If you think the scriptures (the Bible) have been changed, can you say when they were changed, and how?

Currently there are over 2,300 known and registered copies of the different new Testament texts in the original language known to exist. All before the Nicene Councils of the 350's AD, where most people argue that the first set of changes were made. Another 5,000 + still exist from after that time.

When you compare these original manuscripts, they agree with each other word for word 99.7% of the time. Most of the variants are word order (Jesus Christ instead of Christ Jesus) different spellings of the same word. or obvious copying errors such as missed words/lines or duplicated words/lines. Of the roughly 8,000 lines that make up the New Testament, fewer than 40 of them have any serious debate as to the original reading. Not a single one of those lines affect a major church doctrine.

With that many known manuscripts, it is impossible for anyone to have altered the text. It would be spotted in an instant. (And it has been when people have tried to do it.)

Sorry but there is nor historical or textual evidence to support the claim that the text has been altered. Rather than is an abundance of evidence to show that the texts we use today are reliable and accurate.

Remind your Muslim friend that there are currently over a dozen different versions of the Qur'an including:

Nafi` (from Medina; d. 169/785)

Ibn Kathir (from Mecca; d. 119/737)

Abu `Amr al-`Ala' (from Damascus; d. 153/770)

Ibn `Amir (from Basra; d. 118/736)

Hamzah (from Kufah; d. 156/772)

al-Qisa'i (from Kufah; d. 189/804)

Abu Bakr `Asim (from Kufah; d. 158/778)

So how can they claim that it has never changed or been altered?

There is contention over who wrote the Qu'ran as well, that is why you have different sects in religion, each follows its own interpretation of what was originally written.

As for how much of the Bible has been 'found' I would suggest that you are exaggerating somewhat.

It also has to be pointed out, that any translation of text from ancient languages to modern must be viewed with caution, word we think are one thing may actually mean something else, even if the translation is accurate, how can we be sure of the context.

'She turned green with envy', this could mean that a person literally turns green, maybe people could turn green and have lost the ability. The idea of people 'feeling blue', we know what we mean, but taken literally does it mean that some people can feel colours as well as see them?

Then you can get into the area of words that change meaning, the obvious example would be 'gay', sorry but it is the best I could come up with.

(Translate a word in Old English, cwen, answer at the end of this)

Try to read some original text in old English, Shakespear is bad enough, Chaucer is horrendous, and some of the really old manuscripts are just beyond hope for most people, and they are often less than 1000 years old, once you get into long dead languages over 2000 years old that must be the stuff of nightmares.

(Old English cwen= queen)

>It seems though when I ask where they were changed, by whom, and how much, no one seems to have the time to answer.

Because they have been changed so many times, it is not a one sentence or even one thesis answer. For instance, compare the KJV (catholic and derived from the Vulgate) to the Luther Bible (Protestant reformation and derived from the textus receptus) and with careful scrutiny you'll see that the translations (ergo the text and the interpretations of same) are different in many places.

>Obviously the Dead Sea Scrolls have confirmed the valid scribing of the Old Testament in its entirety,

...which is an out and out lie by anyone claiming this. The dead sea scrolls actually proved that the content of the O/T was fluid and changed many times up until about 300CE and showed that the masoretic texts, on which most modern bibles were based were extremely inaccurate in many places.

It's quite clear you have done zero study on this topic.

Muhammad is the last prophet of the ademic cycle of six thousand years 1844 A,D

1844 A,D is 1260 A,H molsem calendar it also corresponds to the end of the two thousand three hundred years and the end of the ademic cycle of six thousand years

If you read the first chapter it states that these things will shortly come to Pass ( 96 A,D )

The two witnesses would be Mohammad and ally his son in law

The year 1260 in the muslem calender is1844 A,D

Have you considered that there could be something in the bible that they don’t want you to know about

There are approximately 5600 texts found dated before the second century was done, that show an accuracy in comparison at over 99 percent....the gospel remains the same. The evidence is overwhelming.

http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

they re wrote god to be a good guy, rather than the bad one he was. little things like mentions the planets, mentions 24 hr in a day, must prove its wrote after man discovered the planets or after man made up 24hrs in a day

don't believe your friend though, cos his religion also is man made rubbish.

Here's how illogical the Muslim argument is: We are to believe that after only about 500 years, the bible became so corrupted, it was no longer the word of God and thus we needed Mohammed. But after 1400 years, we can have complete confidence that the Koran is still exactly God's word. Huh?

It's been rewritten like 20 times, usually because it's translated, and some translations are a little edgy. like For example "The Virgin Mary" could really just be "The lady Mary" because of language barriers. Many Kings and I think even a US President made their own version. << History is a bunch of lies agreed upon, but as I am repeatably told Christians don't need proof they just need faith.

A good place to start my friend and may our Father in heaven guide your path.

http://promotethetruth.com/

The scriptures and the Bible currently are not the same. God's old testament is the law of Moses; NOT Genesis-Malachi.