is the BIble currupt?

Question

1.Why do the followers of Islam believe that Jesus Christ was not crucified and that God caused somebody who looked like Jesus to be crucified in his place? Six centuries after Jesus Christ descend into Heaven. This is promulgated in the Koran, Jesus was crucified not

2.Why do they also follow the assumption the Bible is corrupt whilst accepting some elements in the Bible as true and reject other segments as false?

3. It can be assumed without a shadow of doubt if the Bible is corrupted so is the Koran is also corrupt?

4. Mohammed could neither read nor write. How was he able to know what his scribes wrote down or remembered was what he actually said?

5. Jesus was the only Prophet to be born of a virgin (immaculate conception) and raised into heaven whilst still living and will be the judge of mankind on Judgement day. Mohammed will not be there, if fact he was not certain he would inherit eternal life. The greater prophet therefore is Jesus.

Answer 1

Yes, the bible is corrupt.

Mankind cannot create a perfect religion. It's an impossibility.

Answer 2

Nice approach.

About the Bible being corrupt: although I hear all the time that modern languages cannot convey all the nuances of the original Hebrew (Old Testament) and Greek (New Testament), the original versions are available for those willing to study classical languages. And the idea of corruption through copying of manuscripts doesn't hold either, because fairly old manuscripts are available, especially for the New Testament. When corruption did occur, however, it was in places of no doctrinal relevance, where the copist could not verify the meaning. These rare instances are well documented by historians, who in this way can trace the "genealogy" of manuscripts (which was copied after which).

Perhaps more important than the Scriptures is the faith of the Church, who kept this Tradition of the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ until the Gospels were written, and then secured their validity along the centuries. What I mean is that if a hostile entity were copying the Bible, we could expect such disfiguring corruption, but we could not expect that from the Church, who was cherishing it. Remember that for more than three hundred years, Christianity was met with hostility, if not persecution from the authorities. Those people cherished their faith more than their life and wouldn't have accepted such a corruption of their most important Scriptures.

About Islamic claims to "know better":

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/stjohn_islam.aspx
http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/islam_definitivereply.aspx

Answer 3

5. "My Teacher is better than yours" never got anybody anywhere. Learn from the wise men's example and quit bickering about who was the greater figure.

2. Some elements in the bible are probably historically accurate. Others have metaphorical value, while others are most likely malicious in intent. It all depends on their origin; after all, it is not a single book but a collation of several. To immediately throw the whole discussion away as the collection of books either being all true or all false is naive.

1. "Someone else was crucified" is an easier explanation for events than "He came back to life again". Christians often forget that, having grown used to the idea. Whether or not its true, it certainly would seem more obvious to the outside observer.

I don't know enough about Mohammed or the Koran to answer the others.

Answer 4

No the bible is not currupt as there are many documents in support of the Bible As for the Koran no documents of any significance. Mohammed it seems took what he wanted from the Bible and the rest was made up for the benifit of his followers. The Koran changed so many times that to amy learned person it is difficult to understand I agree the only Prophet to be aclaimed as the highest is Jesus Christ. I suppose that the Koran could be currupt as Mo had no way of telling what was written down as he was told was accurate. I can find no evidence that jesus was not crucified. It seems most idiotic to conceive that 600 years after he went up in the clouds that evidence could be provided that he did not die on the cross. Its like saying that President A Loncoln was not shot or King Harold was not in Hastings so could not have been hit by an arrow in the eye. We cant change history 600 years after the avent.

Answer 5

The bible is corrupt. The Romans only included the bits that they felt were beneficial in brainwashing and controling the masses. That is what makes it corrupt. So many other books were written, the ones included were written over a hundred years after the death of the so called jesus guy. Again that makes it corrupt as the stories were passed by word of mouth for around 3 generations before they were written down, some for more. We all know what happens in the game Chinese whispers - things get completely distorted.

Answer 6

There are over 5000 Greek manuscripts of the new testament in existence. Many more than from other ancient writings. So if we believe in other historic happenings we can believe in the NT too.
I don't believe in the corruption of the bible. Who could possible change all the bibles that where around at that time from Spain to Turkey. Change all the same sentences. It is impossible. All Bibles were handwritten and all have the same text. Only minor differences like switched letters occurred.

Its Mohammed that took parts from the bible to make Jews and Christians follow his new religion
www.carm.org
www.faithfreedom.org

Answer 7

If you carried out a little serious historical research, and spouted less Bible dogma you would understand the lunacy of your posting. You have not done ANY independent thinking, instead you rant about fictional characters within a Mythology as though they are REAL. Of course the Bible is corrupted, the Koran too! Do you not understand - attacking other religions does not make your nonsense fact!!

Answer 8

I think throughout history from worshipping trees up to the fairly new scientology it is in the human nature to search for answers and sometimes one person stands up and claims to have the "definitive" truth. The lack of understanding of where we really are from has spawned certain people through history to try and write their "version". Some are dismissed and some are followed. The bible was obviously the first main one. Then someone 600 years later decided they didnt like that so wrote their version, the koran. So i guess it just where in the world and who you were bought up by in which of these ancient scholars that you choose to believe

Answer 9

History cannot be changed altered slightly but the facts remain. The koran was a beautiful book to start of with but was added to to satisfy certain people in Medina. All evidence points to JC being killed on a wooden cross and rising on the 3rd day.
I agree with the author it makes sense to accept JC as higher than Mo

Answer 10

Firts time on here so i wont be rude but I dont think the bible is currupted i read the quran and the bible and i think the quran hard to fathom out it seems weird and contradictions abound same in the haith and mohammeds life story He was good and kind to start off with but he went off the tracks maybe power he got currupted his thinking. I decided to be an apostate and follow Jesus but I cant tell my family they would want to kill me for my dishonour to Allah and Islam

Answer 11

GOD Laws are made of three Books: The Old Testament, The new Testament and Quran as a conclusion all originated from the middle east. How can you understand GOD LAWS with out reading GOD Conclusion?