What makes the Quran, better than Bible or Torah?

I claim that it is the evolved literature beyond the first 2 religions of abraham.

not that the culture of the time was better or that the material even compares to the amount of material of today but of the period, they had already combined the material of their period and rewrote the doctrine of both of the previous to create Quran.

Kind of like, a science book become obsolete within about 10 years as new material is understood.

I see the quran as the same.

For the arguing type, it is easy to find cruelty and abuse and corruption and even really weird ritualistic behavior in all of them old theological bodies of literature but i find it ever weirder that people will condem Quran simply because of what a few do with it.

ie.... there are more quacks in christianity than all three of the religious bodies of abraham. (from popes and inquisitions, to Davidians and charles manson)

how many have actually compared the bodies of literature to the level of what is good about each?

 

It's harder to burn.

 

1. The Torah is actually a subset of the Bible.

2. Show me in the Quaran where Allah became man on earth and died a propituatory death for his creation.

 

torah is actually a combination of literature, well before a bible was ever thought of

the evolved literature of quran did not recognize that a god came to earth to die.

Heck the majority on the earth already know 'god' did not come to earth as a human being and die for 'his creations'. As it is a rediculous claim to even hold.

hence the OP is holding; the evolution returned to using integrity over belief

 

What are the qualifications for it being more evolved?

 

No acutually it is the first five books of the Bible - it did not come from a combination of literature. And...it was not before the Bible was ever thought of, it is an integral part (def: subset) of the Bible which before Christ had not completely been written yet.

Of course the Quran did not recognize that allah came to earth and died because he did not - God did. People need to get it through their heads that Allah <> God.

Hmm... apparently you know something the 1+ billion people who call themselves Christians don't. I applaud your vast knowledge of what God did and didn't do. Perhaps you should check with Him first though... jes' sayin'.

Your self declared victory is amusing and cute.

 

Allah translates very well into English as God, however, Muslims tend to want to keep the word Allah because of linguistic reasons. Because of the grammar in Arabic, you cannot construct certain words based on Allah, you cannot construct for instance, "Goddess", or most of the words that English uses for, for instance, Roman "Gods", demi-gods, and so on. The word god has so many meanings in English and western languages that some Muslims think that "god" can have too many meanings, but even they appreciate the the correct translation is "God".

 

Allah may tecnically translate into the word "god" in English, but it does not translate into God - as in the living God of Abraham and Isaac. The one who created the earth and offered his only son as a living sacrifice for the sins of mankind. Perhaps to some a fine distinction, but an important distinction nonetheless.

 

It's the other way around, Allah does not translate into the word "god", but to the word "God". Some Muslims do however not want Allah to be associated with any "god" that is not "God" and therefore keep the name Allah.

Exactly what he did and didn't is up for theological debate, not linguistic.

 

Quite so. It originates in a word meaning something like "The One", and so would be terminologically inappropriate for the members of the Roman or Norse pantheons, for example.

However, it's an entirely appropriate name for Arabic-speaking Christians or Jews to use when speaking of the deity, and the name Allah is used in Christian services from Malta to Baghdad.

Nor do Muslims speak, in Arabic, of Christians worshipping "Deus" or "Theos" or "God", "Gott", "Bog" or "le bon Dieu" - as though He becomes a different person when referred to in a different language.

 

torah: equals five books (a combination of literature)

i guess you must be one of them slooooowwww learners?!?!?

bible wasnt written until well after jesus and created by men who combined a whole bunch of literature

geeze

to you god is dead

jesus knew he wasnt god (john 14:28ye heard that I said to you -- I go away, and I come unto you; if ye did love me, ye would have rejoiced that I said -- I go on to the Father, because my Father is greater than I)


perhaps i should sloooooowwwww down for youuuuuuuuu

all ah existence (mother nature) is your creator, your air, your food, your mother and father in one.

you and i can observe and read and learn more knowledge than jesus, moses, muhammed, einstein, confucius and your beliefs, combined in a few years.

that is what you are failing at; you dont comprhend that KNOWLEDGE EVOLVES

you aint even a battle to seek a victory over

tooooooo slooooooowwwwwww (by choice)

 

i love it,

knowledge conveying among people to learn from.

So lets measure the validity:

all mass, all energy, all time: ONE (Existence itself)


all ah it................. god itself as being all as ONE

the name being, the math describing the process between the three.


hey, it works!!!!

 

The Bible is Holy Scripture. That's not the same as "literature".

How then do you explain Christ reading scripture (e.g. part of the Bible) in the temple? If the Bible wasn't written till after Jesus what was he reading from? Your argument here doesn't even make any sense.

Using this scripture as proof that Jesus was (is) not God reveals your clear misunderstanding of the trinity.

Another clear misunderstanding. The Word of God is living and active, it's sharper than any double edged sword. It penatrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow. It judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

Knowledge may evolve, but truth doesn't. The Word of God is truth, not knowledge.

 

If the FATHER IS GREATER THAT I, then how can it be a MOTHER NATURE? Would He not have said the MOTHER AND FATHER are greater than I? Thats a clear contridiction in your post. Dude wake up get off the Canabiss.....

 

The Quran lacks originality it is a poor copy of the Torah and the Bible.

 

The Torah and the Bible?

Oh dear. Oh dearie me.

 

The short answer? Nothing.

The various holy books contain much more that is in agreement then they are in disagreement about. The differences mostly emerge from the application of wisdom in the various contexts, such as the right to defend one's self and one's people.

The Old Testament is littered with examples of this (both good and bad), and the Prophets eventual need to defend himself and his followers from near certain annhilation speak to this point. The same process emerges from the Christian principle of the Just War docrtine.

They all same the same things, but people being people, will tend to shift the context to meet their preconcpetions rather than study the situation to reveal what the context should: God's wisdom.

I have seen people of all faiths use these tools, holy books, for exactly such a purpose. And I have seen people of all faiths abuse and distort these tools for personal gain or merely to injure or rationalize. (Interestingly enough, all the Abrahamic Holy Books contain strong caution about just such practices).

If a man reaches the conclusion that selfless is a good thing by studying the five pillars of Islam .... is that any less wise than a man who reaches the same conclusion by reading and understanding Jesus extolling of the need to help the poor?

In the end, holy books are a tool of enlightenment, but, like any tool, even the very best tool, they can be used incorrectly.

Trying to turn a screw with a hammer is about as effective as using overtly selective quotes from a holy book to justify narrow political or ideological goals.

Just as everything can see you 'banging a screw to no effect,' so too will anyone actually familiar with the Holy Text recognize the twisted messages of those who abuse in the name of these tools.

That must be why why chase them into caves in far off places of the world ;o)

 

Christ once said that loving God above all else and loving your neighbor as yourself is the heart of God and his laws. In fact, we are to do those to our enemies.

Show me anything comaprable to your "evolved" Quran.

If you ask me, Mohammad returned us all to the old covenant of an eye for an eye. As Christ aptly pointed out, he was the fulfillment of the law which is love. Before Christ came mankind did what was natural, which is to love those who love them. As he once said, even all sinners can do that. Christ introduced the supernatural, which is to love those who don't love us back. It is the fulfillment of the law of love.

As far as introducing a new text, Christ did not do that did he? He simply shed light as to the spirit of the laws that came before him. For example, he was accused of breaking the Sabbath for healing on the Sabbath, but Christ said the Sabbath was made for men, not a ritualistic day for ignoring man's needs. He also stood in the gap for a woman caught in adultery. Show me anything, just anything, comparable with Mohammad in terms of compassion and mercy for the lowest of the low.

As for the sins of Christiandom in the past, if memory serves, Christianity got caught up in an age where the masses where not allowed to read the holy scriptures, let alone be able to read them. If they had not controlled the masses as they did, the oppressive theocracies that gave rise to such things as the inquisition and Crusades would have been quelled far sooner than during Martin Luthers day.

 

who said that?

DO you mean, jesus?

And what is 'the law'?

Perhaps Mark 10:17-19 (injil) (personal responsibility)

aint my quran....

i dont do rituals to the dirt, nor call jesus the christ (like he charged; matt 16:20)

i kind of like the idea of "lying is for dying"

but i also purely love the 'turn da utter cheek" (which means, do not allow an atrocity that another can do to you, cause you to act in adversity; example; if your car is broken into, do you lock it tomorrow?)

BS............. Love is an ability of all. And the 'christ' is to enable all but unfortunately Jesus didnt have 'the name' (to enable all)

returning to the garden is the inevitable (returning to god) ie.... nature isnt to take from, but to live with

then all are supernatural (in a real sense, that is correct). As all can love, any and all (give of self for others, life)

it is how to live forever

my sentiments exactly. ie... why kiss the dirt five times a day, when you could be feeding the hungry in need

church in a the word sense, is 'gathering' to teach another..... not some building to put gold and painting in and call it holy. Make shelters with them.

no

If you want to see how much good is within quran, you read it but to judge quran without reading it, you are of false witness, if you speak a negative without knowing

great fact most should observe.

which in a sense fits a problem you seem to have; claiming but did not read (quran)

if the christians were not the closest thing to 'anti-christ' on the globe, we wouldnt have the foundations of the 'invisible hand' as the root of America

(of no need of virtues)

'we' are the island nation between 2 seas and the beast of many heads (invisible hand) is the root of our destruction

the reason: the people believe they can harm and are forgiven (of no innert responsibility to actions)

which is a direct contrast to what Quran teaches (the evolution)

 

He is a she? (giggle giggle)

but the fact is, nature (mother) is the boss of any life you ever knew (you must breath, eat, cloth and all that you are (elements, energy, time) is of HER (him; god).

the whole of the universe is him/her/it/existence itself; god (all mass (corporeal), all energy (light, spirit). all time (transcendent); god itself)

the name is the math showing how it all works (the process), which is equal to all life EVER. (the last word to all arguments is the name of the boss.)

you the one smoking the crack of theology (lies from almost 1400 yrs ago)


and ps.... you are of the life (sperm/egg; light) of your mother and father, when you false witness, you dishonor them (are worthless)

 

I don't think I've seen a more lost person......

 

Can't help but agree- if you have the Bible (Old and New) in your hands as a template to write a new book free of errors that the Bible is full of, you can't help but write a better book.

But then again, that does not make the Qu'ran any less correct as a book.

 

I agree.... as literature bound to theology is most often misinformed. (ie... human being write all words and material covering such a span of time has far too many opinions in between)

 

lost?

you dont even comprehend that nature is who owns you. (of mind, you left the garden; by choice)

 

The fact that it is the most recent.

Of course, that is only true if you accept the Quran as divinely inspired. But if you do, it makes sense that it would be the most relevant of the three texts.