Why do muslims think Bible is corrupted and Islamic texts are well preserved?

[Lars]

Just been thinking. Now some argument is people deviated the texts is probably the argument that i can think of, to why retcon happend.

But just logically speaking. If people have bad memory of a text. Since muhammad in Islam was sent to unlettered people.... wouldnt this just be repeating the same mistake? Some can try to argue "Well it was collected by a reliable person, or reliable people". But does that qualify as legit? If one argues that memory forgets certain things over the years? Just mildly curious?

Edit: Update. Wanna update something. They may not think Quran is well preserved, but that the overall Biblical is deviated. So maybe i should update that as a question. But curious to what you think?

 

[Sirona]

Obviously, to gain authority for their claims of being the "one true religion". And I don't think this is limited to Islam only. Christians say the New Testament supersedes the "Old Testament" of the Jews, Muslims say the Koran supersedes both the "Old" and the New Testament. AFAIK the only religion that also claims that (only) the Koran is "uncorrupted" are Baha'is, because their religion developed from a Shi'ite Muslim background, but it seems that Muslims especially in Iran hate and persecute them them nevertheless, because Baha'is believe that their own saviour Baha'ullah made Mohammed and his claim to be the "seal of the prophets" (final prophet) obsolete.

 

[Altfish]

Just been thinking. Now some argument is people deviated the texts is probably the argument that i can think of, to why retcon happend.

But just logically speaking. If people have bad memory of a text. Since muhammad in Islam was sent to unlettered people.... wouldnt this just be repeating the same mistake? Some can try to argue "Well it was collected by a reliable person, or reliable people". But does that qualify as legit? If one argues that memory forgets certain things over the years? Just mildly curious?

Atheists go one step further, they think all religious texts are at best dubious.

 

[danieldemol]

Just been thinking. Now some argument is people deviated the texts is probably the argument that i can think of, to why retcon happend.

But just logically speaking. If people have bad memory of a text. Since muhammad in Islam was sent to unlettered people.... wouldnt this just be repeating the same mistake? Some can try to argue "Well it was collected by a reliable person, or reliable people". But does that qualify as legit? If one argues that memory forgets certain things over the years? Just mildly curious?

I think the abscence of any significant variants tells us that there is probably not substantial loss of the actual words of the Quran, however it's meaning seems to have been handed down via oral tradition and that possibly means it's original meaning has been lost in places where it is unclear.

In my opinion.

 

[ChristineM]

Just been thinking. Now some argument is people deviated the texts is probably the argument that i can think of, to why retcon happend.

But just logically speaking. If people have bad memory of a text. Since muhammad in Islam was sent to unlettered people.... wouldnt this just be repeating the same mistake? Some can try to argue "Well it was collected by a reliable person, or reliable people". But does that qualify as legit? If one argues that memory forgets certain things over the years? Just mildly curious?

For the same reason Christians say the Qur'an is corrupted.

A case of my book is better than your book

 

[shunyadragon]

Just been thinking. Now some argument is people deviated the texts is probably the argument that i can think of, to why retcon happend.

But just logically speaking. If people have bad memory of a text. Since muhammad in Islam was sent to unlettered people.... wouldnt this just be repeating the same mistake? Some can try to argue "Well it was collected by a reliable person, or reliable people". But does that qualify as legit? If one argues that memory forgets certain things over the years? Just mildly curious?

Jews also consider the New Testament a corrupted non-scriptural test. Christians consider the Quran a non-scriptural compiled text, but of course each religion considers their own scripture sacred and non-corrupted. That is simply what ancient religions believe concerning their own scripture, and condemn the scripture of other ancient religions unless it fits with in context of their own scripture.

In reality the scripture of most ancient religions are to a degree redacted, edited, compiled from older texts and oral traditions in their history and reflect the and the ancient beliefs and culture at the time they were written. The historical/philosophical/religious texts of Confucius may be a notable exception.

 

[Lars]

For the same reason Christians say the Qur'an is corrupted.

A case of my book is better than your book

But the thing is its Islamic texts who says Bible has been corrupted. I just wanna test the argument is all. Nothing personal or anything, just want to hear what the argument would be.

 

[ChristineM]

But the thing is its Islamic texts who says Bible has been corrupted. I just wanna test the argument is all. Nothing personal or anything, just want to hear what the argument would be.

I gave my argument.

 

[Lars]

I gave my argument.

Well reading different texts is interesting. I also heard argument that the way alzheimer's works, is if you do same thing too often. But if you do different stuff you are less likely to develop it. Reading religious texts is one interesting way i think of learning of different cultures, and it overall keeps your head and toes on the move. So i guess its why i like learning about them

Not to mention it also lowers pressure gage, because then you know what they are talking about. And you can keep on eating right while studying

 

[Glaurung]

I don't think this is limited to Islam only. Christians say the New Testament supersedes the "Old Testament" of the Jews

Not quite. While Christians do claim that the Mosaic Law has been superseded, the Old Testament is still accepted as divine revelation. There's no claim that the Old Testament is corrupt. And I say Old Testament rather that Hebrew Bible because the Catholic and Orthodox canons differ from the Protestant/Jewish one.

For the same reason Christians say the Qur'an is corrupted.

Christians don't typically claim the Qur'an has been corrupted as Christians reject the Qur'an outright. The Qur'an's textual integrity is meaningless to Christians.

 

[ChristineM]

Not quite. While Christians do claim that the Mosaic Law has been superseded, the Old Testament is still accepted as divine revelation. There's no claim that the Old Testament is corrupt.


Christians don't typically claim the Qur'an is corrupted as Christians reject the Qur'an outright. The Qur'an's textual integrity is meaningless to a Christian.

As no doubt the corrupted bible is meaningless to Muslims

 

[Glaurung]

As no doubt the corrupted bible is meaningless to Muslims

I did not say the Qur'an itself is meaningless to Christians. It is meaningful in that the text explicitly denies at least two central tenets of Christian belief. (The incarnation and the crucifixion). What I did say is that for Christians the integrity of the Quranic text is a meaningless concern as to remain Christian is to reject Muhammad's claims to a superseding divine revelation.

Christianity makes no claims about the state of the Quranic text beyond rejecting it. As obviously you could not accept the Qur'an as divine revelation and remain Christian.

 

[ChristineM]

I did not say the Qur'an itself is meaningless to Christians. It is meaningful in that the text explicitly denies at least two central tenets of Christian belief. (The incarnation and the crucifixion). What I did say is that for Christians the integrity of the Quranic text is a meaningless concern as to remain a Christian is to reject Muhammad's claims to a superseding divine revelation.

Christianity makes no claims about the state of the Quranic text beyond rejecting it. As obviously you could not accept the Qur'an as divine revelation and remain Christian.

Yeah. That's religion for ya, my holy book is better than your holy book.

The Qur'an was written long after the bible so I'm not surprised the bible does not predict it. However there are many Christians who openly dis the Qur'an in the name of their religion.

And i have never met a Muslim who even considers the bible.

 

[Glaurung]

Yeah. That's religion for ya, my holy book is better than your holy book.

View attachment 53740

The Qur'an was written long after the bible so I'm not surprised the bible does not predict it. However there are many Christians who openly dis the Qur'an in the name of their religion.

And i have never met a Muslim who even considers the bible.

Spoiler: Concerning books

Both Christianity and Islam have deep intellectual histories. So I utterly reject what is implied by the image you've posted.

 

[ChristineM]

Spoiler: Concerning books

Right. How many gave you read. How many do you yse to guide your religious life,?

 

[Brian2]

Just been thinking. Now some argument is people deviated the texts is probably the argument that i can think of, to why retcon happend.

But just logically speaking. If people have bad memory of a text. Since muhammad in Islam was sent to unlettered people.... wouldnt this just be repeating the same mistake? Some can try to argue "Well it was collected by a reliable person, or reliable people". But does that qualify as legit? If one argues that memory forgets certain things over the years? Just mildly curious?

Muslims believe what the Quran tells them.

 

[Muffled]

Just been thinking. Now some argument is people deviated the texts is probably the argument that i can think of, to why retcon happend.

But just logically speaking. If people have bad memory of a text. Since muhammad in Islam was sent to unlettered people.... wouldnt this just be repeating the same mistake? Some can try to argue "Well it was collected by a reliable person, or reliable people". But does that qualify as legit? If one argues that memory forgets certain things over the years? Just mildly curious?

The authors did not have to rely on memory. The Holy Spirit was there to bring everything back to mind. That is why we get exact quotes.

 

[Glaurung]

Right. How many gave you read. How many do you yse to guide your religious life,?

I love the written word. And I spend significant time with it. The important point is that being an atheist in no way grants you an intellectual high ground.

 

[Muffled]

But the thing is its Islamic texts who says Bible has been corrupted. I just wanna test the argument is all. Nothing personal or anything, just want to hear what the argument would be.

I know of no Quranic text that says the Bible is corrupt. It would appear since the the Qu'ran appeared in the 7th century that a mention of the people of the book, suggests that God views the OT and NT as one book.

 

[shunyadragon]

The authors did not have to rely on memory. The Holy Spirit was there to bring everything back to mind. That is why we get exact quotes.

A very subjective hypothetical claim based your belief.