The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that from the ninth centuries A.D., the Jewish scribal copying of the Old Testament Scriptures was accomplished with remarkably few errors. With the exception of minute copying errors here and there, the Dead Sea manuscripts exhibited virtually identical readings to their counterparts of the ninth century. They proved that the many scholars who expressed doubts concerning the accuracy of the Massoretic text were unfounded.
@ozzycda I am also a convert from christianity. But I find Islam cannot offer anything that christianity cannot. Nor does the Q offer anything scriptures cannot. the I belong to no particular religion and the Almighty does not and never has created religion. he certainly did not create "christianity". Man did that. What I have done is to follow the scriptural teachings which is not affiliated to any religions. I regard myself as a karaite follower and that is my "religious" home so to speak.
@ozzycdaWell I certainly wish you well wityh your newdound religion. A religion that's based purely on the dreams of Arab trader whose religion can be likened to those of the JW's and the mormons. One only has to take a cursory read of the Quran and its gross imperfections. A perfect God would Never write an imperfect book and a perfect God would write a book so that all and sundry, not just the imams, would have at least an idea of what his love is all about. Something amiss in the Q
Secondly, the reason we would have less variants of the Koran is because Uthman rounded up the different manuscripts and created ONE manuscript tradition, destroying the rest. We can't know for sure that what he created is what was there originally. If I'm incorrect about this fact, please let me know.
@codysblackbox With all due respect you are incorrect. This old misconception and myth that Uthman burned all the manuscripts of the Quran and that he either "created" or "canonized" something he approved is contrary to the actual history of the Quran. A reading of the Hadiths in Sahih Bukhari regarding this topic would reveal that he did no such thing. However I will send you a link to a video I did on this subject, which is in two parts.
I agree that comparing the NT to other ancient documents is like comparing apples to oranges, but for a different reason. Numerous ancient documents have had additions as the manuscript tradition goes forward in time. The New Testament is absolutely not alone in this. What makes the New Testament different is that we have so many manuscripts, so close to the time of the originals, that we know when something has been added. We don't THINK someone added to Mark-- we KNOW it.
Here is a quote from the book "Text of the New Testament" By Dr Bruce Metzger and Dr Bart D Ehrman: "After extended study, he came to the conclusions that the variant readings were fewer in number than might have been expected and that they did not shake any article of evangelic doctrine.
Also the vast majority of these later intepolations are believed to be stories which were collected and added in themargins by scribes then a later scribe came along and inserted them into the text
"So textual variants alone do not automatically prove corruption"
You are right that it doesn't mean corruption, but you also have to admit it leaves room for suspecting it. And you know that nowhere in this society flawed inconsistent testimonies would never be believable and the only reason why anyone would allow it to be considered to be true within there religion is simply to defend their religion.
asi have already said there are 200,000 textual variants and 98% of them areminor mispelt words and gramatical errors with 2% cahnging the text in any way and not 1 of them undermine any christian doctrine. there are even textual variants in your koran. if you listen to Dr Puin (which i doubt you do) he argues the whole of the koran has been re -written on the basis of the sana MS and there are 1300 textual variants between the topkapi and samaqand codices
@DrakeBobson01 : Dr Puin must have not know Arabic then, all my quran versus are the same in the whole world, we always listen to the recitation broadcast in the TV from Mekkah to all muslim countries, and it is always the same all around the world. Quran has only have 1 copy - no difference at all.
At around 2:00 of your video, you categorize textual variants (your verbiage is "wholesale sections) as being as large as the addition of entire paragraphs or books. This is a blatant miscategorization of what was presented in Dr. White's video, and you simply expanded upon your exaggeration.
Actually, there are greater variants in Quranic resensions than those in Biblical manuscripts. Dr. White made a point of these, and you should review his video, to avoid misrepresenting him.
Thanks for drawing my attention to this point, I think perhaps I might have been referring to something he said in part 1 of this 2 part video. However after reviewing his video, I see where your point comes from. I will make note of it in the more info section of the video.
Dr.Oakly disables comments in his posts saying atheists have no moral restraints and therefore use foul language. But some of the most foul, hurtful, racist homophobic cussing I have heard is from people who call themselves Christians or Muslims. Conversely there are many atheists in the world who DO have moral restraints and social values. His censorship may protect his audience from profanity, but it also protects them from reading arguments against deism. I suppose he wouldn't want that.
Actually, I'm sorry to say it but, Dr. Oakley is not someone open for debate on youtube. He is a bit too official and I don't think he would ever see this video.
You could very well be right, and I am not actually personally interested in debating him, having seen his other debates, I thoughts of him are rather stale as of late. However for your information he has seen one of my videos, and commented on it. But thanks for your comment and for watching. Peace.
I noticed that James White doesn't actually answer the basic questions regarding their erroneous beliefs eg Shabbir Ally in his debate ( not with James ) said why can't God just forgive; why does God need to take an innocent life, and Jame's reply was, cause God just can't ( because that would be unjust )? Also, how can God become a man? it's nonsense. He's relpy was God didn't become a man, he went inside the man. His replies are so clever. But always faulty. If only Gary Miller was around!!
Dude, he is lying in almost every sentence. He claims to know Greek, Hebrew but does he give evidence for his claims? I have seen many of his videos and he does not demonstrate his knowledge. Probably he had once a primer in Greek for a term in college but he does not speak or "know" Greek and you have probably a better understanding than White does.
DrOakley's main argument is always this:
You cannot criticize religion if you are not a theologian. I think he makes just
Are you retarded? He taught college courses in Greek and Hebrew, written books using Greek and Hebrew, and is acknowledged by Greek scholars like Wallace, Ehrman, Piper, Sproul and the rest that he knows Greek and Hebrew.
Nope, no plays by Shakespere claimed to be the word of God, that would make the huge difference. Actually there are textual mistakes in the manuscripts of that play according to Shakespearen scholars Johnson and Capell.
I read the textual criticisms of the 'Merchant' and there are far fewer questions of definciency and variance in the many copies, than in either the Bible or Quran. Using the Muslim test for revelation, the 'Merchant' would be scripture. Also, Shakespere borrowed from the Bible hundreds of times, so that would also make him a prophet.
LOL no my friend once again your ignorance is sooooo plain here. The play does not claim to be the word of god nor does it claim to be scripture so Muslims would not take it as such. But you JUST SAID there were no TEXTUAL MISTAKES, at least have the honesty to admit you were wrong instead of dodging with ANOTHER ignorant statement.
The many copies of the Merhcant have far fewer variations than either the Bible or Quran. I think that your ignorance is like a palpable membrane that could actually be measured. Lots of books have claimed to be the word of god, yet are not. The Muslims have created a test for revelation that the Merchant could pass far easier than the Quran.
Also, I said 'textual corruptions' not 'textual mistakes'. Like a good Muslim, you spend a lot of energy misquoting and maligning other people's notes.
I did not intentionally misquote you so I apologize for that, but once again you know nothing about Islam whatsoever from your few comments you have posted. It does not matter if the "Merchant" would pass or not, Muslims would not take it as scripture as I have illustrated already.
Also you say Muslims have "created a test". I'm sure you have no idea what that "test" actually contains in the minds of Muslims when they look at other scriptures that came before the Quran.
Also if you knew ANYTHING ABOUT ISLAM, which you obviously do not, you would no that Muslims believe that the Quran is the FINAL REVELATIONS from God to mankind. There is nothing after it, so therefore none of your illogical and plain stupid arguments hold any water against Islam.
Believing is one thing, proving is another matter entirely. Muslims have created a test for revelation that includes the issue of textual variations and internal contradictions as a criteria for the Quran's allegedly heavenly origins. If you weren't stupid, you would know that many other recent and ancient texts offer the same proofs. Consider this, are there any contradictions in the Declaration of Independence or the Lord of the Rings? If not, then you must accept them as the word of God.
Your a freaking moron, look at you actually trying to say that Muslims would take these documents are revelation, first off NONE OF THESE DOCUMENTS CLAIM TO BE THE WORD GOD. ALso I just told you no Muslim would accept them based on what I have already said.
Looks like your faith in your little tribal god is as weak as your speaking skills. Must you reveal your intellectual frailty so often with these insults?
I never said I didn't hurl anything at you, I am not acting the victim. It is obvious you have no real understanding of Islam, you need to do more research and your ignorant. That is my observation you. I am pointing out that you are a hypocrite by saying I insulted you so that reveals some sort of weakness in my intellect, the same must therefore be applied to you, since you also insulted myself personally but also my religion.
Contradictions are lack thereof is NOT the only thing Muslim use to view other documents that actually claim to be scripture or from God. Once again your ignorance is plain here as well.
Well you obviously do not know the full details that Muslims use to test previous scriptures or else you would not have made the blunders you have been making in your comments.
I only know what I read on Islamic wesites and see in these videos. A cornerstone of Islamic polemics is the assertion that the Quran is free from contradictions and therefore must be of divine origin.
Alot of times in the video, you use the term' textual-criticisms' when I think you mean 'textual deficiencies'. To dismiss the discrepancies found in the Quran as mere dialectal variation ignores the real essence of dialectal difference. Muslims tend to think that as long as the same alphabet was used [i.e. Arabic] that the differences can be reconciled.
Meh.. Nice try. However I think we do have enough evidence of verses that are not found in particular Qurans and ones that were abrogated and removed to say the situation is analgous
Jazakallah bro for your review. Personally I think Dr. Oakley is just another Jay Smith but with a different attitude. Notice how he indirectly accuse the Muslims of somehow being afraid of doing textual analyses...lol it's the usual missionary tactic. Would love to see a debate between him and a knowledgable brother and see how he can handle it :)
I'm not accusing anyone , but why do you think it is only recently that We have been getting this kind of critical information on variants in Quranic texts?
No my friend, critical textural studies of the Quran have been available in the public for centuries. You see, muslim scholars have been doing their job particurlarly in the middle ages. They studied and analysed evey text of the Quran and is available for everyone who cares to look into. Now we see some orientalist & missionaries misquoting som muslim scholars to point out the so called changes :) But the bad news for you guys is that this deception been exposed repeatedly.
You could find them in any islamic bookshop. Or even on the internet. Though most of the work done by muslim scholars are in arabic, so if you know arabic it would make your studies much more ambitious. But for a start you could just visit the site that ozzycda has included in this video.
Can you recommend one web site, in English, that contains a clearly understandable textual criticism of the Qur'an, for those of us who don't speak Arabic yet? Can you also recommend one book or one scholar that can provide research of textual verification for the Qur'an, based on manuscript evidence, in English?
The exact opposite is true. The variances of the Bible were pointed out for the first time in 16th century! 1500 years after the writing of the Gospel. The "variances" in the Quran, as James White stated, are discussed in the Tafseers of the earliest scholars of Quranic science.
Because we don't mix The Quran with the work of the scholar. Muslim scholars explained and examined every word of the Quran with scrutiny from the beginning, and their work is available for all people for free.
What is unique about the Bible is that the scribes who added entire section, didn't face any resistance or objection from anyone, for centuries! It's was not until Historians put their hand on the manuscripts, that the corruption were pointed out.
If Oakley knows Arabic we can explain to him clearly.
SAMAND33 7 months ago
Comment removed
SAMAND33 7 months ago
yes we have looked at the text...
jlcopp3915 1 year ago
is this guy a joke.... just asking??? this dude is a joke...
jlcopp3915 1 year ago
The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm that from the ninth centuries A.D., the Jewish scribal copying of the Old Testament Scriptures was accomplished with remarkably few errors. With the exception of minute copying errors here and there, the Dead Sea manuscripts exhibited virtually identical readings to their counterparts of the ninth century. They proved that the many scholars who expressed doubts concerning the accuracy of the Massoretic text were unfounded.
san manuscripts prove koran has changed
rickru1 1 year ago
May Allah reward you my dear brother.
DrXoz 1 year ago
Are you scholar of Islamic theology?
BGfromGB 1 year ago
@BGfromGB No I am a student who has been studying comparative religion for around seven years.
ozzycda 1 year ago
@ozzycda It appears you are a muslim. Correct?
BGfromGB 1 year ago
@BGfromGB I am, covert from Christianity for about four years now.
ozzycda 1 year ago
@ozzycda I am also a convert from christianity. But I find Islam cannot offer anything that christianity cannot. Nor does the Q offer anything scriptures cannot. the I belong to no particular religion and the Almighty does not and never has created religion. he certainly did not create "christianity". Man did that. What I have done is to follow the scriptural teachings which is not affiliated to any religions. I regard myself as a karaite follower and that is my "religious" home so to speak.
BGfromGB 1 year ago
@BGfromGB Nice, I hope your beliefs satisfy you and do good for your life.
ozzycda 1 year ago
@ozzycda Thank you. I find the Quran unfathonable even in its most simplistic grammatical form.
BGfromGB 1 year ago
@ozzycda Sorry to butt in, I just want to thank you for showing me the only wholesome, mature conversation on youtube.
PikkuRiisa 1 year ago
@ozzycdaWell I certainly wish you well wityh your newdound religion. A religion that's based purely on the dreams of Arab trader whose religion can be likened to those of the JW's and the mormons. One only has to take a cursory read of the Quran and its gross imperfections. A perfect God would Never write an imperfect book and a perfect God would write a book so that all and sundry, not just the imams, would have at least an idea of what his love is all about. Something amiss in the Q
BGfromGB 5 months ago
@BGfromGB Christianity offers the free gift of salvation. Islam offers work your way to salvation if you are good enough.
ElenaGeorge1 5 months ago
Secondly, the reason we would have less variants of the Koran is because Uthman rounded up the different manuscripts and created ONE manuscript tradition, destroying the rest. We can't know for sure that what he created is what was there originally. If I'm incorrect about this fact, please let me know.
codysblackbox 1 year ago 2
@codysblackbox With all due respect you are incorrect. This old misconception and myth that Uthman burned all the manuscripts of the Quran and that he either "created" or "canonized" something he approved is contrary to the actual history of the Quran. A reading of the Hadiths in Sahih Bukhari regarding this topic would reveal that he did no such thing. However I will send you a link to a video I did on this subject, which is in two parts.
ozzycda 1 year ago
I agree that comparing the NT to other ancient documents is like comparing apples to oranges, but for a different reason. Numerous ancient documents have had additions as the manuscript tradition goes forward in time. The New Testament is absolutely not alone in this. What makes the New Testament different is that we have so many manuscripts, so close to the time of the originals, that we know when something has been added. We don't THINK someone added to Mark-- we KNOW it.
codysblackbox 1 year ago
Here is a quote from the book "Text of the New Testament" By Dr Bruce Metzger and Dr Bart D Ehrman: "After extended study, he came to the conclusions that the variant readings were fewer in number than might have been expected and that they did not shake any article of evangelic doctrine.
SuperJoseph1987 2 years ago
THANX BROTHER FOR THE INFO
wat7771 2 years ago
Also the vast majority of these later intepolations are believed to be stories which were collected and added in themargins by scribes then a later scribe came along and inserted them into the text
DrakeBobson01 2 years ago
So textual variants alone do not automatically prove corruption
DrakeBobson01 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"So textual variants alone do not automatically prove corruption"
You are right that it doesn't mean corruption, but you also have to admit it leaves room for suspecting it. And you know that nowhere in this society flawed inconsistent testimonies would never be believable and the only reason why anyone would allow it to be considered to be true within there religion is simply to defend their religion.
jdnmlm 2 years ago
asi have already said there are 200,000 textual variants and 98% of them areminor mispelt words and gramatical errors with 2% cahnging the text in any way and not 1 of them undermine any christian doctrine. there are even textual variants in your koran. if you listen to Dr Puin (which i doubt you do) he argues the whole of the koran has been re -written on the basis of the sana MS and there are 1300 textual variants between the topkapi and samaqand codices
DrakeBobson01 2 years ago
@DrakeBobson01 : Dr Puin must have not know Arabic then, all my quran versus are the same in the whole world, we always listen to the recitation broadcast in the TV from Mekkah to all muslim countries, and it is always the same all around the world. Quran has only have 1 copy - no difference at all.
kojekish 1 year ago
At around 2:00 of your video, you categorize textual variants (your verbiage is "wholesale sections) as being as large as the addition of entire paragraphs or books. This is a blatant miscategorization of what was presented in Dr. White's video, and you simply expanded upon your exaggeration.
Actually, there are greater variants in Quranic resensions than those in Biblical manuscripts. Dr. White made a point of these, and you should review his video, to avoid misrepresenting him.
stronzo5785 2 years ago
Thanks for drawing my attention to this point, I think perhaps I might have been referring to something he said in part 1 of this 2 part video. However after reviewing his video, I see where your point comes from. I will make note of it in the more info section of the video.
peace
ozzycda 2 years ago
dr oakly...is a nonesense..and jesus said ..the wicked hide when no one is looking....
ime23me 2 years ago
Dr.Oakly disables comments in his posts saying atheists have no moral restraints and therefore use foul language. But some of the most foul, hurtful, racist homophobic cussing I have heard is from people who call themselves Christians or Muslims. Conversely there are many atheists in the world who DO have moral restraints and social values. His censorship may protect his audience from profanity, but it also protects them from reading arguments against deism. I suppose he wouldn't want that.
caseyspaos 2 years ago
Actually, I'm sorry to say it but, Dr. Oakley is not someone open for debate on youtube. He is a bit too official and I don't think he would ever see this video.
Optimusprimemc 2 years ago
You could very well be right, and I am not actually personally interested in debating him, having seen his other debates, I thoughts of him are rather stale as of late. However for your information he has seen one of my videos, and commented on it. But thanks for your comment and for watching. Peace.
ozzycda 2 years ago
@Optimusprimemc no, that's what he wants you to think. he's a narcissist and a liar not as important as he wants you to think
Freethinker12341 1 year ago
I noticed that James White doesn't actually answer the basic questions regarding their erroneous beliefs eg Shabbir Ally in his debate ( not with James ) said why can't God just forgive; why does God need to take an innocent life, and Jame's reply was, cause God just can't ( because that would be unjust )? Also, how can God become a man? it's nonsense. He's relpy was God didn't become a man, he went inside the man. His replies are so clever. But always faulty. If only Gary Miller was around!!
IanFromBirmingham 2 years ago 2
James White and honesty?
Dude, he is lying in almost every sentence. He claims to know Greek, Hebrew but does he give evidence for his claims? I have seen many of his videos and he does not demonstrate his knowledge. Probably he had once a primer in Greek for a term in college but he does not speak or "know" Greek and you have probably a better understanding than White does.
DrOakley's main argument is always this:
You cannot criticize religion if you are not a theologian. I think he makes just
RationalEmotive 3 years ago
stuff up to obscure the debate and impress ignorant people.
I think you are more intelligent than Oakley and really want to find the truth, so pretty sad that you want to listen to James White.
RationalEmotive 3 years ago
The schools he went to require fluency in Greek and Hebrew.
PickinNgrinin 3 years ago
Are you retarded? He taught college courses in Greek and Hebrew, written books using Greek and Hebrew, and is acknowledged by Greek scholars like Wallace, Ehrman, Piper, Sproul and the rest that he knows Greek and Hebrew.
rhedrich3 3 years ago
There are asolutely so textual corruptions within The Merchant of Venice by William Shakespere. Does that one thing make the play inspired by God?
Commentator256 3 years ago
Nope, no plays by Shakespere claimed to be the word of God, that would make the huge difference. Actually there are textual mistakes in the manuscripts of that play according to Shakespearen scholars Johnson and Capell.
ozzycda 3 years ago
I refer you to the book The text of the Merchant of Venice for more information.
ozzycda 3 years ago
I read the textual criticisms of the 'Merchant' and there are far fewer questions of definciency and variance in the many copies, than in either the Bible or Quran. Using the Muslim test for revelation, the 'Merchant' would be scripture. Also, Shakespere borrowed from the Bible hundreds of times, so that would also make him a prophet.
Commentator256 3 years ago
LOL no my friend once again your ignorance is sooooo plain here. The play does not claim to be the word of god nor does it claim to be scripture so Muslims would not take it as such. But you JUST SAID there were no TEXTUAL MISTAKES, at least have the honesty to admit you were wrong instead of dodging with ANOTHER ignorant statement.
ozzycda 3 years ago
The many copies of the Merhcant have far fewer variations than either the Bible or Quran. I think that your ignorance is like a palpable membrane that could actually be measured. Lots of books have claimed to be the word of god, yet are not. The Muslims have created a test for revelation that the Merchant could pass far easier than the Quran.
Also, I said 'textual corruptions' not 'textual mistakes'. Like a good Muslim, you spend a lot of energy misquoting and maligning other people's notes.
Commentator256 3 years ago
I did not intentionally misquote you so I apologize for that, but once again you know nothing about Islam whatsoever from your few comments you have posted. It does not matter if the "Merchant" would pass or not, Muslims would not take it as scripture as I have illustrated already.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Also you say Muslims have "created a test". I'm sure you have no idea what that "test" actually contains in the minds of Muslims when they look at other scriptures that came before the Quran.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Also if you knew ANYTHING ABOUT ISLAM, which you obviously do not, you would no that Muslims believe that the Quran is the FINAL REVELATIONS from God to mankind. There is nothing after it, so therefore none of your illogical and plain stupid arguments hold any water against Islam.
ozzycda 3 years ago
*know
ozzycda 3 years ago
Believing is one thing, proving is another matter entirely. Muslims have created a test for revelation that includes the issue of textual variations and internal contradictions as a criteria for the Quran's allegedly heavenly origins. If you weren't stupid, you would know that many other recent and ancient texts offer the same proofs. Consider this, are there any contradictions in the Declaration of Independence or the Lord of the Rings? If not, then you must accept them as the word of God.
Commentator256 3 years ago
Your a freaking moron, look at you actually trying to say that Muslims would take these documents are revelation, first off NONE OF THESE DOCUMENTS CLAIM TO BE THE WORD GOD. ALso I just told you no Muslim would accept them based on what I have already said.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Looks like your faith in your little tribal god is as weak as your speaking skills. Must you reveal your intellectual frailty so often with these insults?
Commentator256 3 years ago
I'm only speaking the truth.
ozzycda 3 years ago
LOL tribal God, wow, give me a break, you seriously need to do more research into Islam before making such bogus claims and arguments.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Oh and your a hypocrite by the way, you called me stupid and insulted my religion.
ozzycda 3 years ago
You were hurling insults far faster and with greater enthusiasm. Stop pretending to be a victim, and show a little tact.
Commentator256 3 years ago
I never said I didn't hurl anything at you, I am not acting the victim. It is obvious you have no real understanding of Islam, you need to do more research and your ignorant. That is my observation you. I am pointing out that you are a hypocrite by saying I insulted you so that reveals some sort of weakness in my intellect, the same must therefore be applied to you, since you also insulted myself personally but also my religion.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Ozzy were you born a muslim or a convert?
Kitab14 3 years ago
Convert.
ozzycda 3 years ago
COOL!
You should make a video of why you convert?
I like convert stories.
Kitab14 3 years ago
Contradictions are lack thereof is NOT the only thing Muslim use to view other documents that actually claim to be scripture or from God. Once again your ignorance is plain here as well.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Islamic Theology is clear that Muhammad is the final Messenger and Prophet from God to mankind, so therefore there is no OTHER scripture after him.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Islamic theology can claim to be as clear as it wants, but your test for heavenly origins is not.
Commentator256 3 years ago
Well you obviously do not know the full details that Muslims use to test previous scriptures or else you would not have made the blunders you have been making in your comments.
ozzycda 3 years ago
I only know what I read on Islamic wesites and see in these videos. A cornerstone of Islamic polemics is the assertion that the Quran is free from contradictions and therefore must be of divine origin.
Commentator256 3 years ago
That is just one of the many other concepts that Muslims use to look at other scriptures besides the Quran, contradictions is just one.
ozzycda 3 years ago
Alot of times in the video, you use the term' textual-criticisms' when I think you mean 'textual deficiencies'. To dismiss the discrepancies found in the Quran as mere dialectal variation ignores the real essence of dialectal difference. Muslims tend to think that as long as the same alphabet was used [i.e. Arabic] that the differences can be reconciled.
LothairLorraine 3 years ago
Meh.. Nice try. However I think we do have enough evidence of verses that are not found in particular Qurans and ones that were abrogated and removed to say the situation is analgous
facilisdescenus 3 years ago
Jazakallah bro for your review. Personally I think Dr. Oakley is just another Jay Smith but with a different attitude. Notice how he indirectly accuse the Muslims of somehow being afraid of doing textual analyses...lol it's the usual missionary tactic. Would love to see a debate between him and a knowledgable brother and see how he can handle it :)
Sammer1111 3 years ago
You should see his responses to Abdullah on textual claims.I think he did it well
facilisdescenus 3 years ago
Did you even bother to look at the links i posted???
ozzycda 3 years ago
I'm not accusing anyone , but why do you think it is only recently that We have been getting this kind of critical information on variants in Quranic texts?
facilisdescenus 3 years ago 2
facilisdescenus, what do you mean by "we"? Who's We?
Sammer1111 3 years ago
I mean everyone-the public
facilisdescenus 3 years ago
No my friend, critical textural studies of the Quran have been available in the public for centuries. You see, muslim scholars have been doing their job particurlarly in the middle ages. They studied and analysed evey text of the Quran and is available for everyone who cares to look into. Now we see some orientalist & missionaries misquoting som muslim scholars to point out the so called changes :) But the bad news for you guys is that this deception been exposed repeatedly.
Sammer1111 3 years ago
I really would like substantiation for this claim.
Where are the critical studies noting the differences between manuscripts?
What Muslims scholars published these studies?
Could you give me some names and some dates?
facilisdescenus 3 years ago
You could find them in any islamic bookshop. Or even on the internet. Though most of the work done by muslim scholars are in arabic, so if you know arabic it would make your studies much more ambitious. But for a start you could just visit the site that ozzycda has included in this video.
Sammer1111 3 years ago
Can you recommend one web site, in English, that contains a clearly understandable textual criticism of the Qur'an, for those of us who don't speak Arabic yet? Can you also recommend one book or one scholar that can provide research of textual verification for the Qur'an, based on manuscript evidence, in English?
Thanks in advance...
stronzo5785 3 years ago
Yes actually there is a link in the description section of this video called Islamic-Awareness, I highly recommend this site.
Peace and thanks for watching!
ozzycda 3 years ago
The exact opposite is true. The variances of the Bible were pointed out for the first time in 16th century! 1500 years after the writing of the Gospel. The "variances" in the Quran, as James White stated, are discussed in the Tafseers of the earliest scholars of Quranic science.
Watch james White's video response to my video.
1MoreMuslim 3 years ago
So why don't we have critical editions of the Quran noting these variant readings in the tafsir and hadith 1moremuslim?
facilisdescenus 3 years ago
Because we don't mix The Quran with the work of the scholar. Muslim scholars explained and examined every word of the Quran with scrutiny from the beginning, and their work is available for all people for free.
What is unique about the Bible is that the scribes who added entire section, didn't face any resistance or objection from anyone, for centuries! It's was not until Historians put their hand on the manuscripts, that the corruption were pointed out.
1MoreMuslim 3 years ago
me thinks, u have given the good doc, more credit, then he deserves.
imadhurata 3 years ago
Bro, jazakallah for the video. By the way, why not posting this video as a response to his video?
prober0101 3 years ago 7
WOOKIE!
drgonboyx 3 years ago 2
jazakallahu khair, very well explained
ramluck5 3 years ago 6
Salaam,
Great explanation! Jazakallahu khair.
Nazihah06 3 years ago 6
thanks for the vid, keep up the good work, jazakallahu khair.
qabandiman 3 years ago 6