Bible or Quran?

"Is Any of it from God? - Really?"

 

"Can You Help Me?"
"Christians claim the Bible is God's Word ~ Muslims claim the Quran is the Speeck of Allah"
~ Does either Book have authenticity?"

YES! We check it out NOW - click www.BibleIslam.com

Here's something from a brother (in Canada) doing dawah online and thanks for the letter to JustAskIslam.com

His problem comes from a Christian who makes statements about Quran with little or no knowledge ofeither the Bible or the Quran.

Dear Brother and Sheikh Yusuf Estes, Assalaamu Alaikum, I’m doing Dawah online (forum) with a best and positive manner as Allah command us to do, I need little help regarding this post. please help me, inshallah. Salam alaykum - brother in Vancouver, Canada

***********************************
Here is the post from a Christian: [name deleted]
-----------------------------------

I'm entering this site with some hesitation because I know how firmly held the beliefs are of Muslims and Christians. We bring our own perspectives to every conversation, influenced by culture and background and biases.

Having said that, and admitting that I am influenced by the culture that I live in. Please do not see this as a personal attack, but rather as an honest explanation of why I do not believe the Qur’an but I do believe the Bible. It's not a comprehensive explanation, but it's a start.

One of the main reasons I do not find the Qur’an credible is that it was "revealed" to one man who's philosophy changed radically from the beginning of his "revelation" to the end.

As he gained a following and was able to build an army, he stopped preaching peace and started preaching physical conquest. I'm very sorry to sound insulting, and I don't mean to be personally offensive, but from my perspective Mohammed appears to be a schizophrenic (goes away to a cave to hear voices no one else can hear) with an ever mounting paranoia and messiah complex on the same order as Adolph Hitler.

I know that sounds really harsh and I'm sorry, but I don't think there's any way to state that opinion honestly without sounding rude.

The Bible, on the other hand. was revealed to many many authors over the course of thousands of years. Reading it from cover to cover shows us that God is willing to do whatever it takes to build a relationship with us.

In the beginning of the Bible God commands the Jews to conquer their enemies and those in opposition to His sovereignty, but there is firm evidence that violent overthrow of societies does not draw people to God.

He clearly demonstrates throughout the course of the historical books that violence is NOT the way to bring people to an understanding of himself.

Consistently throughout the Bible God shows us that the punishment for our sinfulness is death, and he ALWAYS provides a satisfactory solution to this problem without us having to take the punishment.

The Qur’an says that Abraham took Ishmael to mountain top, and the Torah says he was to sacrifice Isaac, but the point of both stories is that a sacrifice is required.

The story of the Passover is more evidence of the need for a sacrifice to cover God's people. Jesus is the final sacrifice lamb. He takes the punishment we deserve...

God made a provision yet again so that we can remain in relationship with him. Why? Because in spite of our sinfulness, in spite of the fact that we don't deserve a relationship with Him, God LOVES us. He's willing to go even to the point of SELF-SACRIFICE to be with us for eternity.

We're not capable of performing enough good deeds, praying often enough, giving enough money or travelling far enough to pay the debt. Only the almighty God Himself can do it. I understand that Surah 22 explains that infidels like me will receive a shameful chastisement, and that you believe that my "doubt" is evidence that I deserve harsh judgement, but don't you think a fairly objective view is required in order to have an honest faith?

Have you ever looked at the Koran in chronological order?

Have you ever looked at Mohammed as a person rather than a prophet?

What evidence does he give that he is credible beyond the fact that he led many armies in violent conquest?

Jesus consistently demonstrated peace. He never led an army or harmed a single person. He went to the cross in silent sacrifice. He consistently taught that our relationship with God is evident in our treatment of the people around us. Jesus consistently taught that we need to be humbly aware of our shortcomings and able to forgive and love those around us for their shortcomings. He taught us that we will be known as his followers if we love one another. He taught us to be gracious just as God is gracious. He performed miracles witnessed by hundreds that did no harm to anyone and demonstrated God's good will towards us. Most importantly, He died and came back to life to demonstrate God's forgiveness and that even death cannot conquer God. Which of these men demonstrate an understanding of the one true God who desires peace for his people?

I can't speak for you, but I choose Jesus. [signed name]

PS: I actually have read only some of the Quran and the Bible before I accepted Christ. I read parts of each book and several books on religious history before coming to Christ.

"Remember... Love one another..." I'm wating for you reply, please reply me as soon as possible ____________________________________________

Regarding the letter you attached from the "Christian" - let me say that this is a very deep subject and not one for a single email. But let me give you a brief insight as to what I might do in a similar situation.

First, I do not like it when someone pretends to be 'hesitating' to say something at first, but as you read on they compare our beloved prophet, peace be upon him, to Adolf Hitler. This is absolutely uncalled for and inappropriate.

Next, I would like to encourage everyone to read what we have published about both the Quran and the Bible:

www.IslamCode.com <articles on Bible & comparing Christian to Islam>

www.AllahsQuran.com <new site>

www.Qtafisr.com <excellent tafsir site for Quran>

www.IslamTomorrow.com/free <free download of Quran>

We know the Bible in either the Old or the New Testament does not exist anymore in the original form either in memory or text anywhere on the earth, nor has it existed as such for at least 1,500 or more years.

The Quran on the other hand, is exactly preserved and memorized as it was during the lifetime of the holy prophet, peace be upon him.

The teachings of Islam from the Quran and the hadeeth of Muhammad, peace be upon him, are very clear and available in the original texts in Arabic for whomsoever would like to read them.

There are no "hidden" books (called 'apocrapha' by the Catholics) or 'alternate readings' of older, 'more authentic' manuscripts (see: Revised Standard Version of Bible, introduction.
This is in the very beginning of my own Bible - given to me by my grandfather in 1954, when I was a youth. READ IT:

"The King James Version has with good reason been termed 'the noblest monument of English prose.' Its revisers in 1881 expressed admiration of 'its simplicity, its dignity, its power, its happy turns of express... the music of its cadences, and the felicities of its rhythm.' It entered, as no other book has, into the making of the personal character and the public institutions of the English-speaking peoples. We owe to it an incalculable debt." "Yet the King James Version has grave defects. By the middle of the nineteenth century, the development of Biblical studies and the discovery of many manuscripts more ancient than those upon which the King James Version was based, made it manifest that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for a revision of the English translation. The task was undertaken, by authority of the Church of England, in 1870. The English Revised Version of the Bibles was published in 1881-1885; and the American Standard Version, its variant embodying the preferences of the American scholars associated in the work, was published in 1901." "Because of the unhappy experience with unauthorized publications in the two decades between 1881 and 1901, which tampered with the text of the English Revised Version in the supposed interest of the American public, the American Standard Version was copyrighted, to protect the text from unauthorized changes. In 1928 this copyright was acquired by the International Council of Religious Education, and thus passed into the ownership of the churches of the United States and Canada which were associated in this Council through their boards of education and publication." ".... decision was reached that there is need for a thorough revision of the version of 1901..""In 1937 the revision was authorized by vote of the Council." "Thirty-two scholars have served as members of the Committee charged with making the revision, and they have secured the review and counsel of an Advisory Board of fifty representatives of the co-operating denominations." "Each section has submitted its work to the scrutiny of the members of the charter of the Committee requires that all changes be agreed upon by a two-thirds vote of the total membership of the Committee." "The problem of establishing the correct Hebrew and Aramaic text of the Old testament is very different from the corresponding problem in the New Testament." "For the New Testament we have a large number of Greek manuscripts, preserving many variant forms of the text. Some of them were made only two or three centuries later than the original composition of the books." "For the Old Testament only late manuscripts survive, all (with the exception of the Dead Sea Texts of Isaiah and Habakkuk and some fragments of other books) based on a standardized form of the text established many centuries after the books were written." "The present revision is based on the consonantal Hebrew and Aramaic text as fixed early in the Christian era and revised by Jewish scholars (the 'Masoretes') of the sixth to ninth centuries. The vowel signs, which were added by the Masoretes, are accepted also in the main, but where a more probable and convincing reading can be obtained by assuming different vowels, this has been done." "... vowel points are less ancient and [less] reliable than the consonants." "Departures from the consonantal text of the best manuscripts have been made only where it seems clear that errors in copying had been made before the text was standardized." "Most of the corrections adopted are based on the ancient versions [translations into Greek Aramaic, Syriac, and Latin], which were made before the time of the Masoretic revision and therefore reflect earlier forms of the text." "Sometimes it is evident that the text has suffered in transmission, but none of the versions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we can only follow the best judgment of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of the original text." "Many difficulties and obscurities, of course, remain." "Where the choice between two meanings is particularly difficult or doubtful, we have given an alternative rendering in a footnote." "If in the judgment of the Committee the meaning of a passage is quite uncertain or obscure, either because of corruption in the text or because of the inadequacy of our present knowledge of the language, that fact is indicated by a note." "It should not be assumed, however, that the Committee was entirely sure or unanimous concerning every rendering not so indicated." "To record all minority views was obviously out of the question." "The King James Version of the New Testament was based upon a Greek text that was marred by mistakes, containing the accumulated errors of fourteen centuries of manuscript copying." "It was essentially the Greek text of the New Testament as edited by Beza, 1589, who closely followed that published by Erasmus, 1516-1535, which was based upon a few medieval manuscripts." "The earliest and best of the eight manuscripts which Erasmus consulted was from the tenth century, and [yet] he made the least use of it because it differed most from the commonly received text; Beza had access to two manuscripts of great value, dating from the fifth and sixth centuries, but he made very little use of them because they differed from the text published by Erasmus." "We now possess many more ancient manuscripts of the new Testament, and are far better equipped to seek to recover the original wording of the Greek text. The evidence for the text of the books of the New Testament is better that for any other ancient book, both in the number of extant manuscripts and in the nearness of the date of some of these manuscripts to the date when the book was originally written."

The words are in plain English. The second paragraph says it all, "Yet, the King James Version has grave defects."

Therefore, we must conclude the "King James Version" is NOT the Actual Bible sent by God to mankind.

(Please continue to chapter 2 - "Are There Contradictions in the Bible?")

After reading them both (entirely) take some time to read again the letter of the person and then think for yourself what they said in their closing remarks.

He admits not having read either one of the Bible or the Quran - before he made up his mind.

So his decision is based on bias and prejudice (pre-judgement) and he is not on any guidance from God Almighty Allah.

This is even more obvious when you consider he wants us to reorder the surahs and ayahs in the Quran according to how he thinks they should be. We know from 1,400 years of recorded scholarlly work, all of the hadeeth and Quran have been preserved and who originally heard everything, memorzied it, wrote it down and to whom they transmitted it. We know when these people were born, where, how long they lived and where they died.

This is totally absurb and out of context with the way Qur'an is revealed. The way Quran is assembled is not from Muhammad, peace be upon him, it is from Alllah. Therefore, the arguement about placing them in an acsending or descending order is totally illogical.

What next? Will he ask us to put them in alphebetical order? Or in order of the Arabic letters (alief, laam, meem, etc.)? This is nothing but nonsense.

Consider the Bible as regards order of revelation, and then think again about this silly idea. According to scholars of the Bible, the Book of Job (we call him Ayyoob) is probably the oldest of all books in the Old Testament. Yet it is almost in the middle of what they have today.

Then according New Testament scholars, the Book of Mark is actually than the Book of Matthew, the book before it.

The statement about the Bible being "revealed" to many different authors is quite incorrect. It came directly to the prophets, peace be upon them all, and to none others.

The people after them lost some (see:Bible reference to loosing the texts of Moses in the Arch of the Covenant during the Babylonian exile) and changing and ignoring some (see: Matthew 5:17, 18 Jesus claims Pharisees are not following the original Law (Torah).

Then come to the very clear problems of the contradictions and errors in the Bible (see our website www.IslamCode.com <article: "Bible: A Closer Look"> and compare to the Qur'an wherein there is not a single contradiction.

The fact is Allah challenges the unbelievers with the statements:

• "Have not the unbelievers considered, if it (Qur'an) were from other than Allah, they would find therein many contradictions?"
• And the saying of Allah in the beginning of Surah Baqarah, "This is the Book wherein there is no doubt." (Baqarah, chapter 2, verse 2).
• And also, "If you are in doubt about it (Qur'an), then bring a book like it."
• And another challange, "Bring ten surahs like it."
• And finally, "Bring one surah like it."

The Qur'an is memorized today by over ten million (10,000,000) living human beings, in the original text and in the original language.

There are more than a billion distributed around the world in written form - and each is exactly like the other.

There no versions of Quran.

Ever single Muslim has memorized at least some portion of the Qur'an in the original Arabic language.

Come let us compare these statements to any other religious book - or any book at allfor that matter and tell us what you find.

We are waiting.

Unless and until a person cleans their heart from biases and prejudices, they will never be guided by Allah. This is not about your relationship with them. It is about their relationship with Allah.

If they want truth - they need to pray directly to Allah and ask for it. But if they want misguidance - then let them pray to whatever they want - and they will be misguided.

You should offer to share what we have and listen to what they have (in a sincere effort to understand their perspective). Then pray for them and for us to be guided by Allah.

That's all there is to it. - Salam alaykum

PS - Remember to ShareIslam.com in all your emails

Other sites we have on these topics include:

www.IslamCode.com

www.AllahsQuran.com

www.Qtafsir.com

www.ProphetOfIslam.com

www.YouTubeIslam.com

Now - Find all our links to Islam: www.LinksToIslam.com (cool name, huh?)

< Prev		Next >