1400+ years and Qurans challenge remains far from being broken.

[QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"][QUOTE="Oleg_Huzwog"]

The Sana'a manuscripts suggest it has not remained in its original form.

ghoklebutter

http://www.muslimedia.com/ARCHIVES/features99/orientalist.htm

I suggest you do cuz I aint gonna be bothered to explian to you that it doesnt prove anything.

[QUOTE="aaaaarrrrggggg"][QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]What?:|

 

metroidfood

Tasting death.... eating dead things. 

Plants aren't alive? You just totally redefined my knowledge of biology! :P

Alright then.... Fruitinarians! Fruit isn't alive!

I predict that it will rain sometime within the next millenium. You will revere me as a prophet if I am right. :roll:

[QUOTE="dave123321"]

[QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]Quran says,(not exact words) "Every soul would have to taste death" 1400 years ago there was no way anybody could even think of the biological and scientific advancements that man has now achieved.But yet of all things man has achieved,permanently avoiding death is one that nobody has even come close to and neither will anyone ever.Video_Game_King

Actually , I have been alive for 200000000+ years now.

*kills you* What's death taste like?

no its exactly the same i speak it myself

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"][QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]Despite all the enemies?

 

And why is it the first holy book so have achieved such a feat?

Thinker_reborn

 What are you talking about? What "feat"? What you are saying about the Qu'ran I can say the exact same thing about the torah or the christian bible. 

I'm not an expert on the christian bible, but I know a bit about the Torah, and supposedly up until Moses the Torah was all oral. So there is no real "original" copy of it. What I was really talking about in my previous post is that the teachings of the Torah, and the teachings of the Christian bible haven't changed for over thousands of years since the religions first started. 

yo OP man out of all the things the Quran says, this is the one thing u say? i expected u to give us a link like this:

http://www.miraclesofthequran.com/scientific_index.html

and btw, Islam didnt started 1400 years ago. we believe that it started all the way from the beginning with Adam and Eve. the Quran is basically the LAST revelation to mankind. before that, we had hundreds of revelation books such as the bible, torah etc but unfortunately, the words have been changed and therefore the true words were gone making it useless.

hence, this Quran is the last one and God promised that He will protect it until judgement day. so many people tried to change it, but have failed miserably. so what u see in the Quran right now, this is how it EXACTLY was 1400 years ago...

[QUOTE="metroidfood"][QUOTE="aaaaarrrrggggg"]

 

Tasting death.... eating dead things. 

aaaaarrrrggggg

Plants aren't alive? You just totally redefined my knowledge of biology! :P

Alright then.... Fruitinarians! Fruit isn't alive!

Fruits usually contain living embryos in the seeds or parts of the ovary wall even if you avoid the seeds. :P

Thinker_reborn : this ideas is far more older than the quran !

and for the stupid people who insist that the bible was changed ! even if it was? it only contains teachings about forgiveness and love and about being spiritual and not to care about earthly possessions ( which is part of the world problems .. the rich dont donate for the poor ) 

 Dont get me started please and stop this non-sense 

Quran says,(not exact words) "Every soul would have to taste death" 1400 years ago there was no way anybody could even think of the biological and scientific advancements that man has now achieved.But yet of all things man has achieved,permanently avoiding death is one that nobody has even come close to and neither will anyone ever.Thinker_reborn

and dude, is this a serious challenge? everyone was keenly aware that everyone would die (save for those alive at the eschaton)

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"] [QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"] No you cant.There original forms are either lost or nobody knows which is the original form.Thinker_reborn

Two things to be addressed:

I intend to not die-I have made a deal with Cthulhu that, if I can awake him from his dream state in R'lyeh, he shall grant me power comparable to that of Shub Niggurath, The Black Goat of the Woods with a Thousand Young.

Second:

How do we know that it remains completely unchanged and other holy books, such as the New Testament, the Torah, etc. have been corrupted?

[QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Wrong answer. Original manuscripts exist of the NT. They are not lost...they know which are original.:|LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="CBR600-RR"]Do you believe what someone wrote on the Quran? Just like the Christian Bible, man made.Thinker_reborn

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]Link?NTWrightfan

[QUOTE="NTWrightfan"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Considering you made the intitial statement I do indeed look forward to your link.LJS9502_basic

part 2 of that book talks about textual criticism and how it works (and why we can, of course, trust the text New Testament)

[QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]

[QUOTE="CBR600-RR"]Do you believe what someone wrote on the Quran? Just like the Christian Bible, man made.soldier-dark

Indeed.  The same (that a single word has not been proven wrong) could be said for the Bible, especially the New Testament, and the inconsistencies between the Old Testament and the New Testament (the transition between these two is where the consistencies preside) could be attributed to the change in the covenant between God and mankind-according to the Bible, there were three covenants. 

The first was between Adam and God, and stated that God would eventually provide a savior to mankind.  The second was between God and the Jewish people, which stated that there was a means of purifying one's self from sin via animal sacrifice.  The final was between God and everyone, and was pretty much the "believe in Jesus" one.

Not a single word of the Bible has been proven wrong.  However, that doesn't mean any of it was proven to be right.

Soldier-dark hit the nail on the head :)

[QUOTE="soldier-dark"][QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]How come a single word of Quran hasnt been proven wrong?

thepwninator

Indeed. The same (that a single word has not been proven wrong) could be said for the Bible, especially the New Testament, and the inconsistencies between the Old Testament and the New Testament (the transition between these two is where the consistencies preside) could be attributed to the change in the covenant between God and mankind-according to the Bible, there were three covenants.

The first was between Adam and God, and stated that God would eventually provide a savior to mankind. The second was between God and the Jewish people, which stated that there was a means of purifying one's self from sin via animal sacrifice. The final was between God and everyone, and was pretty much the "believe in Jesus" one.

Not a single word of the Bible has been proven wrong. However, that doesn't mean any of it was proven to be right.

Soldier-dark hit the nail on the head :)

[QUOTE="NTWrightfan"]LJS, the original manuscripts of the New Testament ARE lost. probably eaten by worms or decayed by fungi. But we need not panic, for this is where the discipline known as textual criticism comes into play. LJS9502_basic

"No original manuscripts of the original Greek New Testament have been found."

Eh?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="NTWrightfan"]LJS, the original manuscripts of the New Testament ARE lost. probably eaten by worms or decayed by fungi. But we need not panic, for this is where the discipline known as textual criticism comes into play. GabuEx

"No original manuscripts of the original Greek New Testament have been found."

Eh?

You're wrong, as long as technology continues to improve.  Someone is going to think of a way to digitize consciousness, then whoever wants it (can pay for it) will live forever!  

Or that's what post-cyberpunk authors would have us believe. 

Hmm... that's interesting. Does that verse imply that everyone with a soul will die?

"No original manuscripts of the original Greek New Testament have been found."

Eh?

GabuEx

I had to take the little one to practice so I grabbed a quick link....here's a better read

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

"No original manuscripts of the original Greek New Testament have been found."

Eh?

LJS9502_basic

That's supposed to be a challenge proving something?

Who's Muhammad's alter-ego, Captain Obvious? 

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]

"No original manuscripts of the original Greek New Testament have been found."

Eh?

NTWrightfan

NTWright is right-Greek was the predominant language in that part of the Roman Empire during that time period.

yes actually they would have been in Greek, and the Greek new Testament was not printed until Erasmus' Textus Receptus NTWrightfan

[QUOTE="Thinker_reborn"]How come God promise in the Quran itself that He will protect it in being preserved in it's original form and so it has remained in it's original form without "any" disputes?

Oleg_Huzwog

The Sana'a manuscripts suggest it has not remained in its original form.

you probably just compleatly crushed his world view or put him in a very strong mode of denial :P

[QUOTE="NTWrightfan"] yes actually they would have been in Greek, and the Greek new Testament was not printed until Erasmus' Textus Receptus LJS9502_basic

1: There are no scrolls of the New Testmament. all manuscripts thus far discovered were codices (books). This is one particularly unique feature of early christian communities.
2: It is possible to actually tell whether a book is a translation from another language. The Greek new testament manuscripts from before midieval times show no evidence of being translated from other languages
3: the manuscripts we actually ahve are not hte autographa, they are copies of copies of copies (no, that's not an excaggeration, its actually an understatement)

[QUOTE="thepwninator"][QUOTE="soldier-dark"] They haven't been proven right either. You can't argue for proof of religion or against it.

NTWrightfan

Indeed. The same (that a single word has not been proven wrong) could be said for the Bible, especially the New Testament, and the inconsistencies between the Old Testament and the New Testament (the transition between these two is where the consistencies preside) could be attributed to the change in the covenant between God and mankind-according to the Bible, there were three covenants.

The first was between Adam and God, and stated that God would eventually provide a savior to mankind. The second was between God and the Jewish people, which stated that there was a means of purifying one's self from sin via animal sacrifice. The final was between God and everyone, and was pretty much the "believe in Jesus" one.

Not a single word of the Bible has been proven wrong. However, that doesn't mean any of it was proven to be right.

Soldier-dark hit the nail on the head :)

However, there's possibility it was just a story written to fit with the time, taking the setting of the world it was written in. I'm not necessarily saying it's fiction, just that there's a possibility you can't really argue until your dead, and that might not even work out for you. It's kind of a meaningless quarrel fighting on the credibility of things we have such little information on. soldier-dark

Wow WTF is wrong with gamespot.It's so damn unresponsive and slow right now.I can even seem to quote people.Thinker_reborn

It's been like that with me all the time since the new design.

I want to make 3 points here

1: There are no scrolls of the New Testmament. all manuscripts thus far discovered were codices (books). This is one particularly unique feature of early christian communities.
2: It is possible to actually tell whether a book is a translation from another language. The Greek new testament manuscripts from before midieval times show no evidence of being translated from other languages
3: the manuscripts we actually ahve are not hte autographa, they are copies of copies of copies (no, that's not an excaggeration, its actually an understatement)

NTWrightfan

2. Of course, since the teaching themselves would have been in Aramaic...the language of Jesus it's not possible to say some translation did not occur even were it to be oral to written.

3. There exists some original Greek transcripts.

[QUOTE="soldier-dark"] However, there's possibility it was just a story written to fit with the time, taking the setting of the world it was written in. I'm not necessarily saying it's fiction, just that there's a possibility you can't really argue until your dead, and that might not even work out for you. It's kind of a meaningless quarrel fighting on the credibility of things we have such little information on. NTWrightfan

1. Yet some scholars state otherwise. LJS9502_basic

really? who are these scholars? I can cite world class textual critics to agree with my point (Bruce Metzger, Bart Ehrman, unfortunately Metzger died last year)

2. Of course, since the teaching themselves would have been in Aramaic...the language of Jesus it's not possible to say some translation did not occur even were it to be oral to written.LJS9502_basic

I agree that the teachings of christ were in aramaic, in fact we can detect aramaisms in the stories (which actually lend credence to their historicity), but the problem here is that we can also tell if the work is a direct translation of another manuscript written in another language. Our best Greek new testament manuscripts show no evidence of being translations of earlier editions of different languages.

3. There exists some original Greek transcripts.

LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="NTWrightfan"][QUOTE="soldier-dark"] However, there's possibility it was just a story written to fit with the time, taking the setting of the world it was written in. I'm not necessarily saying it's fiction, just that there's a possibility you can't really argue until your dead, and that might not even work out for you. It's kind of a meaningless quarrel fighting on the credibility of things we have such little information on. soldier-dark

*tad bit off topic* there's a fair bit of evidence that the synoptic Jesus tradition is reliable.

I give the Quran as much thought as I give any religious text- none.

If god wanted to talk to me he would tell me directly, not through thousands of printing machines and a decaying manuscript.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

really? who are these scholars? I can cite world class textual critics to agree with my point (Bruce Metzger, Bart Ehrman, unfortunately Metzger died last year)

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]2. Of course, since the teaching themselves would have been in Aramaic...the language of Jesus it's not possible to say some translation did not occur even were it to be oral to written.NTWrightfan

I agree that the teachings of christ were in aramaic, in fact we can detect aramaisms in the stories (which actually lend credence to their historicity), but the problem here is that we can also tell if the work is a direct translation of another manuscript written in another language. Our best Greek new testament manuscripts show no evidence of being translations of earlier editions of different languages.

3. There exists some original Greek transcripts.

LJS9502_basic

Eastern churches for one example.

Not necessarily true. There have been translations of translations.

You might avail yourself of google...I found lots of sites claiming original intact text.

Now this is far off topic...so I'll say adieu.

I've been busy arguing the Ontological proof (never saw that coming before yesterday)

really? so you can find me an eastern church which has the autographa of one of the books of the NT?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Not necessarily true. There have been translations of translations.LJS9502_basic

yes, and textual critics can tell if a work is a translation of a translation.

You might avail yourself of google...I found lots of sites claiming original intact text.LJS9502_basic

nope, sorry. we can reconstruct the original text, but we dont actually have the original text.

Now this is far off topic...so I'll say adieu.

LJS9502_basic

whatever that means

It doesn't take rocket science to work it out. After you get past optimal breeding ages your body stops being as efficient, though having good genes and a healthy consistent diet can drag it on a bit.

Humans start to age after about 30. 

Thinker_reborn : this ideas is far more older than the quran !

and for the stupid people who insist that the bible was changed ! even if it was? it only contains teachings about forgiveness and love and about being spiritual and not to care about earthly possessions ( which is part of the world problems .. the rich dont donate for the poor ) 

 Dont get me started please and stop this non-sense 

sentenced83