One Reason the Bible Is More Trustworthy Than the Qur'an

Alan explains why the Bible is more historically reliable than the Qur'an. 

Transcript:

00:01 Is the Qur'an as trustworthy as the Bible?

00:03 I'll give you one reason why it's not.

00:09 Well one of the main reasons I find the Qur'an untrustworthy has to do with the

00:14 source criticism, which entails studying the sources upon which a text relies.

00:19 For example, the Qur'an tells stories about Jesus that are from

00:24 sources known to be fraudulent. For example, in Surah 19, you can read the

00:28 story of Jesus' birth, and we're told that the pains of childbirth drove Mary

00:33 under a palm tree. And she hears this voice that tells her that God will

00:37 provide for her, at which point the tree provides her with some dates and a

00:41 stream that appears below it. So she could, of course, now eat, and drink, and be

00:45 comforted. Now, we don't see that story in the gospels which, of course, were

00:50 eyewitnesses or written by eyewitnesses of Jesus' life. But we do see this story

00:54 in almost exact same detail in the lost books of the Bible, which are

00:59 second-century apocryphal fables written over a hundred

01:02 years after Jesus was born. In fact, there are other stories about Jesus where He

01:07 speaks in full sentences while still a baby and makes birds come alive after

01:11 shaping them out of clay. Now, although these stories are not found in the

01:16 gospel accounts, they are found in the first gospel of the infancy of Jesus

01:20 Christ and the infancy gospel of Thomas which, again, are apocryphal gospels

01:26 written, in some cases, hundreds of years after Jesus' life and are known to be

01:31 fakes. Now, one of the most dramatic examples of the Qur'an borrowing from

01:35 other sources is in Surah 5:32 where the context is about Cain killing Abel. Now,

01:41 this verse contains a warning that if you kill one innocent person like Cain

01:46 did with Abel, it's as bad as killing all of humanity. But if you save one life,

01:51 it's as good as saving all of humanity. Now, it turns out those words are almost

01:56 identical to a Jewish rabbi's commentary on Genesis 4:10 found in the Jewish

02:02 literature of the Talmud written about four hundred years before the Qur'an. Now,

02:06 the rabbi argues that the Hebrew word for "blood" is written in

02:09 plural form, and because of that grammatical point, key reasons that even

02:15 though Abel was a single person killing him is as bad as killing all of humanity.

02:19 Now to me, this is incorrect commentary right? But the Qur'an inadvertently quotes

02:24 that mistaken commentary written by a Jewish rabbi and then passes it off as

02:29 divine writ. Now remember, Muslims claim that Qur'an is a book that was written

02:33 exclusively by Allah and has eternally existed in Heaven. So they don't believe

02:39 in the doctrine of inspiration. They don't claim Allah inspired human authors to

02:43 write down the words of the Qur'an. Every word is supposed to be from the mouth of

02:48 Allah. And that's why it's significant that the Qur'an copies words from a

02:52 Jewish rabbi who wrote down mistaken commentary about Genesis 4. And

02:56 that's one of the reasons I don't think the Qur'an is trustworthy.

video |
Alan Shlemon

Give

Give

Give