Do Christians have the real Bible? Christian Vs Muslim Perspectives

I appreciate Ijaz, for taking up my challenge, we will be debating on other topics as well in future, hopefully. I will try to use as much sources with facts and use as clear reasoning in my arguments as I can. I will be defending two contentions: Christians Scriptures are preserved to an overwhelming Textual reliability The analysis of Bible proves Islam to be a paradox regardless of whether it is preserved or not Their book, the Qur'an, is believed to have been 'sent down' from heaven unfettered by the hands of men. It is this belief in scripture as a revelation which has been 'sent down' (Nazil or Tanzil) which they then impose upon the Bible as well. But it is wrong for Muslims to assume that the Bible can be measured using the same criteria as that supposed for the Quran. It is wrong for skeptics to test the textual reliability of the Bible as scripture by presuming a standard which the Bible itself does not hold. Definition of Inspiration: In 2 Timothy 3:16, we are told that all Scripture is inspired. The word used for inspiration is theopneustos which means "God-breathed," implying that what was written had its origin in God Himself. In 2 Peter 1:21 we read that the writers were "carried along" by God. Thus, God used each writer, including his personality to accomplish a divinely authoritative work, for God cannot inspire error. At the same time we do not believe that doctrine of inerrancy means that the original 'autographed copies' should survive till today, for even if they existed, skeptics would doubt whether they are really the originals; nor do we hold that the minor and insignificant changes, roughly around 2-3% in the New Testament texts make any contradiction with our doctrine of inerrancy as those variations have no implication to any theology at all. So I will not let any muslim attack strawman. Historiography is a branch of study which focuses on the logical, conceptual, and epistemological aspects of what historians do. Critical historiography studies, among other things, the different tests which should be applied to a document to determine whether or not it is historically reliable. When many of these tests are applied to the New Testament documents, they show themselves to be as reliable as, or superior to, most other ancient documents.[1] Versions (Translations) We have today in our possession 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, another 10,000 Latin Vulgates, and 9,300 other early versions (MSS), giving us more than 24,000 manuscript copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today! (taken from McDowell's Evidence That demands a Verdict, vol.1, 1972 pgs.40-48; and Time, January 23, 1995, pg.57) Early Church Fathers A further witness to the NT text is sourced in the thousands of quotations found throughout the writings of the Church Fathers (the early Christian clergy [100-450 A.D.] who followed the Apostles and gave leadership to the fledgling church, beginning with Clement of Rome (96 A.D.) There are also some 86,000 quotations from the early church fathers and several thousand Lectionaries. It has been observed that if all of the New Testament manuscripts and Versions mentioned above were to disappear overnight, it would still be possible to reconstruct the entire New Testament with quotes from the Church Fathers, with the exception of fifteen to twenty verses![2] Those numbers of manuscript keep increasing every year. The new discoveries of mss this year in 2012 have made the textual integrity of the NT even more astonishing. We now have abour 33% of NT dated from first century to second half. Moreover we continue to discover more ancient and old manuscript even today, very often which makes the textual integrity and reliability stronger. On 10 February 2012 Daniel B. Wallace says, Quote" I mentioned that seven New Testament papyri had recently been discovered—six of them probably from the second century and one of them probably from the first. These fragments will be published in about a year. These manuscripts now increase our holdings as follows: we have as many as eighteen New Testament manuscripts (all fragmentary, more or less) from the second century and one from the first. Altogether, about 33% of all New Testament verses are found in these manuscripts. But the most interesting thing is the first-century fragment. " (The Center for the Study of NT Manuscripts)[3] Since this debate is between Christianity Vs Islam, it would be unfair if we do not talk about the implications to Islam. Coming to my second contention: Even if the Bible corrupted or preserved; we will see that in both cases, Islam appears to be a paradox, and incoherent to be taken as meaningful. Muhammad maintained that the scripture of Jews & Christians are revelation of Allah; he did not claim to found a new religion but another prophet of the same God of the Bible. Ijaz needs to refute the following argument to defend Islamic position. a) Either the Bible is corrupted, having lost its original message or it is preserved b) In both cases the claims of Muhammad or his God proves to be wrong. c) Therefore it follows that Islam is false Evidence: (1) Quran allegedly "confirms & verify" the previous books supposedly the Bible of Allah (Sura 2:40-42,126,136,285,89,91,97,101; 3:3,71,93; 4:47,136; 5:47, 6:92; 10:37; 12:111; 35:31; 46:30 and so on) (2) Allah claims to guard his dhikri in Surah 15:9. Same word Dhikri/ Dhikraan is used for previous books also; S 16:43, 21:7, 21:48, 53:36. So Its obvious in Islamic perspective that he would "guard" and preserve his Bible too. (3) Quran claims the scriptures/books of Allah are unalterable (6:34,115 and 18:27) (4) Quran calls the Bible or previous books of Allah as Equal with Quran-- he makes no distinction btw ANY of his books (3:84, ; 2:136 ) it also appeals to them S 10:94 etc. and since Quran also confirm the whole previous books(1), thus when it talks about alleged corruption of books by some people (S 2:79) it is reasonable to assume it is referring only a small group twisting and changing it for limited period and not ultimate corruption for whole Books. In Conclusion, if Bible is corrupted and lost forever from believers, Islam is false because the claims, promises of Allah are refuted, he could not save his eternal revelation. If it is preserved then we clearly see that whole book of Muhammad contradicts the Bible; this is why we had actually a new religion founded by Muhammad. [1] A sample chapter from the book "Scaling the secular city" by J P Morland http://www.bethinking.org...... [2] Jimmy Williams http://www.leaderu.com...... [3] The Center for the Study of NT Manuscripts http://www.csntm.org......