Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

The Qur'an Corrects The Mistakes Of The False Injil/torah


  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#18 GAHD

GAHD

    Eldritch Horror

  • Administrators
  • 2793 posts

Posted 30 December 2018 - 01:25 AM

Isn't it a holy crime to translate The Book into any other language? I vaguely remember that coming up last time I was in a mosque.

#19 A-wal

A-wal

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1316 posts

Posted 30 December 2018 - 06:33 AM

And what gives the Qur'an the authority or credibility to raise it above the validity (or lack there of) of any other religious nonsense?

 

Stuff.

But all of this is based on the assumption that the Qur'an is in fact not a steaming pile of horse manure. This assumption is faulty and invalid.

 

Those who have denied Our signs, and reacted to them with arrogance, the gates of the sky will not open for them, nor will they enter paradise until the camel passes through the eye of a needle. It is such that We recompense the criminals.

Then just like the Christian fairy god father, it's a god I wouldn't want anything to do with even if I did believe in it.

 

That eye of a needle line is in the bible too, they're basically the same with a few revisions. I think it goes "There's more chance of a camel passing through the eye of a needle than of a rich man going to heaven." Rich Christians obviously ignore that bit.

 

There wasn't two of every animal of the ark either and Lucifer is not the name of the devil, Lucifer is mentioned once, he was the king of Babylon, not even an angel.


Edited by A-wal, 30 December 2018 - 07:13 AM.

  • GAHD and Thoth101 like this

#20 Thoth101

Thoth101

    Explaining

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 537 posts

Posted 08 February 2020 - 04:38 AM

And what gives the Qur'an the authority or credibility to raise it above the validity (or lack there of) of any other religious nonsense?

 

But all of this is based on the assumption that the Qur'an is in fact not a steaming pile of horse manure. This assumption is faulty and invalid.

 

Then just like the Christian fairy god father, it's a god I wouldn't want anything to do with even if I did believe in it.

 

That eye of a needle line is in the bible too, they're basically the same with a few revisions. I think it goes "There's more chance of a camel passing through the eye of a needle than of a rich man going to heaven." Rich Christians obviously ignore that bit.

 

There wasn't two of every animal of the ark either and Lucifer is not the name of the devil, Lucifer is mentioned once, he was the king of Babylon, not even an angel.

 

Good points with the exception of one thing. Lucifer was actually the morning star as translated in the original Hebrew. Also the word Lucifer is Latin which didn't exist when Isiah was written. So it was later edited into most likely in the King James version. I just wanted to point that out. I am pretty sure there wasn't a king of Babylon named Lucifer.