May 2, 2012 -- 12:20AM, Lilwabbit wrote:

You failed to offer any objective criteria for establishing that Christianity and Islam "base" their religion on Judaism. Neither did you offer any objective criteria for establishing that the Muslims got the original accounts of the prophets wrong, for to do that you'd have to first establish that the Jews and the Christians got it right. You can't. I'll be happy to examine all your objective evidence once you've got some.

Let's start with who was brought up as a sacrifice by Abraham. The Torah says it was Isaac in Genesis 22.

bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=di... 

May 2, 2012 -- 11:03AM, JAstor wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 12:20AM, Lilwabbit wrote:

You failed to offer any objective criteria for establishing that Christianity and Islam "base" their religion on Judaism. Neither did you offer any objective criteria for establishing that the Muslims got the original accounts of the prophets wrong, for to do that you'd have to first establish that the Jews and the Christians got it right. You can't. I'll be happy to examine all your objective evidence once you've got some.

Let's start with who was brought up as a sacrifice by Abraham. The Torah says it was Isaac in Genesis 22.

bible.ort.org/books/pentd2.asp?ACTION=di... 

So what objective criteria can you provide for me to accept that the account of Torah is correct and not that of the Qur'án? You'd have to start by providing objective evidence that Isaac and Ishmael even existed. Argumentum ad populum won't do (i.e. "coz the Jews and Christians who disagree on so many things both believe in the account of the Torah!). Neither does argument for age (i.e. "coz Torah is older and therefore must be truer!").

Regards,

Wabbit

May 2, 2012 -- 1:33PM, vra wrote:

I have to ask what difference does it make?  To me, what was, was.  It may be a nice little academic debate but, to me, that's about all that it's worth.

Shalom

Agreed, wholeheartedly.

May 2, 2012 -- 1:46PM, JAstor wrote:

3) Given that both texts agree they both existed, the question is which one, from an objective standpoint, is more likely correct? I submit that in any valid court of law, for instance, if you have two older documents from different sources that cannot be accused of intentionally doctoring the document and that they are in agreement, and you then compare their consistent document to a new document that disagrees with both, then it is the former which an objective observer will conclude is correct, not the latter. At the very least, such a court would put the burden of proof upon the latter to uproot the assumption that the earlier competing-but-agreeing texts got it wrong. 

Firstly, there's only one older document -- the Torah. Christians happen to agree with that one for a purely subjective reason. Secondly, if you wish to use the court analogy, then the question of bias will also have to be brought to bear. Christians have every reason to oppose the Qur'án because it suggests that the truth of Jesus isn't enough nor complete. Thirdly, by your logic we should accept that Isaac was also 180 years when he died, and Noah was a ripe 950 when he met his Maker.

I hope you're not serious.

Wabbit

May 2, 2012 -- 2:03PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 1:33PM, vra wrote:

I have to ask what difference does it make?  To me, what was, was.  It may be a nice little academic debate but, to me, that's about all that it's worth.

Shalom

The only reason for the discussion is because Mulsims and those who follow from the Muslim tradition use the difference as part of their "argument" that the Torah has been corrupted and thus needed correction by the Qur'an. While the Muslims and those who follow from the Muslim tradition need to justify their scripture, practice, etc...  in reference to ours, we have no such need.

Inaccurate. The discussion was started by JAstor and you gladly joined the bandwagon. Vra is being very reasonable. It is you who seem to be far more eager to dwell on the Qur'ánic departure from the Torah than the Muslims or "those who follow from the Muslim tradition" who don't seem to care one bit whether or not the Torah agrees with their account. Besides, you do not even know the Bahá'í account.