[Ali Imran]

His stories were out everywhere in the internet spreads fast

Bef many don’t know who your prophet muh was?

Ok. So you don't know because you have not read from scholars.

So please don't speak without knowledge.

[Lukongsimi]

Can goggle the biology of your muh
What don’t know ?

[pinkpanther]

That verse 2:79, is referring to the children of Israel.

Where in the Quran with Tafsir reading say that what the Christians have right now is corrupted..

You interpreted everything wrongly
Your Tafsir does not even mention the Christians

Verse 79 turns to the Jewish scholars. They were greedy and self-seeking, and in order to please the people for receiving money and respect from them, they used to misrepresent divine injunctions, going so far as to change the words of the Torah or distort the sense, pretending all the while that this was just what Allah had said or meant. 

The Verse 79 announces a grievous punishment for these two sins - distorting the Word of Allah and earning money by doing so.

[Ali Imran]

Can goggle the biology of your muh
What don’t know ?

How do you know the information you're getting from the internet from some unknown people is true?

[Ali Imran]

Where in the Quran with Tafsir reading say that what the Christians have right now is corrupted..

Why do you need the Quran to know if the NT is corrupted or not? Just go to your own Christian scholars of the NT.

[Lukongsimi]

https://youtu.be/cD178PXa68M?si=dAJELLfn9dDOtKBg

[Lukongsimi]

How do you know the information you're getting from the internet from some unknown people is true?

How do you know it’s not true?

[pinkpanther]

Why do you need the Quran to know if the NT is corrupted or not? Just go to your own Christian scholars of the NT.

 
Most scholars have stated that it has not been corrupted, and even your own scriptures do not indicate otherwise. 

If it were indeed corrupted, would Allah instruct Muhammad to check with corrupted scriptures? I urge you to consider this from a logical perspective...

[pinkpanther]

How do you know it’s not true?

Yes ..he needs to prove it is a lie..or else just talk only

[Ali Imran]

 
Most scholars have stated that it has not been corrupted, and even your own scriptures do not indicate otherwise. 

If it were indeed corrupted, would Allah instruct Muhammad to check with corrupted scriptures? I urge you to consider this from a logical perspective...

Do you agree with your own scholars, like Metzge,r who said the NT is corrupted?

[Ali Imran]

How do you know it’s not true?

I have read many biographies of our Prophet including one from a credible historian Karen Armstrong.

And we Muslims have the most comprehensive historical records of the Prophet.

[pinkpanther]

Do you agree with your own scholars, like Metzge,r who said the NT is corrupted?

Is scribal errors a form of textual corruption? Corruption is very broad .I don know which corruption he is referring to

[pinkpanther]

I have read many biographies of our Prophet including one from a credible historian Karen Armstrong.

And we Muslims have the most comprehensive historical records of the Prophet.

 Karen armstrong...moslems love to use her works

[Ali Imran]

Is scribal errors a form of textual corruption? Corruption is very broad .I don know which corruption he is referring to

Bruce Metzger, in his book A Textual Commentary of the NT", said the verse 1 John 5:7 is a corruption.

You can also go to the many Bibles we have today, like the RSV or NIV, and read the footnotes on why they removed that verse. 

So, you don't need the Quran or our scholars to confirm the corruption of the NT.

[Ali Imran]

 Karen armstrong...moslems love to use her works

I recommend Karen Armstrong for two reasons. 
1. She is not a Muslim.
2. Her book on the Prophet is an easy read.

[pinkpanther]

Bruce Metzger, in his book A Textual Commentary of the NT", said the verse 1 John 5:7 is a corruption.

You can also go to the many Bibles we have today, like the RSV or NIV, and read the footnotes on why they removed that verse. 

So, you don't need the Quran or our scholars to confirm the corruption of the NT.

Do you know why it was included then removed?
Because the verse appears in some Latin Vulgate manuscripts and later Greek texts but many Greek manuscripts do not have it...

AI

The removal of the verse from many modern Bible translations aims to reflect the most accurate and original wording of the New Testament, avoiding doctrinal interpretations based on later textual additions.

[Ali Imran]

Do you know why it was included then removed?
Because the verse appears in some Latin Vulgate manuscripts and later Greek texts but many Greek manuscripts do not have it...

AI

The removal of the verse from many modern Bible translations aims to reflect the most accurate and original wording of the New Testament, avoiding doctrinal interpretations based on later textual additions.

Cool.

So there, we know that they forged that verse and put it into the Bible, and for many centuries, it was read by millions of Christians thinking it was the word of God.

Can you call those forged verses a corruption?

[pinkpanther]

Cool.

So there, we know that they forged that verse and put it into the Bible, and for many centuries, it was read by millions of Christians thinking it was the word of God.

Can you call those forged verses a corruption?

It is not even corruption
1 John 5:7-8 is not a forgery in the sense of being a deliberate falsification of the original text of the Gospel of John. It is a later addition to the letter of 1 John, included in some manuscripts but omitted by most modern translations because of its lack of support in the older manuscripts....

[Ali Imran]

1 John 5:7-8 is not a forgery in the sense of being a deliberate falsification of the original text of the Gospel of John. It is a later addition to the letter of 1 John, included in some manuscripts but omitted by most modern translations because of its lack of support in the older manuscripts....

Ok. We can disagree on the terminology. What is true is that someone added verses to it, a few hundred years after that epistle was written. We can call it a corruption. Bruce Metzger called it a corruption.

[pinkpanther]

Ok. We can disagree on the terminology. What is true is that someone added verses to it, a few hundred years after that epistle was written. We can call it a corruption. Bruce Metzger called it a corruption.

I wouldn't call it a corruption..majority of scholars consider it to be a genuine part of the original text...it is just later added.

[Ali Imran]

I wouldn't call it a corruption..majority of scholars consider it to be a genuine part of the original text...it is just later added.

Bruce Metzger called it a corruption.

[Ali Imran]

I wouldn't call it a corruption..majority of scholars consider it to be a genuine part of the original text...it is just later added.

Wait a minute.

Are you saying it was originally there, then it was taken out, and then it was put back and now taken out again?

[pinkpanther]

Wait a minute.

Are you saying it was originally there, then it was taken out, and then it was put back and now taken out again?

it was in the Latin Vulgate and some later Latin manuscripts, as well as in certain Greek manuscripts... So this was not a forgery..

It was taken out because in the very early Greek manuscripts, it does not contain the phrase

does it affect or influence the core christian tenets..No

[pinkpanther]

Although the text of 1 John 5:7 does not appear in the oldest Greek manuscripts, its inclusion does not “corrupt” the Bible. Corruption implies fraud, fakery, reprobation, and perverse behavior with an ulterior motive, among a whole host of other nefarious adjectives

[Ali Imran]

it was in the Latin Vulgate and some later Latin manuscripts, as well as in certain Greek manuscripts... So this was not a forgery..

It was taken out because in the very early Greek manuscripts, it does not contain the phrase

does it affect or influence the core christian tenets..No

So the original author didn't write that. Someone added it much later, we don't know who. 

Why do you think they did that? 

My guess would be to silence the Christians who rejected the Trinity.

[Lukongsimi]

https://youtu.be/gOxe_mpsX4I
Interesting ☝🏻

[pinkpanther]

So the original author didn't write that. Someone added it much later, we don't know who. 

Why do you think they did that? 

My guess would be to silence the Christians who rejected the Trinity.

It is not like someone purposely wrote something false....it was there in the manuscripts but not found in the oldest

[pinkpanther]

https://youtu.be/gOxe_mpsX4I
Interesting ☝🏻

These people must have done alot of work to conclude that the Quran is corrupted..

[Ali Imran]

It is not like someone purposely wrote something false....it was there in the manuscripts but not found in the oldest

It is the only verse in the entire NT that would explicitly confirm the Trinity. Someone added it in. Again, my guess would be to completely silence the Unitarians.

There were Christians who rejected the Trinity in the early days of Christianity. And then, they were wiped out by the Trinitarians. A famous Unitarian was Michael Servetus, was burned alive for rejecting the Trinity.

[pinkpanther]

It is the only verse in the entire NT that would explicitly confirm the Trinity. Someone added it in. Again, my guess would be to completely silence the Unitarians.

There were Christians who rejected the Trinity in the early days of Christianity. And then, they were wiped out by the Trinitarians. A famous Unitarian was Michael Servetus, was burned alive for rejecting the Trinity.

Just one verse is not enough to silence the Unitarians lah...do you how many Bible verses support the Trinity?