Did Jesus Exist?

[Enochian]

Remember the Gospels and Acts were composed AFTER Paul's letters.
Gerd Lüdemann says:
"Not once does Paul refer to Jesus as a teacher, to his words as teaching, or to [any] Christians as disciples."
and
"Moreover, when Paul himself summarizes the content of his missionary preaching in Corinth (1 Cor. 2.1-2; 15.3-5), there is no hint that a narration of Jesus’ earthly life or a report of his earthly teachings was an essential part of it. . . . In the letter to the Romans, which cannot presuppose the apostle’s missionary preaching and in which he attempts to summarize its main points, we find not a single direct citation of Jesus’ teaching."
According to Richard Carrier, Paul's letters indicate that Cephas etc. only knew Jesus from DREAMS, based on the Old Testament scriptures.
1 Cor. 15.:
"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also."
The Scriptures Paul is referring to here are:
Septuagint version of Zechariah 3 and 6 gives the Greek name of Jesus, describing him as confronting Satan, being crowned king in heaven, called "the man named 'Rising'" who is said to rise from his place below, building up God’s house, given supreme authority over God’s domain and ending all sins in a single day.
Daniel 9 describes a messiah dying before the end of the world.
Isaiah 53 describes the cleansing of the world's sins by the death of a servant.
The concept of crucifixion is from Psalm 22.16, Isaiah 53:5 and Zechariah 12:10.

- - - Updated - - -

Jesus is the same Rising Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah.

Paul only ever indicates 2 sources of Jesus info, Scripture (the LXX) and dream teachings.

Paul never indicates Cephas or anyone else was a disciple of Jesus. Apostle doesn't mean disciple.

Philo independently confirms Jesus is the same Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah:
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13541

[anatolian]

Which part of your post does actually prove your claim? I couldnt find a connection.

[Enochian]

Let me try to format better:

Remember the Gospels and Acts were composed AFTER Paul's letters.

Gerd Lüdemann says:

"Not once does Paul refer to Jesus as a teacher, to his words as teaching, or to [any] Christians as disciples."

and

"Moreover, when Paul himself summarizes the content of his missionary preaching in Corinth (1 Cor. 2.1-2; 15.3-5), there is no hint that a narration of Jesus’ earthly life or a report of his earthly teachings was an essential part of it. . . . In the letter to the Romans, which cannot presuppose the apostle’s missionary preaching and in which he attempts to summarize its main points, we find not a single direct citation of Jesus’ teaching."


According to Richard Carrier, Paul's letters indicate that Cephas etc. only knew Jesus from DREAMS, based on the Old Testament scriptures.

1 Cor. 15.:

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also."

The Scriptures Paul is referring to here are:

Septuagint version of Zechariah 3 and 6 gives the Greek name of Jesus, describing him as confronting Satan, being crowned king in heaven, called "the man named 'Rising'" who is said to rise from his place below, building up God’s house, given supreme authority over God’s domain and ending all sins in a single day.Daniel 9 describes a messiah dying before the end of the world.

Isaiah 53 describes the cleansing of the world's sins by the death of a servant.

The concept of crucifixion is from Psalm 22.16, Isaiah 53:5 and Zechariah 12:10.

[Ümit]

Let me try to format it better for you:

Just because Paul did not refer to Jesus, does not mean he does not exist.
So your thread title "Jesus never existed" is false based on what you presented here.

Second, I do not know whatever this LXX is or Sir Lüdemann is, but this whole Bible thingy (OT, NT, LXX or whatever) is corrupt...and therefore cannot be used as reference, and certainly not to disprove the existence of Jesus.

Islam is an Abrahamic religion. So it shares its roots with Christianity and Judaism. However, this doesn't mean that Islaam is based on these two religions. Only the source is the same.
That is why there are so many similarities between these religions.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[eesa the kiwi]

What religion do you follow @Enochian

[Enochian]

Second, I do not know whatever this LXX is or Sir Lüdemann is, but this whole Bible thingy (OT, NT, LXX or whatever) is corrupt...and therefore cannot be used as reference, and certainly not to disprove the existence of Jesus.

The historicity of Jesus is based on Paul's letters such as this passage.

Even secular historians view Paul's letters as reliable.

[Ümit]

The historicity of Jesus is based on Paul's letters such as this passage.

Even secular historians view Paul's letters as reliable.

Is the historicity of Jesus ONLY based on Paul's letters or are there more sources?
And are you just claiming that all historians unamiously agree with each other that Jesus is just fiction?

Is that what you are telling us?

[Mandy]

Is the historicity of Jesus ONLY based on Paul's letters or are there more sources?
And are you just claiming that all historians unamiously agree with each other that Jesus is just fiction?

Is that what you are telling us?

I agree with Umit here.

@Enochian, you say that all non religious historians consider Paul's letter to be true. Yet most most historians agree Jesus existed. So how can those same letters tell you Jesus did not exists?
Also, saying a certain thing are not mentioned somewhere is not proof it does not exist. I do not write about the sun every time I write something, yet, the sun is still shockingly still there!

[CuriousonTruth]

Well atleast she is partly correct, the European Jesus never existed and is a creation of Europeans.

The middle eastern Isa(A) existed, whether the "gospels" of thomas and co are in anyway reflective of reality is another thing. Muslims take what is in the Quran and that's it.

[Abz2000]

Of course i exist - dumbass

[Saira Khan]

One correction to your post. Actually St. Paul did not exist. It was the Church who later on "created" something with the name St. Paul to combat the religion of Jesus and to gain power through the newly created character. Most Christians today are actually Paulians, followers of so called Apostle Paul. They form most doctrines around Paul, not Jesus.

[Scimitar]

The historicity of Jesus is based on Paul's letters.

False.

Considering you yourself are contesting this point.

Do you know what irony is?

- - - Updated - - -

One correction to your post. Actually St. Paul did not exist.

Seriously? :D Nah, you need to stop feeding bias as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Of course i exist - dumbass

:D ... that's all folks

[Enochian]

One correction to your post. Actually St. Paul did not exist. It was the Church who later on "created" something with the name St. Paul to combat the religion of Jesus and to gain power through the newly created character. Most Christians today are actually Paulians, followers of so called Apostle Paul. They form most doctrines around Paul, not Jesus.

Do you understand that the teachings of Jesus are based on Paul?

For example, Paul was the one who originally taught the concept of loving your neighbor etc. in Rom. 12.14-21; Gal. 5.14-15; 1 Thess. 5.15; and Rom. 13.9-10.

[Saira Khan]

Do you understand that the teachings of Jesus are based on Paul?

Rather you can say that Paul's teachings are based on Jesus to some extent. Paul (if any) was converted to faith in Jesus (in 33 CE). Even for those who believe that Paul existed, he never met Jesus in person and he only had heard of Jesus, his teachings and his miracles. Paul was so influenced by all he heard about Jesus that later on he termed Jesus to be the son of God (by his own extreme enthusiasm for Jesus).

[Enochian]

Even for those who believe that Paul existed, he never met Jesus in person and he only had heard of Jesus, his teachings and his miracles.

Paul never says Jesus performed miracles.

The Gospel miracles are plagiarized off the Old Testament.

Here is just one example:

It happened after this . . . (Kings 17.17)

It happened afterwards . . . (Luke 7.11)

At the gate of Sarepta, Elijah meets a widow (Kings 17.10).

At the gate of Nain, Jesus meets a widow (Luke 7.11-12).

Another widow’s son was dead (Kings 17.17).

This widow’s son was dead (Luke 7.12).

That widow expresses a sense of her unworthiness on account of sin (Kings 17.18).

A centurion (whose ‘boy’ Jesus had just saved from death) had just expressed a sense of his unworthiness on account of sin (Luke 7.6).

Elijah compassionately bears her son up the stairs and asks ‘the Lord’ why he was allowed to die (Kings 17.13-14).

‘The Lord’ feels compassion for her and touches her son’s bier, and the bearers stand still (Luke 7.13-14).

Elijah prays to the Lord for the son’s return to life (Kings 17.21).

‘The Lord’ commands the boy to rise (Luke 7.14).

The boy comes to life and cries out (Kings 17.22).

‘And he who was dead sat up and began to speak’ (Luke 7.15).

‘And he gave him to his mother’, kai edōken auton tē mētri autou (Kings 17.23).

‘And he gave him to his mother’, kai edōken auton tē mētri autou (Luke 7.15).

The widow recognizes Elijah is a man of God and that ‘the word’ he speaks is the truth (Kings 17.24).

The people recognize Jesus as a great prophet of God and ‘the word’ of this truth spreads everywhere (Luke 7.16-17).

- - - Updated - - -

Rather you can say that Paul's teachings are based on Jesus to some extent. Paul (if any) was converted to faith in Jesus (in 33 CE). Even for those who believe that Paul existed, he never met Jesus in person and he only had heard of Jesus, his teachings and his miracles. Paul was so influenced by all he heard about Jesus that later on he termed Jesus to be the son of God (by his own extreme enthusiasm for Jesus).

The teachings of Jesus are based on Paul.

I just gave an example.

Also its a basic academic fact.

Kurt Noll says "Early post-Pauline writings transmit favourite Pauline doctrines (such as a declaration that kashrut need not be observed; Mk 7:19b), but shifted these declarations to a new authority figure, Jesus himself."

[Ümit]

So again, what is your claim now?

- Did Jesus exist?
Based on what you have presented here so far and disregarding all other evidences about the existence of Jesus, you still cannot possibly answer this question.
- The story of Jesus in the Bible was based on Pauls writings?
I could not care less about what false stories are told in the Bible about Jesus because the whole Bible is as corrupt as it can get.
- Cephas was an apostle and not a disciple of Jesus?
Again, I couldn't care less...but how can an apostle be a "messenger" without learning this message first? so aren't all apostles once disciples?
- Philo independently confirms Jesus is the same Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah?
So? I do not get the point here...should that be a different Jesus?

- So the whole Bible about Jesus is not reliable but the writings of Paul about Jesus (who has never ever seen Jesus in his whole life) is reliable?
In my opinion both are equally unreliable.

[eesa the kiwi]

What religion do you follow @Enochian

Still waiting

[Enochian]

So again, what is your claim now?

- Did Jesus exist?
Based on what you have presented here so far and disregarding all other evidences about the existence of Jesus, you still cannot possibly answer this question.
- The story of Jesus in the Bible was based on Pauls writings?
I could not care less about what false stories are told in the Bible about Jesus because the whole Bible is as corrupt as it can get.
- Cephas was an apostle and not a disciple of Jesus?
Again, I couldn't care less...but how can an apostle be a "messenger" without learning this message first? so aren't all apostles once disciples?
- Philo independently confirms Jesus is the same Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah?
So? I do not get the point here...should that be a different Jesus?

- So the whole Bible about Jesus is not reliable but the writings of Paul about Jesus (who has never ever seen Jesus in his whole life) is reliable?
In my opinion both are equally unreliable.

How come Muslims don't point out the Gospels are fiction?

I gave one example above of a miracle of Jesus being plagiarized from the Old Testament.

I showed Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is based on Paul.

Jesus riding on a donkey is from Zechariah 9.

The cleansing of the temple as a fictional scene has its primary inspiration from an ancient faulty translation of Zechariah 14.21 which changed 'Canaanites' to 'traders'.

[Ümit]

How come Muslims don't point out the Gospels are fiction?

I gave one example above of a miracle of Jesus being plagiarized from the Old Testament.

I showed Jesus' Sermon on the Mount is based on Paul.

Jesus riding on a donkey is from Zechariah 9.

The cleansing of the temple as a fictional scene has its primary inspiration from an ancient faulty translation of Zechariah 14.21 which changed 'Canaanites' to 'traders'.

Muslims do not point out the Gospels are fiction, because it isn't. The Gospels are Divine revelations to Isa as (Jesus). We believe the original Gospels as it were revealed to Jesus as truth. However, the Gospels in that original form does not exist anymore. the message is lost.
Therefore, the Gospels as we know today is corrupt and cannot be trusted anymore.
Besides, God gave us a replacement of the Gospels, which is the Quraan. That overwrites the content of the Gospels. In the presence of the Quraan, the Gospels have no authority anymore.

[Enochian]

Muslims do not point out the Gospels are fiction, because it isn't. The Gospels are Divine revelations to Isa as (Jesus). We believe the original Gospels as it were revealed to Jesus as truth. However, the Gospels in that original form does not exist anymore. the message is lost.
Therefore, the Gospels as we know today is corrupt and cannot be trusted anymore.
Besides, God gave us a replacement of the Gospels, which is the Quraan. That overwrites the content of the Gospels. In the presence of the Quraan, the Gospels have no authority anymore.

If Islam doesn't understand the Gospels are fiction, thats a huge red flag to me.

[Ümit]

If Islam doesn't understand the Gospels are fiction, thats a huge red flag to me.

again...the gospels as we know today is corrupt and cannot be trusted. to which degree it is false we do not know and honestly....we do not care because the Quraan replaced it.
to say that all of the Gospels are fiction would therefore be wrong.
if that is a red flag to you...then maybe you should fgure out why your red flag got triggered in the first place...because İ still dont know what you try to achieve with this thread.

[Physicist]

Implausible theory even from atheistic point of view. He was describing recent events, with many living witnesses around. Why would anyone take him serious and copy some fiction book which was quite expensive at the time.
What I found in wikipedia: In the beginning Paul was persecuting early disciples of Jesus. Certainly there were something going out there. Whatever were reasons of his conversion, but perhaps his background influenced him.

[Insaanah]

Greetings,

Since this is in the clarifications about Islam section and you are asking us whether we believe that Jesus, peace be upon him existed, the answer to that is a simple yes.

It is an article of faith to believe in and respect Jesus, peace be upon him. We believe in him as he was; one of the most noble and purest of humanity to ever walk the earth, and one of the greatest messengers of Allah, sent to the Children of Israel. Allah gave him a scripture called the Injeel. We do not reject him (as Jews do), nor do we deify him (as Christians do). Neither he, nor any other messenger, was divine, ever claimed divinity, or to be God's son. We believe he was born miraculously of the noble virgin Mary (peace be on her), and that he is the messiah. We do not however, believe that he died or was crucified. He will return to earth near the end of time.

[Enochian]

again...the gospels as we know today is corrupt and cannot be trusted. to which degree it is false we do not know and honestly....we do not care because the Quraan replaced it.
to say that all of the Gospels are fiction would therefore be wrong.
if that is a red flag to you...then maybe you should fgure out why your red flag got triggered in the first place...because İ still dont know what you try to achieve with this thread.

It's interesting you cannot admit the Gospels are fiction.

Because that would undermine Islam as well.

[Enochian]

Implausible theory even from atheistic point of view. He was describing recent events, with many living witnesses around. Why would anyone take him serious and copy some fiction book which was quite expensive at the time.
What I found in wikipedia: In the beginning Paul was persecuting early disciples of Jesus. Certainly there were something going out there. Whatever were reasons of his conversion, but perhaps his background influenced him.

Jesus is the same Rising Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah.

Paul only ever indicates 2 sources of Jesus info, Scripture (the LXX) and dream teachings.

Paul never indicates Cephas or anyone else was a disciple of Jesus. Apostle doesn't mean disciple.

[Ümit]

It's interesting you cannot admit the Gospels are fiction.

Because that would undermine Islam as well.

right...that would totally ruin İslam...İ don't know...based on what...but still it would totally destroy İslam...

[Physicist]

right...that would totally ruin İslam...İ don't know...based on what...but still it would totally destroy İslam...

I disagree.
Even if there will be 100% proof that Paul made a fiction book: It doesn't prove that there were no prophet Isa at that or another time.

Even if there will appear 100% proof that there were no any remotely similar events, it will only make reconsider purpose of that part of Quran. I really don't care about exact events of the past.
Quran is not some mere chronicle or dumb instruction.
It is a Guidance, it says what has to be said.
Even if something understood wrong by some people, it was designed so.
Allah knows best.

[eesa the kiwi]

right...that would totally ruin İslam...İ don't know...based on what...but still it would totally destroy İslam...

Perhaps you should be more clear you are being sarcastic

[Saira Khan]

@Enochian let us conclude this thread now, by answering my one simple question on your side.
Do you believe that Bible is word by word correct and authentic as to be Divine (Paul, Mathew, John etc)? OR do you believe that some of it is correct and some of it is being corrupted by later priests etc? Or do you believe that only Paul is correct as compared to Mathew and John etc ? I will wait for your answer. Based on your answer in any case, I will logically invite you to accept Islam for your salvation (in this world and hereafter).

- - - Updated - - -

[Ümit]

Perhaps you should be more clear you are being sarcastic

yes İ'm sorry

@Physicist
İ was being sarcastic

i mean...İ thought you guys knew me well enough to understand İ was being sarcastic. i've been around for a while here on islamicboard. And İ am a big defender of islam and science. So i didn't think that you would interpret my post any other way than being than being sarcastic

[Enochian]

right...that would totally ruin İslam...İ don't know...based on what...but still it would totally destroy İslam...

Islam claims the Gospels were originally true.

[eesa the kiwi]

yes İ'm sorry

@Physicist
İ was being sarcastic

i mean...İ thought you guys knew me well enough to understand İ was being sarcastic. i've been around for a while here on islamicboard. And İ am a big defender of islam and science. So i didn't think that you would interpret my post any other way than being than being sarcastic

I understood bro but enochian might not have

- - - Updated - - -

Islam claims the Gospels were originally true.

No. Islam teaches the gospel that was revealed to jesus alayhis Salam is true

Is the 4 gospels in the modern day bible the gospel of jesus no. They may have some remnants of the message revealed to jesus but have undergone so many alterations and distortions that what jesus alayhis Salam taught is barely recognizable

Islam is a call to return to the worship of Allah (which is the Arabic name for God) alone without partners which is what jesus taught. The teachings of Paul where a prophet is deified and the law of the prophet's abandoned we reject this

[Physicist]

yes İ'm sorry

@Physicist
İ was being sarcastic

i mean...İ thought you guys knew me well enough to understand İ was being sarcastic. i've been around for a while here on islamicboard. And İ am a big defender of islam and science. So i didn't think that you would interpret my post any other way than being than being sarcastic

It just reminded me reaction of one muslim-born friend, when I told him my idea how we will be resurrected.
He exclaimed: "But that would mean that Allah doesn't exist!"

[eesa the kiwi]

@Enochian here is a short spoken word on the Islamic concept of jesus. inshaAllah (God willing) you'll find it beneficial

[Enochian]

No. Islam teaches the gospel that was revealed to jesus alayhis Salam is true

Is the 4 gospels in the modern day bible the gospel of jesus no. They may have some remnants of the message revealed to jesus but have undergone so many alterations and distortions that what jesus alayhis Salam taught is barely recognizable

Islam is a call to return to the worship of Allah (which is the Arabic name for God) alone without partners which is what jesus taught. The teachings of Paul where a prophet is deified and the law of the prophet's abandoned we reject this

Islam claims Jesus performed miracles.

Islam claims Jesus had a mother called Mary.

These things are from the Gospels.

[eesa the kiwi]

Islam claims Jesus performed miracles.

Islam claims Jesus had a mother called Mary.

These things are from the Gospels.

Islam is an Arabic word meaning submission to the will of Allah. A Muslim is one who submits.
All the true prophets taught Islam to worship Allah alone and follow the messengers

As jesus alayhis Salam was a true prophet of Allah he taught Islam to worship Allah alone and to obey the messengers and even though his teachings have become so distorted by the Jews and Christians you can still see remnants of his message for example in the bible he is alleged to have said hear oh Israel the lord you God is one

Let me ask you a question if Allah sent jesus alayhis Salam as a prophet and subsequently generations took him falsely as an idol contradicting the very core of his message there is no God but Allah. Would not Allah send another prophet to clarify for mankind what his religion is

Prophet Muhammad sallaho alayhi wa sallam is that prophet. He couldn't read or write and the bible hadn't even been translated into Arabic at his time so dont claim Islam copied the gospels

Basically for a Muslim the teachings of the bible fall into three main categories

1. That which we know is true because it conforms to the revelation revealed to prophet Muhammad sallaho alayhi wa sallam. The miracles of jesus is one example
2. That which we know to be false because we have been taught in the Quran or sunnah that its false. The attribution of deification to jesus is an example of this
3. The third category is things we dont know if they are true or false as nothing has been mentioned in the Quran and the sunnah of prophet Muhammad sallaho alayhi wa sallam. These things we neither confirm nor deny

A Muslim believes in the miracles of jesus not because of what was mentioned in the bible but because what we have been taught by prophet Muhammad sallaho alayhi wa sallam

[Enochian]

As jesus alayhis Salam was a true prophet of Allah he taught Islam to worship Allah alone and to obey the messengers and even though his teachings have become so distorted by the Jews and Christians you can still see remnants of his message for example in the bible he is alleged to have said hear oh Israel the lord you God is one

This is not a teaching of Jesus.

Like everything else in the Gospels, this is plagiarized from the LXX.

[Grandad]

You write:

‘Paul never indicates Cephas or anyone else was a disciple of Jesus. Apostle doesn't mean disciple.’

Indeed, it does not.

‘Disciple’ is a Biblical term meaning learner or pupil. The word ‘apostle’ defines one who has been given a specific mission or purpose (that – in Greek – is the literal meaning of the word ‘apostle’) .

Paul does not refer to Cephas, and the others, as ‘disciples’ for the simple reason that by the time he met them they were no longer pupils, but leaders – teachers.

‘Then God, who had specially chosen me while I was still in my mother's womb, called me through his grace and chose to reveal his Son in me, so that I might preach the Good News about him to the pagans. I did not stop to discuss this with any human being, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were already apostles before me, but I went off to Arabia at once and later went straight back from there to Damascus. Even when after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him for fifteen days, I did not see any of the other apostles; I only saw James, the brother of the Lord.’ (Galatians 1: 15-19).

You will see that Paul refers to several ‘apostles’ of Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām); naming both Cephas (Peter) and James, the ‘brother of the Lord’.

He goes on:

‘I was so determined to safeguard for you the true meaning of the Good News, that I refused even out of deference to yield to such people for one moment. As a result, these people who are acknowledged leaders - not that their importance matters to me, since God has no favorites - these leaders, as I say, had nothing to add to the Good News as I preach it. On the contrary, they recognized that I had been commissioned to preach the Good News to the uncircumcised just as Peter had been commissioned to preach it to the circumcised. The same person whose action had made Peter the apostle of the circumcised had given me a similar mission to the pagans. So, James, Cephas and John, these leaders, these pillars, shook hands with Barnabas and me as a sign of partnership: we were to go to the pagans and them to the circumcised.’ (Galatians 2: 5-9).

In these verses Paul reaffirms Peter as an apostle and (by virtue of his status as apostle) names him as one of the leaders of the community in Jerusalem. A ‘disciple’ (‘pupil’) no longer.

Paul also refers to James and John as ‘leaders’ (and, by implication, as fellow apostles).

Paul writes: ‘The same person whose action had made Peter the apostle of the circumcised had given me a similar mission to the pagans.’ This person, of course, is Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām).

It is quite clear that Paul recognises the historical existence of Yeshua; and the fact that he (Yeshua) was the one who had commissioned the apostles to convey his message to others; who had given them a specific mission.

- - - Updated - - -

You write that the Shema is ‘not a teaching of Jesus (but) ‘plagiarized from the LXX.’

‘Sh'ma Yisrael Adonai Eloheinu Adonai Eḥad’ – ‘Hear, O Israel: the LORD is our God, the LORD is One.’

This is the central creed of Judaism; found in the Taurat; the Holy Book given to Moses by Allāh (subḥānahu ūta'āla). It pre-dates the Septuagint, and would have been recited by Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām) every day of his life. He was, after all, a devout Jew.

- - - Updated - - -

You write: ‘ Islam claims Jesus performed miracles. Islam claims Jesus had a mother called Mary. These things are from the Gospels.’

These things are also from the Qur’an; a confirmation of that which is stated in the Gospels. The Qur’an does not – after all – teach that everything in the Gospels is false.

- - - Updated - - -

You write: 'Islam claims that the Gospels were originally true'.

It does not.

The Arabic word ‘ʾInjīl’ is translated ‘Gospel’ by those writing in English. However, in the Qur’an the word is always in the singular, and is never used to describe the four Gospels of the New Testament.

There is no doubt that the New Testament Gospels were written after the lifetime of Yeshua. Therefore they cannot be the ‘ʾInjīl’ mentioned in the Qur’an. The Exalted says: ‘We sent Yeshua, son of Mary, in their footsteps, to confirm the Torah that had been sent before him: We gave him the Gospel (ʾInjīl) with guidance, light, and confirmation of the Torah already revealed - a guide and lesson for those who take heed of Allāh.’ (Al-Ma’ida: 46).

It is quite clear from this verse that Yeshua was given the ʾInjīl (Gospel) complete; how else could it have been ‘a guidance, light and confirmation of the Torah’?

First example of Gospel falsehood:

The King James Bible (including the American Version); the King James 2000 Bible; the Jubilee Bible 2000; the Douay-Rheims Bible; the Webster’s Bible Translation; and the Young’s Literal Translation contain what is known as the ‘Comma Ioanneum’. This is shown below in capitals:

‘For there are three that bear record IN HEAVEN, THE FATHER, THE WORD, AND THE HOLY GHOST: AND THESE THREE ARE ONE. AND THERE ARE THREE THAT BEAR WITNESS IN EARTH, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.’

Anthony and Richard Hanson write: ‘It (the ‘Comma Ioanneum’) was added by some enterprising person or persons in the ancient Church who felt that the New Testament was sadly deficient in direct witness to the kind of doctrine of the Trinity which he favoured and who determined to remedy that defect . . . It is a waste of time to attempt to read Trinitarian doctrine directly off the pages of the New Testament.’ (‘Reasonable Belief: A Survey of the Christian Faith; page 171).

The ‘Comma Ioanneum’ is spurious, and yet for centuries the Church insisted it be included in 1 John 5: 7-8; on the grounds that it had become official Church teaching.

In 1927, the Holy Office (Guardian of Catholic orthodoxy; and once named the ‘Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition’) declared: ‘After careful examination of the whole circumstances that its genuineness could be denied’ (Ludwig Ott: ‘Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma’, page 56).

This is why one of my Bibles (the Jerusalem Bible - a Catholic version) reads: ‘So there are three witnesses, the Spirit, water and blood; and the three of them coincide.’ Another Catholic version of mine – the Douay-Rheims – does contain the ‘Comma Ioanneum’. So which of these two is the uncorrupted: the former or the latter?

Second example:

The story of the woman caught in adultery (found in John 7) has been a source of much controversy for decades. Is it authentic; or is in a later insertion into the text?

The King James Version (based on the Textus Receptus) includes the ‘pericope adulterae’ as an original part of the Gospel. On the other hand, more modern translations – such and as the ESV, NIV, RV; NRVS; and GNB – include the ‘pericope adulterae’, but bracket it as not original; while others print it in a smaller font (TNIV), or place it at the end of the gospel (REB), all with notes of explanation. This is because the story is not found in the earliest Greek manuscripts.

It certainly seems as if, somewhere along the way, a scribe added this story into John’s Gospel in a place he thought it would fit well. Most likely, the story had been circulating for a long time – as an oral tradition – and a scribe (or scribes) felt that, since it was already accepted as truth by consensus, it was appropriate to include it in the text of Scripture. The problem is that truth is not determined by consensus (witness the ‘Comma Ioanneum’ debacle).

The omission of the ‘pericope adulterae’ from the early manuscripts has been explained as an attempt by early church leaders to prevent scandal; to prevent the impression that adultery is acceptable (for Yeshua is said to have forgiven the woman). Concerned for the moral welfare of their flock these leaders are said to have ordered the story’s removal. If this is true, then they tampered with the Gospel!

The fact remains that the ‘pericope adulterae’ is not supported by early manuscript evidence (and some might say, the best manuscript evidence); there is, therefore, serious doubt as to whether it should be included in the Bible at all.

Third example:

Mark 16: 9-20: ‘Now when he rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, from whom he had cast out seven demons. She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it. After these things he appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country. And they went back and told the rest, but they did not believe them. Afterward he appeared to the eleven themselves as they were reclining at table, and he rebuked them for their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they had not believed those who saw him after he had risen. And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.” So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by accompanying signs.’

Some manuscripts end the book with 16:8; others include verses 9-20 immediately after verse 8. At least one manuscript inserts additional material after verse 14; some manuscripts include, after verse 8, the following: ‘But they reported briefly to Peter and those with him all that they had been told. And after this, Jesus himself sent out by means of them, from east to west, the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.’ These manuscripts then continue with verses 9-20.

Conclusion:

An acknowledged spurious text – justifying the belief in a Trinitarian deity – and still present in at least six current versions of the Bible; the insertion of the ‘pericope adulterae’; and the changes to Mark.

Perhaps now you can understand why scholars (both Christian and Muslim) speak of a corrupted New Testament!

[Enochian]

Paul never indicates anyone ever met Jesus.


And again, the Gospels are fiction.


It doesn't matter if they are corrupted.

[Zafran]

Paul never indicates anyone ever met Jesus.

Jesus pbuh definitely existed, Paul isnt the only one who writes about him - Josephus does as well and the Talmud. There are also other roman sources. Him being God/part of a trinity isnt exactly a historical undertaking, its also a big difference between Islam and Christianity. Not the historicity of Jesus pbuh.

And again, the Gospels are fiction.

The Gospels are not fiction, instead they are written about a man that inspired the followers in Roman Palestine.

[Enochian]

Composed AFTER the letters of Paul, the events in the Gospels are plagiarized off the LXX.

The sayings of Jesus in the Gospels are things Paul originally said.

Kurt Noll says " Early post-Pauline writings transmit favourite Pauline doctrines (such as a declaration that kashrut need not be observed; Mk 7:19b), but shifted these declarations to a new authority figure, Jesus himself. "

The Donkey(s) - Jesus riding on a donkey is from Zechariah 9.

Mark has Jesus sit on a young donkey that he had his disciples fetch for him (Mark 11.1-10).

Matthew changes the story so the disciples instead fetch TWO donkeys, not only the young donkey of Mark but also his mother. Jesus rides into Jerusalem on both donkeys at the same time (Matthew 21.1-9). Matthew wanted the story to better match the literal reading of Zechariah 9.9. Matthew even actually quotes part of Zech. 9.9.

The Sermon on the Mount - Paul was the one who originally taught the concept of loving your neighbor etc. in Rom. 12.14-21; Gal. 5.14-15; 1 Thess. 5.15; and Rom. 13.9-10. Paul quotes various passages in the LXX as support.

The Sermon of the Mount in the Gospels relies extensively on the Greek text of Deuteronomy and Leviticus especially, and in key places on other texts. For example, the section on turning the other cheek and other aspects of legal pacifism (Mt. 5.38-42) has been redacted from the Greek text of Isaiah 50.6-9.

The clearing of the temple - The cleansing of the temple as a fictional scene has its primary inspiration from an ancient faulty translation of Zech. 14.21 which changed 'Canaanites' to 'traders'.When Jesus clears the temple he quotes Jer. 7.11 (in Mk 11.17). Jeremiah and Jesus both enter the temple (Jer. 7.1-2; Mk 11.15), make the same accusation against the corruption of the temple cult (Jeremiah quoting a revelation from the Lord, Jesus quoting Jeremiah), and predict the destruction of the temple (Jer. 7.12-14; Mk 14.57-58; 15.29).

The Crucifixion - The whole concept of a crucifixion of God’s chosen one arranged and witnessed by Jews comes from Psalm 22.16, where ‘the synagogue of the wicked has surrounded me and pierced my hands and feet’. The casting of lots is Psalm 22.18. The people who blasphemed Jesus while shaking their heads is Psalm 22.7-8. The line ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ is Psalm 22.1.

The Resurrection - Jesus was known as the ‘firstfruits’ of the resurrection that would occur to all believers (1 Cor. 15.20-23). The Torah commands that the Day of Firstfruits take place the day after the first Sabbath following the Passover (Lev. 23.5, 10-11). In other words, on a Sunday. Mark has Jesus rise on Sunday, the firstftuits of the resurrected, symbolically on the very Day of Firstfruits itself.

Barabbas - This is the Yom Kippur ceremony of Leviticus 16 and Mishnah tractate Yoma: two ‘identical’ goats were chosen each year, and one was released into the wild containing the sins of Israel (which was eventually killed by being pushed over a cliff), while the other’s blood was shed to atone for those sins. Barabbas means ‘Son of the Father’ in Aramaic, and we know Jesus was deliberately styled the ‘Son of the Father’ himself. So we have two sons of the father; one is released into the wild mob containing the sins of Israel (murder and rebellion), while the other is sacrificed so his blood may atone for the sins of Israel—the one who is released bears those sins literally; the other, figuratively. Adding weight to this conclusion is manuscript evidence that the story originally had the name ‘Jesus Barabbas’. Thus we really had two men called ‘Jesus Son of the Father’.

Last Supper - This is derived from a LXX-based passage in Paul's letters. Paul said he received the Last Supper info directly from Jesus himself, which indicates a dream. 1 Cor. 11:23 says "For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread." Translations often use "betrayed", but in fact the word paradidomi means simply ‘hand over, deliver’. The notion derives from Isaiah 53.12, which in the Septuagint uses exactly the same word of the servant offered up to atone for everyone’s sins. Paul is adapting the Passover meal. Exodus 12.7-14 is much of the basis of Paul’s Eucharist account: the element of it all occurring ‘in the night’ (vv. 8, 12, using the same phrase in the Septuagint, en te nukti, that Paul employs), a ritual of ‘remembrance’ securing the performer’s salvation (vv. 13-14), the role of blood and flesh (including the staining of a cross with blood, an ancient door lintel forming a double cross), the breaking of bread, and the death of the firstborn—only Jesus reverses this last element: instead of the ritual saving its performers from the death of their firstborn, the death of God’s firstborn saves its performers from their own death. Jesus is thus imagined here as creating a new Passover ritual to replace the old one, which accomplishes for Christians what the Passover ritual accomplished for the Jews. There are connections with Psalm 119, where God’s ‘servant’ will remember God and his laws ‘in the night’ (119.49-56) as the wicked abuse him. The Gospels take Paul's wording and insert disciples of Jesus.

Miracles - Just like everything else in the Gospels, miracles are plagiarized off the LXX.

Here is just one example:

It happened after this . . . (Kings 17.17)

It happened afterwards . . . (Luke 7.11)

At the gate of Sarepta, Elijah meets a widow (Kings 17.10).

At the gate of Nain, Jesus meets a widow (Luke 7.11-12).

Another widow’s son was dead (Kings 17.17).

This widow’s son was dead (Luke 7.12).

That widow expresses a sense of her unworthiness on account of sin (Kings 17.18).

A centurion (whose ‘boy’ Jesus had just saved from death) had just expressed a sense of his unworthiness on account of sin (Luke 7.6).

Elijah compassionately bears her son up the stairs and asks ‘the Lord’ why he was allowed to die (Kings 17.13-14).

‘The Lord’ feels compassion for her and touches her son’s bier, and the bearers stand still (Luke 7.13-14).

Elijah prays to the Lord for the son’s return to life (Kings 17.21).

‘The Lord’ commands the boy to rise (Luke 7.14).

The boy comes to life and cries out (Kings 17.22).

‘And he who was dead sat up and began to speak’ (Luke 7.15).

‘And he gave him to his mother’, kai edōken auton tē mētri autou (Kings 17.23).

‘And he gave him to his mother’, kai edōken auton tē mētri autou (Luke 7.15).

The widow recognizes Elijah is a man of God and that ‘the word’ he speaks is the truth (Kings 17.24).

[Insaanah]

To us, your arguments about the authenticity of the current day gospels are irrelevant. They (your arguments) really make no difference to us. If you strongly believe the gospels aren’t true, then go and convince Christians. You’re wasting your time here, and ours. Our scripture is the Quran, revealed to prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, by the God of Abraham peace be upon him, who is the God of Moses peace be upon him, who is the God of Jesus peace be upon him, who is the God of Muhammad peace be upon him, indeed the God of us all.

We believe that a scripture called the Injeel was given to Jesus peace be upon him by God. We haven’t seen what that original scripture looked like, but it is one of our articles of faith to believe in it. It’s possible the current day gospels may contain fragments of the revelation that was in the injeel, as brother eesa the kiwi mentioned.

The message of God has been the same since the beginning of time, so it is not surprising if there are similarities to the Quran in some places in the current day gospels and differences in others where man made ideas have been introduced into the gospels.

The main point is, the Quran is here, here and now. The original, true, and unadulterated message of God, unchanged and untampered with by man. 100% God's word. No versions. No editions. No human authors. Free from any human interference. The message of God to all mankind, in it's final, unadulterated and pristine form. Thus it supersedes the previous scriptures, while being a continuation, confirmation and culmination of the original message contained within them, in its last and final form.

It is a book that tells us what has always been expected from humans since the beginning of time; what God told His prophets to teach people since the creation of the first human. That core message never changed. The essence of Islam is what always was, and has always been, the true and natural religion; the way of all the Prophets, the original message, the only message. The message was: to submit wholeheartedly to the will of God and to worship Him and Him alone, without any associates in, or parts to, His Exclusive Divinity, and to obey the prophet.

Thus, Islam is not a new faith, but is the same Ultimate Truth that God revealed to all prophets, including Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them all). Thus Islam is not named after a specific person (like Christianity, Buddhism), nor after a certain race or place (like Judaism, Hinduism), but is named by God Himself, the meaning loosely translating as 'submission to God', which is what every Prophet and their righteous followers did, from amongst all times, places and peoples. That in itself is one fraction of the evidence that it was the way of all the Prophets from the beginning. Since the time of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that message is available unchanged and unadulterated. He is the last, not first, prophet of Islam; a messenger to all mankind.

Now that this information has been given to you including by other brothers and sisters on this thread, what are you going to do about it? I invite you to come to and believe in and embrace that truth. Will you do it?

[Enochian]

You are just saying a bunch of things that are objectively not true.

[Enochian]

Thus, Islam is not a new faith, but is the same Ultimate Truth that God revealed to all prophets, including Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them all).

Jesus is not a prophet.

Jesus is the same Rising Jesus from the LXX version of Zechariah.

I understand scholars like Bart Ehrman, Mark Goodacre etc. say Jesus existed.

But thats based on misreading what Paul says.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you Enochian;

The sayings of Jesus in the Gospels are things Paul originally said.

What you say has little bearing on what Muslims believe. I have to say you don't seem to make much sense to Christians either. Chronologically, Jesus came before Paul in the Bible, so you make no sense at all saying that Jesus followed Paul's teachings; it is clearly the other way round.

I am struggling to understand your motivation to post on an Islamic forum, if you are enquiring about Islam, then try asking questions about Islam.

In the spirit of searching for God,

Eric

[Enochian]

Greetings and peace be with you Enochian;



What you say has little bearing on what Muslims believe. I have to say you don't seem to make much sense to Christians either. Chronologically, Jesus came before Paul in the Bible, so you make no sense at all saying that Jesus followed Paul's teachings; it is clearly the other way round.

I am struggling to understand your motivation to post on an Islamic forum, if you are enquiring about Islam, then try asking questions about Islam.

In the spirit of searching for God,

Eric

Smart Christians know the Gospels were composed after the letters of Paul.

Its a basic academic fact.

Encyclopedia Britannica:

"The books are not arranged chronologically in the New Testament. The Epistles of Paul, for example, which address the immediate problems of local churches shortly after Christ’s death, are considered to be the earliest texts."

[Saira Khan]

Chronologically, Jesus came before Paul in the Bible, so you make no sense at all saying that Jesus followed Paul's teachings; it is clearly the other way round.

I am struggling to understand your motivation to post on an Islamic forum

You are very right. I have explained this to her earlier but my words fell on deaf ears lol.

[Saira Khan]

And (remember) when God will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto men: ‘Take me and my mother as deities beside God?’" He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours; truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden. Never did I say to them except what You commanded me - worship God, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them; and You are a Witness to all things.
(Quran 5:116-117)

"...the Father is greater than I." (John 14:28)
"When you pray, say Our Father which art in heaven." (Luke 11:2)"…
The son of man did not come to be served, but to serve." (Matthew 20:28)
"The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus." (Acts 3:13)
"Men of Israel, listen to this, Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through Him, as you yourselves know." (Peter, the Apostle. Acts 2:22).
This is what the Christians and Muslims believe in, the rest are not Christians but actually "Paulian" in true sense defying the teachings of Jesus.

[Enochian]

And (remember) when God will say (on the Day of Resurrection): "O Jesus, son of Mary! Did you say unto men: ‘Take me and my mother as deities beside God?’" He will say: "Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would surely have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours; truly, You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden. Never did I say to them except what You commanded me - worship God, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them; and You are a Witness to all things.
(Quran 5:116-117)

"...the Father is greater than I." (John 14:28)
"When you pray, say Our Father which art in heaven." (Luke 11:2)"…
The son of man did not come to be served, but to serve." (Matthew 20:28)
"The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus." (Acts 3:13)
"Men of Israel, listen to this, Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through Him, as you yourselves know." (Peter, the Apostle. Acts 2:22).
This is what the Christians and Muslims believe in, the rest are not Christians but actually "Paulian" in true sense defying the teachings of Jesus.

Do you understand the Gospels are based on Paul's letters?

Paul never taught Jesus was God.

God handed over all his duties and powers to Jesus, an adopted created being.

Jesus is the power of God and the wisdom of God, but not himself God (1 Cor. 1.24), only the image of God (literally, ‘God’s icon’, 2 Cor. 4.4; though compare 1 Cor. 11.7, where the same is said of ordinary men, but there only through their unity with Christ); he was made by God (1 Cor. 1.30). He sits at the right hand of God and pleads with God on our behalf (Rom. 8.34). All things were made by God, but through the agency of Christ (1 Cor. 8.4-6). Christ is given the form of a god, but refuses to seize that opportunity to make himself equal to God, but submits to incarnation and death instead, for which obedience God grants him supreme authority (Phil. 2.5-11). And Christ will in the end deliver the kingdom to God, who only gave Christ the authority to rule and wage war on God’s behalf; and in the end Christ will give that authority back to God (1 Cor. 15.24-28).

Thus in our earliest sources Jesus was always distinguished as a different entity from God, and as his subordinate. Even in Colossians he is the image of God, not God himself; in fact, he is ‘the firstborn of all creation’ (and thus a created being), and ‘God dwelled within him’, in the same sense as was imagined for Jewish prophets, priests and kings (Col. 1.15-19). Thus in Rom. 1.4 (and all of Hebrews 1) Jesus is only appointed the ‘Son of God’. This was precisely how the phrase ‘Son of God’ and the concepts of divine ‘incarnation’ and ‘indwelling’ were then understood by the Jews. This was therefore not a radical idea but entirely in accord with popular Jewish theology. This would still make Jesus a god in common pagan parlance, but not in the usual vocabulary of Jews, who would sooner call such a divine being an archangel or celestial ‘lord'.

[Ümit]

You are just saying a bunch of things that are objectively not true.

Look, let me explain this all works since the beginning of creation:

Allah (God), The one and only...created Adam and Eva. Adam as was the very first Prophet. All Prophets have "Direct" connection with Allah. "Direct" means that Angel Gabriel always had the task to deliver Divine messages to the prophets.
So every prophet on earth received these divine messages through angel Gabriel and spreaded among the people. Adam as did that. But after a couple of generations later, people started to add innovations to this original message and slowly a new man made religion is born. So, a second prophet comes to continue Adam as work on earth. He also delivers the original message through angel Gabriel and perhaps a couple more rules because the human kind has been developing and discovering in the mean time.
for example, in Adams time people did not discover alcohol yet...or homosexuality or whatever...so these rules came later on.

This means by doing that, adams as rules are overwritten and updated by these newer rules. a couple of generations after death of the second prophet, people start to wander off again, started adding innovations and voila...a third religion is born...Perhaps even a mix with the remains of the other man made religion....

In short, every prophet comes with the same ground message + additional and updated rules and overwrites the rules of the past messages...everytime humand wandered off and created a new man made religion.

That is the main reason that almost all religions are the same in the basic message.

Prophets like Adam as, Jacob as, jonas as, Ismael as, Isaak as, Solomon as, Abraham as, Lot as, Noah as, Moses as, Jesus as, Dawood as, Zacharias as, all were prophets send by the same one and only God to deliver the same basic message.
So Moses as came along and delivered us the Thorah...The Thorah got completely destroyed at the time and everything got lost...People reconctructed it again as good as possible from memory...but it wasn't the original message anymore...and again started to wander off again in the meantime...and Judaism was born...

So Jesus as came along and brought us the Injeel which is compaired to the Thorah, the same basic message...People again altered it and voila, Christianity was born.

And now, for the last time, one final prohet has come to us, which is Muhammed as, and brought us the Quraan...and finally this time we managed to preserve the original message in its purest form until this day.

That is why the Quraan, the Bible and Thorah have so many similarities...it looks like bad copies from each other...but they really are not. they just have the same origin.

That is also why we do not have any interest in what Paul, mattheus or who ever has written...because they were not even prophets. At best we can say that the writings of the Discipels of Jesus can be seen as an extra information about Jesus as...kinda like "Hadeeths of Jesus as" but again, it is not 100% correct.

The biggest failure of the Christians was to make Jesus as a God. a direct outcome of this failure is then that the ordinairy human disciples of of Jesus as suddenly become prophets because they had direct communication with the man made God, Jesus as, and everything they write becomes a part of the revelations and automatically a part of the Bible as we know today.

And again....all contradictions between LLX and Gospels and OT and NT or whatever...none of them are interesting to Muslims anymore. The final message is the Quraan...in original form and language, free accessible to all mankind...free to translate it if you need to study it...you don't need to meet come conditions to accept it.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh and Jesus as never got crucified, hanged or killed otherwise. Allah just took him away at the moment he got betrayed and they came to arrest him. Judas' appearance changed to resemble Jesus as and he mistakenly got arrested and killed instead.
After one of several days Jesus as did re-appear to the people to deliver his final messages and disappeared again.

Where he is now, no one knows exactly...but is still alive...he will come back one day, fight and siege the Dajjal (antichrist for the Christians), die like every other living creature, and after that the day of judgement will come.

[eesa the kiwi]

You are just saying a bunch of things that are objectively not true.

You know for an agnostic you seem pretty certain which is I ronic considering
considering your entire religion is based on "I dont know"

- - - Updated - - -

To us, your arguments about the authenticity of the current day gospels are irrelevant. They (your arguments) really make no difference to us. If you strongly believe the gospels aren’t true, then go and convince Christians. You’re wasting your time here, and ours. Our scripture is the Quran, revealed to prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, by the God of Abraham peace be upon him, who is the God of Moses peace be upon him, who is the God of Jesus peace be upon him, who is the God of Muhammad peace be upon him, indeed the God of us all.

We believe that a scripture called the Injeel was given to Jesus peace be upon him by God. We haven’t seen what that original scripture looked like, but it is one of our articles of faith to believe in it. It’s possible the current day gospels may contain fragments of the revelation that was in the injeel, as brother eesa the kiwi mentioned.

The message of God has been the same since the beginning of time, so it is not surprising if there are similarities to the Quran in some places in the current day gospels and differences in others where man made ideas have been introduced into the gospels.

The main point is, the Quran is here, here and now. The original, true, and unadulterated message of God, unchanged and untampered with by man. 100% God's word. No versions. No editions. No human authors. Free from any human interference. The message of God to all mankind, in it's final, unadulterated and pristine form. Thus it supersedes the previous scriptures, while being a continuation, confirmation and culmination of the original message contained within them, in its last and final form.

It is a book that tells us what has always been expected from humans since the beginning of time; what God told His prophets to teach people since the creation of the first human. That core message never changed. The essence of Islam is what always was, and has always been, the true and natural religion; the way of all the Prophets, the original message, the only message. The message was: to submit wholeheartedly to the will of God and to worship Him and Him alone, without any associates in, or parts to, His Exclusive Divinity, and to obey the prophet.

Thus, Islam is not a new faith, but is the same Ultimate Truth that God revealed to all prophets, including Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them all). Thus Islam is not named after a specific person (like Christianity, Buddhism), nor after a certain race or place (like Judaism, Hinduism), but is named by God Himself, the meaning loosely translating as 'submission to God', which is what every Prophet and their righteous followers did, from amongst all times, places and peoples. That in itself is one fraction of the evidence that it was the way of all the Prophets from the beginning. Since the time of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that message is available unchanged and unadulterated. He is the last, not first, prophet of Islam; a messenger to all mankind.

Now that this information has been given to you including by other brothers and sisters on this thread, what are you going to do about it? I invite you to come to and believe in and embrace that truth. Will you do it?

Jazak Allah khair sister

OP seems to have reading comprehension issues. Multiple well explained arguments have been presented but they are dismissed with one sentence answers that adress none of the points

Thread closed until OP can learn to discuss intelligently like an adult