Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!m2c!wpi!gwydion@rice.edu
From: gwydion@rice.edu (Basalat Ali Raja)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: Biblical corruption - where is the evidence?
Message-ID: <7872@wpi.wpi.edu>
Date: 7 Feb 90 20:17:48 GMT
References: <7710@wpi.wpi.edu>
Sender: shari@wpi.wpi.edu
Reply-To: gwydion@dyved.csc.ti.com (Basalat Ali Raja)
Lines: 22
Approved: shari@wpi.edu


In article <7710@wpi.wpi.edu> bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken) writes:

>I do not see how you can arrive at that.  Looking at both the verses
>and their contexts, I see nothing about the verses in #2 above that
>would inticate a non-universal time domain.  "No man can change the
>words of God" sounds clearly like a statement of fact describing how
>the world works.  I see nothing at all that limits its time domain.
>If God gives a universal law that nobody can change His word, then
>I don't see how the fact that he chose to give it to man at time X
>permits this law of God to be void before He chose to give it to man.

What is the "Word of God"?  It is the Quran, and nothing else right
now.  The Torah and the Injeel, in their present forms, are NOT the 
Word of God.  The originals might or might not be preserved - there
is no non-religious evidence that I have at this time.

It depends on whether you interpret the statement "no man can change
the Word of God" as a law that has been established, or a statement
that is logically true.  My interpretation is that of a law.  It seems
that you prefer it as a statement.  On the whole, I cannot seem to escape 
the conclusion that mine makes more sense.