Bible Corrupted?

[Islamis_Allah_Tashit]

Is the Bible corrupted? And if so, how much is corrupted? The most common answer from Muslims is that there are true parts of the Bible and false parts of the Bible. People changed some verses and added some as well that did not come from Allah.

2:140 Or do ye say that Abraham, Isma'il Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes were Jews or Christians? Say: Do ye know better than Allah. Ah! who is more unjust than those who conceal the testimony they have from Allah. but Allah is not unmindful of what ye do!

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!

Here, it just told us that not only is there corruption, but that it is willful and intentional corruption

3:187 And remember Allah took a covenant from the People of the Book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it; but they threw it away behind their backs, and purchased with it some miserable gain! And vile was the bargain they made!

5:13 But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them,

2:59 But the transgressors changed the word from that which had been given them;

Here, we see that the Bible wasn't completely corrupted, and that much of it is from the true, original book.

Those who follow the Messenger (Mohammed), the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them (7:157 MP).

And when there cometh unto them (Jews) a Scripture (the Qur'an) from Allah, confirming that in their possession (2:89 MP).

So it looks like to me, that some of the Bible was changed and therefore one cannot fully rely on it and only the parts that do not disagree with the Quran are the legitimate parts

So, here's the critical issue. There was no original scripture written in heaven like the Quran claims. All of the past Abrahamic scriptures were narrated stories. None of them were God speaking directly to them in first person like the Quran is. ALL of them are written in third person narrative. So, if the Bible was corrupted, and the good original copy was like the Quran and was God talking directly to us, then that means that the original scriptures were not just corrupted, but every single verse was rewritten to change the entire thing from first person form into third person narrative.

But the Quran doesn't say the entire thing was rewritten, it just says some of the places got corrupted. So this is a major dilemma. And, to make matters worse, we can't find even one shred of Biblical scriptures written in first person form. Even the Dead Sea Scrolls were written in third person narrative. And, the interesting part is that none of these supposed corrupters attempted to call their book the Gospel of Jesus because there never was a Gospel of Jesus. He was not given a book as the Quran claims, and he never wrote one. That wasn't his job. Others simply wrote about him.

Does anybody else see the problem developing? It looks like we have one odd man out, and that's the Quran. The Quran is the fake, and the Bible and Torah are a collection of narrative recollections of events that were supposed to have happened between God and man. There might have been translation problems, some conflicts.....but essentially, it has remained the same. Pretty good for being started around 1500 BC.

It seems as though God really doesn't say very much directly to mankind via writings, but rather takes actions knowing that mankind will write about them. But the Quran is entirely different. This is why I think that it's the Quran that is actually the scam.

Muhammad didn't understand that there wasn't a Gospel of Jesus. Maybe Jesus understood the problem that if he touts himself and writes about himself, then this would be logically self fulfilling and therefore flawed. But if others wrote about him, and made declarations about him, then it would be more legitimate because it is not just the person themselves making the self fulfilling claim (like Muhammad did), but instead would be others making the claim making it more legitimate and less self serving. It's hard to sit there and say "I'm a Prophet" and when people ask you why you tell them "because that's what this book I'm creating says". Doesn't sound right, does it? Not to me. Even if Jesus ended up being fictional, the writers were far more sophisticated in their sense of reasoning than the author of the Quran. Of course Jesus wouldn't say "I am a prophet because I am in this book I am writing". That would be childishly silly. But that's precisely what Muhammad did.
_________________
Somebody get me a hairdryer

[skynightblaze]

[Q8sobieski]

[Mersk]

[Quranandscience]

[Islamis_Allah_Tashit]

[Islamis_Allah_Tashit]

[FreePower]

And don't forget that there were many versions of the Qur’an all of which were burnt by Uthman and standardized into one copy. That is a corrupt book.
_________________
The Meeting House - What convinced me - www.themeetinghouse.ca - Irreligious Christians

“The greatest ignorance is to reject something you know nothing about”

[Quranandscience]

[katlike]

Quranandscience:

[Islamis_Allah_Tashit]

[Islamis_Allah_Tashit]

[reletomp]

[DSingh]

Did those prophecies state a specific time when this "prophet" would arrive? Because the prophet could even be me!
_________________

[Mersk]