Conversation with a Muslim: Bible reliability (Part 2)
- skubalonministries
- Jul 1, 2021
- 34 min read
Updated: Jul 17, 2021
Muslim: Wow lol, you managed to overlook (or in one case, misunderstand) ALL of my main arguments. These arguments.
- "Even today there are many people who can read Arabic without any Harakah" - How do you reconcile this?
- "Are you saying that the works they wrote are unreadable? Why would they write it in that case?" - these works are not Quran. They are commentary or biographies or deep dives into specific topics. They are basically books. Why would those people write books in the time of Prophet (s.a.s) using a language with no Harakah if those writings would be unreadable? And if they are unreadable then how do people read them perfectly fine even to this day...
- "How could you know what sound that symbol makes if it's missing a dot? "This" and "thrice"... How can someone ever know what sound "th" makes? Maybe English needs more dots..." - you commented on the first sentence, but somehow ignored the rest??
in that diagram they couldn't even get 1 simple fact right. The most basic and most obvious fact. Remember when I said Uthman (Ra) standardised the Quran? Well he standardized it in his own dialect. The Meccan Quraishi dialect of Hafs. These idiots tried to claim Hafs was a later dialect when actually it was the official language of Mecca, the home of the Prophet (s.a.s) before Prophethood lol."
- okay fair enough I used insults here (which I take back). But if you were in my shoes you would understand why. This diagram made me facepalm so hard. But more to the point. You didn't address the point. Why did they claim the Hafs Quran was a later invention when it was the Dialect of the Prophet (s.a.s)? lmao! Like him and his closest companions spoke Hafs Arabic and most of them memorised in Hafs. What a shocking overlook o_O
"Of course I am ignorant of islam. That's why I asked you to explain it to me" fair enough... I'll leave it with you, if you want to try to address the above points then go for it. Otherwise we can move on to Qira'at which seems to be the next thing you want to talk about. Tbh after all my refutations I didn't think these guys could be seemed credible in anyone's mind lol. But if you want to keep leaning on them we can easily address the issue of Qira'at no problem
Me: The purpose of my sharing those videos is to show you that I can also make claims on the same level as your claims about the Bible. There are people on both sides who can make really good sounding cases. We both have our scholars. I am not educated enough on the issues of the Quran to be able to have a conversation that you would find satisfying, but I did link you to a channel with arabic-speaking former muslims who are experts in this area. You could ask your questions to them and get a meaningful response. I have only a general knowledge about islam so I try to ask you questions instead of making claims. If I ever want to know something about it all I can do is look to other people who have made it their focus in life. Studying my own religion is my focus. This allows me to offer a defense against attacks. I'm not quite as interested in going out of my way to attack others. I know of certain anti-muslim channels that are shameful because all they ever do is attack.
I hope you can also admit that you are not an expert on biblical transmission and that you also must rely on the experts on your side. This whole time I've been trying hard to show you the double standards being applied to these issues. You made some facepalm claims too.
"Even today there are many people who can read Arabic without any Harakah. How do you reconcile this?" I don't. It's beyond my education to be able to speak on this. The Bible is my area of expertise.
"Why would those people write books in the time of Prophet (s.a.s) using a language with no Harakah if those writings would be unreadable?" I have no idea. Sorry but this is beyond my knowledge.
"you commented on the first sentence, but somehow ignored the rest??" I was trying to keep my comments only on things that I can understand and interact with. I was asking you to help me understand these things. That whole paragraph says "One example they gave was missing dots. How could you know what sound that symbol makes if it's missing a dot? "This" and "thrice"... How can someone ever know what sound "th" makes? Maybe English needs more dots..." I must have missed something. I'm not sure what else I could comment on.
"Why did they claim the Hafs Quran was a later invention when it was the Dialect of the Prophet (s.a.s)? lmao! Like him and his closest companions spoke Hafs Arabic and most of them memorised in Hafs. What a shocking overlook o_O" Good question. I have no idea. You should ask them and see if there is an answer. That channel exists for the purpose of talking about those kinds of things. They have Q&A so you could send in your question and see if it stumps them or maybe they have an answer you've never considered before.
Every video I linked was from a different person, so it's not like I'm relying on one scholar or one particular source. They all make points that sound very convincing especially when it comes from a muslim. Could it be that you have listened to muslim teachers who make good sounding points and you go along with it because it sounded good? Is it at all possible that maybe you've been mistaken about any of the things you have believed about the Bible because you got it from someone who didn't necessarily know what they were talking about?
What do you say to the video of Shabir Ally that I shared? He's a respected muslim scholar talking about the different versions of the Quran and how there are textual issues that need to be dealt with. There are muslim scholars talking about textual problems in the transmission of the Quran.
What do you say to the video of Nabeel Qureshi who asks you to look up the information that he mentions? I linked that clip because of your statement "I guarantee they are all 114 chapters btw since I have never seen a Qur'an with a different number of chapters." He gives you information to look and see for yourself.
What do you say to my appeal to your responsibility as a muslim to check the message of the Quran against the injeel which can only be found in the New Testament? We know the Bible today says the same thing it said in muhammad's day. Why would the Quran tell you to check the Bible if the Bible is unreliable? How can you check it if it's corrupted?
The Bible has warnings about people who will come later and teach a new message. It says even if an angel comes and teaches you something new, you are to reject it. Galatians chapter 1 for example. Seeing as there is no evidence whatsoever that the text of Galatians was ever changed or corrupted, how can I reject what it says and embrace a man who received a new message from an angel?
Muslim: I noticed you updated your message after my response. Pretty sneaky..
If I'm being totally honest I don't think its fair for you to be throwing random videos you found especially considering we have established you actually don't understand the topics we have been discussing -_- But let me try to address some of them anyway...
This man claimed Ibn Masud (ra) had a Quran with different chapters than the rest of the Sahaba. He is referring to Ibn Masud's temporary period of disagreeing with the rest of the Sahaba that the last 2 surahs (Falaq and Naas) were a part of the Quran. He eventually agreed that they were. Falaq and Naas are prayers for protection from evil and corruption. He thought they were dua's (invocations) and not actually from Quran. But this was only for a short period of time. The rest of the 112 chapters he agreed on. Notice how the man in the video didn't say 'Ibn Masud disagreed that 2 small chapters were a part of the Quran for a brief period of time'. Rather he made it sound like Ibn Masud (ra) had an entirely different Quran and died on it. This is not research or logic, it is flat out deception.
He also claimed that Ibn Ubayy (ra) had different words in his Quran. I think he may have been referring to this Hadith since he was rejecting that differences are only in Qira'at so it probably wasn't that he was talking about Qira'at. this is the verse in Bukhari "'Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur'an) yet we leave some of what he recites.' Ubai says, 'PI have taken it from the mouth of Allah's Apostle and will not leave for anything whatever." But Allah said "None of Our Revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten but We substitute something better or similar." This is speaking of abrogated versus. Abrogated verses are verses that Allah intentionally removed from the Quran such that even the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.s) did not object to their removal. And we actually don't have any existing abrogated verse today as we should expect. Again, the Hadith says one thing and the man in the video rephrases it to say something else.
https://youtu.be/BwSkDXXpNSI - this guy actually is an idiot. If you watch his 'leaving Islam video' and read the comments you will see why. But regardless he is talking about Qira'at
https://youtu.be/pfoSEu3kLZk - again, Qira'at
https://youtu.be/BwSkDXXpNSI - these guys are idiots... they say because the word has no Haraka the word can have 30 meanings... this goes back to what I said about the fact that Harakah never existed in the time of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.s). So why in the world would these people be writing poems, books, tafsir and so and so if they knew those books were not going to be able to be read... because they dont have Haraka (facepalm ...)
... also it's very strange they claim that a word can have 30 meanings and yet they read it well enough to make a video about it ...
https://youtu.be/F6agQmo5OTc - I dont believe the Muslim ever spoke in this video. In any case it seems like the guys was referring to Qira'at...
Mind you I didn't dig up old manuscripts and look for Scribal errors in those manuscripts, or look for different translations of the Bible from different dialects to suggest difference. I pulled 2 verses from the KJV Bible and suggested they had opposite meanings. Even the Scribal error I pointed out was existing in the current KJV version its not from manuscripts.There is nothing deceptive about that. I chose your book, from a widely accepted version and compared 2 verses in that very book.
None of the video's or arguments you threw at me are even remotely comparable to what I did
Me: "Pretty sneaky" With God as my witness, when I edited my comment you had not replied yet or else I would have left it alone. After I posted it I realized after you would probably object to my angel/demon issue because it's not a solid issue. I removed it so that it wouldn't become an unwanted line of discussion. I would expect you to appreciate that. On my screen I commented over an hour ago and your response is only 5 minutes ago. I will respond to the rest of your comments next time I'm able to, but I wanted to tell you this as soon as I saw your message.
Muslim: fair enough. I just saw some extra stuff in there I hadn't while I was responding. Could be you edited while I was replying
Me: "This man claimed Ibn Masud (ra) had a Quran with different chapters" So now you can say that you have seen a Quran with different chapters. At least I hope you're honest enough to not say anymore that you've never seen it. I give you credit that you will be honest about it.
"He is referring to Ibn Masud's temporary period of disagreeing..." I understand. No reason for me to comment about the rest of this paragraph unless there's something you insist on.
"This is speaking of abrogated versus. Abrogated verses are verses that Allah intentionally removed from the Quran such that even the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.s) did not object to their removal. And we actually don't have any existing abrogated verse today as we should expect." This sounds to me like another reason not to trust the Quran. It sounds like you're "explaining away" a problem just like you accused me of "explaining away" the issues you have with the Bible. All of this sounds like "explaining away". Do you see how your kind of argumentation can be used against you yet? Again, all of this is for the sole reason of showing you that you have double standards.
"this guy actually is an idiot. If you watch his 'leaving Islam video' and read the comments you will see why. But regardless he is talking about Qira'at" This sounds like you are explaining it away.
"they say because the word has no Haraka the word can have 30 meanings" From someone like me who doesn't speak arabic they do seem to know what they're talking about. They make a good sounding case. Are you saying just because someone on my side makes a good sounding case that I shouldn't just go along with it? Are you telling me that I should actually spend the time to do my research and make sure it's correct before I use it against muslims?
I dont believe the Muslim ever spoke in this video. In any case it seems like the guys was referring to Qira'at..." I timestamped it. It's a video about Shabir Ally's comments.
"Mind you I didn't dig up old manuscripts and look for Scribal errors in those manuscripts" I wish you would though. This is what I wanted you to show me. I wanted you to show me manuscript evidence that shows conflicting messages so that you could prove to me that the message has been changed. I wanted you to dig.
"or look for different translations of the Bible from different dialects to suggest difference. I pulled 2 verses from the KJV Bible and suggested they had opposite meanings." You suggested it but didn't prove it. Your interpretation goes against the entire rest of the book. You cannot pull a single verse from the Bible and build your case on it when the rest of the Bible disproves your case. This is what you've done with "Why do you call me good".
"Even the Scribal error I pointed out was existing in the current KJV version its not from manuscripts." If you're talking about the longer ending of Mark it's in the KJV because it was in the manuscripts that the KJV translators used.
"I chose your book, from a widely accepted version and compared 2 verses in that very book." The KJV has been losing popularity over the past 100 years or so. But you're looking at a translation no matter which one you choose unless you are reading it in Greek. If I showed you something in the English Quran and claimed it was a problem you would tell me that's not the actual Quran and I should read it in Arabic to see the true meaning. We don't go this far. Any translation that gets the message across is considered the word of God.
The ESV says: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."
The NIV says: "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."
The KJV says: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."
They are slightly different but they're equally the word of God because both have accurately conveyed the same message. Am I understanding you correctly to say that this is similar to what you've said about the different versions of the Quran? That it's not really different "versions" but different readings?
"None of the video's or arguments you threw at me are even remotely comparable to what I did" What you did was make claims and not even bother linking me anything until we finally got to Codex Sinaiticus. I treated you the way I would like to be treated. I included links to other people who are more educated than me. I had to ask you repeatedly to show me proof that the Bible got too corrupted to know it's original message. I linked experts along with my statements. I'm just a guy in a comment box so I have no authority in your eyes. I tried to show you there are people with doctorates who have very valid things to say about this issue. Why did you never do this for me? Why did you never point me toward a muslim teacher who is knowledgeable about these claims you've made about the Septuagint not being available to Jesus, the claim that He couldn't speak or read Greek, the theories about corruption, or any of your claims?
You came to me making bold claims as if I should take your word for it. You may reject the men I showed you but I did try to show you something other than my own theories and opinions. I am trying and trying to show you that you use double standards. You don't approach the Bible with the same standard that you approach the Quran with.
Muslim: I'm not sure what it is with you but you have a knack for misunderstanding things. When I quote "This man claimed Ibn Masud (ra) had a Quran with different chapters" that does not mean there was a Qur'an with different number of chapters. This all happened before the Quran was even compiled. And Ibn Masud (ra) had the chapters that he disagreed on memorised anyway which means he had the same Quran memorised, it just wasn't compiled yet. My argument against the 'man in the video's' point was to show he poorly phrased his claim. Meaning his claim is wrong. There is no Quran with a different number of Chapters.
I did not explain away Qira'at. I'm happy to discuss it when you are done with the rest of this nonsense. I've already mentioned I am ready to talk about this..
With regard to the video about Harakah and a word having 30 meanings you said "Are you saying just because someone on my side makes a good sounding case that I shouldn't just go along with it? Are you telling me that I should actually spend the time to do my research and make sure it's correct before I use it against muslims?" -- so let me ask you, if I told you Spanish is unreadable, is that something that requires you to research and confirm? They are claiming the language in the time of the Prophet (sas) was unreadable (facepalm). I think it's fair to say that if you are going to make the claim to people that an entire people wrote in an unreadable language then you best do your research first before you make a fool of yourself -_-
So you failed to provide any evidence of a Quran with more or less than 114 chapters... I can show you plenty of Bibles with different number of chapters / verses etc..
With regards to my points on the Bible I feel I need to re-list them and show you they are different to the types of arguments you made.. I will do that in the next post.
When I argued against the Bible I only used contradictions found in a single given version. So you could pick up one official version of the Bible, flip to one page, read a verse, then flip to another page, then read another verse and you see a contradiction (see below). This is not the same as grabbing 2 different books, in 2 different dialects and then claiming there is a contradiction.
“Solomon had [a]forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.” - Kings 4:26
“Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horses,[a] which he kept in the chariot cities and also with him in Jerusalem.” - 2 Chronicles 9:25
— so was it 4000 or 40000?
"Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.”
- 2 Chronicles 36.9“
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.” - 2 Kings 24.8
— So was it 8 or 18?
““Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.” Mark 10:18
““Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”” Matthew 19:17
— I pointed out that objectively this looks like a contradiction
“Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself.” Matthew 27:5
“Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.” Acts 1:18
— So did Judas hang himself or did he fall headlong and his entrails gushed out?
You just bombarded me with a bunch of videos of people either talking about Qira'at (different dialects, again happy to discuss) or some that were claiming ancient arabic is unreadable??? None of what you threw at me is even remotely comparable..
All I am asking is for you to solve the above contradictions in a single compiled and officially published version of the Bible that is the most widely accepted version today. That's all. Not explain conflicts in the ancient past -_-
And the worst part about it for you is that I explained all your (or your youtube friends) arguments away... you can't even explain these few verses away
Me: "I'm not sure what it is with you but you have a knack for misunderstanding things." I'm not the smartest man or the most educated. I feel I have been transparent with you and told you honestly when we're talking about something I am not knowledgeable about. You don't understand even though I've told you many times I only shared those videos in order to show you that we can also make claims. We also have scholars. Even though I have repeatedly told you this, it continues to go over your head. I don't know if you're doing it on purpose or if you also "have a knack for misunderstanding things". Maybe go back and re-read all the times I've told you this.
"When I quote "This man claimed Ibn Masud (ra) had a Quran with different chapters" that does not mean there was a Qur'an with different number of chapters. This all happened before the Quran was even compiled. And Ibn Masud (ra) had the chapters that he disagreed on memorised anyway which means he had the same Quran memorised, it just wasn't compiled yet. My argument against the 'man in the video's' point was to show he poorly phrased his claim. Meaning his claim is wrong. There is no Quran with a different number of Chapters." I understand. You are saying there is no Quran with different chapters. That is an issue for you to have settled in your own mind, and it's for you to know whether it's true or not. It really has no affect on me. I linked it to show you that Christians can also make claims about the Quran. Like I told you many times already. So I understand your answer and we can move along now if you'll allow it.
"I did not explain away Qira'at." I used your terminology against you because you said I explained away the Bible. I'm trying to show you the double standard you have.
"so let me ask you, if I told you Spanish is unreadable, is that something that requires you to research and confirm? They are claiming the language in the time of the Prophet (sas) was unreadable (facepalm)." I have to object here. The way you ask the question I am of course forced to say "no" it wouldn't require me to research for Spanish. But I don't think Spanish is a fair comparison at all. Hebrew would make more sense to use in this case since Hebrew and Arabic are similar for not having vowels. If you ask the same question about Hebrew, then the answer would be "yes" for the average person. I personally wouldn't have to look it up because I already know that Hebrew can have different readings depending on the vowel markings, but I assume you mean to ask would the average person need to research this in order to determine if it were true. The answer is yes because the average person isn't knowledgeable about semitic languages.
"I think it's fair to say that if you are going to make the claim to people that an entire people wrote in an unreadable language then you best do your research first before you make a fool of yourself" I agree.
"So you failed to provide any evidence of a Quran with more or less than 114 chapters" It's not my task to provide anything of the sort. It's irrelevant to me how many chapters it has or if there are different versions. My task is to defend the Bible and Christianity.
"I can show you plenty of Bibles with different number of chapters / verses etc.." So can I. That's not a problem for us.
All of the above issues are in regards to my video links and in my view have no bearing on the ultimate outcome of this conversation. As I have said many times already I linked them along with my questions/comments so that you can see we also have our scholars who make good sounding cases, and we also can make claims that cast doubts on your book. All of the above issues are resolved as far as I'm concerned. You maintain that there is 1 un-altered perfect Quran. I can say to me it sounds like you explained away the issues but this gets us nowhere right?
Me: "When I argued against the Bible I only used contradictions found in a single given version. So you could pick up one official version of the Bible, flip to one page, read a verse, then flip to another page, then read another verse and you see a contradiction (see below). This is not the same as grabbing 2 different books, in 2 different dialects and then claiming there is a contradiction."
“Solomon had [a]forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen.” - Kings 4:26
“Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horses,[a] which he kept in the chariot cities and also with him in Jerusalem.” - 2 Chronicles 9:25
This is an obvious scribal error. Most modern Bibles will have this information in the footnotes at the bottom of the page so that you can know what's going on. We don't hide this information. Even if you just look at this online Bible and turn on the footnotes option. It's at the bottom of the page for everyone to see.
"so was it 4000 or 40000?“ I'm not aware of anyone who thinks it's 40,000 because of the context. There are people who believe all sorts of things so we could probably find someone but they would be in a very small minority.
"Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.” - 2 Chronicles 36.9“
Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.” - 2 Kings 24.8
The issue here is exactly the same thing. It's a scribal error that made its way into one manuscript tradition and is easily identified because it's in the minority. Again modern Bibles put this information in the footnote so you can check it out. Look at this online Bible and see it yourself in the notes. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2+Chronicles+36.9&version=ESV
This is not secret information. It's not even a reason to doubt anything since we have so much evidence proving what the original reading was.
"So was it 8 or 18?" I think there's only one manuscript that says 18. The huge majority of manuscripts say 8 so that's my answer.
““Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.” Mark 10:18
"“Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”” Matthew 19:17
I don't even know what more you want me to say about this. The text does not say Jesus isn't good. In my theology Jesus is good, and even in muslim theology Jesus is good. Jesus has always been called good by everyone who has an opinion worth listening to. He calls Himself good many times even giving Himself names like "Good Shepherd". The entire book teaches that Jesus is good. This man approaches Jesus wanting to know what more works should he do in order to see heaven. For a man to ask Jesus such a thing means that the man doesn't have a clue who Jesus is. If he understood who he was talking to he wouldn't have asked this. Jesus knew this and asked the man to explain why he would call Jesus good since there is none good but God. Jesus is forcing this man to recognize that if Jesus is indeed good, then He must also be God. To say that He's not God is to say that He is not good. I know you reject this, so you don't even have to bother telling me.
Matthew and Mark do not disagree. They word the same teaching in a slightly different way. I have said if you want a full grammatical reason for why this is the case you should contact a professor of Greek. http://AOMIN.org is the website of a Greek professor named James White. Try asking him. Or maybe http://CARM.org could answer it.
The word 'contradiction' has a definition that does not apply to this case. They don't disagree either since they are teaching the exact same thing. This isn't like the case of 4,000 vs 40,000, or 8 years vs 18 years old. These are 2 different authors in 2 different books, not 2 manuscripts of the same book and same author.
“Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself.” Matthew 27:5
“Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.” Acts 1:18
"So did Judas hang himself or did he fall headlong and his entrails gushed out?"
Both. Why do you think these are contradictory? Acts doesn't say that Judas didn't hang himself. Maybe Judas hanged himself and his body decayed and then fell and broke open when it hit the ground. This is the normative understanding of what happened to Judas. For this to be a problem one author would need to say Judas hanged himself, and the other would have to say he threw himself off a cliff, or he fell on his own sword, or some other contradictory account. But two authors giving different details about the same event doesn't mean they disagree. It just means one author told you some details about what happened, and the other author gives additional details.
"You just bombarded me with a bunch of videos of people either talking about Qira'at (different dialects, again happy to discuss) or some that were claiming ancient arabic is unreadable??? None of what you threw at me is even remotely comparable." Trust me if I wanted to bombard you I could do it with dozens of links but I didn't do that. I shared a few links. You really seem to be hung up on those video links. Somehow you have missed the fact that I told you why I sent you them. I was showing you that I can also throw accusations and claims around, even if I don't know what I'm talking about, even if the people I got it from don't know what they're talking about.
"All I am asking is for you to solve the above contradictions..." I have now given you the explanations for all of these very popular and well-known issues that Christians have been explaining openly for literally centuries. They have such simple explanations but you've spun it into some kind of unsolvable conundrum because you have an agenda when it comes to the Bible. It's not my fault you haven't looked for these answers before. Anyone who knows how to use google could find the answer to each one of those issues in under 5 minutes. And there's no reason for it to be a problem unless you want it to be a problem.
"All I am asking is for [you] to solve the above contradictions in a single compiled and officially published version of the Bible that is the most widely accepted version today. That's all. Not explain conflicts in the ancient past" What are you telling me here? You want me to personally do this, or did you mean this is what you wish Christians would do? What can I even say to this strange remark?
And the worst part about it for you is that I explained all your (or your youtube friends) arguments away" Do you think that I was under the impression that you wouldn't have answers? I've said all along and I'll say for the 1000th time now. I asked you the questions that I asked, and I shared those videos for a single reason. It was to show you that we can also throw around wild claims and we can also appeal to scholars. We both have experts that make good sounding cases.
"you can't even explain these few verses away" I have explained each verse and given a rational and logical reason for the problems. You can accept these explanations and still remain a faithful muslim. It does nothing at all to your faith to allow us an explanation. Remember how you explained some of the above issues and I said things like "I understand". I accepted that you were able to provide an explanation didn't I? Now you have received valid explanations. If you want to stubbornly reject them, that's on you. If you want further clarification, by all means ask for it and I will tell you everything I know.
I must point out again that none of the textual issues you've used affect Christian theology in any way. Every Bible teaches the same God, same Savior, same gospel, etc, etc. There is zero evidence that the message of the Bible has ever changed. This is my ultimate point in our conversation. They all teach the same theology no matter if a scribe got a number wrong, or if 2 authors use different wording to teach the same thing, or if one gives X information and the other gives Y information about the same event. These are incredibly weak attacks. This is apologetics 101 stuff. You still have not shown me any two manuscripts that teach differing theologies of opposing gospels, or anything that would actually impact Christian theology.
I think it's important for you to help me understand this. You're told to check the Quran's message against the injeel. The injeel is in the New Testament. If it's too corrupt to know the message, how can you check it? Aren't you undermining your own book everytime you say the Bible is too corrupt to be able to trust it? Your book refers to things that happened in the Bible. Why would allah allow his message to become unreliable? Why are you told to check it if it can't be trusted? Did muhammad ever say the Bible was corrupted, or does the Quran ever say this? Help me understand why you are so certain the Bible is corrupt and how it's not a problem for you as a muslim. Please treat me with the same respect that I am showing you.
Muslim: I have answered this many times. The Injeel was the guidance given to Jesus and Jesus taught it to his disciples. Since we can't prove the Bible can be traced back to the disciples we don't know what to trust in the Bible and what not to trust in the Bible. Muslims do not completely dismiss everything that is said about Jesus in the Bible. We just don't use it to base our salvation on it. Since it's impossible to know if what is said about him in the Bible is actually true or not.
Quick question, do you believe a book that has persisting Scribal errors in it can be called the word of God?
On the topic of Judas. One excerpt says
"Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself."
And another says
"Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out."
Can you at least admit that it is biased to conclude from all that that he hung himself, died, then his corpse decayed and he fell headlong and his entrails gushed out. I mean, is that even possible? If he decayed his entrails would have already gushed out, surely his flesh would decay faster than his bones. Also it said he fell headlong. If he was hung by the neck, it's a bit of a stretch to say he fell on his head. And then theres the fact that in one account he threw the money down in the temple. Whereas in the other he used it to purchase a field. Not only are these accounts completely different from each other. It seems the only points of intersect are that a man named Judas existed, he had some money, then he didn't, then wasn't alive anymore. But the details of how all that happened never intersect. Rather you just try to join them by coming up with a strange scenario that honestly doesn't even seem feasible
I get what you intended by showing those videos. Many of those videos were not actually scholars btw and some of their claims were outright ridiculous. Especially the Hatun quoters man they were by far the most ridiculous. But my examples shown of the Bible are straightforward. If the Bible has shown proof it is susceptible to Scribal errors (even after official compiling) then it is shown to be unreliable. And the Judas case seems extremely contradictory as I mentioned in the previous paragraph. These are the reasons I don't base my salvation on it.
Also even if all the stuff those videos are saying is true, which I explained why it isn't. None of it proves there was ever a Quran different to the one we have today. 114 chapters, Fatiha to Naas. Same number of verses. Even Shia use the same Quran. You can go from east to west and check every mosques bookshelf and there is the Quran, 114 chapters Fatiha to Naas, spoken in the words of God, transmitted by the angel Gabriel to Muhammad (sas) who spoke it to mankind. Christian's can't even agree on the number of books there should be in the Bible and they constantly update it, as if God's word needs updating.. isn't it absurd that God's word are a certain set of books for Catholics and another set of books for Protestants? So God's words change depending on your sect?
anyway I think I'm really done now. If you want me to respond in the next message I will but it will be my last response.
I guess I see where you are coming from in saying that you personally feel like you have reconciled the issues that I have brought up in your point of view. So that's fair enough I'm not here to force you to stop believing what you believe. My intention was always to have a discussion and make my points and I feel like I have done that, you just aren't accepting my points and fair enough
One last thing though. I will make prayer to the one true God that he guides me to the truth whatever that might be, and I will leave it to you to decide if you want to do the same. I highly suggest it though, since it's a very straightforward prayer. Either it will guide you to what you already believe if that's the truth, or it will guide you to something else whatever that truth may be. As long as the one True God actually does exist, I don't see how this prayer could ever backfire honestly. It just has to be sincere
Me: "The Injeel was the guidance given to Jesus and Jesus taught it to his disciples." But you can only know about Jesus and His disciples because of what the New Testament says. His disciples wrote it. You reject their firsthand eyewitness accounts in exchange for a book that came half a millennium later. This seems completely faulty and illogical.
"Since we can't prove the Bible can be traced back to the disciples we don't know what to trust in the Bible and what not to trust in the Bible." It can be determined whether the Bible is traced to them. Early Christians loved to write about Christianity. For example John had a disciple named Ignatius. He wrote about his belief in the Trinity in 110 AD. We can re-assemble the entire New Testament by getting it out of the books those guys wrote. So even if we had no ancient NT manuscripts at all, you could open a modern Bible and compare it to what early Christians quoted from their ancient Bible and you would be able to get the entire message out of their writings. It would be for you to show some evidence that it's not traced to them since we have such an overwhelming amount of evidence on our side. Here is one example of a scholar showing this. I could 'bombard' you with dozens if I wanted to. https://youtu.be/LuiayuxWwuI
"Muslims do not completely dismiss everything that is said about Jesus in the Bible." I know, and I find it very inconsistent and illogical. You should either reject it or embrace it. Either it's corrupt or it isn't.
"We just don't use it to base our salvation on it." You should since it came first, and it meshes perfectly with the Old Testament. Jesus fulfilled over 300 OT prophecies, like where He would be born, when He would be born, what He would do, that He would die and live again, etc, etc. Then comes the Quran and it's completely different and doesn't mesh at all with the previous revelation from God. It doesn't work with the Bible at all, so I reject the Quran and you reject the Bible. Both of us recognize that they're incompatible. I gave a good example in a previous comment. Galatians chapter 1 says if anyone, even an angel, were to come and teach a different message, you are supposed to reject it. It says anyone teaching a different message is cursed/damned. Then muhammad gets his new message from an angel and I'm supposed to listen to him? This is a huge problem.
"Since it's impossible to know if what is said about him in the Bible is actually true or not." This can be said about the Quran too. I don't believe what it says is true. I feel that I have a valid reason for rejecting the Quran while you don't have a good reason to reject the Bible.
Quick question, do you believe a book that has persisting Scribal errors in it can be called the word of God? This is a difference between how Christians and muslims think. Muslims will say when I read the Quran if it's in English I'm not really reading the actual Quran. It has to be in the Arabic correct? We don't do this. We don't think every Christian in the world needs to learn Greek. If you are reading a faithful translation that gets the message across, then yes it is the word of God. Errors can appear in any translation. That doesn't make it any less the word of God. It just means a guy made a mistake when He was copying the word of God. We believe the original writing was theopneustos or "God-breathed" and as long as the translation is conveying the same message it's legit.
"Can you at least admit that it is biased to conclude from all that that he hung himself, died, then his corpse decayed and he fell headlong and his entrails gushed out." No I don't think it's biased. I think it's one valid theory. Unless you think gathering all known information about something and putting it all together into one narrative means that you're being biased. It's a logical inference from the information we have that this could be what happened. There are other theories out there and it's fine to have a different idea. Whatever happened to Judas has no bearing on any matters of theology, salvation, or the gospel message.
"I mean, is that even possible?" Plenty of people think it is. I see no logical problem with it. I'm willing to hear your objections.
"If he decayed his entrails would have already gushed out, surely his flesh would decay faster than his bones." The decaying part is only a speculation. We have no idea how long he was there before his corpse was found. We don't know if there were birds eating his remains that maybe caused the body to fall down. All we know is what the text says. It's just speculation after that.
"Also it said he fell headlong. If he was hung by the neck, it's a bit of a stretch to say he fell on his head." That's just your opinion. Strange things happen. When I was a teenager my friend's dad was a police officer and he could tell us stories of all sorts of bizarre crime scenes that happen. Some scholars think he hanged himself and the rope immediately broke and he literally fell head first to the ground. Maybe he was killed by the impact, or maybe his decaying body was gashed open on the ground or on rocks below him. It doesn't say how high he was. It may have been a tree at the top of a cliff. Maybe he climbed out onto a branch on a steep hill. Ultimately the Bible doesn't tell us all of these details.
"And then theres the fact that in one account he threw the money down in the temple. Whereas in the other he used it to purchase a field." The money was considered "blood money" by the Jews. By law they were not allowed to use blood money for normal business because it was unclean to them. Under these conditions they had allowances for certain things that they were allowed to do with blood money. Basically they were not allowed to benefit from it personally. In this case they donated it to the purchase of a potter's field and it was used as a burial place for strangers. Since that money never belonged to the men who Judas threw it at, the money was still considered to belong to Judas by Jewish reckoning. If they claimed it as theirs they would instantly be guilty of his blood. That's why it can be seen either way, as Judas purchasing the field since it was his money and not theirs, or as the Jews purchasing the field since they were the ones who physically did the exchange with Judas' money. There is nothing inconsistent about this in Jewish thinking. Your question is understandable though. Modern thinking is often very unlike ancient Jewish thinking. I've learned by experience there's always a rational answer. All you have to do is honestly look for it.
"Not only are these accounts completely different from each other." I understand how it seemed that way to you but I have now given you an explanation.
It seems the only points of intersect are that a man named Judas existed, he had some money, then he didn't, then wasn't alive anymore. But the details of how all that happened never intersect. Rather you just try to join them by coming up with a strange scenario that honestly doesn't even seem feasible" It doesn't seem feasible to you. I don't have a problem with it. Why shouldn't we combine everything it says about him in order to get the full picture? Do you use this standard when it comes to your scripture? Don't you also combine all of the details into one picture?
You can read everything we know about Judas from the Bible here.
"I get what you intended by showing those videos." Thank you.
"None of it proves there was ever a Quran different to the one we have today..." No argument about any of this. Whether or not the Quran has other versions is ultimately not a concern for me. It's for you to have settled in your own heart.
"Followers of Christ can't even agree on the number of books there should be in the Bible" This has been an issue between Protestants and Catholics for centuries. They didn't declare the extra books as officially part of their Bible until the 1500's and then they pretend that we're the ones in error for not using these books which the Jews never considered scripture, is never quoted in the New Testament, and was never kept in the holy place where the scriptures were kept. The Jews only considered those books as edifying stories with some factual history in it but it was never considered the word of God. The books of the New Testament are not disputed by anyone though. Protestants, Orthodox, and Roman Catholics all have the same books in the New Testament. I'd be glad to answer whatever I can about this if it's something you want to know more about.
"and they constantly update it, as if God's word needs updating" Would you clarify what you're talking about here? Translators are always tinkering with readings in order to create a more paraphrastic reading or a more literal reading, depending on the purpose of the translation. Some Christians use the NASB because it's the most technically strict in its translation. But as a result of the rigid formal translation, readability is often sacrificed. On the other hand there are more dynamic translations that don't necessarily try to do a word for word translation but they try to convey the essence of the message in a more readable manner. So maybe the NASB will put out a new edition where they've managed to smooth out a part of the translation and make it more readable. Is this what you mean by updating? Creating a new edition of a translation?
Me: If you want the conversation to end then it's over. I'll leave you with some resources.
http://GotQuestions.org - You can ask them any question about the Bible or Christianity. They have a large database including many common muslim issues.
http://CARM.org is basically an encyclopedia of Christian apologetics information. This also has a large section on islam and answers to common questions.
CIRA International is a Christian ministry made from former muslims and they invite questions and dialogs. Ask them anything. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC5zGnPFoN5LjAsxU8ESiBMw
Dr James White is a Christian scholar who has done more debates and dialogs with muslims than anyone else I've ever heard of. He is an amazing resource in all areas of Christian apologetics. https://youtu.be/HUR_ABmkPks
This is an earnest plea to all muslims: https://youtu.be/4CWTd5lXAWg
"I will make prayer to the one true God that he guides me to the truth whatever that might be, and I will leave it to you to decide if you want to do the same." Thank you I appreciate that. I've been mentioning you in my prayers all along.
Thanks for the stimulating conversation. I learned a lot from you. I hope you also learned from me. I have a lot of conversations like this with people from many different beliefs. It's important to me because we have the same ancestors which makes us brothers. I don't want my brother to perish. I love you so I have to tell you the truth. Without faith in Christ you will perish. God requires perfect flawless righteousness which is something a man cannot achieve. But Jesus Christ lived a perfectly righteous life because He truly is good. His righteousness can be credited to you through faith. God has promised that anyone who comes to Jesus for salvation will never be rejected. You will gain His righteousness and your sins will go onto Him. You have God's promise that you'll be safe from condemnation if you repent and believe in Jesus. I pray that the One true God will guide your steps, that He will touch your heart, that He will grant you grace and mercy, and that He would give you eternal life through faith in Jesus Christ. May God bless you and your family.
"The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead." (Acts 17:30-31)
Please take the final word and leave me with whatever resources you wish.
Muslim: Only advice is the one I already gave. Sincerely ask the one true God for the absolute truth. This prayer can never backfire..
"This is the day the truthful will benefit from their truthfulness; theirs are Gardens under which rivers flow (in Paradise) - they shall abide therein forever. Allah is pleased with them and they with Him. That is the great success (Paradise)."
https://youtu.be/8bnrhQn7dlk
Comments