the bible?

Question

so the bible is just a memorey of man. how exactly was it lost. and its not in its original languge because english is only 900 years old and the bible is 1400 years old. what languge was the bible in?? if you dont know this look it up. it says in the bible tht the original was lost.

it says in the bible itself that it is lost. The Bible is a book that was written over a period of about 1,400 years by about forty people from different walks of life, from king to fisherman. It was people who put pen to paper, but the Bible claims to have been inspired by God:

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God... (2 Timothy 3:16)

oh yeah i forgot to say it is only the memorie of people but they did an ok job but they did not make it completly as it was. also there are more than 1000 diffrent bibles.

no the quran was not lost. because if you saw this on the internet they found a very old quran and it is the same as the one today, see this site about it.http://www.irfi.org/articles/articles_401_450/oldest_quran_in_the_world.htm

also in the quran God promises that none can write anything like it and that none can change it. also it is impossible for it to be lost because over 9 million muslims memorized it.

the quran is not in its original form when translated into english or any other languge becasue there are so many choices of words. like when saying which of the bountys of your lord can you deny. you can also say which of your lords favors can you deny. see. but in arabic you have to say it as is without a diffrent word.
if you want you can hear what this surah is about. its called AR-RAHMAN. meaning the Benificent. one of the many attributes of Allah. the meaning will appear as the reader recites the quran. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ivk7NoXxUA&eurl=

im not saying anything bad about the bible. because as i muslim i must belive in the first bible but since its gone alllah gave me the Quran. the bible (injeel).

a preist wrote on a website that the bible was made 1400 years ago. i am only basing this on what you guys belive.

you know what is proof the bible first belonged to the muslims. the original languge is not english. when jesus speaks to God he said illah illah so which is close Allah Allah or God God. and in the arabic languge allah describes no one but god. not jesus because jesus is called isa. so jesus was infact talking to God and not the trinty himself

the quran is not in its original form unless it is in arabic. i myself have a copy of that quran in english arabic and how to say it in english. many people before making a copy of the quran and translating it tell you clearly that the quran is not in its original form unless it is in the arabic languge. because since there are so many choice of words.so if the quran was so easy to change like the bible it would have over a 1000 diffrent types.but since it can not be changed there is only one word and not a word can be changed from that sentence. Allah has challanged man to make something like the quran, but the quran is in arabic so you would have to know the languge. so thats what people mean. if you wanna listen to this and see if you can yourself make something that sounds like this the listen and try. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dltai2RC6IM&eurl=
also the beauty of the quran is so overwhelming. that tone and the way you read it it comes by itself. but only if it u can read

ok thank you all. i mean to not make any big deal about this so its time for this question to close.again thank you all. this has been a peaceful argument betteween us. i apreciate the answers and thoughts about this. peace to all.

see the site. also if you don’t agree that this is the first and only Quran I am not going to force you to believe. Again I have nothing against the bible. also the quran right when the nabii Mohammed reveled one the people would write and make copy after copy. the inspiration of the religion and its beauty caused people to memorize. today as I have said over 9 million Muslims memorized the quran why do you not think that when the nabii was there people would memorize so firmly and beautifully..Do you know how people say that they would give up life just to help jesus in the day of his return. well people would do anything to follow the way of the prophet.

Answer 1

The original of the Qur'an was lost too. Why do Muslims insist that the Bible is unreliable because the originals cannot be found, but they accept the Qur'an as true even though its original documents (which were written on palm leaves, tree bark, bones, etc) cannot be found?

A double standard?

It is noted that there are so many ancient copies of the Bible dating back so many years, that if a certain version of the Bible had been altered, it should be immediately obvious by simply comparing one ancient copy with another. After hundreds of years of Biblical archeology NO ONE has found proof that the Bible has had any major alterations or edits as the Muslims claim (minor changes in wording, grammar or spelling does not change the meaning of a passage).

----------------------------------------------
Some Muslims argue that the Bible is no longer reliable because the original manuscripts have been lost. Therefore there is no possible way to check the accuracy of today's Bible by comparing it to the very first words of recorded scripture.

It is true that none of the original manuscripts have been found, and are probably lost. However, the very same can be said of the Qur'an. In "The Holy Qur'an / Tratislatioti and Commentary," (2nd Edition, 1977), the author Yusuf Ali in his introduction on page 32 states the following:


No sooner was a passage of the Qur'an revealed that it was recorded on leaves of date-palm, barks of trees, bones, etc., at the dictation of the Holy Prophet and all these pieces were put in a bag.

Notice that the verses of the Qur'an were copied onto leaves, tree bark, bones, etc. Further research reveals that according to the hadith, (a collection of Muslim traditions) compiled by Al-Bukhari entitled Sahih al-Bukhari, the verses of the Qur'an were recorded also onto white stones and "men's breasts." Whether the phrase "men's breasts" is to be taken literally or figuratively (to mean the memories of those who knew the verses by heart), it is obvious that neither case could fit the description of being "put in a bag." Furthermore, no person or museum has yet been able to exhibit any such collection of palm leaves, tree bark, white stones, and bones to verify the existence of the original manuscripts. Thus, even though all Qur'ans today may agree with the final copy that was approved by the Muslim ruler Uthman, twenty years after the death of Muhammad, no Muslim can prove that his Qur'an agrees exactly with the scriptures dictated by his prophet, simply because he faces the same problem as the Christian. The original documents have been lost!

If the Muslim can still accept the validity of his Qur'an without the proof of the original manuscripts, then it should not be so difficult for him to allow the Christian to accept the validity of his Bible.

As for the Muslim accepting the Bible, he does not have to worry. The Qur'an itself says it came to confirm the previous holy books. If this is true, then the Muslim should not have to be concerned about original manuscripts. Had there been any major errors in the Bible, then surely the Qur'an would not have come to confirm, but rather to annul, replace, or correct. However, no such indication is given by the Qur'an. And so the Muslim, on the basis of his own Qur'an can feel free to trust the validity of the holy books of the Bible.

Answer 2

The different books of the Bible were written at different times in history by different people. Some is Greek, some is Aramaic, and some is Hebraic.

"By 250 A.D. there was nearly universal agreement on the canon of Hebrew Scripture. The only issue that remained was the Apocrypha…with some debate and discussion continuing today. The vast majority of Hebrew scholars considered the Apocrypha to be good historical and religious documents, but not on the same level as the Hebrew Scriptures.
For the New Testament, the process of the recognition and collection began in the first centuries of the Christian church. Very early on, some of the New Testament books were being recognized. Paul considered Luke’s writings to be as authoritative as the Old Testament (1 Timothy 5:18; see also Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7). Peter recognized Paul’s writings as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15-16). Some of the books of the New Testament were being circulated among the churches (Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27). Clement of Rome mentioned at least eight New Testament books (A.D. 95). Ignatius of Antioch acknowledged about seven books (A.D. 115). Polycarp, a disciple of John the Apostle, acknowledged 15 books (A.D. 108). Later, Irenaeus mentioned 21 books (A.D. 185). Hippolytus recognized 22 books (A.D. 170-235). The New Testament books receiving the most controversy were Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 John, and 3 John. The first “canon” was the Muratorian Canon, which was compiled in (A.D. 170). The Muratorian Canon included all of the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, and 3 John. In A.D. 363, the Council of Laodicea stated that only the Old Testament (along with the Apocrypha) and the 27 books of the New Testament were to be read in the churches. The Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397) also affirmed the same 27 books as authoritative."

Answer 3

Someone has badly misinformed you the Bible is about 4,000 yrs old was originally written in Hebrew then greek and aramaic the translated ito every major language today and the original writings of the Bible still exhist i have read them and you can see them in a number of museums world wide tell whoever it was they need to get their facts straight this is the real truth here gorbalizer

Answer 4

the bible is made up of different books, some were written in aramaic, hebrew, greek, however, your right that the very original stories werent even in these texts, or at least were undocumented. (you cant tell me that adam and eve were put here with pen and paper in there hand and documented what happened? and what happened before they were created? a lot of it was passed down word of mouth, until documentation came into play.

Answer 5

The bible is the inspired word of God. It is complete and translated from the original Greek and Hebrew.

Answer 6

What exactly is your question? Some of the writings are actually older than 2000 years if your consider parts of the old testament being the Torah. Plus you say it says that the Bible was lost, what says. Please site your source. Yes, parts were lost and some parts are still lost today, not considering the parts we have but as mainline Christians, disregard.

Answer 7

The scriptures are over 2500 years old, and WHO say's the original is lost? British Museum Library has a good collection and the Vatican also has a good collection ,,anyway WHO say's their lost?

Answer 8

My Bible is still in the original language, Hebrew, and we read from it daily. You would be amazed to learn how much more you can find in the original version!
.

Answer 9

Yes, you are extremely confused. One document on this planet we know more about than any other is the Bible. It is, and has been the most studied document ever in history.