For Wise Haven

[bruv]

Dear Wise Haven, many thanks for responding to my post buddy.I would like to have responded, but unfortunately the topic is locked. I also tried sending you a PM, but Im a n00b on here so do not have the privileges as of yet.

Anyways you said..
Hi Bruv,I understand you may be confused. As I understand there is only one Bible and the versions to which you allude refer to the language it was translated into and the time the translation was ratified. For example the King James version is the same Bible as the New International version but using language contemporary to the period it was produced.Hope this is useful, friend.
I guess it was in response to myself saying:
You see.. since there have been many versions and revisions of the Holy Bible since the Quran came into existence, its hardly a sensible request.
Mate, I totally understand what your saying and what not. I appreciate that you believe that I am confused. Its all good.

But heres a scan of the preface of the Revised Standard Version 1971:

check this out mate:"yet the king James Version has grave defects."or:"that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for revision"Yes its the version from 1971 and its the RSV which talks of the KJV..Within the context of my response to Amy's request, I believe the situation is black and white with little room for confusion.Hope this clears things up buddy.

 

[Wise Haven]

Bruv - I have also seen that preface (In one of the Bibles I possess) and with further investigation (couple of years back now)these supposed grave errors were probably over exaggerated IMHO.One of the important things to remember is that any version of the bible (Now)published always comes from direct translations from original or ancient texts rather than a re-working of a previous translation. Therefore it is not relevant with regards the Koran. As Muslims say - the only recognized version of the Koran is the original Arabic and translation into other languages do not do full justice to the original. That could also apply to translations of the Bible.These are moot points though. I am not the expert on the Koran and all I can assume is that (if the koran states the bible is corrupt) this is due to an incomplete or innacurate rendering to Muhammad via oral or other texts (which Muhammad could not read anyway) So I would conclude that the inacuracies would have occurred in the conveying of scripture to Muhammad by another (Unknown)Not being a Koranic expert It is probably best we lock this thread until we have another expert on board.If we do not lock the thread off their is a danger that anything I comment on may be construed as deliberate misrepresentation and any Muslim guests might be offended by an innocent statement of my limited knowledge. It is just fair to say I cannot comment any further.I will ask the CB management to lock this thread.I did not receive you pm - I think ones privileges increase after a period of time - I am not sure as I am new here too.