Islam's Plagiarized Christian Origins

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeusVult09
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hadi said:
why are some passages not found in the original manuscripts (I am talking about manuscripts that were found but they do not include these passages)…for example the adulteress story

please answer…
Click to expand...
For the adulteresss story, not that the passages were not found in the original manuscript, but the original manuscript had had it in the first places, it was already quoted in many old Christian manuscripts as early as the 3rd age. But then considering that adultery was a very serious sin, some societies at that age was not ready to accept such “forgiving” treatment over it, they might have taken it away. Read the following link:

bible-researcher.com/adult-hills.html
bible-researcher.com/adult.html

🙂
 
ZAKI said:
No that’s what everybody says (except for a few irrational people)

wasalam
Click to expand...
I am not irrational in thinking that Christians and Muslims don’t follow the same god. There is a definite inherited tradition within Islam as an Abrahamic faith but just because the Koran professes that Abraham was a muslim as were all the Jewish prophets and that islam is a continuation doesn’t mean I believe it.
 
seraphime2008

this proves that adding or removing passages in the NT was an easy job since people didn’t recite the entire NT but people had to read what was written down…and the style of the text is difficult to memorize…(similar to the style of the Ahadiths in Islam,difficult to memorize and therefore it had to be written down so people could read it)
also,few people had the privilege to obtain and read manuscripts , common people had to rely on others telling them what is written there.

this was not the case for the Quran,it was recited from the beginning of the revelation and people recited it at least 5 times a day because of its unique language and the strong oral tradition of the Arabs (people could memorize and recite a 1000 line poem very easily…like the pre-Islamic Seven Hanged poems)…so literate and illiterate common people could easily memorize the Surahs of the Quran…

Again,the style of both NT and Ahadiths were meant to be written down to better be used ,you don’t find Muslims memorizing entire books of Ahadiths,but millions of Muslims have memorized the entire Quran throughout the ages…this why you find many forgeries in the Ahadiths,and for the same reason in the NT)…
 
Hadi said:
seraphime2008

this proves that adding or removing passages in the NT was an easy job since people didn’t recite the entire NT but people had to read what was written down…and the style of the text is difficult to memorize…(similar to the style of the Ahadiths in Islam,difficult to memorize and therefore it had to be written down so people could read it)

this was not the case for the Quran,it was recited from the beginning of the revelation and people recited it at least 5 times a day because of its unique language and the strong oral tradition of the Arabs (people could memorize and recite a 1000 line poem very easily…like the pre-Islamic Seven Hanged poems)

Again,the style of both NT and Ahadiths were meant to be written down to better be used ,you don’t find Muslims memorizing entire books of Ahadiths,but millions of Muslims have memorized the entire Quran throughout the ages…this why you find many forgeries in the Ahadiths,and for the same reason in the NT)…
Click to expand...
Indeed that it’s an easy job to add or remove passages the NT if there are no authorities to keep them intact and there are no societies that used it and can always and had always compared the new copies to the old copies. But contrary, you have to remember that we have witnesses, societies, authorities and books that recorded all those books from generations to generations, and if we are an honest person, we have to admit that all those records and all the tedious jobs of the scholars to investigates the originality of the bible, have all come to the conclusion that we do have done a great job of maintaining the bible. Why you come to different direction of conclusion is an amazing thing to me? 🤷

While all those studies can bring clear minds to the conclusions that the Bible has been reserved well, you on the other hand wanted so bad to think differently. What bible do we have today? Conclusively by those studies, is the same bible as the original one, not the one that is missing a passage? Don’t you get it?

As for reciting, I believe it’s all fall to the tendency of human err. None has ever been a witness of how the Koran been collected and none can ever claim that it’s original. As you repeating the old adage that it’s all preserved well, in fact you don’t have the witness as explicit as a written recorded book that is passed from one generation to the next. Look at the problems that other posts have stated to you, even Muhammad didn’t remember the surah! You said millions have memorized that, where are all those millions that have passed away? Can you take them as your witness? You can’t. So, you keep repeating those magic words that “it’s preserved well”.

Your argument is the one that is standing on a very thin ice.
 
Byzantine_Wolf said:
There’s a historical document detailing a dinner held between a well known monk and a Muslim ruler, which leads into a debate regarding Christianity and Islam between the monk and the ruler’s advisers. It’s somewhat spurious since there is no real way to tell if it really comes from the time period it claims to, nevertheless it is a fine example of Muslim theology regarding Christ and the Word. There is a part of the dialogue, near the end, where the monk asks one of the Muslim advisers if he believes in God. The Muslim agrees. The monk asks if the Muslim believes in the Word of God. The Muslim agrees. The monk asks if the Muslim believes in the Spirit of God. The Muslim again agrees. The monk then declares that the Muslim is a Christian, since he believes in the Father, Word, and Spirit!
Click to expand...
You mean this one?
 
Hadi said:
I meant for us, Muslims , we say Our God is the same God ,so saying Islam plagiarized Christianity has no effect on us …if we Muslims believed in a different God (that is ,we Muslims say the God of the Jews is different than our God,then yes ,one would agree with the plagiarism accusation)

Again, i am speaking on behalf of the Muslims ,not the Christians
Click to expand...
I have no problem if you want to believe that we believe in the same God, however, why not deny Muhammed and Islam completely in order for you to understand who the real God is. The Christian and Jewish God is more of the same roots, while the Islamic understanding of God based on Muhammed is not in accord with the Book that you are supposed to make as source of guidance and truth.

We are all children of God. I should only say that you were misled by one person whose persona was more of a con man in the first place just because he disagreed with what he heard and the anger towards jews and the christians during his time. Try to know your prophet well and you can tell that he deceived you. But if in your heart you want to believe because you are part of his culture and not as a child of God according to the Holy book then it would be very difficult for you to accept the truth.

Let “Love” comes in to your heart because that is what God is all about. God will do everything to make you understand how much He loves you, not how much your so called prophet deceives you to believe him and to sow hatred towards you neighbors. Christians believe that God is “Love” because it kept showing all of us how much He loves us, and by doing so, He even did all the impossibilities just for you to know how much he loves you by coming down into our world to become flesh and works wonders for you and me. After that, in fulfillment of the prophesies, he offered himself as ransom for the sins of the world.

My friend God is not about according to one person making up stories of revelations. Many false prophets did that and are still doing it so today. Instead of defending the works of one man, try to ask God to open your heart and mind for understanding.
 
Hadi said:
seraphime2008

this proves that adding or removing passages in the NT was an easy job since people didn’t recite the entire NT but people had to read what was written down…and the style of the text is difficult to memorize…(similar to the style of the Ahadiths in Islam,difficult to memorize and therefore it had to be written down so people could read it)
also,few people had the privilege to obtain and read manuscripts , common people had to rely on others telling them what is written there.

this was not the case for the Quran,it was recited from the beginning of the revelation and people recited it at least 5 times a day because of its unique language and the strong oral tradition of the Arabs (people could memorize and recite a 1000 line poem very easily…like the pre-Islamic Seven Hanged poems)…so literate and illiterate common people could easily memorize the Surahs of the Quran…

Again,the style of both NT and Ahadiths were meant to be written down to better be used ,you don’t find Muslims memorizing entire books of Ahadiths,but millions of Muslims have memorized the entire Quran throughout the ages…this why you find many forgeries in the Ahadiths,and for the same reason in the NT)…
Click to expand...
i have already proven that even Mohammad forgot the Koran that there were 7 versions of the Koran and many lost verses of the Koran and hence your argument is nonsensical
 
seraphime2008 said:
Indeed that it’s an easy job to add or remove passages the NT if there are no authorities to keep them intact and there are no societies that used it and can always and had always compared the new copies to the old copies. But contrary, you have to remember that we have witnesses, societies, authorities and books that recorded all those books from generations to generations, and if we are an honest person, we have to admit that all those records and all the tedious jobs of the scholars to investigates the originality of the bible, have all come to the conclusion that we do have done a great job of maintaining the bible. Why you come to different direction of conclusion is an amazing thing to me? 🤷

While all those studies can bring clear minds to the conclusions that the Bible has been reserved well, you on the other hand wanted so bad to think differently. What bible do we have today? Conclusively by those studies, is the same bible as the original one, not the one that is missing a passage? Don’t you get it?

As for reciting, I believe it’s all fall to the tendency of human err. None has ever been a witness of how the Koran been collected and none can ever claim that it’s original. As you repeating the old adage that it’s all preserved well, in fact you don’t have the witness as explicit as a written recorded book that is passed from one generation to the next. Look at the problems that other posts have stated to you, even Muhammad didn’t remember the surah! You said millions have memorized that, where are all those millions that have passed away? Can you take them as your witness? You can’t. So, you keep repeating those magic words that “it’s preserved well”.

Your argument is the one that is standing on a very thin ice.
Click to expand...
The Koran was collected together as 1 manuscript 20 years after Mohammad’s death
under caliph uthman , who burnt all the variant manuscripts so as to give the Muslims 1 unified codex in the Qurashi dialect something Mohammad failed to to do. And for this act of sacrilege Uthman was assassinated.
 
jakasaki said:
NoWings

Never mind, I found it… I think… 😛

fordham.edu/halsall/source/christ-muslim-debate.html
Click to expand...
You were both right 😃
DeusVult09 said:
Yes I know it makes no sense does it ?..Bit of a double standard
Click to expand...
Another example of such in Islamic apologetics. The Bible is tarnished because of variances, the Koran isn’t tarnished despite variances. You can trust the hadiths, but not the ones from the same sources that embarrass us. You can trust the Bible as the word of God, you can’t trust the Bible as the word of God. The early Muslims can be trusted, the early Christians can’t be trusted. Etc etc etc…
 
ZAKI said:
i thought you were smart but anyway earth to deus.
Islam is a follow up of christianity that is why all three are known as the abrahamic religions

wasalam
Click to expand...
As I stated to Hadi, there’s a difference between what a person believes and what something truly is. Therefore, Muslims may argue that they are one of the Abrahamic religions and an extension of Christianity, but under theological and historical scrutiny this does not hold up.

To put it in perspective, Ba’hai might argue they are an extension of Islam (since they believe Mohammad to be one of their prophets), but any sensible Muslim would know that is false. Similarly, a man who comes 600 years after Jesus, doesn’t come from the Church, and teaches things that contradict Christian theology cannot possibly be an extension of Christianity - at best, he’s teaching a heresy.
 
DeusVult09 said:
The Koran was collected together as 1 manuscript 20 years after Mohammad’s death
under caliph uthman , who burnt all the variant manuscripts so as to give the Muslims 1 unified codex in the Qurashi dialect something Mohammad failed to to do. And for this act of sacrilege Uthman was assassinated.
Click to expand...
Ok, thanks for the info. Was Uthman really assasinated because that act or because the Muslims then had confusions over who, why and what’s the base for the successions for their leaders? I also heard that at the time Uthman died, he had acquired a very large sum of wealth that could always bring envy towards other companions and followers of Muh.

And I always wonder how Muhammad reveal those verses to his followers, did he just say something like…“Hey…this is what Allah has revealed to me: bla…bla…bla…, and please you all remember this words and recite them from now on…!”. And automatically they all nodded their head and began accepting and repeating those words without even checking how he got it and proofing it came from God…
I really wonder whether this method can be called trustworthy…
 
Byzantine_Wolf said:
You were both right 😃

Another example of such in Islamic apologetics. The Bible is tarnished because of variances, the Koran isn’t tarnished despite variances. You can trust the hadiths, but not the ones from the same sources that embarrass us. You can trust the Bible as the word of God, you can’t trust the Bible as the word of God. The early Muslims can be trusted, the early Christians can’t be trusted. Etc etc etc…
Click to expand...
Yes I know so much Islamic apologetics has many presuppositional premises which are never proven even though an argument is advanced on them. Like for example about the bible being corrupted, nowhere in the Koran does it explicitly say that the New Testament has been corrupted but Muslims hold this as an already proven concept when debating.

Muslims complain about the textual variants in the bible arguing that it’s a sign of corruption but when the Koran is examined and discovered to also have variants like I proved Muslims like our friend hadi here produce the argument that “ohh well the Muslims remembered it all perfectly” something which the sunnah doesn’t attest to as they were 7 different version of the Koran which caused conflict, verses of the kroan were lost (125 versesincluding the stoning verses werelost because a goat ate the only manuscript of those verses or other verses were lost because the people who memorized them died in battle) and Mohammad himself forgot it. The angel jibril was supposed to have recited it entirely to Mohammad once a year so he would forget but if even he forgot verses and entire surah’s what chance did the common Muslims have at remembering it 100%? So this argument of preservation through memory is illogical.
 
DeusVult09 said:
So this argument of preservation through memory is illogical.
Click to expand...
It’s also, again, inconsistent, and like any poor argumentation can be used against itself. The Jews of the Old Testament and in the time of Christ, for example, lived in a society where they grew up memorizing their scripture. So, by that same logic, wouldn’t it make sense to say that the Jewish scriptures were then preserved? Of course Muslims would argue against this, but it would once again lead to inconsistency.
 
rikkk1958 said:
I have no problem if you want to believe that we believe in the same God, however, why not deny Muhammed and Islam completely in order for you to understand who the real God is. The Christian and Jewish God is more of the same roots, while the Islamic understanding of God based on Muhammed is not in accord with the Book that you are supposed to make as source of guidance and truth.

We are all children of God. I should only say that you were misled by one person whose persona was more of a con man in the first place just because he disagreed with what he heard and the anger towards jews and the christians during his time. Try to know your prophet well and you can tell that he deceived you. But if in your heart you want to believe because you are part of his culture and not as a child of God according to the Holy book then it would be very difficult for you to accept the truth.

Let “Love” comes in to your heart because that is what God is all about. God will do everything to make you understand how much He loves you, not how much your so called prophet deceives you to believe him and to sow hatred towards you neighbors. Christians believe that God is “Love” because it kept showing all of us how much He loves us, and by doing so, He even did all the impossibilities just for you to know how much he loves you by coming down into our world to become flesh and works wonders for you and me. After that, in fulfillment of the prophesies, he offered himself as ransom for the sins of the world.

My friend God is not about according to one person making up stories of revelations. Many false prophets did that and are still doing it so today. Instead of defending the works of one man, try to ask God to open your heart and mind for understanding.
Click to expand...
Anybody can come along hundreds if not thousands of years after a holy book has been written and appropriate parts of it claming that their religion is a continuation of the old and that the original tale is corrupted and that only their version in their new holy book has it right but this is not proof. This is far from it . This is all the kroan does.

There is no proof Ibrahim ever went to Mecca around 2000 BC when he was supposed to have lived and there is no proof he built the kaba. There is no archeological evidence that Mecca even existed till after the advent of Christianity and the first written reference to the Kaba a building supposedly constructed by ibrahim around 2000 BC is the 2nd century , it took 2000 years for somebody to write about the kaba? I don’t think so , the Arabs were surrounded by literate cultures on all sides and there is no reference to wither the kaba or mecca, anywhere strange if it was as prominent and as old as the kroan says. The koran is retrospective mythmaking and the result of plagiarism, just because it contains the same characters as the bible doesn’t mean the same god inspired it. That again is a muslim presupposition

religionresearchinstitute.org/mecca/archeology.htm
 
seraphime2008 said:
Ok, thanks for the info. Was Uthman really assasinated because that act or because the Muslims then had confusions over who, why and what’s the base for the successions for their leaders? I also heard that at the time Uthman died, he had acquired a very large sum of wealth that could always bring envy towards other companions and followers of Muh.

And I always wonder how Muhammad reveal those verses to his followers, did he just say something like…“Hey…this is what Allah has revealed to me: bla…bla…bla…, and please you all remember this words and recite them from now on…!”. And automatically they all nodded their head and began accepting and repeating those words without even checking how he got it and proofing it came from God…
I really wonder whether this method can be called trustworthy…
Click to expand...
Incorrect. Uthman was assassinated for a different reason and the Uthman Quran is exactly like the other Qurans only it is in a different arabic dialect.

wasalam
 
seraphime2008 said:
Ok, thanks for the info. Was Uthman really assasinated because that act or because the Muslims then had confusions over who, why and what’s the base for the successions for their leaders? I also heard that at the time Uthman died, he had acquired a very large sum of wealth that could always bring envy towards other companions and followers of Muh.

And I always wonder how Muhammad reveal those verses to his followers, did he just say something like…“Hey…this is what Allah has revealed to me: bla…bla…bla…, and please you all remember this words and recite them from now on…!”. And automatically they all nodded their head and began accepting and repeating those words without even checking how he got it and proofing it came from God…
I really wonder whether this method can be called trustworthy…
Click to expand...
well people were also really pissed off with him for other reasons but i think that it had something to do with it.
 
Byzantine_Wolf said:
As I stated to Hadi, there’s a difference between what a person believes and what something truly is. Therefore, Muslims may argue that they are one of the Abrahamic religions and an extension of Christianity, but under theological and historical scrutiny this does not hold up.

To put it in perspective, Ba’hai might argue they are an extension of Islam (since they believe Mohammad to be one of their prophets), but any sensible Muslim would know that is false. Similarly, a man who comes 600 years after Jesus, doesn’t come from the Church, and teaches things that contradict Christian theology cannot possibly be an extension of Christianity - at best, he’s teaching a heresy.
Click to expand...
but bahai IS an extension of islam :confused:

wasalam
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top