Answering a Christian’s Challenge on Quran Manuscripts

Over at brother Ijaz Ahmed’s website “Calling Christians”, I am in a discussion with a Christian named “Zozeph Francisco” (see the screenshots below). He was posting in response to brother Ijaz’s post on Dan Brubaker’s book “Corrections in Early Qur’an Manuscripts”, which was reblogged on this blog previously. This Christian asked whether there were any manuscripts of the Quran that contain all 114 surahs. Brother Ijaz had already pointed out that all 114 surahs are in fact accounted for in the 1st-century of the Islamic calendar. But I could see the Christian was not satisfied. Thus, I pointed him to the Topkapi Manuscript, which is dated to the 1st/2nd century AH and contains 99% of the Quranic text. All 114 surahs are accounted for, with only 2 folios missing. Unsurprisingly, realizing that he had been refuted, the Christian moved the goal post!

Calling Christians - Zozeph Francisco Quran Manuscripts 1Calling Christians - Zozeph Francisco Quran Manuscripts 2Calling Christians - Zozeph Francisco Quran Manuscripts 3Calling Christians - Zozeph Francisco Quran Manuscripts 4Calling Christians - Zozeph Francisco Quran Manuscripts 5


1,419 thoughts on “Answering a Christian’s Challenge on Quran Manuscripts

  1. mr.heathcliff

    Now answer why were the girls taken?”

    can u tell me why the high priest gets 32 virgins ? why the levites get 320?
    imagine the women in your family were distributed like this and then the sweaty male banging them night and day, would u call that love?
    which biblical law says a captive “servant” cannot be mated on ?


      1. mr.heathcliff

        u dirty bagwans testicles, yhwh/jesus ALLOWED FREE romance for the horny hebrew soldiers.



        high priests get 32, tell me, S.O.B high priest will do what with 32 virgins ?

        high priest will use 32 FOR himself, for what, you tell me?

        high priest is to EAT these virgins, how do you EAT flesh?


      2. mr.heathcliff

        jesus wanted the high priest to “eat up” girls with CLOSED VAGINAS.
        in this incident, some how non-virgins would give a “spiritual infection” to the hebrews, so much for the bs that physical things cannot affect your spiritual state.


      3. mr.heathcliff

        bagwans left testicle, yhwh gave virgin test to the hebrews , he told them bloody sheet is 100 % proof of virginity, we know that bible DOES NOT FORBID RAPE OR KILLING DURING CAPTURE OF virgin and non-virgins, since hebrews ALREADY had a test for proof and THEY are told TO PERFORM the law of god to VERIFY things, then we can be sure the girls were RAPED .

        jesus inspired the jews to marry with 3 year old children.


  2. mr.heathcliff

    But Saul hasn’t obeyed Yahweh’s orders to the letter. He killed all the men, women and children, but didn’t go quite
    all the way. And for this sin, according to the pro-Davidic text,
    Yahweh rejects Saul as king and promises the throne to another,
    namely, David


    hey pig, how come you keep on denying that your god did not command to kill children, when the text explicitly does?

    Liked by 1 person

  3. mr.heathcliff

    lets run with your BULLSH*T that children were not killed, i will NOW show u that your jesus was a STINKING scum bag who deserves to be RAPED by romans for the crimes he did with the father in heaven.

    When Saul obeyed the divine order to slaughter Amalekites (1st Samuel 15:2-3 ff) he pursued the Amalekites as far as Shur, see v. 7. That means Saul pursued them to a place that was situated between Egypt’s outer western territory and the promised land’s western border.

    Here’s the problem: Shur was apparently a waterless desert that was part of Isreal’s Exodus wilderness wanderings, such that thirst could only be remedied by divine miracle, Exodus 15:22. Every other time the bible mentions “Shur”, it is a place that is not desired. Hagar was by a spring on water not in Shut but ON THE WAY to Shur (Gen. 16:7). Abraham settled BETWEEN Kadesh and Shur; (Gen. 20:1). Ishmael similarly settled in the same general area just before entering Shur (25:18). Shur is a desert wasteland with no water (Ex. 15:22, supra). The Amalekites who escaped Saul in 15:7, apparently regrouped, but when David meets them for battle, they are found not IN, but NEAR “Shur”, 1st Sam. 27:8.

    If the consistent biblical witness is historically and geographically accurate, this “Shur” was parched arid land utterly inhospitable to life. That is, Saul put Amalekites and their kids in the position of slowly starving/thirsting to death (or facilitating death by disease, since hunger and thirst would also inhibit the immune system), and Apologist Glenn Miller cites the inhospitable ANE as the reason why immediately slaughtering the Amalekite children was more humane.

    Another possible definition of “Shur” in scholarship is the one that says this was a place of Egyptian fortresses, what Egypt would logically do with its military to protect its borders from invaders.

    If that is the particular “Shur” to which Saul chased the Amalekites, then Saul was chasing them toward another enemy (If apologists are correct to say Amalekites were incorrigible brutes, Egypt would resist them with military force too, and not exactly bring camel loads of food and water), in which case Saul, a military leader, surely knew that chasing the Amalekites so close to Egyptian fortresses would subject Amalekites to further battle with Pharaoh, likely making the allegedly incorrigible Amalekites even more desperately barbaric to plunder any smaller bands or groups that might be found traveling along the way, so they could to avoid being wiped out by Egypt in that generally inhospitable region.

    That is, the two most popular scholarly opinions about this “Shur” each does a fair job of justifying the theory that Saul intended for Amalekites to suffer a slow miserable death.

    And apparently you didn’t notice: the thesis of Copan and Flannagan, that pagans who chose to flee would not be wiped out, is disproved by Saul’s chasing them such a great distance from Havilah to Shur, and one conservative Christian inerrantist commentator says Saul’s “ambush” in 1 Sam. 15:5, 7 was intended to trap and kill any Amalekites who tried to flee the battle:

    “His troops were now poised for a frontal attack on the major Amalekite settlement as well as an attack on the Amalekites attempting to escape the main Israelite force…” Bergen, R. D. (2001, c1996). Vol. 7: 1, 2 Samuel (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Page 169). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

    For these reasons, I believe apologists are incorrect when they say the genocide-thesis is unreasonable and unscholarly. The more you have God intending only to “dispossess”, the more this God appears willing to subject women and children to a method of dying involving far more misery and suffering than simple death-by-sword.


    1. mr.heathcliff

      what do you say now your burnt hindu scum bag? you gonna keep on hiding under jesus’ BLOODY virgin skirt? you dirty spirtual homosexual, seeker of private parts . yhwh gave u his love in his bridal bed, but you sought your crucified gods little winky.

      Study the Bible
      Easy-to-Read Version
      Ezekiel 23:20
      She remembered her lover with the penis like a donkey and a flood of semen like a horse.


      1. 🤣😂 Here we go again! This monkey is stuck in a loop. First, it’s “where, where, show me” then it’s “really but this is what Muhammad did”! Son of Satan, you need to pray for even half a brain because current one is malfunctioning. It’s affecting what was left of your intelligence. We have already shown that taph means little girls. They were taken as sex slaves. The little boys were killed along with all the older women. Ready to renounce your evil god?

        Liked by 1 person

  4. stewjo004

    @ Zoze the Blind Clown

    Are you retarded I quoted where the text says the girls were raped (I’ll capitalize for you this time):

    Genocide of Midian
    Numbers 31:1-13

    Little Girls taken as sex slaves
    Numbers 31:17-18

    The little girls were raped

    Would you prefer I mail you the text in braille? The verse says women captives (like those little girls) could be raped and you just discard them afterward. Just saying where, where won’t make the text go away, the passage EXPLICITLY says “you raped her”.

    Liked by 2 people

  5. mr.heathcliff

    Hey Heath, did you hear back from the brother who writes refutations of atheists? I would like him to contribute articles for the blog.

    he said he will contribute when he can,inshAllah

    Liked by 1 person

  6. mr.heathcliff

    17 Completely destroy them…


    (te·chai·yeh) = life


    (ne·sha·mah.) = breath

    your blood thirsty god said to KILL OF this.





    1 most often of devoting to destruction cities of Canaanites and other neighbours of Israel, exterminating inhabitants, and destroying or appropriating their possessions:

    a. Israel and her leaders subject Numbers 21:2,3(destruction according to vow), Joshua 6:21 (compare חֵרֶם ליהוה Joshua 6:17; all J); in Joshua 6:18 read תַּחְמְדוּ (for ᵑ0 תַּחֲרִימוּ, see Di VB); Joshua 8:26 (ᵐ5, not ᵐ5L, omit verse), Joshua 10:1 (JE), Deuteronomy 2:34; Deuteronomy 3:6 (twice in verse); Deuteronomy 7:2 (twice in verse) (commanded through Moses, compare for underlying thought Deuteronomy 7:4; Deuteronomy 7:5; Deuteronomy 7:6), Deuteronomy 20:17 (twice in verse) (commanded by ׳י), Joshua 2:10; Joshua 10:28,35,37,39,40 (divine command), Joshua 11:11,12,20,21 (divine command Joshua 11:12; Joshua 11:20; all D), 1 Samuel 15:3,8,9 (twice in verse); 1 Samuel 15:15,18,20 (divine command 1 Samuel 15:3; 1 Samuel 15:18; 1 Samuel 15:20, compare 1 Samuel 15:11; 1 Samuel 15:22; 1 Samuel 15:23); quite secondary is simple exterminate 1 Kings 9:21; 1 Chronicles 4:41.

    THE SAME WORD “ta·cha·ri·mem” used in deut 20:17 is used in OTHER PLACES, now tell me PIGS testicle, how do you “destroy” by NOT LEAVING ANYTHING ALIVE WHICH BREATHES, how do you DO THAT ?

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I remember Jonathan Sheffield appealing to this argument for the bible but his idea of the sciences and the logic behind it was very weak, will try to find some articles and comments of his to get into the details one day

        Liked by 1 person

      2. and lol why is a Christian speaking about *complete early manuscripts*? Their earliest textual “evidences” are literal bits of parchments which are torn here and there and even the earliest which is even smaller than my wallet is extremely late compared to what we have


    1. mr.heathcliff

      Did u see sheffields debate with ehrman and carrier?
      he pulled the same claim about “apostolic church” and how “islam controlled its text”

      none of it worked, he got worked

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s