Islam's Plagiarized Christian Origins

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeusVult09
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
This may be a little off topic but it follows. Just look at many of the old religions and you’ll find the similarities. Take a look at the great flood, both books have that, but so does the mayan culture and the book of zen. and not just the great flood either but other stories as well… who’s to say that the quran copied the bible? may it was the other way around… maybe, maybe not, but it makes on think you know?
Not for very long. The Bible [New Testament] was written down at least 500 years before Mohammed was even born, and the Qur’an was not written down until after his death in 632 AD. Personalities in the Qur’an are similar to those of the Bible; in fact and in order to establish credibility, Mohammed claims to be the last in the line of Biblical prophets. Therefore, I think it’s fair to say Islam tried to copy the Bible, however poorly.

It is a little off-topic, but have you ever considered that the flood of the Bible is a metaphor for a great upheaval of an existing order? If we look at that as a possibility, “floods” occur all the time. For example, the Great Depression would be an economic “flood”. World War II would be one of the greatest “floods” of all time. So I laugh at all those shows about the search for Noah’s Ark.
 
I presume you are talking about the seventh century Qur’an found in Yemen.

It has to be the true Qur’an because it dates from first century of Hijra and was discovered in the Great Mosque of Sana’a (Yemen). The present standard one significantly differs from the ancient Yemeni Qur’an [the modern version has the word “sword” removed]. Carbon dating system confirmed that the ancient Qur’an is not one forged by religious rivalries or kafirs [infidels/non-believers]. Moreover, the ancient Qur’an [complete with the word “sword”] was discovered by Muslims, not kafirs. The one today is different because it has been corrupted by men. Perhaps the ancient one has the verses of Jesus and the cup. If so, then the Qur’an you have today is not a true Qur’an.
yes these manuscripts shoot down Muslim claims about not 1 word ever being changed so completely that in my onion they are not entitled to talk a bout the corruption of the bible as that is pure hypocrisy. Christos tried to tell me that it was all a trick by this German professor. Muslims will believe any lie rather than believe the truth
 
This may be a little off topic but it follows. Just look at many of the old religions and you’ll find the similarities. Take a look at the great flood, both books have that, but so does the mayan culture and the book of zen. and not just the great flood either but other stories as well… who’s to say that the quran copied the bible? may it was the other way around… maybe, maybe not, but it makes on think you know?
well as the books of the bible existed long before the koran i have to say that is imposible
 
Planten,

Since you buy into what you say above, please allow me to introduce you to several Nigerian business men who need help transferring money overseas.

Of course, that is a 4-1-9 scam and you would never fall for a scam. Oh, wait… I see you already did.
cthulhubryan, I could not understand you. Since you are some lost person i.e.a Protestant (Methodist) wanting to come home, I would suggest that you go home before evening falls. Let us know when you are at home. Thanks.
 
AFskater;5563496:
Originally Posted by AFskater
This may be a little off topic but it follows. Just look at many of the old religions and you’ll find the similarities. Take a look at the great flood, both books have that, but so does the mayan culture and the book of zen. and not just the great flood either but other stories as well… who’s to say that the quran copied the bible? may it was the other way around… maybe, maybe not, but it makes on think you know?
well as the books of the bible existed long before the koran i have to say that is imposible
Maybe it was the bible who took these teachings from other scriptures, is what i think he meant to say, only if he comes back and says it himself. Anyways, that question still stands, its easy to say that the Bible has plagiarized something else, because those books have been written before the Bible. (Look at my previous post for a continuation of this message)
 
I presume you are talking about the seventh century Qur’an found in Yemen.

It has to be the true Qur’an because it dates from first century of Hijra and was discovered in the Great Mosque of Sana’a (Yemen). The present standard one significantly differs from the ancient Yemeni Qur’an [the modern version has the word “sword” removed]. Carbon dating system confirmed that the ancient Qur’an is not one forged by religious rivalries or kafirs [infidels/non-believers]. Moreover, the ancient Qur’an [complete with the word “sword”] was discovered by Muslims, not kafirs. The one today is different because it has been corrupted by men. Perhaps the ancient one has the verses of Jesus and the cup. If so, then the Qur’an you have today is not a true Qur’an.
Seriously, you keep claiming it has been corrupted by man when it hasn’t. The Quran was being recited in 7 different dialects, which have also been preserved. Also, if people are writing down certain verses on a single page, doesnt mean that they have to be in that order, or it was put in the wrong order. If u ask why would someone write down these verses on a certain peice of paper. If I wanted to memorize some verses of the Quran, and lets say i knew these few verses here, but found it hard to memorize or remember this one verse among them i would write it down. Then same thing with another from elsewhere. Majority of these pages found were sigle paged manuscripts. As to why it was cleared with water and rewritte. Also, if a person has finally memorized these verses which he was having trouble on, and there is a scarcity of paper, he would wash the verses away, let the paper dry, and then rewrite. It is as simple as that.

As to the Bible, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, this is a short excerpt from the book, The Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls

"In contrast to some Jews (including some Jews defined by apocalypticism),
the Qumran Essenes were defined by where they were. They
were in the wilderness preparing the way of YHWH. This place “in the
wilderness” is singularly significant because of their understanding of
the Voice calling them, both through Scripture (Isa 40:3) and existentially
into the wilderness. That is, while many Jews and most Christians
have interpreted Isa 40:3 to mean “A voice is calling in the wilderness,
‘Prepare the way of Yahweh,’” the Qumranites understood it differently.
The Voice had been heard calling them into the wilderness to prepare
the way of Yahweh; hence, for the Qumranites the verse meant, “A
Voice is calling, ‘In the wilderness prepare the way of Yahweh’.”13 "

With a footnote to the number 13 saying

“13. This idea is developed further in James H. Charlesworth, “Intertextuality:
Isaiah 40:3 and the Serek Ha-Yahad,” in The Quest for Context and Meaning: Studies in
Biblical Intertextuality in Honor of James A. Sanders (ed. C. A. Evans and S. Talmon; BibIntS
28; Leiden: Brill, 1997), 197–224.”
 
Another exerpt from the book. Page26

Despite their having the same text base and the same contents, the
Protestant First Testament and the Tanak convey quite different messages
precisely because of their different structures. And the Protestant structure
is basically the same as all other Christian canons, Roman Catholic
and the various Orthodox canons, except that the latter have more books
in them than the Protestant. The two major differences between the
Jewish canon and the Christian First Testament are the position of the
Latter Prophets in each, and the tendency in the Christian canon to
lengthen the story line, or history, that begins in Genesis, to include
Ruth, Esther, Chronicles, Ezra-Nehemiah, Judith, Tobit, and the
Maccabees. And each of these major differences in structure makes a
clear statement of its own, even before consideration of content.
 
And another

Taken together, the biblical manuscripts from Qumran illustrate several
crucial features of scriptural development
. First, the phenomenon of textual
plurality prevailed
at Qumran. Th ose who preserved the Scrolls kept copies of
a number of diff erent manuscript traditions
.12 Th is suggests that there was no
“standard” version of the Scriptures in this period
but rather a plurality of different
textual traditions with thousands of diff erent readings in circulation at
the same time
. Second, amid Qumran’s textual plurality, the proto-Masoretic
tradition is the most widely attested tradition at Qumran. Th e widespread transmission
that would make the Masoretic tradition Judaism’s most authoritative
text was, therefore, already underway at Qumran prior to the Common Era.
Finally, if some manuscripts represent the work of a Qumran scribal school,
**then one may speculate that the Community was genuinely dedicated to the
production of its own editions **of biblical texts.

I have highlighted a few major points.
  1. It shows that the Bible had many different developmental stages, after which it has reached it current form. They had many different copies of the same manuscript, therfore it is assumed that there was no standard version as there is today. There were thousands of different readings of manuscripts that were available at the same time.
  2. That if you are not willing to accept that the bible had many different developmental stages and many different forms then it can be said that the Qumran Community were producing editions of their own. Thus they were changing the Bible already from that early a time period.
 
One important feature of Great Isaiah is the amount of textual correction it
exhibits. Just as we often make mistakes when copying or typing information,
ancient scribes made mistakes when copying manuscripts. Given the phenomenon
of textual plurality during this time, it was also possible for scribes to
correct readings in one manuscript by consulting those of another. Th us, one
is not surprised to fi nd hundreds of corrections in Great Isaiah. Methods of
correction in the scroll include supralinear corrections (added “above the line”),
numerous strike-throughs, overwriting, and the use of small dots (“cancellation
dots”) above, and often below, incorrect letters.

Page 90 (Previous ones are from just before these. I really recommend this book. I have it in PDF format if anyone wishes for me to send it to them.
 
Two examples of scriptural anthologies include the Testimonia and the
Consolations. Th e Testimonia (4QTestim = 4Q175) lists on a single sheet of
parchment a series of quotations (without commentary) that illumine a common
theme. Th ese quotations include a proto-Samaritan version of Exod 20:21b and
Deut 18:18–19, followed by quotations from Num 24:15–17, Deut 33:8–11,
and an extrabiblical writing known as the Apocryphon of Joshua. Our scribe has,
therefore, presented these texts in a sequence refl ecting the order of the biblical
narrative from Sinai to conquest (Exodus–Joshua). Testimonia was penned
approximately100–75 b.c.e. by the same scribe who copied the Rule of the Community
(1QS) and made numerous corrections to Great Isaiah. Surprisingly, the
previously unknown Apocryphon of Joshua was worthy to be cited alongside passages
from the Torah.

Beautiful, a person who is correcting your scriptures believes that The Apocryphon of Joshua was worthy to be cited alongside passages from the Torah, but forgive me, there is no full copy of this Apocrypha, is there?
 
Th e beginning of this chapter has already indicated that no biblical writing
is preserved in more numerous copies than Psalms. Yet the Qumran versions
of Psalms diff er radically from their presentation in Bibles today and, in fact,
include psalms previously unknown to modern readers.
Along with well over thirty additional copies from Qumran, the Great
Psalms Scroll from Cave 11 (11QPsa = 11Q5), copied in the fi rst century c.e.,
has given scholars unprecedented vantage into the growth and development of
the Psalms. Two immediate surprises encounter the reader of this scroll. First,
this scroll preserves an ordering of Pss 93–150 that is very diff erent from that of
the Masoretic Psalter, the version of Psalms found in the Hebrew Bible today.
Second, the Great Psalms Scroll, along with other Qumran Psalms manuscripts
(4QPsf = 4Q88; 11QPsb = 11Q6; cf. 4Q380–381; 11QapocPs = 11Q11), contained
psalms that are not even present at all within the Masoretic Psalter



Four additional psalms, however,
were previously unknown, including a “Plea for Deliverance,” “Apostrophe to
Zion,” “Hymn to the Creator,” and “David’s Compositions.”
Taken together, the comprehensive ordering of these materials in the Great
Psalms Scroll is as follows: Pss 101; 102; 103; 109; 118; 104; 147; 105; 146;
148; [120]; 121–132; 119; 135; 136; 118; 145; 154; “Plea for Deliverance”;
139; 137; 138; Ben Sira 51; “Apostrophe to Zion”; 93; 141; 133; 144; 155;
142; 143; 149; 150; “Hymn to the Creator”; 2 Sam 23:1–7; “David’s Compositions”;
140; 134; 151. Th e scroll ends with an extended blank at the bottom of
the page, indicating that this was the intended conclusion of the scroll.

page 93-94
 
I missed out some stuff rom post 189

Remember, the Apocryphon of Joshua is different from the Book of Joshua. However, the Apocryphon is in fragments.

Therefore, isn’t it possible that this was originally part of the Book of Joshua which sometime either was removed, or was lost from that Book?
 
cthulhubryan, I could not understand you. Since you are some lost person i.e.a Protestant (Methodist) wanting to come home, I would suggest that you go home before evening falls. Let us know when you are at home. Thanks.
Very funny. But still avoids the fact that Mahomet was a scammer.
 
Seriously, you keep claiming it has been corrupted by man when it hasn’t. The Quran was being recited in 7 different dialects, which have also been preserved.
You keep claiming it has not been corrupted by man when there is scientific evidence that it has, according to the Muslim definition of “corruption”. We have been told by Muslims that the only true Qur’an is the one in Arabic. I asked which dialect and received no reply. Now you tell us it was in 7 dialects, so I ask once again which one is the true Qur’an?
…if people are writing down certain verses on a single page, doesnt mean that they have to be in that order, or it was put in the wrong order.
This is an astounding statement because a Muslim poster in another thread offered one example of the Bible’s corruption is one Gospel having Jesus cursing a fig tree and then going to the temple, while another Gospel has the incidents in reversed order.
If u ask why would someone write down these verses on a certain peice of paper. If I wanted to memorize some verses of the Quran, and lets say i knew these few verses here, but found it hard to memorize or remember this one verse among them i would write it down. Then same thing with another from elsewhere. Majority of these pages found were sigle paged manuscripts. As to why it was cleared with water and rewritte. Also, if a person has finally memorized these verses which he was having trouble on, and there is a scarcity of paper, he would wash the verses away, let the paper dry, and then rewrite. It is as simple as that.
And there is where the corruption occurs. Without a central authority to manage scripture, changes will occur because people do not write down the exact same thing even though they hear the same thing.
Poster planten told us that Muslims recite the Qur’an in a group and if anyone makes a mistake, he is corrected immediately. Who decides if someone made a mistake? My experience in working with groups shows that the person with the loudest voice dominates and decides what is correct, merely because he has the loudest voice. More timid people, even though they might be correct, tend to keep quiet. Corruption then enters.
Muslims brag that the Qur’an has not changed one jot or tittle in 1,400 years, yet when we show evidence it has, they dismiss it as minor, thus contradicting themselves. You can’t have it both ways, so which is it?
 
Seriously, you keep claiming it has been corrupted by man when it hasn’t.
Furthermore, consider Old English of the Middle Ages with Modern English today:
In Old English:
Here bygynneth the Book of the Tales of Caunterbury
Whan that Aprill, with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote
And bathed every veyne in swich licour,
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the Ram his halfe cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye,
That slepen al the nyght with open eye-
(So priketh hem Nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes
To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes;
15And specially from every shires ende
Of Engelond, to Caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke
That hem hath holpen, whan that they were seeke.

In Modern English:
Here begins the Book of the Tales of Cantebury
When in April the sweet showers fall
That pierce March’s drought to the root and all
And bathed every vein in liquor that has power
To generate therein and sire the flower;
When Zephyr also has with his sweet breath,
Filled again, in every holt and heath,
The tender shoots and leaves, and the young sun
His half-course in the sign of the Ram has run,
And many little birds make melody
That sleep through all the night with open eye
(So Nature pricks them on to ramp and rage)
Then folk do long to go on pilgrimage,
And palmers to go seeking out strange strands,
To distant shrines well known in distant lands.
And specially from every shire’s end
Of England they to Canterbury went,
The holy blessed martyr there to seek
Who helped them when they lay so ill and weak.
So the Bible changed to keep up with the language that people spoke so that it would be understandable to those who are living now.

To claim that any language, including Arabic, is exempt from change in 1,400 years is the height of the absurd. In fact, if the Koran has not changed to keep up with the vernacular, we can say it is no longer the perfect word of Allah because it is less understandable, and the less understandable it is, the less perfect it is; and to the extent it is still understandable, it is to fewer and fewer people. Eventually, the language will become essentially extinct, and then NO ONE will understand it. Ironically, Muslims take pride in this by claiming the only true Koran is in Arabic. So the Muslim claim that it is the “perfect word of Allah”, as if to gain some prestige through membership in an exclusive club, is thus refuted and exposed for what it is.
 
Originally Posted by Christos
Seriously, you keep claiming it has been corrupted by man when it hasn’t. The Quran was being recited in 7 different dialects, which have also been preserved.
QUOTE=sedonaman;5565268]You keep claiming it has not been corrupted by man when there is scientific evidence that it has, according to the Muslim definition of “corruption”. We have been told by Muslims that the only true Qur’an is the one in Arabic. I asked which dialect and received no reply. Now you tell us it was in 7 dialects, so I ask once again which one is the true Qur’an?
So Christos - which version of the 7 dialect koran is written in the tablets which are with allah?

Quote the koran passage, show where the koran states that it is preserved in 7 different dialects

Don’t show me the hadith - but koran only.
 
This may be a little off topic but it follows. Just look at many of the old religions and you’ll find the similarities. Take a look at the great flood, both books have that, but so does the mayan culture and the book of zen. and not just the great flood either but other stories as well… who’s to say that the quran copied the bible? may it was the other way around… maybe, maybe not, but it makes on think you know?
Now you begin the slippery slope. Many an argument has been made about Ziusudra and the Sumerian tale of the flood that predates the Old Testament. Many have falsely claimed that this means that the Bible was a copy of the Sumerian tale. In fact it is not. Any tale that occurs in any Sumerian book will be the oldest of it’s kind. Why? Because writing was invented at Sumer.

The tales of Noah as Oral Tradition are older than the Sumerian Tales, but all the tale of Ziusudra tells us is that this event in the Bible did occur. As one might expect, all peoples had to then descend from the crew of the Ark and thus would have the cultural memory of the flood.
 
Furthermore, consider Old English of the Middle Ages with Modern English today:
In Old English:
Here bygynneth the Book of the Tales of Caunterbury
Whan that Aprill, with his shoures soote
The droghte of March hath perced to the roote
And bathed every veyne in swich licour,
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
The tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the Ram his halfe cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye,
That slepen al the nyght with open eye-
(So priketh hem Nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes
To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes;
15And specially from every shires ende
Of Engelond, to Caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke
That hem hath holpen, whan that they were seeke.

In Modern English:
Here begins the Book of the Tales of Cantebury
When in April the sweet showers fall
That pierce March’s drought to the root and all
And bathed every vein in liquor that has power
To generate therein and sire the flower;
When Zephyr also has with his sweet breath,
Filled again, in every holt and heath,
The tender shoots and leaves, and the young sun
His half-course in the sign of the Ram has run,
And many little birds make melody
That sleep through all the night with open eye
(So Nature pricks them on to ramp and rage)
Then folk do long to go on pilgrimage,
And palmers to go seeking out strange strands,
To distant shrines well known in distant lands.
And specially from every shire’s end
Of England they to Canterbury went,
The holy blessed martyr there to seek
Who helped them when they lay so ill and weak.
So the Bible changed to keep up with the language that people spoke so that it would be understandable to those who are living now.

To claim that any language, including Arabic, is exempt from change in 1,400 years is the height of the absurd. In fact, if the Koran has not changed to keep up with the vernacular, we can say it is no longer the perfect word of Allah because it is less understandable, and the less understandable it is, the less perfect it is; and to the extent it is still understandable, it is to fewer and fewer people. Eventually, the language will become essentially extinct, and then NO ONE will understand it. Ironically, Muslims take pride in this by claiming the only true Koran is in Arabic. So the Muslim claim that it is the “perfect word of Allah”, as if to gain some prestige through membership in an exclusive club, is thus refuted and exposed for what it is.
So your admitting the Bible changed to keep up with the language. However, its quite obvious that these are english translations of the Bible. The translations may vary 1 million times if it wants, but the original must not change. Furthermore, the Quran is perfect so it does not need to change. If you want to believe that the Bible was changed, so be it. Majority of the Christian world would disagree. Actually, it is not to fewer and fewer people, because millions of people around the world speak Arabic, and Arabic grammer derives from the Quran because of it’s exquisite and articulate use of language. We take pride in that yes, the true Quran is in Arabic, and no matter how many times you translate it into english or other languages, people will still learn Arabic to understand the original Quran (im talking about the Non-Arab speaking people.) Your areguments here are completely useless.
 
You keep claiming it has not been corrupted by man when there is scientific evidence that it has, according to the Muslim definition of “corruption”. We have been told by Muslims that the only true Qur’an is the one in Arabic. I asked which dialect and received no reply. Now you tell us it was in 7 dialects, so I ask once again which one is the true Qur’an?
The quran was previously being recited in 7 different dialects, meaning its the same thing, but how some people pronounce tomato (tomayto and tomahto) doesnt mean its diffferent does it?
This is an astounding statement because a Muslim poster in another thread offered one example of the Bible’s corruption is one Gospel having Jesus cursing a fig tree and then going to the temple, while another Gospel has the incidents in reversed order.
The people wrote it in that manner for them selves, not for the whole Islamic world, but in the bible it is written in reverse order for all of the Christian world.
And there is where the corruption occurs. Without a central authority to manage scripture, changes will occur because people do not write down the exact same thing even though they hear the same thing.
Poster planten told us that Muslims recite the Qur’an in a group and if anyone makes a mistake, he is corrected immediately. Who decides if someone made a mistake? My experience in working with groups shows that the person with the loudest voice dominates and decides what is correct, merely because he has the loudest voice. More timid people, even though they might be correct, tend to keep quiet. Corruption then enters.
Muslims brag that the Qur’an has not changed one jot or tittle in 1,400 years, yet when we show evidence it has, they dismiss it as minor, thus contradicting themselves. You can’t have it both ways, so which is it?
Your experience with working in a group must have been a bad one then. Also, the correction is made based on the Original, not our own opinions. Therefore, even if someone had the loudest voice, even the ones who arent as loud enough woud be saying the same thing. If the person with the loudest voice had made a mistake also, then another person would not let the recitor continue until he has fixed that mistake. The evidence that is has? It’s not evidence it has, because the verses in the Quran were revised by the prophet. Whereas the ones the people were having written themselves were not so it could have had a mistake in it, not saying it did.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top