Comparing the Koran with the Bible

[sedonaman]

… Muslim societies are better at hiding these atrocities, …

No. Rather too many in the West are capable of ignoring inconvenient facts that don’t support their ideology.

 

[viveret]

No. Rather too many in the West are capable of ignoring inconvenient facts that don’t support their ideology.

The increasing integration of the world and the incredibly fast diffusion of information make it impossible for atrocities in any quarter to be hidden. It is a development that pleases me much.

 

[viveret]

we have to remember that Jesus used to talk figuratively. But then when he talked plainly with his disciples he made it clear that he was sent FROM God and that he did not say that he WAS God.

I have noted that in the Muslim world, the literal use of language is privileged over the figurative use of language.
In the West, this is not so.
The figurative and metaphoric uses of language can carry as much truth as the literal.
But this is a cultural value, not a religious one.
Another reason that comparing the Koran and Bible is a futile project.

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

bump for what

your friend said
For those who are unaware this is the oldest known remnants of a Quran dated 7th/8th century found in an upstairs room in the Sana’a Mosque in Yemen in 1972. The texts are said to be very different from those in today’s Quran.

many information are said through people

who said that ?
how is it differs ?
where is the sources ? where is the eveidences

i didn’t answer to him actually because of his weak response not because i have no answers as you think

You don’t have any answers. All you did was respond to a question with more questions. That’s the #1 sign of no argumentation and dodging answers.

we have to remember that Jesus used to talk figuratively. But then when he talked plainly with his disciples he made it clear that he was sent FROM God and that he did not say that he WAS God.

Ah yes, the old “Jesus never said I am God” argumentation, made so popular by Ahmed Deedat and yet so astoundingly fallacious and easy to refute that I sometimes wonder if Muslims even read the responses by Christians to this.

This argumentation is fallacious for a few reasons:

• We are told that Jesus never said the exact words, “I am God.” Well, neither did He ever say “I am a prophet,” nor “I am just a messenger” either. Therefore by the Muslim’s own standards Jesus is neither God, prophet nor messenger.
• The mere statement “I am God” would not have to be given to prove that Jesus was divine. This would be like saying Hitler wasn’t racist because he never said the exact words “I am racist.” It’s essentially inventing a scenario and then demanding the other person respond.
• Even if Christ did say “I am God,” those words alone would not make it true. If I started a thread where I simply said “I am God,” would that mean Muslims had to worship me? I don’t think so, yet this is the kind of logic being presented.

The fact is, if Christ was merely a man, then He said some things that would have been very blasphemous.

• He stated that He existed before Abraham, and in fact was nearly stoned for doing so (John 8:57-59).
• Christ compares Himself to the bread that came down from heaven in the deserts of Sinai (John 6:32-33, 35). No prophet ever came down from heaven.
• He identifies Himself as the Resurrection and the Life, and that no one will die who believes in Him. Not God, but Him (John 11:23, 25).
• Christ forgave the sins of the paralytic (Matt 9:2), something only God could do. In fact, the Pharisees were quick to point this out (Mark 2:7).
• He asked God: “glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:5; emphasis mine). If He were a prophet, He would not be telling God that he existed with God before the world was, and neither would he be asking for such glory.
• Christ accepts worship from men, such as the man born blind (John 9:38). There are only three times in the New Testament that this also happens: Cornelius bowing to the apostle Peter (Acts 10:25); the apostle John to the angel (Rev 19:10); and John again it the angel (Rev 22:8). In all of these three situations, the person worshiped immediately scolds the other person, telling them to only worship God. Christ never did this. Surely if He was a prophet - and a great prophet at that - He would be the number one opponent to man worship.
• Christ, standing before the Sanhedrin, makes reference to a prophecy in Daniel 7:13 (Matt 26:64; Mark 14:62; Luke 22:67-69). That passage was not only a Messianic prophecy, but one that suggested deity. The Sanhedrin knew this well - in fact they knew it so well that the high priest tore his robes (a sign that he had just heard blasphemy) and condemned Christ to death.

Again, if Christ were a mere prophet, then He would be a false and blasphemous one for the claims made. As I stated before, Christ did not have to claim deity to confirm it, in fact a study of the New Testament scriptures shows that affirmation of His deity came in His actions, and He sought the statement of others towards His deity rather than His own words. The fact is, the old saying goes, “If it looks like a duck, quacks like a ducks, and swims like a duck, then it must be a duck”…but according to some Muslims that duck would never be considered a duck unless it stopped quacking and said “I am a duck.”

 

[flower_of_God]

You don’t have any answers. All you did was respond to a question with more questions. That’s the #1 sign of no argumentation and dodging answers.

Ah yes, the old “Jesus never said I am God” argumentation, made so popular by Ahmed Deedat and yet so astoundingly fallacious and easy to refute that I sometimes wonder if Muslims even read the responses by Christians to this.

This argumentation is fallacious for a few reasons:

• We are told that Jesus never said the exact words, “I am God.” Well, neither did He ever say “I am a prophet,” nor “I am just a messenger” either. Therefore by the Muslim’s own standards Jesus is neither God, prophet nor messenger.
• The mere statement “I am God” would not have to be given to prove that Jesus was divine. This would be like saying Hitler wasn’t racist because he never said the exact words “I am racist.” It’s essentially inventing a scenario and then demanding the other person respond.
• Even if Christ did say “I am God,” those words alone would not make it true. If I started a thread where I simply said “I am God,” would that mean Muslims had to worship me? I don’t think so, yet this is the kind of logic being presented.

The fact is, if Christ was merely a man, then He said some things that would have been very blasphemous.

• He stated that He existed before Abraham, and in fact was nearly stoned for doing so (John 8:57-59).
• Christ compares Himself to the bread that came down from heaven in the deserts of Sinai (John 6:32-33, 35). No prophet ever came down from heaven.
• He identifies Himself as the Resurrection and the Life, and that no one will die who believes in Him. Not God, but Him (John 11:23, 25).
• Christ forgave the sins of the paralytic (Matt 9:2), something only God could do. In fact, the Pharisees were quick to point this out (Mark 2:7).
• He asked God: “glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:5; emphasis mine). If He were a prophet, He would not be telling God that he existed with God before the world was, and neither would he be asking for such glory.
• Christ accepts worship from men, such as the man born blind (John 9:38). There are only three times in the New Testament that this also happens: Cornelius bowing to the apostle Peter (Acts 10:25); the apostle John to the angel (Rev 19:10); and John again it the angel (Rev 22:8). In all of these three situations, the person worshiped immediately scolds the other person, telling them to only worship God. Christ never did this. Surely if He was a prophet - and a great prophet at that - He would be the number one opponent to man worship.
• Christ, standing before the Sanhedrin, makes reference to a prophecy in Daniel 7:13 (Matt 26:64; Mark 14:62; Luke 22:67-69). That passage was not only a Messianic prophecy, but one that suggested deity. The Sanhedrin knew this well - in fact they knew it so well that the high priest tore his robes (a sign that he had just heard blasphemy) and condemned Christ to death.

Again, if Christ were a mere prophet, then He would be a false and blasphemous one for the claims made. As I stated before, Christ did not have to claim deity to confirm it, in fact a study of the New Testament scriptures shows that affirmation of His deity came in His actions, and He sought the statement of others towards His deity rather than His own words. The fact is, the old saying goes, “If it looks like a duck, quacks like a ducks, and swims like a duck, then it must be a duck”…but according to some Muslims that duck would never be considered a duck unless it stopped quacking and said “I am a duck.”

Very good argumentation!

 

[InSearchofGrace]

well its not our fault that muslim families are good families with healthy values

its not our fault that christian families are getting apart,its not our fault that you guys love more your dogs and cats then your children,partners,that homosexuality is more acceptable then a traditional family…not our fault that you get divorced for every litle thing

Perhaps you can consider these:

What’s important to Muslim families:

• Punishment to homosexuals, death in Islamic states, maybe less “cruel” in non-Islamic states
• Punishment for premarital / extramarital sex. Honor killings for females by the males in their families.
• Punishment for apostasy, same parameters as to homosexuals.
• Unequal standing of women with men on inheritance, property settlement and custody of children upon divorce, etc.
• Family and children in a polygamous setting. Also, Shi’ites have mut’a, a form of legalized prostitution, marrying for temporary sex. Sunnis, it seems, allow the same. In Sahih Muslim: Jabir Ibn Abdullah and Salama Ibn al-Akwa’ narrated: There came to us the proclaimer of Allah’s Messenger (May peace be upon him) and said: “Allah’s Messenger has granted youto benefit yourself (Istamta’u), i.e., to contract temporary marriage with women.”
• Looking to eternal life with sex with 72 virgins and wine that is not really wine ?!? for men, without virgin partners knowing about each other (I can’t wrap my head around this, being a woman).

Bosnian Muslim, if you lived according to the tenets of your faith and went to heaven after death, how do you see YOUR eternal life? This was asked of you before in another thread, but you did not reply.

What’s important to Christian families:

• Dignity of human life, not just the lives of our pets
• Forgiveness for sins including illicit sex with opposite or same sex with contrition and penance. These sins are not condoned. Don’t interchange Christian values with secular values, as Sam_777 has pointed out.
• Prayers for apostates, never death
• Equal standing of women with men on inheritance, property settlement, custody of children upon separation from spouse, etc.
• Family and children in a monogamous setting. Christians go astray, yes, society does frown on it and the Church considers it a sin.
• Looking forward to eternal life in the presence of God.

That’s just a quick, no means complete, comparison. Jharek might have a more eloquent way of comparing Muslim v Christian family values. He does have a way with words, which is why I thoroughly enjoy his posts.

Peace.

 

[viveret]

Looking forward to eternal life in the presence of God.

And if the presence of God is not enough for you . . . then you really want too much.

 

[scottm]

Aha, so Jesus will be the judge. More than strange, considering that muslem mention only Mohammed, even in their own creed. They say there is only one GOD and Mohammed is HIS messsenger. Under these circumstances how come exactly Jesus, just a prohet according to them will judge? Isn’t this God’s job?

In your oppinion how did Coran appear, who wrote it? Or, do you believe it has divine sours?

(1) The Koran speaks of numerous prophets by name, most of them appearing in the Old Testament, and adds that there were many others not named. It says that God/Allah sent prophets all over the world. (“Allah” is the Arabic word that means “God.” Arab-speaking Christians use that word for the Christian God.) Mohammad is merely the last prophet of God. That’s what the clause “seal of the prophets” means: when you’re done with a scroll or a letter you seal it up. Last prophet.

The Islamic creed asserts one God (“There is no divinity except the Divinity,” or “There is no God except God”), and the Koran specifies which one that is: it’s the God of Noah, Abraham, Lot, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, the Twelve Tribes of Israel, David, Solomon, John the Baptist – and I’m probably forgetting some other characters. All of these Bible characters are identified in the Koran as the very prophets from the Jewish and Christian scriptures, thus unifying the three religions. The Koran says that all of these prophets preached the same message that Mohammad preached, and from the same God; e.g. Sura 41:43, “Nothing is said to you [Mohammad] that was not said to the messengers before you.” CCC paragraph 841 affirms this. I quote the CCC: “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.”

This, plus the unique attributes of Jesus, explain why Jesus is above Mohammad in status.

(2) Jesus Christ preached 500-some-odd years before Mohammad was born. And the Koran says that Jesus was a prophet of Allah/God. Therefore, Mohammad’s message (ie, the text of the Koran) must be compatible with the message of Jesus. To say otherwise makes the Koran a lie. The message of Jesus is contained in the New Testament writings and the oral tradition of his disciples. Those oral traditions are contained primarily in two places: in liturgies and in the Nicene Creed. So, we have to be able to reconcile the NT, the liturgies, the Nicene Creed, and the Koran – all four. If we cannot do that then the Koran is a lie (because it claims to be the same as what came before it). But if the Koran is a lie then the CCC is probably wrong to assert that Moslems worship our God; there’d certainly be some explaining to do.

The NT, liturgies, and Creed have already been reconciled. All that remains is the Koran. In this thread I’ve made the basic steps of reconciliation. A fuller treatment is warranted but it would take a whole book to do it, and it’s a done deal as far as I’m concerned. My basic steps are right. The Koran can be read in way that harmonizes with Christianity, while simultaneously affirming non-negotiable Islamic essentials.

The origin of the Koran is now a done deal. We’re boxed into a corner once it is harmonized with the Bible and Mohammad is a prophet. Of course it came from God, ultimately, but if Mohammad said the proximate messenger was an angel, so be it. That story is consistent with the history of Islam. The Koran came from an angel of God as far as I’m concerned, but that is a conclusion I have drawn, not an assumption that I began with.

 

[scottm]

Here’s the walk a Moslem has to do. He or she has to accept and affirm four things:

1. The Ten Commandments
2. The practice of prayer to God
3. The Nicene Creed
4. The practice of the eucharist

Those are the four non-negotiable essential elements of Christianity.

The first two are already part of Islam. Pious Moslems actually pray to God a minimum of five times every single day.

I’ve already explained that the Koran speaks against an heretical trinity and says nothing about the Nicene Creed’s trinity. I’ve already pointed out how the Koran treats Jesus as a unique person, and how close the actual words of the Koran come to explaining the Christian trinity in its passages about the death and ascension of Jesus. **Islam would not break if the Nicene Creed’s trinity is accepted. ** Look different – yes. But not break.

The eucharist is a logical consequence of accepting the Nicene Creed; once you have the Creed you get the eucharist for free.

Going the other way, a Christian has to accept seven things. The first is that there is no God except God – as if that’s a problem. It’s part of the Nicene Creed. Second, a Christian has to accept a month of fasting – as if that should be a problem. A long time ago fasting was common. The Byzantine calendar still has a 7-week fast preceding Pascha/Easter. Maybe we can agree that the Byzantine Lenten fast replaces Ramadan; I don’t know. They exist for the same purpose. Third, a Christian has to accept more frequent prayer – as if that should be a problem. Pious Moslems shame us when it comes to the habit of prayer. Fourth, a Christian has to accept a pilgrimage to the shrine Abraham erected to monotheism – as if that should be a problem. Not. Fifth, a Christian has to accept a poor tax, aka special offerings to the poor. But we already do that for Lent, so that’s not a problem. Sixth, a Christian has to accept that there will be an end of time coinciding with a Judgement Day that ushers in the hereafter (heaven and hell). But these points are already in the Nicene Creed.

Seventh, lastly, a Christian has to accept that Mohammad was the last prophet of God, but that point of doctrine was accomplished when the Nicene Creed was incorporated into the Koran. It’s a freebie.

 

[bosnian_muslim]

scottm i dont know what you are trying to proove but all i have tp say is that islam and christianity are two different faith with very different beliefs…and very different traditions.We have very little in common,and please dont even dream about that a muslim would accept the trinity.Thats the most important part of your faith and at the same time islam sees it as a the biggest sin(polytheism)

 

[scottm]

Thats the most important part of your faith and at the same time islam sees it as a the biggest sin(polytheism)

I agree that the Koran describes polytheism as the gravest sin, but you’re embarrassingly mistaken to apply that to Christianity. Christianity is monotheistic – as passionately monotheistic as Islam is. Therefore, every single time you assert that Christians are polytheists, you either (a) willfully lie, which violates Allah’s laws, or (b) display an embarrassing level of misinformation.

But now that you know as a fact that Christianity is passionately monotheist – because I just told you so, and because you’re going to look up the text of the Nicene Creed and learn it for yourself – option “b” is no longer an option for you. You only have option “a” in the future, starting now. So don’t go spreading lies about Christians being polytheists.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

I think it’s a BIG problem to say that a Christian HAS to travel anywhere, even a shrine to God. Churches are shrines to God themselves. What makes one that Muhammed built special? Why more special than St. Peter’s Bailica?

I have a problem with that.

 

[bosnian_muslim]

we do not understand monotheism in the same way

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

Just want to maintain attention to my response to elwill here, however as a side venture…

…please dont even dream about that a muslim would accept the trinity.Thats the most important part of your faith and at the same time islam sees it as a the biggest sin(polytheism)

And that is one reason why the Quran could not be sourced to God - because in it God claims that Christians are guilty of a heresy they don’t even practice. The Trinity is not polytheism, and anyone who says so has no idea what they are talking about.

 

[bosnian_muslim]

Just want to maintain attention to my response to elwill here, however as a side venture…

And that is one reason why the Quran could not be sourced to God - because in it God claims that Christians are guilty of a heresy they don’t even practice. The Trinity is not polytheism, and anyone who says so has no idea what they are talking about.

and i repeat: we do not understand monotheism in the same way

 

[Byzantine_Wolf]

and i repeat: we do not understand monotheism in the same way

That’s fine - if you want to be Unitarian, that’s your prerogative.

However, if you admit we don’t see monotheism the same way, and therefore Christians are monotheists, then don’t call us polytheists. If you do so because of your religion (as you admitted in your previous post) then your religion forces you to lie. If your religion forces you to lie…then it cannot be from God.

 

[flower_of_God]

As far as i am concerned Coran is not from GOD!

 

[elwill]

Ah yes, the old “Jesus never said I am God” argumentation, made so popular by Ahmed Deedat and yet so astoundingly fallacious and easy to refute that I sometimes wonder if Muslims even read the responses by Christians to this.

This argumentation is fallacious for a few reasons:

• We are told that Jesus never said the exact words, “I am God.” Well, neither did He ever say “I am a prophet,” nor “I am just a messenger” either. Therefore by the Muslim’s own standards Jesus is neither God, prophet nor messenger.

i disagree with you , he said many times that he was sent from God ,

Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life

Jhn 7:28 Then cried Jesus in the temple as he taught, saying, Ye both know me, and ye know whence I am: and I am not come of myself, but he that sent me is true, whom ye know not.

If Jesus indeed was God he would have sent himself, not let someone send him.

Now let us look at some other interesting verses concerning jesus (pbuh) :

Jhn 14:24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: **and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me. **

.Jhn 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.

Jhn 8:26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.

Jhn 12:49 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak.

So those verses make it crystal clear that everything he said, everything he spoke was not of his own but of the ONE WHO SENT HIM, which is the Father. So hence Jesus did not even say things of his own! This is proof that he is indeed a prophet, every prophet speaks what God tells them to speak, Jesus is no exception to this rule.

 

[elwill]

The fact is, if Christ was merely a man, then He said some things that would have been very blasphemous.

• He stated that He existed before Abraham, and in fact was nearly stoned for doing so (John 8:57-59).

Now, if Jesus existed before Abraham did, that might be a remarkable thing, but does that prove that he was God?

and , dose this verse clearly means that jesus pre_existed abraham , seems to me incomplete sentence

• Christ compares Himself to the bread that came down from heaven in the deserts of Sinai (John 6:32-33, 35). No prophet ever came down from heaven.

and that’s your proof that jesus is the God

• He identifies Himself as the Resurrection and the Life, and that no one will die who believes in Him. Not God, but Him (John 11:23, 25).

i believe in jesus (pbuh) , what is that supposed to means
i believe in mohammed (pbuh) , what is that supposed to me
believing in someone means that you trust him not that divine him

• Christ forgave the sins of the paralytic (Matt 9:2), something only God could do. In fact, the Pharisees were quick to point this out (Mark 2:7).

let us not forget also that jesus said
“I can of Mine own Self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and My judgment is just; because I seek not Mine own will, but the will of the Father Which hath sent me. If I bear witness of Myself, My witness is not true.”

so he didn’t forgave them by his own will , but the will of the father (the only one could do ) who sent him

• He asked God: “glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:5; emphasis mine). If He were a prophet, He would not be telling God that he existed with God before the world was, and neither would he be asking for such glory.

who asking whom again

• Christ accepts worship from men, such as the man born blind (John 9:38). There are only three times in the New Testament that this also happens: Cornelius bowing to the apostle Peter (Acts 10:25); the apostle John to the angel (Rev 19:10); and John again it the angel (Rev 22:8). In all of these three situations, the person worshiped immediately scolds the other person, telling them to only worship God. Christ never did this. Surely if He was a prophet - and a great prophet at that - He would be the number one opponent to man worship.

what kind of worships did jesus accepted from them ?

• Christ, standing before the Sanhedrin, makes reference to a prophecy in Daniel 7:13 (Matt 26:64; Mark 14:62; Luke 22:67-69). That passage was not only a Messianic prophecy, but one that suggested deity. The Sanhedrin knew this well - in fact they knew it so well that the high priest tore his robes (a sign that he had just heard blasphemy) and condemned Christ to death.

i will explore this one and aswers you later

 

[FaithJoy]

yes,she was a virgin,untouched by a man,when she became pregnant…so there is nothing to be punished for…God made the baby talk in front of the people,so the baby said that she didnt commit zina(sex before marriage)…after that she lived with her relatives

There is a big problem in how you understand what happened. You are assuming that everyone knew that Mary was a virgin, that is not true. You are looking at it in a view that you have read the virgin birth 2000 years after the fact. So, if the people in Mary’s day saw her pregnant without a husband, she would have been stoned to death. Therefore, the Christian story where Joseph was needed to wed Mary in order to protect her, makes much more of a believable story than what the Islam story of no marriage. If the Islam story was true, Mary would NOT have been protected. God’s plan was a marriage to protect Mary, makes much more sense.