BH

If the Bible has been corrupted then the Islamic claim is upheld. Granted, this does not prove Islam true overall, only that one particular claim being true.

Clouseau

If the Bible has been corrupted, and there is not a shred of evidence of any material corruption, the Muslim claim is no further advanced, because it has to be proved that the original Tanakh was as Muhammad with the wisdom of hindsight alleged it was. In fact the Islamic claim is shown desperate, and is actually ridiculed by the opportunistic illogicality of asserting this pov, especially if this one verse is all the evidence it can muster. It is anyway difficult to credit how anyone can seriously believe that mighty Allah left the Israelites and the world without faithful testimony for over a thousand years, and waited for a pretty nondescript and violent Arab to come up with the carefully composed retrospective truth with unattested claims of angelic revelation. And then his work was lost. The mind boggles, frankly.

BH

Honorable Closeau,

We have copies of Jeremiah, Psalms, ect. that differ in their content greatly. We also have copies of Acts 1/10th shorter than other copies. Of course, this assumes these works were/are corrupted copies of works Moses, Jesus, ect. wrote or would have endorsed doctrinally speaking anyway.

I am trying to avoid faith claims here as much as possible so as not to offend. On the otherhand, it does seem that there has been tampering with the Bible, or at least some of the manuscripts of certain books found therein.

Clouseau

Reminds me of "Prophet Jesus (PBUH)."

For the third time, which mss reveal the true original, as revealed by Muhammad?

BH

Thank you for your reply. I see what you are getting at more clearly now.

Who knows which manuscript is the original one.

Clouseau

No-one knows one that agrees with Muhammad, anyway.