Leading evangelical scholar admits Qur’an is better preserved than New Testament

This is very interesting. Craig L. Blomberg is an American New Testament scholar at the evangelical Denver Seminary in Colorado and he is explicitly motivated in his work as a conservative Evangelical to defend the inerrancy of the Bible (if he did not affirm the inerrancy of the Bible he could not keep his job). As such his work is not as objective historically as it could be. BUT see his disarmingly honest comments about the comparative textual reliability of the Qur’an when compared with the New Testament. Blomberg refers to:

“a growing and sophisticated Muslim apologetics that builds its case from the fact the New Testament was not preserved as accurately as the Qur’an has been”

Dr Craig Blomberg talks about his book The Historical Reliability of the New Testament. The quote begins at -2:48.


Categories: New Testament scholarship, Qur'an

30 replies

  1. @ Paul

    Allow me to sum up the incoming comments, ahem:

    Liberal scholar! Liberal scholar! Liberal scholar! If they could say what they REALLY think they would be killed by the Muslims. Actually, you know what the Qur’an has been as analyzed as much as the New Testament but just give it a few more years. Liberal scholars.

    Thank you, everybody, for your time.

  2. We can safely assume that providence did not work in such a way as to guarantee the successful preservation of each and every manuscript and that it was necessary to do so in order to produce bibles true to the originals.

    This is a strawman argument.

  3. Williams quoting Blomberg, “. . . a growing and sophisticated Muslim apologetics that builds its case from the fact the New Testament was not preserved as accurately as the Qur’an has been”

    After Uthman burned all (or most all) the earlier evidence. !!!

    We debated and discussed this before at your old blog that Ijaz Ahmad took over, the nice Muslim that he is.


  4. There is no incentive to falsify the Koran cmpared to the bible.

    • There is ALWAYS an incentive to falsify religious text as a matter of control or doctrine this is why deviants such as the Rafidah tried with “Surah” Nurayn and Wilayah. But because the Qur’an is so mass transmitted it is REALLY difficult which is why most didn’t. Just because God protected our Scripture doesn’t mean people didn’t try.

      • It adds nothing new doctrinally or historically. It was only new to the pagans. It has no doctrinal complexity. One of the reasons that the Jews rejected Mohammed must have been that they saw that he was only plagiarizing their texts and gnostic christian texts and mixing them with pagan things.

      • @ Erasmus

        I have no idea who you are talking about because you played the pronoun game.

        As for their rejection, it was simply because he was an Arab.

  5. @ Ken

    Here let me remind you, I wrote an entire Essay for you to comprehend the different Qiraat and how someone could mess up the Qur’an so Uthman(ra) had to standardize so that it didn’t get jacked up. You then responded:

    “Hey Stewjo004,
    You put so much information that it will take me a long time to even work through it all, read all the links; listen to videos, etc.
    I don’t have time for all of that right now. I RESPOND TO THINGS THAT I ALREADY KNOW ABOUT.”


    Meaning you DID NOT KNOW why Uthman(ra) had to standardize or even what the issue was, meaning you are again spreading misinformation in ignorance.

    • Not having time to read all your long links and videos is not the same as “not knowing what you are talking about”

      That expression, “you don’t know what you are talking about” is not the same as not having time to cull through your ponderous and boring stuff.

  6. I’m sorry Ken please play your theme @ 00:41 while reading my response:

    You said:

    “I respond to things that I already know about.”

    And then proceeded to talk about, the Synoptics and their literary plagiarism meaning you did not know what the issue was (which was the point you brought up)

    As for the rest of the articles, you were the one who brought up the tangents, made a list of unsubstantiated claims and were then refuted. Remember the original point was about my article that you distorted to say what it didn’t (thus you being a liar).

    You did not know about the Qiraat or what the issue is so I think the question REALLY is:

      • Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:
        Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people of Yamama had been killed (i.e., a number of the Prophet’s Companions who fought against Musailima). (I went to him) and found `Umar bin Al- Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), “`Umar has come to me and said:

        “Casualties were heavy among the Qurra’ of the Qur’an (i.e. those who knew the Qur’an by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yamama, and I am afraid that more heavy casualties may take place among the Qurra’ on other battlefields, whereby a large part of the Qur’an may be lost.
        Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur’an be collected.” I said to `Umar, “How can you do something which Allah’s Apostle did not do?” `Umar said, “By Allah, that is a good project.” `Umar kept on urging me to accept his proposal till Allah opened my chest for it and I began to realize the good in the idea which `Umar had realized.” Then Abu Bakr said (to me). ‘You are a wise young man and we do not have any suspicion about you, and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ). So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur’an and collect it in one book.” By Allah If they had ordered me to shift one of the mountains, it would not have been heavier for me than this ordering me to collect the Qur’an. Then I said to Abu Bakr, “How will you do something which Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) did not do?” Abu Bakr replied, “By Allah, it is a good project.” Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and `Umar. So I started looking for the Qur’an and collecting it from (what was written on) palme stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart, till I found the last Verse of Surat at-Tauba (Repentance) with Abi Khuzaima Al-Ansari, and I did not find it with anybody other than him. The Verse is: ‘Verily there has come unto you an Apostle (Muhammad) from amongst yourselves. It grieves him that you should receive any injury or difficulty..(till the end of Surat-Baraa’ (at-Tauba) (9.128-129). Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur’an remained with Abu Bakr till he died, then with `Umar till the end of his life, and then with Hafsa, the daughter of `Umar.

    • Not true; I am fully aware of what the issues are with the Synoptic gospels and the literary view of Mark.
      I gave around 4 sources – 2 of which I read many years ago in seminary in 183-1988.

      It was your irrelevant issues of videos and ponderous articles about Balaam from Numbers, etc. and other one that I don’t have time to investigate – that I don’t have time to look into.

      Quit saying I am lying; disagreement is not lying.

      • Correction of typos. sorry if unclear.

        Not true; I am fully aware of what the issues are with the Synoptic gospels and the literary dependence view of Matthew and Luke being dependent on Mark.
        I gave around 4 sources – 2 of which I read many years ago in seminary in 1983-1988.

      • @ Ken

        No, you are lying and I will continue to say it as long as you continue to misquote and distort facts.

        Notice I don’t call other people on here liars ONLY you, why? Because you are deceptive.

        And now I see why God misleads you because you are too lazy to look into the truth and that is just sad to me.

      • How is anything I have written deliberate lying?

        I know about Mark and that it is the predominate view that Matthew and Luke used Mark. Literary dependence and the Synoptic problem. I have known about that for 36 years.

        I don’t have time for the long and ponderous articles on Balaam, etc. and the other stuff – they are irrelevant and the Balaam one appears to be based on liberal presuppositions.

      • Disagreement is not lying.

        Not having time for some things is also not necessarily lazy. Research takes time. Lord willing, I will seek those other things out; but your name calling and reading the worst possible motives into my heart does not give me desire to do lots of research into those ponderous side issues; just as QB’s / Faiz’ evil character and behavior, name calling, etc. does not motivate me to research his material either.

  7. @ Ken

    AGAIN showing you don’t know what the heck you’re talking about. This is TWO different incidents and situations from ABU BAKR(ra) and UTHMAN(ra). I am talking about during Uthman’s (ra) time and you quote a hadith about Abu Bakr(ra) over twenty+ years beforehand. Thank you for proving decisively you don’t know what you’re talking about will continue to spread propaganda anyways.

    Know that God has shamed you in this life and a worse one awaits in the Next if you continue down your path.

    • I see what you mean now, by those being 2 different events. Sorry. I did not deliberately mean to distort anything. Because they are both together as hadith 509 and 510, it seems like one whole thing.

  8. So, explain what does Qiraat means exactly?


    the plural of “reading”

    Qiraat = readings

    Does it mean pronunciations or interpretations?

    And how does that relate to the 7 Ahrufs ? احرُف (plural of “harf” حرف – letter, speech, talk ) ?

  9. The way of reading something, or pronunciation, is not a textual issue; but a verbal pronunciation issue, so it does not make sense.

    Especially since the readers / reciters (Qurra) in the first Hadith (509) are the ones they were afraid would be killed and so, “loose a large portion of the Qur’an”; whereas the second Hadith in this discussion (510) is about the Qiraat قرائات or فراءات

    • sorry I typed “f” ف instead of “q” ق – the letters are right next to one another on keyboard and when small, I did not see the right one.

      Qiraat قرائات or قراءات

  10. @ Ken

    I have explained it as easy as I can on your blog. If you’re interested you can see there as this will help understand what thr Jews did to their text. Instead of “reading” a more accurate way is reciting. Basically you can keep the dame word and change the meaning through vowel pronunciation and how long you hold. Go to your blog and look at the two qiraat of Surah Ala and you will understand what I’m talking about.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: