but different bibles is a pretty meaningless term. Different covers? You did mention specifically translation issues, so I dealt with it. At least Christians really can read their bibles, unlike many of the Muslims I met in NWFP who, because Arabic is their 8th language, can recite bits of the Koran but understand very little of it and read none of it.

That said,


I will see how?

The Koran claims to be eternal, but it looks to most dispassionate observers awfully like something written in 7th century Arabia. The Koran is supposed to be divinely authored, but contains - for instance - factual errors about what Christians believe. None of that sort of stuff is a problem for the bible because it's not supposed to be that sort of book - it's supposed to be culturally and chronogically contextual, to bear an human fingerprint, and is acknowledged to have preservation issues.

Multiple versions?Explain it.

In the period immediately after Mohammed's death there were multiple versions of the Koran in circulation. That was solved by fiat - by simply declaring one to be authentic. Christians are prepared to be authentic and live with a degree of ambiguity in our manuscripts, comfortable that God can cope with that.

It is not a matter of different translation but DIFFERENT BIBLES.

See above.

The Muslim keeps the above three types of evidence Jealously apart, in their proper gradations of authority. He never equates them. On the other hand, the "Holy Bible" contains a motley type of literature, which composes the embarrassing kind, the sordid, and the obscene ? all under the same cover ? A Christian is forced to concede equal spiritual import and authority to all, and is thus unfortunate in this regard."

This misses the point. For the Christian the Word of God is Jesus of Nazareth. The bible is not the revelation of God, but the messenger by which we know about that revelation. More akin to Mohammed in Islamic tradition than to the Koran.

If you pick up a novel and say it doesn't look like the phonebook you'll be right, but you won't have proved that the phonebook is better than the novel, just that they are different sorts of things. If you try to judge the novel according to the rules for phonebooks you'll erroneously decide the phonebook is better. If you try to judge the phonebook according to the rules for novels you''ll erroneously decide the novel is better. But any meaningful judgement has to look at each according to the merits of what it is supposed to be and how it is supposed to be used.

Quran Challanges Readers
The Quran makes the clear challange, that if you are in doubt about it - then bring a book like it. Also, to bring ten chapters like it and then finally, to bring one single chapter like it. 1,400 years - and no one has been able to duplicate it's beauty, recitation, miracles and ease of memorization.

Either that's a very subjective notion, or it's complete rubbish because the Koran strikes me as singularly unattracive, and quite frankly as boring as the phonebook mentioned above.

Another challange for the unbelievers to consider; "If this (Quran) were from other than Allah, you would find within it many contradictions

And it does. They are simply declared away by claiming that some bits superceed others. Under such rules contradictions are impossible because they are defined away in a manner that would make the most double-think capable Christian fundamentalist blush.

And yet, another challange offered by Allah in the Quran is for the unbelievers to look around for evidences. Allah says He will show them His signs within themselves and on the farthest horizons.

Funny - he keeps showing me reasons to stick to Jesus and the bible.

Scientific Miracles in Quran
The scientific miracles of the Quran could not have been understood at that time, yet today we take for granted the many things included in the revelation of the Quran. Some include mentioning: The formation of embryo in the womb of the mother (surah 98); deep seas partitions; waters that do not mix; clouds and how they make rain and how lightning is caused by ice crystals; formation of the earth's mountains deep underground; orbits of planets and stars and moons - and even the mention of space travel (surah 55:33).

Sorry, but you can play the same game with the bible. Or any ancient piece of literature. Pulling stuff out of context and reading it loosely one can find this stuff in just about anything.

Each Muslim Has "Quran" Memorized
All Muslims have memorzied a portion of the Quran in the Arabic language, as this is an important part of their daily prayers. Many Muslims have memorized large portions of the Quran from one tenth to one half to all of the entire Quran, and all in the original Arabic language. It should be noted, there are over one and a half billion (1,500,000,000) Muslims worldwide and only about 10% are Arab, all the rest are learing the Quran in Arabic as a second language.

I've spent time in N.W.F.P. - the most Islamic bit of Pakistan - and know first hand:
a. How nominal many muslims are in muslim countries, paying scant attention to prayers, mosque or Koran.
b. How little of the Koran they can actually understand. Yes, some of them can "recite' bits in Arabic (in the sense of make the right phonetic noises" but have absolutely no understanding of what they are saying. And these are people who can genuinely converse in 4 or more other languages. Sorry, but you'll have to do some work before I'm convinced that being able to recite bits of the Koran in Arabic with no understanding is better than being able to read and understand the bible in my own language.

While I have a lot of respect for the Muslims I know, and their faith, the Koran I find deeply uninspiring. I'll stick to Jesus of Nazereth, thanks, and the bible as the primary tool to tell me about him. And, to be honest, I'll take Jesus' picture of New Creation over the Koran's picture of heaven any day.

 

[Mansoor_ali]

Topic:Which Bible ?

There is a violent debate amongst Christians regarding which Bible to use , we would think all the Bibles are the same since they claim each one is by God .


Here we will compare the Bibles the Christians _argue_ about between themselves so we can see what all the rage in the midst of Christians is all about .


We will take the most popular Bibles , the King James Version (K.J.V.), the Revised Standard Version (R.S.V.) , the New International Version (N.I.V.) , the Good News Bible (G.N.B.), and the Living Bible Version (L.B.V.) and contrast verses within these Bibles .



verse Matthew 17:21
----------------------

K.J.V. "Howbeit this kind goes not out but by prayer and fasting

R.S.V. (not included)

N.I.V. (not included)

G.N.B. (not included)

L.B.V. (not included)
==================

verse Mark 9:44
-------------------

K.J.V. "Where their warm dies not, and the fire is not quenched"

R.S.V. (not included)

G.N.B. (not included)

N.I.V. (not included)

L.B.V. (not included)
=================

verse Mark 16:9-20
----------------------

K.J.V. (not omitted )

R.S.V. (omitted in edition 1952 and recently restored with the footnote "not include in the most reliable manuscripts)
====================

verse Luke 9:56
-------------------

K.J.V. "For the son of man is not come to destroy men's live but to save.

R.S.V. (not included)

N.I.V. (not included)

G.N.B. (not included)

L.B.V. (not included)
==================

verse Luke 17:36
---------------------
K.J.V. "Two men shall be in the field, the one shall be taken and the other left"

R.S.V. (not included)

N.I.V. (not included)

G.N.B. (not included)
===================

verse John 5:4
------------------

K.J.V. "For an Angel went down at a certain season into the pool and troubled water. Whosoever then after the troubling of the water stepped in was made of whatsoever disease he had"

R.S.V. (not included)

N.I.V. (not included)

G.N.V. (not included)
===================

verse 1 John 5:7
--------------------

K.J.V. "For there are three that bear witness in Heaven, the Father, and the word and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one"

R.S.V. (not included)

N.I.V. "For there are three that testify; the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood and these three are in agreement."

G.N.B. "There are three witnesses; the Spirit, the Water, and the Blood,

L.B.V. (not included)

=========================

the word "begotten" is not included in verse; [[John 3:16]]
---------------

K.J.V. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son"

R.S.V. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only son"

N.I.V. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only son"

G.N.B. "For God so loved the world so much that he gave his only son"

L.B.V. "For God loved the world so much that he gave his only son"

============================

verse Romans 7:17
---------------------

R.s.V. "I do not understand my own actions"

K.J.V. (not included)

===========================

verse Hebrew 12:8
---------------------

K.J.V. "Then you are bastards, and not sons."

R.S.V. "Then you are illegitimate children and not sons."

G.N.B. "It means you are not real sons, but bastards."

L.B.V. "It means that you are not God's son at all"

=====================

verse Job 13:15
-------------------

K.J.V. "Though he slay me yet I trust him"

R.S.V. "he will slay me, I have no hope"

G.N.B. "I've lost all hope so what if God kills me."

L.B.V. "God may kill me for saying this, in fact I expect him to."

=====================

verse Ezekiel 16:25
-----------------------

K.J.V. "And had opened your feet to every one that passed by."

R.S.V. "Offering yourself to any passer by"

N.I.V. "Offering your body with increasing promiscuity to who passed by"

L.B.I. "You offered your beauty to every man who came by"

D.R.V. "And had prostituted thyself to every one that passes by"
=========================

This is excluding the deadly argument between the Catholics and Protestants who have Bibles that differ even more;

The Catholics have 7 additional Chapters/books called "Deutrocanonicals" their names are; (Tobit, Judith, Esther, The Wisdom of Solomon, Baruch, 1st. Maccabees, and 2nd. Maccabees) .
-------------

a total of 73 Chapters/books within the Catholic Bible

============

The Protestants in the year 1611 AD , removed the Deutrocanonicals from the Bible
--------------

66 Chapters/books within the Protestant Bible .

If the Christians had obeyed the Bible from the start , than all the Christians persecuting Christians would not have occurred and will stop occurring .



" What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it." De 12:32


" Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."Pr 30:6



"For I testify unto every man that hearth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:" Re 22:18



"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Re 22:19


By the Grace of Allah (God in the Arabic Language) , the Holy Qur'an , the Third and Final Warning to humans , has been protected by Allah from change for over 1,400 hundred years .


Every letter is identical to the Original Qur'an sent by God , humans have failed in preserving the Enlightenment given to them , so as a Favor to us from Allah , the Qur'an is preserved for us as can be Witnessed by visiting the Islamic Museum in Cairo Egypt where a original Qur'an is available to see.

 

[Mansoor_ali]

Exposing the New Testament's historical corruption

The Gospel of Mark:
Note: This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!

"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"


So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?


The NIV translation notes: "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20."

Now my concern to this corruption and 'answer-the-problem-away' statement is that what are those so-called "reliable early manuscript(s)" and who are the "ancient witnesses"?

If the "gospel of Mark" was indeed Divine and from GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't have this corruption, that they're admitting above, in it.

I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!
Further regarding this Gospel, we read the following commentary about Mark 16:9-20:
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"



This quote raises a very serious issue here. First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel". Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it. The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying.


Removing Mark 16:9-20 is quite appreciated by me personally (to be quite honest with you), because it prevents people from dying from snake bites. But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains.
We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful. The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc... It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man.


If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16:9-20, then who did? And how can you prove the ownership of the other person?

 

[ebia]

Topic:Which Bible ?

There is a violent debate amongst Christians regarding which Bible to use ,

Um, no there isn't. The vast majority of Christians recognise that all translations are inherently imperfect, though there is some discussion about which translation(s) do the best job.

we would think all the Bibles are the same since they claim each one is by God .

Um, many Christians do not claim that the bible is "from God", but that it is written by men inspired by God. But either way, that applies to the original autographs (which we do not have) - not to any translation into English. If you continue to grossely misrepresent Christian understanding you will come across as either uninterested in the truth or badly misinformed.

Here we will compare the Bibles the Christians _argue_ about between themselves so we can see what all the rage in the midst of Christians is all about .

There is no rage (except amongst a tiny handful of extreme fundamentalists who haven't a leg to stand on).

This is excluding the deadly argument between the Catholics and Protestants who have Bibles that differ even more;

The Catholics have 7 additional Chapters/books called "Deutrocanonicals" their names are; (Tobit, Judith, Esther, The Wisdom of Solomon, Baruch, 1st. Maccabees, and 2nd. Maccabees) .
-------------

a total of 73 Chapters/books within the Catholic Bible

The very word Deuterocanonical recognises the secondary status of these books (it means second canon). Many other denominations also recogise the value of these books while distinguishing them from the main canon (eg Anglicans). Pretty much all denominations recognise that these books have some value yet arent' a good basis for doctine - which is fine, because there is virtually no doctine one would get from these books alone.

Describing it as a deadly argument is, again, a gross distortion. The only people who treat it as such are those who want to use it in their existing rants against Catholism or against Protestantism.

============

The Protestants in the year 1611 AD , removed the Deutrocanonicals from the Bible
--------------

66 Chapters/books within the Protestant Bible .

If the Christians had obeyed the Bible from the start , than all the Christians persecuting Christians would not have occurred and will stop occurring .

Intra-Christian persecution is inexcusable - but has nothing to do with differences in bibles. Intra-Islamic persecution is also inexcusable, as is persecution by Christians of Muslims and vice versa. Yet all have happened. Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

" What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it." De 12:32


" Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."Pr 30:6

None of those help to define what the bible is. If you want to understand why there is disagreement you need to get beyond extremist Catholic or Protestant propaganda - the question really is altogether more subtle than either "Catholics added books" or "Protestants removed books".

"For I testify unto every man that hearth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:" Re 22:18

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Re 22:19

"This book" has to refer to Revelations - the bible was not a book at the time of delivery. Technically it still isn't - it's a library of books, usually bound together in one volume.

By the Grace of Allah (God in the Arabic Language) , the Holy Qur'an , the Third and Final Warning to humans , has been protected by Allah from change for over 1,400 hundred years .

So you say. Of course the historical fact that Muslims had to decide which was the definitive version after Mohammed's death makes that look like an unsubstiatable claim.

Every letter is identical to the Original Qur'an sent by God , humans have failed in preserving the Enlightenment given to them , so as a Favor to us from Allah , the Qur'an is preserved for us as can be Witnessed by visiting the Islamic Museum in Cairo Egypt where a original Qur'an is available to see.

As the thing was verbally delivered, there isn't really an original, is there? What you have is, at best, a post-Mohammed transcript declared to be original by men.

 

[ebia]

Exposing the New Testament's historical corruption

The Gospel of Mark:
Note: This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!

All the gospels are supposed to be "original". Mark may be the oldest, and may have been a source for Matthew and Luke, but each is "original" in so far as each author is supposed to be inspired.

"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"


So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus,

If you mean "The New Testament wasn't written down until 150-300 years after Jesus" this is demonstrably false. The New Testament was written between about AD50 and AD130 (30-100 years after Jesus) with most if not all books written by AD90 (60 years after Jesus).

then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?

We actually don't know for sure who Mark was. We don't need to know.

The NIV translation notes: "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20."

Now my concern to this corruption and 'answer-the-problem-away' statement is that what are those so-called "reliable early manuscript(s)" and who are the "ancient witnesses"?

That information is freely available and accessable but would be beyond the scope of a footnote. Pretending someone is trying to hide something is disingenuous at best.

If the "gospel of Mark" was indeed Divine and from GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't have this corruption, that they're admitting above, in it.

Who are you to tell God how he must work? The Judeo/Christian understanding of God has always been of a God willing to operate in the messy world of fallible people.

This quote raises a very serious issue here. First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel".

You keep raising this red-herring. We don't need to know.

Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it. The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying.

What a load of.... Your source really has no interest in truth, has it.

Removing Mark 16:9-20 is quite appreciated by me personally (to be quite honest with you), because it prevents people from dying from snake bites. But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains.
We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful. The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc... It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man.

Absolutely. A big difference between Christianity and Islam is Christianity's intellectual honesty in acknowledging the involvement of humans, the necessity of such involvement, and the problems it brings. Islam simply pretends it can declare such involvement away and pretend it didn't happen.

If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16:9-20, then who did?

Who cares? It's as relevant as what he had for breakfast.

 

[Hentenza]

Mod Hat On
​

Closing for staff review.​