Too bad the salvation was not extended to cananites

Submitted by Abdulkarim Al-habsi (Oman), Feb 3, 2014 at 23:50

To set records straight, first, I am an Arab from the Sultanate of Oman.

Secondly, I don't ask a mullah, stupid or otherwise, on matters of faith. I can read and interpret the Quran and the words and deeds of my prophet myself, thank you very much.

As to your question why I quote what you think I perceive as corrupted book, you are wrong. In Islam, the bible and the torah are not corrupted as such, but modified or distorted. I am not a Muslim if I don't believe in the divinity of the Bible and the Torah. But I am asked to be cautious about them, as certain parts of the two holy books are distorted, not corrupted. The Arabic word used is "حرف" from the verb "تحريف" which more accurately translates to distorted or imprecise, not corrupted.

As to your question why I quote the bible, it is to answer the gentleman who postulates that Christianity in the way it is written is for the salvation of mankind, and I pointed him to the "distortion" in the bible with regards to its treatment of the Canaanites.

And it will be of great help to all, if your arguments are wee bit more civil. There is no need to be abusive.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".