These verses from the bible really anoy me.

[AbdAlRahman]

Wahts the matter with you?

I said " Does this mean the bible is currupted " I didint say it is.

And i probably mixed them up .

[Faithfulservant]

Nothing is the matter with me

If someone suggested to you that the Q'uran was corrupted.. would you not want to say something about it?

I have been on CR for what seems like a long time... many people have suggested that the bible is corrupt.. its discussed at length with no resolution.. you can look back at all the past threads and find them easily.. Alot of those people that suggest it is corrupt are Muslim.. They post almost the exact scriptures and reasonings that you do and I believe that they are derived from sites like Islam answers Christianity.. Its a circle with no resolve.

It goes both ways.. We get well meaning Christians who join CR to save souls and end up being told firmly that its not allowed on CR.. I understand it.. I understand also when muslims try to tell us that Muhammed is the prophet foretold in the bible.. You are trying to be a good Muslim

You are trying to save souls..

Peace

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

Of course, if you accept that both the bible and the quran were written, or at least, dictated by God, and I assume most people on this thread believe at least one or the other, you still cannot avoid the fact that it is kept by men.

I do not know if the original quran still exists, but I am fairly certain that few, if any, of the original books of the bible still exist. What we are left with are copies which are passed down and re-copied many times and often translated into other languages.

Man is an imperfect being and he has produced a copy of a copy of a copy of his holy texts. How can any of these texts possibly have escaped some level of corruption? The very fact that there are different versions of the bible prove that they are not all accurate and most likely none of them are perfect.

I do not think that there is much corruption in these writings, I certainly think that they have not lost their original message, but I do not see how anyone can say that either the Bible or Quran, or any other ancient work which is copied and recopied over and over again is untouched by corruption.

[Faithfulservant]

To each his own.. This is another belief that gets its own circle .. round and round with no resolution.. We hear it so many times that trying to discuss it becomes redundant and theres no enthusiasm in the discussion.. just weariness.

But I respect that God gave man the ability to form an opinion based on whatever means they come up with it..

[Quahom1]

Ooooookayyyy. Let's all chill for a second here.

A series of questions were asked. The idea is to answer them in such a way that the questioner is satisfied (if possible). No one was calling Christianity to task. So, let's breathe for a moment.

There are Surah, that I have questions about as well, but I take that to the Islam forum. Questions about the Bible have been brought here, so let us answer them, as objectively as possible.

v/r

Q

[bananabrain]

i'm not really an "expert", but:

the stuff from numbers 31 *only* applied to that particular group of people at that particular time - the idea being that they were unique in deserving such treatment (rather like some apparently sweeping and similar statements in the Qur'an about jews and christians, as i've been taught). it's not a universal principle and any such practice could only ever have been applied to members of the "seven canaanite nations" (and, in practice, wasn't even carried out terribly well) who are no longer in existence. it was declared more than 2000 years ago that all the "nations" defined in the Torah (apart from us) have become intermingled and thus can no longer be distinguished from each other. thus it is no longer possible to exterminate amalek, for example, because it's not possible to identify someone reliably as an amalekite. there are many reasons adduced by various commentators for why these nations were considered so evil, like child sacrifice, institutionalised incest and prostitution, although no doubt a modern person would find it hard to summon the necessary moral outrage to connect with the Divine command here. incidentally, these passages illustrate the danger of taking things out of context, because they cannot be studied in isolation without taking account of parallel passages commanding us to "love the stranger, for you were strangers in egypt" and so on. if you know the Oral Law that goes with the Written Law, you will know that it's very much more complicated and also much more "modern-friendly" in its sensibilities. suffice it to say that these commandments, even if applied successfully *once*, can no longer be carried out, rather like the instructions to wade into the red sea and wait for the waters to split. it relies on a particular unique set of circumstances, not a general principle of genocide. if only the people who apply similar verses in the Qur'an were as careful.

as far as the stuff with the bulls is concerned, these cases are the basis of an entire tractate of the Talmud concerning civil damage suits and are there to provide a basis for reasoning. the basic thing to remember is that a financial penalty can be paid instead of anyone or anything getting killed, because the Oral Law made such things effectively impossible. it's rather technical though.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[Quahom1]

Much obliged BB. Thank you.


v/r

Q

[Saltmeister]

Originally Posted by AbdAlRahman

Still find it strange

Cous God forbid slavery in the Qu'ran

I find that strage the bit on that God didint forbid it in the bible is becouse ive heard that the bible is filled with human rights and all.

AbdAIRRahman, it's nice to have you posting on our forum.

My understanding is that what people call "human rights" is not the only yardstick to measuring right and wrong. Don't get the wrong idea. I am not undervaluing human beings!!!! I simply believe there is another way to discern between right and wrong and it is not about "human rights."

It depends what you mean by "slaves." Slavery is not inherently evil. It's only because Adam ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil that slavery has the potential to be "evil." When Adam ate that fruit, his human nature was corrupted by the knowledge of evil. He was then capable of thinking evil thoughts.

Lying, selfishness, arrogance, greed, lust and hatred are a result of Adam eating the fruit.

Slavery is where you offer your whole life in service to another. You are bound to this role for life. This is basically what slavery is in essence.

Of course, this bondage can be exploited. Because your destiny is in the hands of another (your master), the one who has power over you can order you around, torture and bully you. When this happens, your master is responding to the dark side of his human nature. His selfishness and arrogance has consumed him either partly or wholely. The power has gone to his head.

This opens up another issue. What do we mean by "slavery?" The kind of slavery described in the Christian Gospel is quite different to that opposed by today's United Nations and human rights movements. You will find in the Gospel that there is barely anything about the trading and selling of slaves. The apostles did not teach people how to exploit slaves. They told people to respect them.

Slaves are told to work hard (for God and not men) and masters are not to lord it over their slaves because whether you are a slave or master you are still a part of the kingdom of God.

This is why the Christian Gospel neither encourages nor forbids slavery.

Slavery, "in theory," according to today's society, is evil. Most people think of slavery as either getting whipped, poked and prodded, or simply being constantly told where to go, what to do, doing someone's else's work, not having the freedom to do what you want, and basically losing your dignity.

The idea that comes from the Gospel is that slavery has its bright and dark sides. The dark side has no role to play if people follow the bright side of their human nature. The slave, with all his good intentions, will work hard, be diligent and conscientious in his work and his master will not lord it over his slave with his authority.

The "master and slave" relationship are merely a temporary aspect of the lives we live in this world. They cease to exist in the next world and next life. The master is no better than the slave and the slave no worse than his master.

We are, in a sense, "slaves" in this world because of the governments we serve, rules and regulations we must follow, we are bombarded by media influences, and have our lives controlled by the political systems/structures that regulate our lives.

As Christians, we are told not to oppose these structures and arrangements, despite how unbearable, intolerable or abominable we find the world around us. That does not mean we will not oppose injustices, but it's just that we must understand that the world around us may not see its own injustices.

That's what it was like back then. Slavery was a part of the legal and social arrangements of that time and Christians couldn't simply decide to go against it because it would also mean opposition to the Roman political system, Roman culture and everything it represented. To have a slave was to be a Roman citizen.

For Christians to do that it would have been "anti-Roman." It was not the purpose of the Christian Gospel to be enemies of state.

The idea was that as a Christian you could be a "slave master" without having the character and personality traits normally associated with "slave masters." Because you were a follower of Christ and part of God's kingdom, you wouldn't be so concerned about making money and self-preservation to have to treat your slaves badly to get them to do work. It's as if they're not really your slaves at all, but God's slaves.

On the other hand, if you were a slave, as a Christian you would be diligent in your work because you work for God not men. You belong to the kingdom of God and are not so worried about your standing in relation to other slaves. You don't become so selfish as to try and impress your master and make him think you're better than the other slaves. You belong to God.

Slavery only becomes evil when your dignity and self-respect is constantly being abused and attacked. That's what you mean when you talk about "human rights."

Islam means "submission to God," so Muslims are slaves of God and follow the rules and regulations sent down to them by God.

In the past, people were slaves because they didn't have dignity. Now, as followers of Christ, we are slaves of God for a different reason. We live as slaves to gain dignity, not to lose it.

Is slavery wrong? Actually, it would be the exact reverse if we live the right way.

Being a slave doesn't mean you lose your dignity.

Slavery not being forbidden by the Gospel doesn't mean it was corrupted. It's actually the other way round. We are so accustomed to think that slavery is only used for wicked purposes that we don't realise how it can be used for holy purposes.

[Quahom1]

Servitude. The concept here is servitude. I, for example, am willingly in servitude to the people of the United States of America. I have been for 25 years of my life. I carry out orders as given to me from time to time, and I give orders to be carried out from time to time, as required. I can not "quit" my job today, because I signed a contract of agreement. There are rules I must follow, but I knew this before I accepted my role.

Am I a slave? Technically, yes. In reality, no. Servant. Public servant. Is it evil? No.

African-Americans on the other hand, were placed into servitude roles, against their will (by their own kings and rulers I must add), over 300 years ago (in the United States). Was that wrong? Yes. They were the spoils of wars between tribes in Africa, and the white man exploited that. That was wrong. That was anti Biblical.

See the difference?

v/r

Q

[AbdAlRahman]

If somone asked me or suggested that the Qu"Ran is currupted i would firstly tell him to give me the verses that lead him to beleave that , i now know that God didint want to change peoples lifes , like a shock , yoyu know if someone came to islam we never rush him into changing his clothes and stuff , no , Allah teached us to do everything step by step , like in the bible , he didint change slavery untill the Qu"Ran i eccept that , Same thing with Gods creation of the universe in 6 days , he could of made it all in a split second if he wanted to , but He did it in 6 days to show us that nothing is a blink away , everything is step by step , so i eccept the bible to be Gods word , i eccept Jesus to be Gods prophet , Human that is , let me guve you other examples of step by step :

6 days of creation
Several prophets " didint just came with 1 and thats it , no like i said God wants to teach us something with his ways of everything "

I wont come up with more, this not the place to say it , anyway i think im done in this subject , i think i wont critisize the bible , ill jut beleave that God sent it with its prophet , thats all i need ,

Thanks to all who answered my questions.

[Quahom1]

Very well. I'll lock the thread.


v/r

Q