Bible and Qu'ran can both be true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter yannick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Y

yannick

Guest
It’s probably a silly question, since this is Christian Forum but we beleive that the Bible is the Word of God, the Muslims beleive that the Qu’ran is the word of God as well can both be true? Is God contradicting himself? if not is this 2 different entities speaking or is it simply that one of those book was invented. I read the Qu’ran it’s interesting but…
 
It’s not possible that they would BOTH be true. Why would you even think the Quran was from God anyway?
 
What I mean is, how could you even entertain this as a possibility?
 
exoflare said:
What I mean is, how could you even entertain this as a possibility?
Click to expand...
I beleive in the true of the Bible I’ll so far as to say that it is the utterance of God. My question really to put it bluntly. Is the Qu’ran fm the devil or a simple lie from a “prophet”?
 
yannick said:
I beleive in the true of the Bible I’ll so far as to say that it is the utterance of God. My question really to put it bluntly. Is the Qu’ran fm the devil or a simple lie from a “prophet”?
Click to expand...
There is indeed a foolproof method to test and ascertain the truth of Islam… or any other religion for that matter.
1 Thessalonians 5:21
Test everything. Hold on to the good.
 
yannick said:
I beleive in the true of the Bible I’ll so far as to say that it is the utterance of God. My question really to put it bluntly. Is the Qu’ran fm the devil or a simple lie from a “prophet”?
Click to expand...
It’s not from God… Epistle Of Saint Paul To The Galatians 1:8 **But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. **

The Angel Gabriel wouldn’t herald another contradictory Gospel, therefore it’s not from God.
 
The Qur’an acknowledges the virgin birth of Jesus. Most Christians acknowledge this as a fact or truth from the Bible. Given this, the Qur’an is not entirely false. The Bible says that Jesus is the “lamb of God”. Just because Mary really didn’t have a little lamb, does this mean the Bible is false? (Oh wait, people will start to argue “degrees of truth”, or something other).

People often view religions as competing for the “market share” of the truth. Perhaps we should see different religions as different sets of lenses through which people perceive the truth. Obviously, some lenses, though viewing the truth, can’t be taken out of one set of frames and fit perfectly into another frame. The frames are human constructs; cultural biases and inheritances that influence how we “think the truth should be framed”. On this basis, I will say that both the Bible and Qur’an perceive the truth (and can be true), even if the lenses used don’t fit interchangeably between Muslim and Christian frames.
 
I’m just a newbie, and am kinda intimidated to join in on a “big boy discussion” but this is an interesting topic.

I’ve read parts of the Koran. It emphatically denies that Christ is the son of God, but rather places him in the role of a human prophet created by God. It also says that Christianity and Judaism “got the message wrong”, and that Mohammed was the last and most correct of the prophets. Obviously, as Catholics, the notion that Christ is a mere prophet and NOT the Son of God is absolutely heretical.

If you want, I’ll research the specific passages, but I remember all this from a previous discussion I had with a protestant friend about Islam.

I’ve read somewhere that it’s been speculated that Mohammed had contact with early Aryan heretics in Arabia, and they helped to influence the Koran.
 
Peregrino said:
The Qur’an acknowledges the virgin birth of Jesus. Most Christians acknowledge this as a fact or truth from the Bible. Given this, the Qur’an is not entirely false. The Bible says that Jesus is the “lamb of God”. Just because Mary really didn’t have a little lamb, does this mean the Bible is false? (Oh wait, people will start to argue “degrees of truth”, or something other).

People often view religions as competing for the “market share” of the truth. Perhaps we should see different religions as different sets of lenses through which people perceive the truth. Obviously, some lenses, though viewing the truth, can’t be taken out of one set of frames and fit perfectly into another frame. The frames are human constructs; cultural biases and inheritances that influence how we “think the truth should be framed”. On this basis, I will say that both the Bible and Qur’an perceive the truth (and can be true), even if the lenses used don’t fit interchangeably between Muslim and Christian frames.
Click to expand...
“Differents set of lenses” I am not too sure I agree with this. It seems to be the tip an argument for relativism. We’ll soon be talking about truth found every where, my truth and your truth instead the Truth. The question seems simple, putting biais aside: Jesus says: I am the son of God, Mohamed says: God has no children/ Christianity says: “Jesus is God”, Islam says “Jesus is not God is a mere prophet granted a great one but a prophet” can both position be true if not and assuming that one is true and the Truth of God, wouldn’t the other one comes from the father of lies wether directly or indirectly?
Enlighten me?
 
What if God wanted them to have it? Do you know what God thinks? We cannot possibly know what HE is thinking or doing ; Or even know .oooooooooooooooooo1% of his plan.
 
Willma said:
What if God wanted them to have it? Do you know what God thinks? We cannot possibly know what HE is thinking or doing ; Or even know .oooooooooooooooooo1% of his plan.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that God willed the protest of His Divinity? or that it is even a possibility?
 
yannick said:
Are you saying that God willed the protest of His Divinity? or that it is even a possibility?
Click to expand...
Can you read his mind? His divinity is NOT the issue, but people beliving in HIM is the bigger foccus.

people fight over such small things…does God exist? Are you following his 10 commandments? Are you giving him due credit?

No one here knows his plan, not even the Pope. People like to pretend they "know’, but they are guessing with the rest of us.
 
Willma said:
Can you read his mind? His divinity is NOT the issue, but people beliving in HIM is the bigger foccus.
Click to expand...
Excuse my lack of intelligence. Beleiving in him is important but we can only beleive (I hope) in a divine God. Otherwise where’s the point? and taken that he want people to simply beleive in him why alter his previous message. the message (not the law) given to the jews was taken in its entirety by the christian, not in pick and choose like on a cherry tree. I am not the sharpest knife in the draw but the point of revelation is just that revelation a clearer understanding, a God that comes closer. To me it looks like the God of the Jew came close in Christianity and oops when right back up in the cloud somewhere in Islam how bout that for gradual revelation? Know doesn’t simply mean knowing it knowing I might say
 
yannick said:
“Differents set of lenses” I am not too sure I agree with this. It seems to be the tip an argument for relativism. We’ll soon be talking about truth found every where, my truth and your truth instead the Truth. The question seems simple, putting biais aside: Jesus says: I am the son of God, Mohamed says: God has no children/ Christianity says: “Jesus is God”, Islam says “Jesus is not God is a mere prophet granted a great one but a prophet” can both position be true if not and assuming that one is true and the Truth of God, wouldn’t the other one comes from the father of lies wether directly or indirectly?
Enlighten me?
Click to expand...
This is a fantastic point. The problem is, the truth is one, God is one but the faith through which you see this truth is not the truth itself. If you acknowledge the existence of God, that truth is not relative. Relativism creeps in when you confuse the faith for the truth.

You can read parts of the Bible and easily come to different conclusions. I can read the Gospel of Mark and say that the inspired writer didn’t think that Jesus was divine. When I read John, I have to conclude that the writer wanted us to believe that Jesus is God. Arius was adept at using scripture to argue his points. Arianism was a widely held view at one time. It took a Church council to “lay down the law” on what constituted the proper view of the “truth.”

It is like the three blind men and the elephant. One has the tail, the other the nose and another say the ear. Each concludes differently what type of animal the elephant really is. The elephant is still an elephant. To say that we perceive things differently is not to acknowledge relativism.

God is God, I find nothing inconsistent with God’s omnipotence or omnibenevolence to say that he sent different messengers (who translated the messages) to different peoples. If fact, given the beauty and massive diversity of creation, I would expect it. Anything less might imply a lack of creativity, effort or compassion.😃
 
Can both the Bible and the Qur’an be true?

Do you mean, empirically true, or fideistically true?

Also: can the Hebrew Scriptures (the Tanakh) and the New Testament both be true?

And if the Tanakh and the New Testament can be interpreted into a holistic fashion such that they both are seen as “true”, why can’t a similar interpretation be done regarding the Bible and the Qur’an?
 
Peregrino said:
This is a fantastic point. The problem is, the truth is one, God is one but the faith through which you see this truth is not the truth itself. If you acknowledge the existence of God, that truth is not relative. Relativism creeps in when you confuse the faith for the truth.

You can read parts of the Bible and easily come to different conclusions. I can read the Gospel of Mark and say that the inspired writer didn’t think that Jesus was divine. When I read John, I have to conclude that the writer wanted us to believe that Jesus is God. Arius was adept at using scripture to argue his points. Arianism was a widely held view at one time. It took a Church council to “lay down the law” on what constituted the proper view of the “truth.”

It is like the three blind men and the elephant. One has the tail, the other the nose and another say the ear. Each concludes differently what type of animal the elephant really is. The elephant is still an elephant. To say that we perceive things differently is not to acknowledge relativism.

God is God, I find nothing inconsistent with God’s omnipotence or omnibenevolence to say that he sent different messengers (who translated the messages) to different peoples. If fact, given the beauty and massive diversity of creation, I would expect it. Anything less might imply a lack of creativity, effort or compassion.😃
Click to expand...
:eek: Wow “Tu m’en bouches coin” french for I am amazed at your answerr. This is by far the best so far and it is giving me a lot to ponder. Your point is elegantly argued.
Simplement formidable monsieur, formidable!!! chapeau:thumbsup: 👍
 
yannick said:
It’s probably a silly question, since this is Christian Forum but we beleive that the Bible is the Word of God, the Muslims beleive that the Qu’ran is the word of God as well can both be true? Is God contradicting himself? if not is this 2 different entities speaking or is it simply that one of those book was invented. I read the Qu’ran it’s interesting but…
Click to expand...
Hi
In its origin OTBible was also true. For NTBible it is a mix as Jesus did not leave anything on writing or authenticated by him when he departed from Galilee.Quran in Arabic Text is true.
Thanks
 
The significance of the Qur’an with regard to the Bible and all other earlier scriptures is like this:

Why read last week’s newspaper when today’s edition has just been delivered to your door-step?

Why refer to an old obsolete book which has many of it’s pages either missing, torn or defaced to the point of being unreadable when the very latest complete and revised edition of the book by the very same author is now available at your neighbourhood bookstore?

Seekers of the Truth need to seriously ponder these questions.
 
Peregrino said:
This is a fantastic point. The problem is, the truth is one, God is one but the faith through which you see this truth is not the truth itself. If you acknowledge the existence of God, that truth is not relative. Relativism creeps in when you confuse the faith for the truth.

You can read parts of the Bible and easily come to different conclusions. I can read the Gospel of Mark and say that the inspired writer didn’t think that Jesus was divine. When I read John, I have to conclude that the writer wanted us to believe that Jesus is God. Arius was adept at using scripture to argue his points. Arianism was a widely held view at one time. It took a Church council to “lay down the law” on what constituted the proper view of the “truth.”

It is like the three blind men and the elephant. One has the tail, the other the nose and another say the ear. Each concludes differently what type of animal the elephant really is. The elephant is still an elephant. To say that we perceive things differently is not to acknowledge relativism.

God is God, I find nothing inconsistent with God’s omnipotence or omnibenevolence to say that he sent different messengers (who translated the messages) to different peoples. If fact, given the beauty and massive diversity of creation, I would expect it. Anything less might imply a lack of creativity, effort or compassion.😃
Click to expand...
This is why God gave us a Church to interpret Scripture for us.

It is impossible for God to send a messenger that denies His divinity. That is what Mohammed/the Koran does.

If you believe in Christ as Lord, you must reject the Koran.

It is the creation of a man, and not a particularly holy man at that.

God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top