Changes

Islamic apologists recognize these contradictions, and therefore charge that the Bible was tampered with, though the amount of alterations required to explain the Quranic deviations from Biblical text would require a radical amount of rewriting, especially of the latter.   

Islamic apologists recognize these contradictions, and therefore charge that the Bible was tampered with, though the amount of alterations required to explain the Quranic deviations from Biblical text would require a radical amount of rewriting, especially of the latter.   

Christian apologists respond to these charges by evidencing that an abundance of manuscripts which predate the Quran yet exist,<ref>http://www.spotlights.org/Bible22.htm</ref> such as the Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350 CE),  with Aland numbering a total of 230 extant New Testament manuscript portions which pre-date 600 AD (192 Greek New Testament manuscripts, 5 Greek lectionaries containing scripture, and 33 translations of the Greek New Testament).<ref>Kurt and Barbara Aland, 1987:82-83</ref><ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibmanu.htm</ref> The doctrinal conflation of these with later manuscripts manifest that the alleged rewriting did not take place.<ref>http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorigin.html</ref><ref>http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/manuscript-evidence-superior-new-testament-reliability</ref>   

Christian apologists respond to these charges by evidencing that an abundance of manuscripts which predate the Quran yet exist,<ref>http://www.spotlights.org/Bible22.htm</ref> such as the Codex Sinaiticus (c. 350 AD),  with Aland numbering a total of 230 extant New Testament manuscript portions which pre-date 600 AD (192 Greek New Testament manuscripts, 5 Greek lectionaries containing scripture, and 33 translations of the Greek New Testament).<ref>Kurt and Barbara Aland, 1987:82-83</ref><ref>http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/bib-qur/bibmanu.htm</ref> The doctrinal conflation of these with later manuscripts manifest that the alleged rewriting did not take place.<ref>http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorigin.html</ref><ref>http://www.carm.org/questions/about-bible/manuscript-evidence-superior-new-testament-reliability</ref>   

In addition, it is postulated that if Muhammed could not read, as Islam states, then he would have relied upon the word of others (travelers, etc.) who were overall likely to be significantly Biblically illiterate.<ref>http://www.letusreason.org/Islam5.htm</ref> This would explain how Muhammed could reprove such things as the Christian Trinity consisting of God, Jesus and Mary,<ref>[http://answering-islam.org/Why-not/13trinity.html Jochen Katz, ''My Questions to Muslims''; Answering Islam]</ref> (Sura 5:116-117) in addition to speaking numerous contradictions of the Bible.

In addition, it is postulated that if Muhammed could not read, as Islam states, then he would have relied upon the word of others (travelers, etc.) who were overall likely to be significantly Biblically illiterate.<ref>http://www.letusreason.org/Islam5.htm</ref> This would explain how Muhammed could reprove such things as the Christian Trinity consisting of God, Jesus and Mary,<ref>[http://answering-islam.org/Why-not/13trinity.html Jochen Katz, ''My Questions to Muslims''; Answering Islam]</ref> (Sura 5:116-117) in addition to speaking numerous contradictions of the Bible.