A challenge for all

  • Thread starter Thread starter ralphinal
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

ralphinal

Guest
Alright, we have a question. Can it be proven that the Bible is valid sacred text without quoting the Bible? Can the Koran be proven without quoting the Koran? Simply put, can we use some methodology to figure out which one is more likely correct? I think that we should try to keep the talk charitable. No anti- anything on this thread please.
 
Alright, that is one way. We could add the Prophacies of Jesus, such as heading towards the Crucifixion and the destruction of the temple. Are there any fulfilled prophacies in Islam?
 
Agnos, any advice? I know that there are major issues with saying this is correct because it says so itself. Any way to analyze? The major way Muslims promote the Koran is by saying the Koran says it is correct. That is circular too.
 
Charlie_Zeaiter said:
The simple answer is prophecy.
Click to expand...
wouldn’t that involve quoting the bible?

i would say there is no sure fire way of proving the “sacredness” of the bible (or the koran or any other “sacred” book). we can see which ones are more historically accurate. we can see which ones stay consistent throughout. and we can ultimately experience the truth lived out in our own lives. i believe the bible is the sacred word of God. i believe there are other “sacred” books that are actually false. but it comes down to faith. i believe the bible is the most consitent with history but as for its sacredness, that comes down to faith.
 
ralphinal said:
Alright, we have a question. Can it be proven that the Bible is valid sacred text without quoting the Bible? Can the Koran be proven without quoting the Koran? Simply put, can we use some methodology to figure out which one is more likely correct? I think that we should try to keep the talk charitable. No anti- anything on this thread please.
Click to expand...
So in other words … we have an effect (the Bible or Koran) and are looking for a cause. I think there are 2 discussion points in your question … 1)valid text … in other words (do those words have a history which could lead to number 2 and 2) are they sacred (a higher standard of existence versus something like the Constitution).

The proof thing is not a good measure as the standard of proof will vary, in other words, no agreeable standard or proof for this type of discussion exists. So absolute proof is not the standard, there will exist a finite amount of data which a person using reason will come to a conclustion, they will either choose …yes, (enough evidence for believing is true) or no (there is not enough evidence so disbelief is the prudent choice.). This standard even exists in our legal system … beyond a reasonable doubt.

The one standard that may be discussed is from a historical perspective. From history we do have artifacts … Dead Sea Scrolls for example that may give some authenticity that these writings existed and they existed at a certain time in history.

So I think this can be discussed from a historical and historical artifact point of view, just like a court case. Is there evidence for a Bible or Koran? This means going back to the beginnig and tracing it forward until the time the Canon was determined (at least for the Bible), I dont know much about the Koran.

The sacred part is a much more contentious and difficult discussion … we will see how the sacred is discussed.
 
I think that either work will hold up under a historic standard, but I may be wrong. The issue with the Koran is that there was no Koran, then boom, there is a Koran. We cannot compair it to the earliest form, and there was no evolution of what should and should not be included. The Bible developed over a longer period of time, allowing for more study over what should belong.

What about the study of inconsistancies in the two works. From a Christian point of veiw, the Bible shows the evolution of the Covenant between God and man through its fulfillment in Jesus. As such, it includes teachings, rules, and revelations about God. How would the Koran be described? Does it reveal anything about God? Do the two books coincide with much? Are there major inconsistancies in either one?
 
You could appeal to the historical martyrdom of witnesses of those who know Jesus rose from the dead.
 
ralphinal said:
Alright, we have a question. Can it be proven that the Bible is valid sacred text without quoting the Bible? Can the Koran be proven without quoting the Koran? Simply put, can we use some methodology to figure out which one is more likely correct? I think that we should try to keep the talk charitable. No anti- anything on this thread please.
Click to expand...
No! This can not be proven. In the same way the Koran can not be. Some of it can be backed up with other historical documnets but to prove that a text is divinely inspired is simply impossible. That is because Jesus never left us the bible. The proper and only way to put the bible into context is trough the church that put the different books & letters together and claimed them as sacred. WIthout the Athority of the Church (The Body of Christ) the bible is…?

Peace!
 
ralphinal said:
Agnos, any advice? I know that there are major issues with saying this is correct because it says so itself. Any way to analyze? The major way Muslims promote the Koran is by saying the Koran says it is correct. That is circular too.
Click to expand...
prophecy is a good way of proving the supernatural quality of a book, but only if the event being prophecied is well beyond the scope of the book. and the event is beyond the age at which the book can still be altered. the prophecies should be very specific, and not broad or too common.

now since both the bible and the koran fails at this. the argument is reduced to ‘which is more correct’.

What is more correct is the book that breeds the best people or best communities on the planet. At this the Quran fails miserably. The bible is ‘more correct’.
 
Hamba,
Thank you once again for helping us understand Islam. I checked the link, but we are trying to prove the validity of the work without using anything in the work itself. The test given was from teh Koran for the Koran. A non-believer would say that good proofreading will prevent errors anyway.

Agnos,
Interesting thought. To me, using these works to predict the future seems like using Nostradamos. Sure, we can find it after the event, but no one has shown me just BEFORE the event.
 
ralphinal said:
Alright, we have a question. Can it be proven that the Bible is valid sacred text without quoting the Bible? Can the Koran be proven without quoting the Koran? Simply put, can we use some methodology to figure out which one is more likely correct? I think that we should try to keep the talk charitable. No anti- anything on this thread please.
Click to expand...
The only (singular) way of proving anything is “sacred” is by revelation from the “sacred source”, assuming the source is actually sacred.

Any other “method” is not “proof” at all, but only “persuasion”.

Some beings are VERY good at “persuasion”. Such as, … well you know.

The only way to have any chance of getting actual revelation from an actual sacred source is to appeal to for revelation.

This assumes that if you were to appeal to THE most good and THE most omnipotent (!?) source of sacredness, <insert “probably singular” pronoun here> would be able to overide any “lesser power” and see to it that you got what you sought.

Only prayer in petition to the actual God who is God for confirmation that He is God can establish that He is indeed the source of the sacred.

And armed with this, we can know what ( who!? ) His singular temporal “outlet” of authority is. And armed with that, we can confirm which texts are truly sacred, by simply asking Him (The Church who is the Body of Christ).

In other words, YES, You CAN confirm that the bible is a valid sacred text without using the bible to confirm itself as sacred.

But the singular way of doing so annoys very nearly everyone but a “good” Catholic.
 
MarcoPolo said:
You could appeal to the historical martyrdom of witnesses of those who know Jesus rose from the dead.
Click to expand...
Hi

I don’t believe that Jesus ever rose from the dead, he in my opinion got cured from the injuries as did Lazarus got cured from the near-dead.

It is only a misconception or superstition of my Catholic friends in my opinion.

Thanks
 
ralphinal said:
Does it (Quran) reveal anything about God?
Click to expand...
Hi

Yes, Quran reveals everything essential about GodAllahYHWH, His attributes and refutes what has been added to His attributes exaggeratingly by others. Quran provides both the Claims and reasons itself in this respect.

Thanks
 
paarsurrey said:
Hi

I don’t believe that Jesus ever rose from the dead, he in my opinion got cured from the injuries as did Lazarus got cured from the near-dead.

It is only a misconception or superstition of my Catholic friends in my opinion.

Thanks
Click to expand...
Hi paarsurrey,

Oh my, how some people can be so predictable…

Luke 16:31 - … ‘If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone were to rise from death’
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top