/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Questions about the Bible



lyesh
03-03-2006, 10:08 AM
[EDIT]
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Eric H
03-03-2006, 01:20 PM
Greetings and peace be with you lyesh;

EDIT
You are free to express your oppinions about the Bible in way you desire.

I am a Catholic but please be aware that I would not talk of the Quaran in such a way because it is the wrong thing to do; and I know many Muslims would rightly be offended.

I leave you my peace and pray for a greater understanding between our faiths,

Eric
Reply

Ameeratul Layl
03-03-2006, 01:39 PM
:sl:

Ppl...wake up...did you noe know that the Bible was written by Jews? The real bible is hidden so is the torah.
The real torah will never mention matters such as:

'Isa is in his own semen'. Why would God want to write this for?

:w:
Ameeratul layls friend
Reply

Kittygyal
03-03-2006, 06:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by izmi
A non-Muslim would get banned if he dared say the same about the Koran that

Lyesh said. But of course this is a Muslim forum, insulting other faiths is allowed.
nonononono that's not true :offended:
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
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
Eric H
03-03-2006, 07:14 PM
Greetings and peace izmi;

But of course this is a Muslim forum, insulting other faiths is allowed
I am very sad you should think this,

In the spirit of praying for greater interfaith understanding

Eric
Reply

The Ruler
03-03-2006, 09:50 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by izmi
But of course this is a Muslim forum, insulting other faiths is allowed.
u shud remember izmi dat wen dealing wid other religion, we shud treat dem da same way as we wud want sum1 else to treat our religion. i really disagree wid ur comment. i fink dat insulting other religion is insulting ur own religion. dis is because, insulting makes ppl c islam in a different way n thus the insults cum bak on us.

pls try to refrain from insulting other religion :)

it may b different to u cuz ur agnostic....but still :)

:w:
Reply

*Hana*
03-03-2006, 10:00 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by izmi
A non-Muslim would get banned if he dared say the same about the Koran that

Lyesh said. But of course this is a Muslim forum, insulting other faiths is allowed.
Salam Alaikum:

Excuse me??!! :muddlehea Please show me where Islam teaches us it is ok to insult other faiths? This is NOT allowed. It is one thing to point out contradictions in the Bible, but calling it ridiculous and insulting it is something entirely different. As Muslims we believe in the original books and we must and we are told these books still contain some of the words of God.

We need to be very careful in taking this path because as you may think you are "only" insulting another faith, you may inadvertently be insulting Islam and the prophets.

Insulting others and putting them on the defensive is not the way to invite others to Islam which represents peace and the only religion that guarantees the freedom of practicing another faith.

May Allah, swt, continue to guide us all and keep us on the straight path. Ameen.

Wasalam,
Hana
Reply

abdullahi
03-03-2006, 11:06 PM
:sl:
:heated:
one of the most important rules to follow when you're giving dawah is to be as respectfull to others feeling as you can be
:w:
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 02:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by lyesh
:sl:

:heated: :heated: :heated:

Introduction: We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted and unreliable and is mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption! "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

... [large quote removed, see forum rule #17]
Your mocking the creator, he was not drunk..He woke up in a inalert state like when you wake up with a hang over..Blasphemy..You will see how you made the wrong choice..because you based everything on your own understanding.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 02:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ShoRoUk.h.
how can god sleep ppl ???? how can a god who is all knowing and seeing fall asleep???

and if he did god would wake up with a hang over?? u said it urself hang over.... hang over only happens wen ur drunk....

common sense ppl ( not so common)
OK, you know little about the Bible. Guess what,,Christ took on human form..Why,,,because, you know yourself God required Blood according to the Torah, to forgive sin..But it was never enough.. So it took one man for sin to enter into the world (Adam) so it took one man; a perfect man to be the sacrifice for all sin(Jesus Christ). We know that there is only one perfect entity,,that one is God. God took on human form, like the first Adam was,,to be the atonement for sin.. That is a God of real love...Then you will ask how can God take on human form and still be God.....(think) he is God, he created the heavens and the earth. I don't worship a little God but a big God..
Reply

ShoRoUk.h.
03-04-2006, 02:28 AM
Eric i agree with u : i pray one day we can all accept and understand one another

even though we may not b able to agree in many fields .... tolerance and RESPeCT ehem ehem IS ENOUGH...

SO WE SHOULDN NT GO AROUND CALLING OTHER PPL'S HOLY BOOKS WHICH HAPPEN TO B MENTIONED IN OUR QURAN GARBAGE NOR RIDiCULIOS...

u give ur lovely opinion with ur lovely backup or proof and thats all ...:D
Reply

ShoRoUk.h.
03-04-2006, 02:31 AM
yes god can do anything.... but look u just said he can DO ANYTHING/// that means of he wanted to forgive all sin on the spot he would have done he would not have needed blood or w/e...

bsides common sense here: if now all ur sins are forgiven u are free to do as u like>>\
so know u can go steal, kill, lie etc and still go to heaven...
peachy...
peace....
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 02:33 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ShoRoUk.h.
yes god can do anything.... but look u just said he can DO ANYTHING/// that means of he wanted to forgive all sin on the spot he would have done he would not have needed blood or w/e...

bsides common sense here: if now all ur sins are forgiven u are free to do as u like>>\
so know u can go steal, kill, lie etc and still go to heaven...
peachy...
peace....
I don't know about your God..But mine is just in all his ways..If he just forgave sin,,that would not be justice,,so why would I believe in him then. And no you are not free to do what you like. That seperates the boys from the men. Scripture says if you love God you will keep His commandments and not use his forgiveness as a cloak to commit sin. Also, if we commit sin he is faithful and just to forgive our sin and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness,,so we repent if we gave in to our evil desires and then get back up and continue in his law, and well doing.(Bringing glory and honor to him.)
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 03:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
I don't know about your God..But mine is just in all his ways..If he just forgave sin,,that would not be justice,,so why would I believe in him then. And no you are not free to do what you like. That seperates the boys from the men. Scripture says if you love God you will keep His commandments and not use his forgiveness as a cloak to commit sin. Also, if we commit sin he is faithful and just to forgive our sin and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness,,so we repent if we gave in to our evil desires and then get back up and continue in his law, and well doing.(Bringing glory and honor to him.)
Peace, Seven:

I agree that God is just in all ways, however, how is having an innocent, sinless man tortured and beaten just? A man without sin, is given ALL the sin and to top it off, he has to die for something he didn't do. Only God knows your heart and if you repent with all sincerety He alone can forgive you, He doesn't need a 3rd party to do that for Him.

And you're right, as Jesus, pbuh, taught, the way to eternal life is to keep the commandments. The first first commandment says, ""Do not have any gods before Me. Do not represent (such gods) by any carved statue or picture or anything in the heaven above or the earth below or in the water below the land. Do not bow down to or worship them."

Jesus, pbuh, reiterates this in Matthew 17: "DO NOT SUPPOSE that I come to abolish the Law and the prophets. I did not come to abolish, but to complete."

And yet, Christians place Jesus, pbuh, on the same level with God, going as far as calling Him God, brandishing Him on a cross and in pictures and praying to Him. Jesus, pbuh, never said, "I am God, worship me." However, He did say, "The father is greater than I".

This is a serious problem, seven. Jesus, pbuh, is telling you there is only one God, and He's telling you to follow the laws before Him. He is teaching the oneness of God, just as all the prophets before Him.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
And no you are not free to do what you like. That seperates the boys from the men
Good enough to quote, well said.

Freedom of speech is a mirror image of passport to spread hate
Reply

shaharoun
03-04-2006, 03:05 AM
:sl:
Yah!!!
It the time for those who have not yet embrassed the right way to think well about this.NO HUMAN BEING CAN REJECT THE EXISTENCE OF GOD,BUT IS OUR
WE ARE RENSPONSIBLE TO FIND THE RIGHT WAY TO LEAD US TO WORSHIP TRUE GOD.

v
:w:
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:08 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
I'd like to apologise on behalf of the idiot who posted such a ridiculous topic up.

Something that i hear myself say more and more to people is 'slander of a religion is slander to all religions'.

How dare you slander a religion like that with so much anger and disrespect.

Yet another individual unable to make intellectual comments so has to rely on copying and pasting hateful articles from the internet.

It is really unfortunate that you wasted a bit of your life promoting hate and disrespect towards a religion when you could have been expressing love for Allah and Islam.

Shame on you, you are no better than the nasty majority in the world that attacks our religion everyday.
How is finding contradictions in the Quran hate,,, and finding supposed contradictions in the Christian Bible not hate...Thats a question for you,, the verses I copied and pasted are from your Quran are they not? So because the articles showed a contradiction.. You call that hate..
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by shaharoun
:sl:
Yah!!!
It the time for those who have not yet embrassed the right way to think well about this.NO HUMAN BEING CAN REJECT THE EXISTENCE OF GOD,BUT IS OUR
WE ARE RENSPONSIBLE TO FIND THE RIGHT WAY TO LEAD US TO WORSHIP TRUE GOD.

v
:w:
I'll just let you know there is only one true God and one true Bible. But I guess you will find that out judgement day.
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:10 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
How is finding contradictions in the Quran hate,,, and finding supposed contradictions in the Christian Bible not hate...Thats a question for you,, the verses I copied and pasted are from your Quran are they not? So because the articles showed a contradiction.. You call that hate..

sorry i've tried quite hard to understand what you're referring to in what i've said.

My good friend the comments i made that u have quoted were not aimed at you, why do you choose to have such a paranoid mind? This isnt the first time you've assumed a reply was for your eyes only!
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:10 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
I'll just let you know there is only one true God and one true Bible. But I guess you will find that out judgement day.
Which version of the bible is that?
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:13 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
sorry i've tried quite hard to understand what you're referring to in what i've said.

My good friend the comments i made that u have quoted were not aimed at you, why do you choose to have such a paranoid mind? This isnt the first time you've assumed a reply was for your eyes only!
Well I was justified in assuming, because I did copy and paste. Thats not being paranoid. If you don't mind could you say who you are replying to next time.(just to avoid confusion.)

Thank You
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:15 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
Which version of the bible is that?
The King James Version,, The true word of God.
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 03:16 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
The King James Version,, The true word of God.
What makes the KJV superior to any other version?
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:17 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
What makes the KJV superior to any other version?
What do you mean by superior?
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:17 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
The King James Version,, The true word of God.

was King James a prophet?

last time i checked it was prophets that spoke the word of God to be written as Holy Books.

It sickens me that people refer to a religion with refernces to non religious people being credited or affliated to the religion.

how can an edited version of a Bible be the true word of God?
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
What do you mean by superior?
it usually means better than :rant:

you stated it was the true word which resulted in someone asking what makes it superior- ie the true word
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:19 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
was King James a prophet?

last time i checked it was prophets that spoke the word of God to be written as Holy Books.

It sickens me that people refer to a religion with refernces to non religious people being credited or affliated to the religion.

how can an edited version of a Bible be the true word of God?
My God is a Big God, you are underestimating Him. He said himself, that his word will be here even after the world is destroyed by fire..
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:20 AM
:rollseyes
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Well I was justified in assuming, because I did copy and paste. Thats not being paranoid. If you don't mind could you say who you are replying to next time.(just to avoid confusion.)

Thank You

i will as long as you choose to read replies more carefully since i said 'i apologise on behalf of the person that posted the TOPIC up' as oppose to the 'person that replied to the topic'...
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:21 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
My God is a Big God, you are underestimating Him. He said himself, that his word will be here even after the world is destroyed by fire..

sorry that doesnt answer my questions.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:22 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
:rollseyes


i will as long as you choose to read replies more carefully since i said 'i apologise on behalf of the person that posted the TOPIC up' as oppose to the 'person that replied to the topic'...
I believe my Bible is the only word of God. Is God so small as to let man Corrupt it..Not the God I serve.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:25 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
My God is a Big God, you are underestimating Him. He said himself, that his word will be here even after the world is destroyed by fire..
A Prophet according to the dictionary is a person sent by God to teach people about his intentions,,not just predicting the future.
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 03:27 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
I believe my Bible is the only word of God. Is God so small as to let man Corrupt it..Not the God I serve.
Peace seven:

The KJV is not the only authorized version of the bible, so how do you know which one is better than the others?

Hana
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:27 AM
that doesnt make sense, since what you've said results in a therefore of saying well therefore if you are a perfect Christian and your family is all slaughtered unjustly that your God is not so strong.

God allows things to happen, it doesnt make God weak!

To say your bible is not corrupted and then to ignore points i've made in response is really irritating, it makes a mockery out of the fundamentals of having a discussion!

So i will not repeat myself and not respond any further until you take my responses to your points and take them in to consideration and responding instead of just ignoring them.

Regards :thankyou:
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:29 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace seven:

The KJV is not the only authorized version of the bible, so how do you know which one is better than the others?

Hana
I am not saying the KJV is better than the others, I just used that so he would know I was referring to the Christian Bible.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:33 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
that doesnt make sense, since what you've said results in a therefore of saying well therefore if you are a perfect Christian and your family is all slaughtered unjustly that your God is not so strong.

God allows things to happen, it doesnt make God weak!

To say your bible is not corrupted and then to ignore points i've made in response is really irritating, it makes a mockery out of the fundamentals of having a discussion!

So i will not repeat myself and not respond any further until you take my responses to your points and take them in to consideration and responding instead of just ignoring them.

Regards :thankyou:
Your funny.. God said his word will never parish. Thats the same word we received from the beginning through Moses. Secondly God said we will face trials and tribulations, sickness and disease, persecution and etc.. All have been true..So I don't see your justified discust..
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 03:36 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Your funny.. God said his word will never parish. Thats the same word we received from the beginning through Moses. Secondly God said we will face trials and tribulations, sickness and disease, persecution and etc.. All have been true..So I don't see your justified discust..
Peace Seven:

Did you ever read the preface included with the RSV? After the most recent revision? I think that was in 1971, but I could be mistaken about the exact year.

Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:40 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

Did you ever read the preface included with the KJV? After the most recent revision? I think that was in 1971, but I could be mistaken about the exact year.

Hana
Yes, Believe me I have done much study into where it was translated from.. You want to know something, thw Quran has been translated into other languages and will see revision also. So I don't think that this should be a matter at all.

Peace to you Hana.
Reply

ShoRoUk.h.
03-04-2006, 03:40 AM
sevenxtrust
with all due respect u keep on saying the Christian bible, my true bible, my bible, the word of god, and the true book...

in fact there is no such thing as the Christian Bible it is christian bibleS because the bible has at least a thousand versions...

and each one contradicts the other....

so god did not make up a bible and send it down... he made thousands of books!

also u said that the bible is the tru word if GOD
King James : was he a god and jesus too ? or does every bible have a special god or prophet who says different things regarding Christianity?

and btw no Muslim would be underestimating god since we belive in God too who is al mighty all seeing and all knowing...

but if u mean Jesus ... we are underestimating him from being a God , for us he was a prophet that we respect peace b upon him...
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 03:45 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Yes, Believe me I have done much study into where it was translated from.. You want to know something, thw Quran has been translated into other languages and will see revision also. So I don't think that this should be a matter at all.

Peace to you Hana.
Yes, both Holy books have many translations. But, versions and translations are 2 different things.

I don't mean where it was translated from....more like what it was translated to. Do you realized how many errors were in the KJV over the years since 1611? Serious errors. Yet, you say God's word can't be tampered or changed. Unfortunately, it has been, to the point where entire verses have been removed. How do you know all the errors have been removed now and what you have contains the pure, true word of God?

Peace,
Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ShoRoUk.h.
sevenxtrust
with all due respect u keep on saying the Christian bible, my true bible, my bible, the word of god, and the true book...

in fact there is no such thing as the Christian Bible it is christian bibleS because the bible has at least a thousand versions...

and each one contradicts the other....

so god did not make up a bible and send it down... he made thousands of books!

also u said that the bible is the tru word if GOD
King James : was he a god and jesus too ? or does every bible have a special god or prophet who says different things regarding Christianity?

and btw no Muslim would be underestimating god since we belive in God too who is al mighty all seeing and all knowing...

but if u mean Jesus ... we are underestimating him from being a God , for us he was a prophet that we respect peace b upon him...
First of all if you are talking about the Catholic Bible thats not a Bible and secondly the others do not contradict each other at all.

King James : was he a god and jesus too ? or does every bible have a special god or prophet who says different things regarding Christianity?

King James just wanted the Hebrew and Greek to be translated into English,,he never did any of the translating.. Secondly Jesus was God in the Flesh..human form. He is God so he can take on human form.. You do not know the true Power of God. It took one man for sin to enter into the world and it took a perfect man to overcome sin..(there is only one perfect, that one is God, may you find him now..)
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:50 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Your funny.. God said his word will never parish. Thats the same word we received from the beginning through Moses. Secondly God said we will face trials and tribulations, sickness and disease, persecution and etc.. All have been true..So I don't see your justified discust..

[edit] you keep saying your God is too powerful for the Bible to to be changed,

but erm, fact is it has, fact is there's more versions of the Bible then there is of Windows XP operating systems, and that's a mean feat!
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:52 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Yes, both Holy books have many translations. But, versions and translations are 2 different things.

I don't mean where it was translated from....more like what it was translated to. Do you realized how many errors were in the KJV over the years since 1611? Serious errors. Yet, you say God's word can't be tampered or changed. Unfortunately, it has been, to the point where entire verses have been removed. How do you know all the errors have been removed now and what you have contains the pure, true word of God?

Peace,
Hana
First of all, there are no entire verses missing,, secondly the apocraphy was only there for a historical reference. Thats why it was put into its own place in the Bible. Not like the Catholic version. But this brought confusion, so they took it out and sold it seperatly as an historical reference that it was intede to be.
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
First of all if you are talking about the Catholic Bible thats not a Bible and secondly the others do not contradict each other at all.

King James : was he a god and jesus too ? or does every bible have a special god or prophet who says different things regarding Christianity?

King James just wanted the Hebrew and Greek to be translated into English,,he never did any of the translating.. Secondly Jesus was God in the Flesh..human form. He is God so he can take on human form.. You do not know the true Power of God. It took one man for sin to enter into the world and it took a perfect man to overcome sin..(there is only one perfect, that one is God, may you find him now..)

[edit]

how can Jesus be God too?

how can he be his father and his son at the same time??

Why would Jesus pray for God to forgive people if he is God!??

it just does not make sense
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 03:54 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
First of all, there are no entire verses missing,, secondly the apocraphy was only there for a historical reference. Thats why it was put into its own place in the Bible. Not like the Catholic version. But this brought confusion, so they took it out and sold it seperatly as an historical reference that it was intede to be.

i think, though it may be just a weird coincidence that there is even a reference to Shakespeare in the KJ Bible! That just shows how edited it is
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:56 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
[edit]

how can Jesus be God too?

how can he be his father and his son at the same time??

Why would Jesus pray for God to forgive people if he is God!??

it just does not make sense
First of all Jesus Came to show us how we should worship him as God.

He is God so he can take on different offices in heaven..He is Holy and they are different aspect of his holiness. [edit]
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 03:58 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
i think, though it may be just a weird coincidence that there is even a reference to Shakespeare in the KJ Bible! That just shows how edited it is
I think you need to do some study, there is no reference to Shakespeare in the Bible..:giggling:
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 04:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
First of all, there are no entire verses missing,, secondly the apocraphy was only there for a historical reference. Thats why it was put into its own place in the Bible. Not like the Catholic version. But this brought confusion, so they took it out and sold it seperatly as an historical reference that it was intede to be.
Peace Seven:

Actually, I wasn't referring to the Catholic version, (those additional books are a whole other topic. :) )

I was referring to versions removing such verses as: Mark 16:9-20 was completely removed in the 1952 RSV revision.

See the following by Ahmed Deedat:

From the Chart — "The Origin and Growth of the English Bible" — appearing below, you will note that all the Biblical "Versions" prior to the Revised Version of 1881 were dependent upon the ANCIENT COPIES — those dating only five or six hundred years after Jesus. The Revisers of the RSV 1952, were the first Bible scholars who were able to tap the "MOST Ancient Copies" fully, dating three and four centuries after Christ. We agree that the closer to the source the more authentic is the document. Naturally "MOST" Ancient deserves credence more than mere "ANCIENT." But not finding a word about Jesus being "taken up" or "carried up" into heaven in the MOST ANCIENT manuscripts, the Christian fathers expurgated those references from the RSV 1952.

THE ASCENSION OF JESUS — had been undermined as a result of Christian Biblical erudition, the publishers of the RSV had already raked in a net profit of 15 000 000 dollars! (Fifteen Million). The propagandists made a big hue and cry, and with the backing of two denominational committees out of the fifty, forced the Publishers to re-incorporate the interpolations into the "INSPIRED" Word of God in every new publication of the RSV after 1952, the expunged portion was "RESTORED TO THE TEXT."

"Why 'restored'"? Because they had been previously expunged! Why had the references to the Ascension expunged in the first place? The MOST Ancient manuscripts had no references to the Ascension at all.

Don't you wonder how many times things have been moved, removed, altered, mistranslated, etc. Man wrote and translated....they are not God, Seven, and they are subject to errors...which we can clearly see. God did not preserve/protect these revelations...He never said He would. However, He did promise to preserve and protect the Qur'an, and He has.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 04:10 AM
one of the biggest things that i pride myself about Islam is that the Qu'ran is true to its word since it was first written.

There is no King Derek Qu'ran 1968 version, there is no Qu'ran version 3.2 corrupt the poor edition!
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 04:12 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
one of the biggest things that i pride myself about Islam is that the Qu'ran is true to its word since it was first written.

There is no King Derek Qu'ran 1968 version, there is no Qu'ran version 3.2 corrupt the poor edition!
King Derek Qur'an 1968 version. :giggling: omg, that sounds so funny.

But, yeah, I understand what you're saying and I agree. I love the fact that the Qur'an hasn't changed since it was revealed over 1400 years ago. Alhamdulillah. :happy:

Wasalam,
Hana
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 04:15 AM
i would like to apologise for ridiculing the Bible there, there is no need or room for it.

Please accept my apology, i was just frustrated by your denial and false allegations that the King James Bible is perfectly completely pure
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 05:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

Actually, I wasn't referring to the Catholic version, (those additional books are a whole other topic. :) )

I was referring to versions removing such verses as: Mark 16:9-20 was completely removed in the 1952 RSV revision.

See the following by Ahmed Deedat:

From the Chart — "The Origin and Growth of the English Bible" — appearing below, you will note that all the Biblical "Versions" prior to the Revised Version of 1881 were dependent upon the ANCIENT COPIES — those dating only five or six hundred years after Jesus. The Revisers of the RSV 1952, were the first Bible scholars who were able to tap the "MOST Ancient Copies" fully, dating three and four centuries after Christ. We agree that the closer to the source the more authentic is the document. Naturally "MOST" Ancient deserves credence more than mere "ANCIENT." But not finding a word about Jesus being "taken up" or "carried up" into heaven in the MOST ANCIENT manuscripts, the Christian fathers expurgated those references from the RSV 1952.

THE ASCENSION OF JESUS — had been undermined as a result of Christian Biblical erudition, the publishers of the RSV had already raked in a net profit of 15 000 000 dollars! (Fifteen Million). The propagandists made a big hue and cry, and with the backing of two denominational committees out of the fifty, forced the Publishers to re-incorporate the interpolations into the "INSPIRED" Word of God in every new publication of the RSV after 1952, the expunged portion was "RESTORED TO THE TEXT."

"Why 'restored'"? Because they had been previously expunged! Why had the references to the Ascension expunged in the first place? The MOST Ancient manuscripts had no references to the Ascension at all.

Don't you wonder how many times things have been moved, removed, altered, mistranslated, etc. Man wrote and translated....they are not God, Seven, and they are subject to errors...which we can clearly see. God did not preserve/protect these revelations...He never said He would. However, He did promise to preserve and protect the Qur'an, and He has.

Peace,
Hana
First of all you should understand that it is the Catholics and Anglicans that mainly use the Revised Standard Version, also the manuscripts that supposedly drop that part of Mark, do not really exist. This I have researched. What happened is the page in one of the originals was not salvegable,,this is truth..Also God said in His Word, that His Word will never parish, even after the earth has been destroyed as by fire..
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 05:47 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
unfortunately you're saying that to the wrong person as i have studied Shakespeare and know more about King James then you've made claims that your God is big and big

[edit]

it's your excus to answer things u cant explain.

How dare you say MY God is small!! how dare you!!

You don't know me, or my God.

You're really in self denial, you've refused to accept any opinions that simply refute what u say.
First of all, I believe in My God, if you believe faith to be arrogance,, fine. But you are far from the truth,, also there is no Shakespeare in the Word of God. Sorry If my faith offends you. But I am not ashamed as to who I serve.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
one of the biggest things that i pride myself about Islam is that the Qu'ran is true to its word since it was first written.

There is no King Derek Qu'ran 1968 version, there is no Qu'ran version 3.2 corrupt the poor edition!
Its funny that you say first written, many people forget, that the 5 Books of Moses and the Books of the Prophets were written 2000 to 1500 years before Christ came. Also the New Testament, was written only 20-30 years after Christ's death. Prophecy in the scriptures, is another thing to consider, how did they know 2000-1500 years before Christ, that he would come(true Prophets of God). There are prophecy's in the OT that are hidden about Christ but have also come true. Did you know the chance of just 1 of the 153prophecys of Christ are 1:30000 and for all 1:10 to the power of 60. That is 60 zeros behind it..WOW
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:08 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
i would like to apologise for ridiculing the Bible there, there is no need or room for it.

Please accept my apology, i was just frustrated by your denial and false allegations that the King James Bible is perfectly completely pure
I accept your apology. But now you are twisting my words. I never said that the KJV itself is 100% faulty free. There are some spelling errors and a small amout of mistranslations. But these are also in the Quran that was translated in other languages. So I don't find this a good arguement..Considering all the mistranslations are known about.
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 06:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
I accept your apology. But now you are twisting my words. I never said that the KJV itself is 100% faulty free. There are some spelling errors and a small amout of mistranslations. But these are also in the Quran that was translated in other languages. So I don't find this a good arguement..Considering all the mistranslations are known about.

comparing the accuracy of the original Qu'ran to modern Qu'ran with the original Bible and modern bibles is like comparing a puddle and an pcean.

There IS a subtle refernce to Shakespeare in the KJ Bible, stop denying what you clearly know nothing about!
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:51 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
comparing the accuracy of the original Qu'ran to modern Qu'ran with the original Bible and modern bibles is like comparing a puddle and an pcean.

There IS a subtle refernce to Shakespeare in the KJ Bible, stop denying what you clearly know nothing about!
:? Where????????????:giggling: :giggling: :giggling: Not to be rude, but this question is very different.
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 06:51 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
First of all, I believe in My God, if you believe faith to be arrogance,, fine. But you are far from the truth,, also there is no Shakespeare in the Word of God. Sorry If my faith offends you. But I am not ashamed as to who I serve.

again you ignore points i've made!!!

where did i say ur faith is arrogance?

If you believe and speak about God to be YOUR God as if there are 68 Gods one for each religion than your very wrong.

Also your attitude about YOUR God being different is shocking and an effective form of separating religions, it is this attitude my good friend that leads to arrogance and supremism (ie My God can use spell check when typing his book etc etc :rollseyes )
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by yasin
again you ignore points i've made!!!

where did i say ur faith is arrogance?

If you believe and speak about God to be YOUR God as if there are 68 Gods one for each religion than your very wrong.

Also your attitude about YOUR God being different is shocking and an effective form of separating religions, it is this attitude my good friend that leads to arrogance and supremism (ie My God can use spell check when typing his book etc etc :rollseyes )
Well I am done here. I see you don't want to know the Truth, and you will pay for your decision. Believe me!!!!Arrogance:giggling: I never knew faith was arrogance,, and me thinking there are other Gods..What???? I am sorry but you have just twisted my words all for what...to win a discussion...You will see.. I tried....Good Bye..
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 07:01 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Well I am done here. I see you don't want to know the Truth, and you will pay for your decision. Believe me!!!!Arrogance:giggling: I never knew faith was arrogance,, and me thinking there are other Gods..What???? I am sorry but you have just twisted my words all for what...to win a discussion...You will see.. I tried....Good Bye..

do you have difficult understanding simple concepts?

AGAIN you ignore what i've said! It's getting silly now. The fact that you've taken the word arrogance to heart and needed to use a mcking smily shows clearly that its touched a raw nerve with you cos you know you are being arrogant! I never said faith is arrogance!
Reply

yasin
03-04-2006, 07:01 AM
and i suggest you do a google search on shakespeare and king james
Reply

Eric H
03-04-2006, 10:27 AM
Greetings and peace be with you all, and may God bless people of all faiths.

We are all free to do as we choose, which means we are all free to strive to love people of other faiths as we love ourselves.

If we choose to love others as we love ourselves then we should strive to love them for who they are, and we should strive to respect their beliefs even though they are different to our own.

We would bring glory to God in the say we strive to find good in others, but how do we bring glory to God in the way we compete against each other, and bring conflict into religion?

Do we use our truth like a verbal sword to cut our opponent down.

I can almost imagine that if each one of us was having this conversation in the same room and we all had guns, we would end up shooting each other.

Can we pray for each other, can we pray that God will be merciful to each one of us whatever our beliefs may be, can we pray for salvation for each other.

In the spirit of seeking peace on Earth

May Gods blessings be with us all

Eric
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 03:30 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
First of all you should understand that it is the Catholics and Anglicans that mainly use the Revised Standard Version, also the manuscripts that supposedly drop that part of Mark, do not really exist. This I have researched. What happened is the page in one of the originals was not salvegable,,this is truth..Also God said in His Word, that His Word will never parish, even after the earth has been destroyed as by fire..
Peace Seven:

You say in one sentence it did not really exist. How do you know? And if one page was not salvageable then the word wasn't preserved. You have to remember you don't have anything from the original revelations and the manuscripts that are available don't say anything about the ascension. So where did that come from? Don't forget, it was 50+ biblical scholars, working together to correct the errors and additions in the bible that made that correction. You have to ask yourself, "If they are still making corrections in the bible, how much has been changed and how much is left to be corrected?" You also have to realize, they are using the oldest manuscripts, so they are not just correcting english translations here, they are changing words completely. For example, the word most used to describe Mary, the mother of Jesus, pbuh, is Virgin....the word virgin is not in the oldest manuscripts and you may be surprised to learn that the word "begotten" is not there either.

Regardless of which denomination uses what version, they are all authorized Christian Bibles. One is no more sacred than the other. Even the Catholic Bible with it's 7 extra books, doesn't change the other 66 books found in every other Bible.

You admit there are errors, although you choose to see them as small....yet you say God preserved His word. One statement can be true...but not both.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 03:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Its funny that you say first written, many people forget, that the 5 Books of Moses and the Books of the Prophets were written 2000 to 1500 years before Christ came. Also the New Testament, was written only 20-30 years after Christ's death. Prophecy in the scriptures, is another thing to consider, how did they know 2000-1500 years before Christ, that he would come(true Prophets of God). There are prophecy's in the OT that are hidden about Christ but have also come true. Did you know the chance of just 1 of the 153prophecys of Christ are 1:30000 and for all 1:1, 000,000,000
Peace Seven:

Do you know who wrote the 5 books of Moses? One thing is for sure...it wasn't Moses. The true authors of these books are not known. There's not a biblical or Christian scholar worth his weight that will tell you different. The vast majority are in complete agreement with this. Regardless of what year the words were written, they were written based on stories, hearsay and tradition....not first hand accounts. You are mistaken in your timeline about the OT. The oldest book of the OT was written approximately 80 years after Jesus,pbuh, was taken up, and the rest later. Absolutely nothing was written in the lifetime of Jesus, pbuh. And the OT books were not authored by the disciples of Jesus, pbuh. Again, these books were written on hearsay, folklore and tradition. Can you explain why John is so vastly different from the 4 synoptics? Can you explain how Isaiah 37 and 2 Kings 19 are identical word for word. Strangely, they have been attributed to two different authors, centuries apart, who the Christians claim have been inspired by God?

It is obvious that the writers of the synoptics (meaning one-eyed), were not writing from first hand experience, but what they did share was a common source for their writing, a shared document.

What exactly are "hidden prophecies"? You mean AFTER an event, someone found something in the bible to say "look, a prophecy!!" People in all faiths do that at one time or another. I can make my trip to the store sound like it was a prophecy in any holy book if I really wanted to. There are also prophecies about Prophet Muhammed, pbuh, in the bible....and these are not hidden, so why do you reject those?

You keep referring to the oldest manuscripts, yet you fail to accept that these are not the originals. No biblical or Christian scholar would tell you the originals exist. They don't.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 04:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
...small amout of mistranslations. But these are also in the Quran that was translated in other languages. So I don't find this a good arguement..Considering all the mistranslations are known about.
Peace Seven:

The argument is that we accept that there could be problems with language translations, that is not the problem. You see, some words cannot be exactly translated from one language to another. The perfect example is the word "God". The word God in arabic is Allah. However, in Arabic this word cannot be altered to become plural, like gods, or gender specific like goddess, or added to other words like godfather, etc. The word Allah stands alone. The closest to the english language is God. Ask any coptic Christian whose history goes back to the life of Jesus, pbuh, and ask what he calls the creator. He will tell you 100% of the time, it is Allah. And if you check the Bible translated for them, the word in the Bible is Allah.

However, the difference is, we have the original compilation exactly as it was revealed to Prophet Muhammed, pbuh. So any question about translation errors are easy to find....we go to the original source. I do it all the time. I don't speak arabic, so when I read something I don't understand, I ask an arabic speaking person to explain it from the arabic words. You don't have that opportunity because even if you found someone that spoke aramaic, you don't have the original revelation to go back to.

Allah, swt, ensured the preservation of the Qur'an and that's been done. The way it was revealed, recited, written and memorized over 1400 years ago is EXACTLY the way it is today. The word Qur'an means recite, a miracle in itself. why? Because in every minute of every day somewhere in the world the word of Allah, swt, is being recited. With the 5 daily prayers compulsary for every Muslim, when one area is finished reciting for fajr prayer, another part of the world is starting with zuhr and that is no sooner complete when another begins Asr prayers, etc.

How many people do you know that can and have memorized the entire bible? Honestly, I don't know of one and have never heard of one, however, the Qur'an was memorized by hundreds at the time it was revealed and today thousands have done the same thing, ranging in ages from 5 to 90.

Allah, swt, has most certainly kept His word when He said it would be preserved and protected.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 04:52 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

The argument is that we accept that there could be problems with language translations, that is not the problem. You see, some words cannot be exactly translated from one language to another. The perfect example is the word "God". The word God in arabic is Allah. However, in Arabic this word cannot be altered to become plural, like gods, or gender specific like goddess, or added to other words like godfather, etc. The word Allah stands alone. The closest to the english language is God. Ask any coptic Christian whose history goes back to the life of Jesus, pbuh, and ask what he calls the creator. He will tell you 100% of the time, it is Allah. And if you check the Bible translated for them, the word in the Bible is Allah.

However, the difference is, we have the original compilation exactly as it was revealed to Prophet Muhammed, pbuh. So any question about translation errors are easy to find....we go to the original source. I do it all the time. I don't speak arabic, so when I read something I don't understand, I ask an arabic speaking person to explain it from the arabic words. You don't have that opportunity because even if you found someone that spoke aramaic, you don't have the original revelation to go back to.

Allah, swt, ensured the preservation of the Qur'an and that's been done. The way it was revealed, recited, written and memorized over 1400 years ago is EXACTLY the way it is today. The word Qur'an means recite, a miracle in itself. why? Because in every minute of every day somewhere in the world the word of Allah, swt, is being recited. With the 5 daily prayers compulsary for every Muslim, when one area is finished reciting for fajr prayer, another part of the world is starting with zuhr and that is no sooner complete when another begins Asr prayers, etc.

How many people do you know that can and have memorized the entire bible? Honestly, I don't know of one and have never heard of one, however, the Qur'an was memorized by hundreds at the time it was revealed and today thousands have done the same thing, ranging in ages from 5 to 90.

Allah, swt, has most certainly kept His word when He said it would be preserved and protected.

Peace,
Hana
Have you forgotten so soon of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating back to 2000 years before Christ's comming.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 04:58 PM
A full copy of the Book of Isaiah was discovered at Qumran.

Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text.

The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling."
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 05:01 PM
In fact, in these scrolls discovered at Qumran in 1947, we have Old Testament manuscripts that date about a thousand years earlier (150 B.C.) than the other Old Testament manuscripts then in our possession (which dated to A.D. 900).

The significant thing is that when one compares the two sets of manuscripts, it is clear that they are essentially the same, with very few changes.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 05:02 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
In fact, in these scrolls discovered at Qumran in 1947, we have Old Testament manuscripts that date about a thousand years earlier (150 B.C.) than the other Old Testament manuscripts then in our possession (which dated to A.D. 900).

The significant thing is that when one compares the two sets of manuscripts, it is clear that they are essentially the same, with very few changes.
The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling."


From manuscript discoveries like the Dead Sea Scrolls, Christians have undeniable evidence that today's Old Testament Scripture, for all practical purposes, is exactly the same as it was when originally inspired by God and recorded in the Bible.

Combine this with the massive amount of manuscript evidence we have for the New Testament, and it is clear that the Christian Bible is a trustworthy and reliable book.

The Dead Sea Scrolls prove that the copyists of biblical manuscripts took great care in going about their work.
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 05:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Have you forgotten so soon of the Dead Sea Scrolls, dating back to 2000 years before Christ's comming.
Actually, no I haven't. It just so happens that I am studying the DDS right now and have been for the past year or so.

What makes you think they go back 2000 years BEFORE Jesus, pbuh? They go back, approximately, 150-300 (300 maximum, the majority are approx. 100-150 years), before, and so far, the "newer" ones are 100 years AFTER Jesus, pbuh. As of today, NOTHING was found that was written during His lifetime.

You have to understand that the DDS were not found in neat little packages in these caves. The scientists that work so diligently to decipher them are working with minute fragments in many cases and try desperately to put them together like a puzzle. Where the scrolls have been completely destroyed through insects, mold, etc., the give their best educated guesses as to what was missing. Oftentimes, these best guesses are replaced with better best guesses.

So far, what I have studied speaks more of the way of life and tradition of those days. There is very little that talks about deep religious beliefs, etc. However, it does confirm much of what Muslims practice today. The belief in ONE God, performing ablution before prayer, prostrating during prayer, etc.

Let me give you an example of what these people are working with. When you see sqared brackets, like this [ ] it means those words were completely missing from the original DDS. If it is written like [Hana], it means the word is a guess. Here is a small sample of a piece of translated text:

[...] under[standing...] [...] to You there to do [...] [...] the God of Isreal [who] creates together (or for the Yahad) [...] [...Mos]es [called] to all Isreal when they saw [...] [...when]

As you can see, so far there is a lot of educated guesses going on. Maybe if they ever finish putting all the puzzles together they can come up with something more concrete....but don't count on it. The DDS were an amazing and invaluable find, but they don't "prove" anything. Not yet anyway. They do give us a great insight to the way of life in those days though. I would recommend the book The Dead Sea Scrolls by Michael Wise, Martin Abegg JR and Edward Cook. It gives a wonderful translation, but also provides full detail on the tedious work involved in the effort to translate the scrolls with accuracy.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 05:33 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Actually, no I haven't. It just so happens that I am studying the DDS right now and have been for the past year or so.

What makes you think they go back 2000 years BEFORE Jesus, pbuh? They go back, approximately, 150-300 (300 maximum, the majority are approx. 100-150 years), before, and so far, the "newer" ones are 100 years AFTER Jesus, pbuh. As of today, NOTHING was found that was written during His lifetime.

You have to understand that the DDS were not found in neat little packages in these caves. The scientists that work so diligently to decipher them are working with minute fragments in many cases and try desperately to put them together like a puzzle. Where the scrolls have been completely destroyed through insects, mold, etc., the give their best educated guesses as to what was missing. Oftentimes, these best guesses are replaced with better best guesses.

So far, what I have studied speaks more of the way of life and tradition of those days. There is very little that talks about deep religious beliefs, etc. However, it does confirm much of what Muslims practice today. The belief in ONE God, performing ablution before prayer, prostrating during prayer, etc.

Let me give you an example of what these people are working with. When you see sqared brackets, like this [ ] it means those words were completely missing from the original DDS. If it is written like [Hana], it means the word is a guess. Here is a small sample of a piece of translated text:

[...] under[standing...] [...] to You there to do [...] [...] the God of Isreal [who] creates together (or for the Yahad) [...] [...Mos]es [called] to all Isreal when they saw [...] [...when]

As you can see, so far there is a lot of educated guesses going on. Maybe if they ever finish putting all the puzzles together they can come up with something more concrete....but don't count on it. The DDS were an amazing and invaluable find, but they don't "prove" anything. Not yet anyway. They do give us a great insight to the way of life in those days though. I would recommend the book The Dead Sea Scrolls by Michael Wise, Martin Abegg JR and Edward Cook. It gives a wonderful translation, but also provides full detail on the tedious work involved in the effort to translate the scrolls with accuracy.

Peace,
Hana
I guess what I mean is the originals, like when they were first written. Sorry for me not articulating so well. The main point is they were written before the Messiah came, regardless of the newer ones. They are the same scriptures. Just the newer ones are newer copies of the old. The Word needs to be preserved. Thats why God used people to copy his word. Do you know how much care they put into re-copying..I mean they counted every letter for one,,to make sure they were accurate..let along other things.
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 05:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
A full copy of the Book of Isaiah was discovered at Qumran.

Even though the two copies of Isaiah discovered in Qumran Cave 1 near the Dead Sea in 1947 were a thousand years earlier than the oldest dated manuscript previously known (A.D. 980), they proved to be word for word identical with our standard Hebrew Bible in more than 95 percent of the text.

The 5 percent of variation consisted chiefly of obvious slips of the pen and variations in spelling."
Peace Seven:

I don't think this is considered a full copy (just one example):

["a rod will grow from] Jesse's [stock], a sprout [will bloom] from his ro[ots]; upon him wi[ll rest] the sp[irit of] [the LORD: a spirit of wisd]om and insight, a spirit of good coun[sel and strength], a spirit of true know[ledge] [and reverence for the LORD, he will delight in reverence for] the LORD [He will not judge only] by what [his eyes] see, [he will not decide only what his ears hear;] but he will rule [the weak by justice and give decisions] [in integrity to the humble of the land. He will punish the land with the mace of his words, by his lips' breath alone] [he will slay the wicked. 'Justice will be the sash around] his waist. 'Tr[uth' the sash around his hips']

So, let's see what they actually have from this verse when you remove the best guesses:

Jesse's, a sprout from his ro; upon him wi the sp om and insight, a spirit of good coun, a spirit of true know the LORD by what see, but he will rule his waist. 'Tr

Remember the [ ] means the text was completely missing and these are guesses which have been substitued for better guesses on occassion. So, no, you don't have the full book of Isaiah.

Peace,
Hana

ps, any spelling errors are mine...it's hard to type like that.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:00 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

I don't think this is considered a full copy (just one example):

["a rod will grow from] Jesse's [stock], a sprout [will bloom] from his ro[ots]; upon him wi[ll rest] the sp[irit of] [the LORD: a spirit of wisd]om and insight, a spirit of good coun[sel and strength], a spirit of true know[ledge] [and reverence for the LORD, he will delight in reverence for] the LORD [He will not judge only] by what [his eyes] see, [he will not decide only what his ears hear;] but he will rule [the weak by justice and give decisions] [in integrity to the humble of the land. He will punish the land with the mace of his words, by his lips' breath alone] [he will slay the wicked. 'Justice will be the sash around] his waist. 'Tr[uth' the sash around his hips']

So, let's see what they actually have from this verse when you remove the best guesses:

Jesse's, a sprout from his ro; upon him wi the sp om and insight, a spirit of good coun, a spirit of true know the LORD by what see, but he will rule his waist. 'Tr

Remember the [ ] means the text was completely missing and these are guesses which have been substitued for better guesses on occassion. So, no, you don't have the full book of Isaiah.

Peace,
Hana

ps, any spelling errors are mine...it's hard to type like that.
75% of it was found, then with the other manuscripts of Isaih they filled in the rest of the puzzle. Go to this link..http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qumdir.htm
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:04 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

I don't think this is considered a full copy (just one example):

["a rod will grow from] Jesse's [stock], a sprout [will bloom] from his ro[ots]; upon him wi[ll rest] the sp[irit of] [the LORD: a spirit of wisd]om and insight, a spirit of good coun[sel and strength], a spirit of true know[ledge] [and reverence for the LORD, he will delight in reverence for] the LORD [He will not judge only] by what [his eyes] see, [he will not decide only what his ears hear;] but he will rule [the weak by justice and give decisions] [in integrity to the humble of the land. He will punish the land with the mace of his words, by his lips' breath alone] [he will slay the wicked. 'Justice will be the sash around] his waist. 'Tr[uth' the sash around his hips']

So, let's see what they actually have from this verse when you remove the best guesses:

Jesse's, a sprout from his ro; upon him wi the sp om and insight, a spirit of good coun, a spirit of true know the LORD by what see, but he will rule his waist. 'Tr

Remember the [ ] means the text was completely missing and these are guesses which have been substitued for better guesses on occassion. So, no, you don't have the full book of Isaiah.

Peace,
Hana

ps, any spelling errors are mine...it's hard to type like that.
In the Qumran caves there were 19 Books of Isaiah found. Hence one consisted of 75% of its entirety. But with all the 19 Books of Isaiah, we then can make from them the full book of Isaiah.
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 06:08 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
In fact, in these scrolls discovered at Qumran in 1947, we have Old Testament manuscripts that date about a thousand years earlier (150 B.C.) than the other Old Testament manuscripts then in our possession (which dated to A.D. 900).

The significant thing is that when one compares the two sets of manuscripts, it is clear that they are essentially the same, with very few changes.
Peace Seven:

Actually, I think you should go to unbiased sites, books, etc., and read about the site of Qumran and the writers of those scrolls. I could type it all here myself, but quite frankly, the post would be TOOOOOOOOO long and too boring for most. It wasn't until 1991 that these scrolls were made public, and when they were....eeek, some very different ideas imerged, including the timeline and writers of these scrolls.

Please take my advice and go to non-christian, non-muslim sites to find your information. To see the truth in anything you have to use unbiased sources. Biased sites will only tell you what they want want you to believe.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:13 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

Actually, I think you should go to unbiased sites, books, etc., and read about the site of Qumran and the writers of those scrolls. I could type it all here myself, but quite frankly, the post would be TOOOOOOOOO long and too boring for most. It wasn't until 1991 that these scrolls were made public, and when they were....eeek, some very different ideas imerged, including the timeline and writers of these scrolls.

Please take my advice and go to non-christian, non-muslim sites to find your information. To see the truth in anything you have to use unbiased sources. Biased sites will only tell you what they want want you to believe.

Peace,
Hana
The writers of the scrolls are of a Jewish sect,,secondly,, the site I referred you too is not Christian,,thirdly its not about ideas but truth..
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 06:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
75% of it was found, then with the other manuscripts of Isaih they filled in the rest of the puzzle. Go to this link..http://www.ao.net/~fmoeller/qumdir.htm
Peace Seven:

The reference books I have come directly from those who are doing the translating and they have explained clearly how they try to fit the pieces together. By the way, they happen to be christian, but they do not let their faith influence their findings.

As I said, none of them were found intact and they use guesses, from other sources, from the length of the gap, etc. But, these guesses have also changed when new documents are pieced together.

Now with the information they possess as new developments arise, they don't even know who wrote them, where they originated, and very few of the earlier writings mention any historical figure by name. Keep in mind, most of the DDS talks about the way of life and community and life/laws inside a religious organization.

There is still SO much to be learned about the DDS and so much that will never be known, so taking the handwriting of unknown scribes from unknown sources is not proof of anything.

The whole DDS topic is very indepth and to have a complete understanding one really has to read a lot. When a very knowledgeable Muslim brother told me that the DDS proves Islam, I didn't take his word for it. I began research, and quite frankly, I can't say it "proves" Islam, but it certainly discusses behaviours more associated with Muslims than present day Christians. As I mentioned before, ablution, prostrating, oneness of God, and one I didn't mention....fasting.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 06:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
The writers of the scrolls are of a Jewish sect,,secondly,, the site I referred you too is not Christian,,thirdly its not about ideas but truth..
Peace Seven:

You are missing the point completely here. None of these scrolls were found intact, some that were "mostly" intact, unfortunately, did not offer insight into much except the way of life and laws for those inside religious communities.

And something else you have to understand, none of the DDS can be called 100% truth. Are there factual evidences in them...absolutely, are there questionable "facts"? Definitely. The people escavating these sites and sincerely translating the DDS are looking for artifacts to back what they translate. They are not trying to prove anything, they are looking for facts. This is something they will continue to do long after we meet our maker. When you have people today adding their best, educated guesses (not for deceiving people), they cannot be 100% truth, they are simply guesses, and these guesses have often been changed. There are spaces in text that I already showed you and that is because they couldn't offer a best guess to fill in the blanks. They are, I believe, sincere in their efforts.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:28 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

The reference books I have come directly from those who are doing the translating and they have explained clearly how they try to fit the pieces together. By the way, they happen to be christian, but they do not let their faith influence their findings.

As I said, none of them were found intact and they use guesses, from other sources, from the length of the gap, etc. But, these guesses have also changed when new documents are pieced together.

Now with the information they possess as new developments arise, they don't even know who wrote them, where they originated, and very few of the earlier writings mention any historical figure by name. Keep in mind, most of the DDS talks about the way of life and community and life/laws inside a religious organization.

There is still SO much to be learned about the DDS and so much that will never be known, so taking the handwriting of unknown scribes from unknown sources is not proof of anything.

The whole DDS topic is very indepth and to have a complete understanding one really has to read a lot. When a very knowledgeable Muslim brother told me that the DDS proves Islam, I didn't take his word for it. I began research, and quite frankly, I can't say it "proves" Islam, but it certainly discusses behaviours more associated with Muslims than present day Christians. As I mentioned before, ablution, prostrating, oneness of God, and one I didn't mention....fasting.

Peace,
Hana
Well I do agree with you, I was simply stating that they have found 19 Books of Isaiah, one of which was 75% completed. Also, with the other 18, there was enough to make a completed book of Isaiah. And yes the books found in the cave would be more like Islam..Why..well you live by the Law, just as the Jewish people's do. I believe the Law is the schoolmaster..Do you think that you can follow the Law to a tee,,some can..But there hearts are far from it. So they Sin internally. They make clean the outside of the cup, but the inside is full of dead mans bones.. Also, the reason there are so many anti-christian material in the Dead Sea Scrolls is because the Jews rejected Christ..and were teaching there own interpretation of the scriptures.. But that is not the Jews fault. Satan has blinded their eyes..God has a special plan for the Jewish people..They will be saved.
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 06:31 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
The writers of the scrolls are of a Jewish sect,,secondly,, the site I referred you too is not Christian,,thirdly its not about ideas but truth..
Peace Seven:

Yes, they could very well be from a Jewish sect...but if you researched, you will know that they don't know who wrote the scrolls found at Qumran. There is a lot of problems with these scrolls. Starting with the fact that there were not made public until loooong after they were found and many religious leaders offered their own interpretation of them before anyone else saw them. Sadly, these translations have been accepted as factual, when they are not.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

You are missing the point completely here. None of these scrolls were found intact, some that were "mostly" intact, unfortunately, did not offer insight into much except the way of life and laws for those inside religious communities.

And something else you have to understand, none of the DDS can be called 100% truth. Are there factual evidences in them...absolutely, are there questionable "facts"? Definitely. The people escavating these sites and sincerely translating the DDS are looking for artifacts to back what they translate. They are not trying to prove anything, they are looking for facts. This is something they will continue to do long after we meet our maker. When you have people today adding their best, educated guesses (not for deceiving people), they cannot be 100% truth, they are simply guesses, and these guesses have often been changed. There are spaces in text that I already showed you and that is because they couldn't offer a best guess to fill in the blanks. They are, I believe, sincere in their efforts.

Peace,
Hana
You are basing this clam on only one of the books from the DDS, there were 19 on the Book of Isaiah only..So I question your conclusion. Because you have narrowed it down to a select group. Then how can you excavate Fact from one piece of the puzzle.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

Yes, they could very well be from a Jewish sect...but if you researched, you will know that they don't know who wrote the scrolls found at Qumran. There is a lot of problems with these scrolls. Starting with the fact that there were not made public until loooong after they were found and many religious leaders offered their own interpretation of them before anyone else saw them. Sadly, these translations have been accepted as factual, when they are not.

Peace,
Hana
Its funny that you said earlier, only in 91 were they made public. There were 11 caves, cave 4 is what was made public in 91(40%). All the others were made public previous too. And as for the writers,,,its been proven that it was a Jewish sect. Not just by Christians..The minority believe otherwise, with no real cause.
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 06:42 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
You are basing this clam on only one of the books from the DDS, there were 19 on the Book of Isaiah only..So I question your conclusion. Because you have narrowed it down to a select group. Then how can you excavate Fact from one piece of the puzzle.
Peace Seven:

Show me where all 19 survived with ZERO damage and no need to go to other sources to fill in the blanks.

There were also duplicate scrolls found written by different scribes....show me where the original source is? Who copied from who? Not only that, in some of these "duplicates" there were alterations. Who did that and why?

You need to look past just the DDS themselves, you have to look at society back then and what was going on at the time. Don't put all your eggs in one basket, Seven. There are many things to learn and know about the DDS, it is far more than a piece of old paper, most of which is in fragments.

Instead of looking for excuses to justify "filling in the blanks", look for logic, look for answers. Don't dismiss changes from one scroll to another...research and find out WHY this might have happened and WHEN.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 06:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Its funny that you said earlier, only in 91 were they made public. There were 11 caves, cave 4 is what was made public in 91(40%). All the others were made public previous too. And as for the writers,,,its been proven that it was a Jewish sect. Not just by Christians..The minority believe otherwise, with no real cause.
Peace Seven:
No, no, friend, none of them were made public at the time they were discovered. They were tucked away and hidden for a number of years. Of course the ones written before Jesus, pbuh, weren't written by Christians. :p There were no Christians before Jesus, pbuh. Chances are the scribes were from a Jewish sect, yes....but they don't know with 100% certainty which group wrote what. They only have speculation. The original thought of the Qumran scrolls has changed dramatically as to who wrote them. That's why I said, it goes far deeper than a piece of paper.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:

Show me where all 19 survived with ZERO damage and no need to go to other sources to fill in the blanks.

There were also duplicate scrolls found written by different scribes....show me where the original source is? Who copied from who? Not only that, in some of these "duplicates" there were alterations. Who did that and why?

You need to look past just the DDS themselves, you have to look at society back then and what was going on at the time. Don't put all your eggs in one basket, Seven. There are many things to learn and know about the DDS, it is far more than a piece of old paper, most of which is in fragments.

Instead of looking for excuses to justify "filling in the blanks", look for logic, look for answers. Don't dismiss changes from one scroll to another...research and find out WHY this might have happened and WHEN.

Peace,
Hana
Those who question the claims of an authentic Septuagint point out that there is no one manuscript that can be labeled with the word "Septuagint". Instead, the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus, and Codex Alexandrinus specifically identify each book by its specific title. The title "Septuagint" is of course one given by scholars to differentiate from the seven or more other Greek versions of the Old Testament, most of which do not survive except as fragments.

All these codices do not differ in any substantive detail, and it is surprising that there are perhaps but two thousand instances of typographical error in such a lengthy collection of hand-copied ancient documents. However, there are many small, yet substantive differences with the newer Masoretic texts written in Hebrew.

Now with the above, I would have to question what you call logic.

Like the New Testament, the LXX is a particularly excellent text when compared to other ancient works with textual variants. To reject the existence of a Septuagint on the grounds of typographical error and other variants is a questionable opinion. Moreover, in many of the places where the LXX differs from the Masoretic Text, the same variants exist in the Dead Sea Scrolls, showing the antiquity of some of these variants and the reliability of the LXX.
Reply

sevenxtrust
03-04-2006, 06:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Peace Seven:
No, no, friend, none of them were made public at the time they were discovered. They were tucked away and hidden for a number of years. Of course the ones written before Jesus, pbuh, weren't written by Christians. :p There were no Christians before Jesus, pbuh. Chances are the scribes were from a Jewish sect, yes....but they don't know with 100% certainty which group wrote what. They only have speculation. The original thought of the Qumran scrolls has changed dramatically as to who wrote them. That's why I said, it goes far deeper than a piece of paper.

Peace,
Hana
Some of the documents were published in a prompt manner: all of the writing found in Cave 1 appeared in print between 1950 and 1956; the finds from 8 different caves were released in a single volume in 1963; and 1965 saw the publication of the Psalms Scroll from Cave 11. Translation of these materials quickly followed.



the finds from Cave 4 were not made public for many years. Access to the scrolls was governed by a "secrecy rule" that allowed only the original International Team or their designates to view the original materials. After de Vaux's death in 1971, his successors repeatedly refused to even allow the publication of photographs of these materials so that other scholars could at least make their judgments. This rule was eventually broken: first by the publication in the fall of 1991 of 17 documents reconstructed from a concordance that had been made in 1988 and had come into the hands of scholars outside of the International Team; next, that same month, by the discovery and publication of a complete set of photographs of the Cave 4 materials at the Huntington Library in San Marino, California, that were not covered by the "secrecy rule". After some delays these photographs were published by Robert Eisenman and James Robinson (A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, two volumes, Washington, D.C., 1991). As a result, the "secrecy rule" was lifted, and publication of the Cave 4 documents soon commenced, with five volumes in print by 1995.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Se...ls#Publication
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 07:07 PM
Peace Seven:

I see you have resorted to copy/pasting. :rollseyes My concern with you doing that is it makes me believe even more you don't have an understanding of what you're trying to "prove". But, it's ok, this is wikipedia's short description of Codex Vaticanus. Nothing here saying it was God's word and if it was, it's been altered, not preserved.

The Greek is written continuously with small neat writing, later retraced by a 11th century scribe. Punctuation is rare (accents and breathings have been added by a later hand) except for some blank spaces, diaeresis on intial iotas and upsilons, abbreviations of the nomina sacra and markings of OT citations.

The manuscript contains mysterious double dots (so called "umlauts") in the margin of the New Testament, which seem to mark places of textual uncertainty. There are 795 of these in the text and around another 40 that are uncertain. The date of these markings are disputed among scholars.


Codex Sinaiticus

The entire codex consists of 346 1/2 folios, written in four columns. Of these 199 belong to the Old Testament and 147 1/2 to the New, along with two other books, the Epistle of Barnabas and part of The Shepherd of Hermas. The books of the New Testament are arranged in this order: the four Gospels, the epistles of Paul, the Acts of the Apostles, the Catholic Epistles, Revelation.

Of its prior history, little is known. It is speculated to have been written in Egypt and it is sometimes associated with the 50 copies of the scriptures commissioned by Roman Emperor Constantine after his conversion to Christianity

A paleographical study at the British Museum in 1938 found additional the text had undergone several corrections. The first corrections were done by several scribes before the manuscript left the scriptorium. In the sixth or seventh century many alterations were made, which, according to a colophon at the end of the book of Esdras and Esther states, that the source of these alterations was "a very ancient manuscript that had been corrected by the hand of the holy martyr Pamphylus". From this is concluded, that it had been in Caesarea Palaestina in the 6th or 7th centuries. (Bruce A. Metzger, the Text of the New Testament, it's Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, Oxford University Press, 1992, p46).


Codex Alexandrinus

The manuscript's original provenance is unknown. A 13th or 14th century Arabic note on folio 1 reads: "Bound to the Patriarchal Cell in the Fortress of Alexandria. Whoever removes it thence shall be excommunicated and cut off. Written by Athanasius the humble."[1] A 17th century Latin note on a flyleaf (from binding in a royal library) states that the manuscript was given to a patriarchate of Alexandria in 1098 (donum dedit cubicuo Patriarchali anno 814 Mrtyrum), although this may well be "merely an inaccurate attempt at deciphering the Arabic note by Athanasius."[2] The codex was brought to Constantinople in 1621 by Cyril Lucar (patriarch of Alexandria then Constantinople) who then presented it to Charles I of England in 1627, thus becoming part of the Royal Library, British Museum and now the British Library.


Changes, alterations, corrections, unknown sources, authors, etc., written long after Jesus, pbuh....little wonder we don't believe these are the true words of God.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 07:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Some of the documents were published in a prompt manner: all of the writing found in Cave 1 appeared in print between 1950 and 1956; the finds from 8 different caves were released in a single volume in 1963; and 1965 saw the publication of the Psalms Scroll from Cave 11. Translation of these materials quickly followed.



the finds from Cave 4 were not made public for many years. Access to the scrolls was governed by a "secrecy rule" that allowed only the original International Team or their designates to view the original materials. After de Vaux's death in 1971, his successors repeatedly refused to even allow the publication of photographs of these materials so that other scholars could at least make their judgments. This rule was eventually broken: first by the publication in the fall of 1991 of 17 documents reconstructed from a concordance that had been made in 1988 and had come into the hands of scholars outside of the International Team; next, that same month, by the discovery and publication of a complete set of photographs of the Cave 4 materials at the Huntington Library in San Marino, California, that were not covered by the "secrecy rule". After some delays these photographs were published by Robert Eisenman and James Robinson (A Facsimile Edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls, two volumes, Washington, D.C., 1991). As a result, the "secrecy rule" was lifted, and publication of the Cave 4 documents soon commenced, with five volumes in print by 1995.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Se...ls#Publication
Ummmm, as I said, none were made public immediately after their discovery. The ones that were hidden for a lot longer must have been hidden for a reason. Robert Eisenman was diligent in his efforts to make them public and to be studied by authentic archeologists with no ulterior motives. He, along with others, were successful in that endeavor. That is why we now have the more accurate translations available to us.

Peace,
Hana
Reply

*Hana*
03-04-2006, 07:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Well I do agree with you, I was simply stating that they have found 19 Books of Isaiah, one of which was 75% completed. Also, with the other 18, there was enough to make a completed book of Isaiah. And yes the books found in the cave would be more like Islam..Why..well you live by the Law, just as the Jewish people's do. I believe the Law is the schoolmaster..Do you think that you can follow the Law to a tee,,some can..But there hearts are far from it. So they Sin internally. They make clean the outside of the cup, but the inside is full of dead mans bones.. Also, the reason there are so many anti-christian material in the Dead Sea Scrolls is because the Jews rejected Christ..and were teaching there own interpretation of the scriptures.. But that is not the Jews fault. Satan has blinded their eyes..God has a special plan for the Jewish people..They will be saved.
Peace Seven:

I missed this post. Actually, as a Christian, following what Jesus, pbuh, truly taught, you're suppose to be following the law as well. I can't say I've read anything anti-christian in the DDS, but I can say I believe I've read where scribes took liberties and altered things.

But, now you have a problem, Seven. You can't use the DDS as the basis of proving the authenticity of the bible while also saying it is anti-christian and altered by Jewish scribes.

You can't pick and choose and say "this part confirms it, but this part is wrong." It comes back to my point that it can't be used for proving anything, it can only give us a great insight as to the life and times of those living in that era and some of their traditions and beliefs.

Peace
Hana
Reply

Muhammad
03-06-2006, 11:23 AM
:sl:

I have edited some posts containing offensive material and deleted off-topic/offensive posts aswell. Please remember to discuss in a respectful manner and stay on topic, Insha'Allaah.

I have also asked the thread starter to edit out offensive material in his post.

Peace.
Reply

Eric H
03-06-2006, 01:23 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Mohammad;
Please remember to discuss in a respectful manner
I think it may be extremely difficult to stay respectful when responding to a thread with a seemingly offensive title.

I honestly feel that if we are to talk about someone else’s faith then we would bring a far greater glory to God if we search for what is best
I have also asked the thread starter to edit out offensive material in his post
I see that the original post has just been edited but I still find it offensive, and I feel sad that I cannot see a way of responding that will bring any peace to this thread.

We must pray for salvation for each other and hope that God in his infinite love will be merciful to us all.

In the spirit of searching for a greater understanding between our faiths

Eric
Reply

Muhammad
03-09-2006, 05:27 PM
Greetings Eric,

format_quote Originally Posted by Eric H
I think it may be extremely difficult to stay respectful when responding to a thread with a seemingly offensive title.
I've changed it now.

I see that the original post has just been edited but I still find it offensive, and I feel sad that I cannot see a way of responding that will bring any peace to this thread.
The post has also been edited.

May God guide us to the truth.

Peace.
Reply

Eric H
03-10-2006, 04:34 PM
Greetings and peace be with you Muhammad;

Thank you for the edit, and let us pray for a respectful thread once more.

God bless you

Eric
Reply

searchingsoul
07-13-2006, 04:46 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Ameeratul Layl
:sl:

Ppl...wake up...did you noe know that the Bible was written by Jews? The real bible is hidden so is the torah.
The real torah will never mention matters such as:

'Isa is in his own semen'. Why would God want to write this for?

:w:
Ameeratul layls friend
Where are they hidden?
Reply

Umar001
07-13-2006, 01:57 PM
Peace be upon yall and mercy from Almighty G-d and blessings.

I seemed to have missed this thread so I will G-d willing just type some comments in order for me to derive good from this and come to a better understanding.

First,
format_quote Originally Posted by Ameeratul Layl
Ppl...wake up...did you noe know that the Bible was written by Jews? The real bible is hidden so is the torah.
The real torah will never mention matters such as:

'Isa is in his own semen'. Why would God want to write this for?
I have never in my entire life read anything of this nature in the Bible's Old Testament, if possible please give us some reference.

To proceed, Seven I have some interest in your points,

format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
Guess what,,Christ took on human form..Why,,,because, you know yourself God required Blood according to the Torah, to forgive sin..
Just would like to know if you could show us where it is stated or examples that Sin can only be cleansed through blood, show us that "G-d required Blood according to the Torah"

Although it would be interesting to discuss the rest of that post, in order not to stray to far I will leave it there, G-d willing.

Proceeding,

format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
I don't know about your God..But mine is just in all his ways..If he just forgave sin,,that would not be justice,,so why would I believe in him then.
I ask why would He not be just? G-d as you agree, I believe, is The Creator of the heavens and the earth, He is the law giver, the one who sets the law, He does not have to answer to any type of UN group.

Now G-d made us, he knows and made us not perfect, he has created us unable to be 100% obidient, thus it is only Just for G-d to have Mercy and forgive us. If he didnt then it would have been an unjust scenario.

So if G-d created us like this, weak and in knowledge that we are sinners, then why would He not forgive us without a need of sacrafice.

Now if your saying G-d made laws about this and He needs to keep to those laws to be Just then thats a different view point.

Moving on,
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
thw Quran has been translated into other languages and will see revision also. So I don't think that this should be a matter at all.
Now, the Qu'ran, meaning the Mushaf, the written scripture is in Arabic, that Arabic Text has not seen any revision.

The different languages in which the Arabic Text has been interpreted by a person and then translated, that can have revisions for no Muslim will say that is the Word of G-d.

The Bible as we have now, has revisions, which leave out certain parts from the bulk text, as I will show in a bit, G-d willing, also this is what the Preface of the Revised Standard Version (illustrated) says with regards to the King James Version:

On Page iii of Preface:

The King James Version had to compete with the Geneva Bible in popular use; but in the end it prevailed, and for more than two and a half centuries no other authorized translation of the Bible into English was made. The King James Version became the "Authorize Version" of the English-speaking peoples.

..................

Yet the King James Version has grave defects. By the middle of the nineteenth centure, the development of Biblical studies and the discovery of many manuscripts more ancient than those upon which the King James Version was based, made it manifest that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for revision of the English translation.
So then the RVS was made, by aparently no less that 32 scholars. (preface iv)

Now to some differences:

1 Epistle of John Chapter 5

Kings James Version:

6This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.

7For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

8And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.
I copied the verses from here to save me writing them out

English Standard Version (since I could not find the Revised Standard Version)

6This is he who came by water and blood--Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.

7For there are three that testify:

8the Spirit and the water and the blood; and these three agree.
New Internation Version (known widely as NIV):

6This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth.

7For there are three that testify:

8the[a] Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.


Footnote

1 John 5:8 Late manuscripts of the Vulgate testify in heaven: the Father, the Word and the Holy Spirit, and these three are one. 8 And there are three that testify on earth: the (not found in any Greek manuscript before the sixteenth century)
Now in case you didnt notice the differences here:

The King James version has the full verses, then the English Revised Version takes away verse 7 and splits verse 8 into 2 so that the verse numbers are still the same, but no mention of this in the footnotes, then finally in the New Internation Version the same split as the English Revised Version is used but now a footnote is provided informing the reader that the passage is not found in any Greek manyscript before the 16 century.

Another example can be found in, The Gospel According To Mark, which is held to be the earliest one, in Chapter 16,

The King James Version says,

Mark 16

1And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him.

2And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun.

3And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

4And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.

5And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.

6And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him.

7But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you.

8And they went out quickly, and fled from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any man; for they were afraid.

9Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

12After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

13And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

14Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

18They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

19So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God.

20And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.
The English Revised Version says,

The Resurrection
1When the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James and Salome bought spices, so that they might go and anoint him. 2And very early on the first day of the week, when the sun had risen, they went to the tomb. 3And they were saying to one another, "Who will roll away the stone for us from the entrance of the tomb?" 4And looking up, they saw that the stone had been rolled back--it was very large. 5And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe, and they were alarmed. 6And he said to them, "Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you." 8And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

[Some of the earliest manuscripts do not include 16:9-20.]
Jesus Appears to Mary Magdalene
9[a] [[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. 10She went and told those who had been with him, as they mourned and wept. 11But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it.


Jesus Appears to Two Disciples
12After these things he appeared in another form to two of them, as they were walking into the country. 13And they went back and told the rest, but they did not believe them.


The Great Commission
14Afterward 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. 15And he said to them, "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: in my name they will cast out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they 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."



19So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven and sat down at the right hand of God. 20And they went out and preached everywhere, while the Lord worked with them and confirmed the message by accompanying signs.]]
Then it states this, as a footnote:

Mark 16:9 Some manuscripts end the book with 16:8; others include verses 9-20 immediately after verse 8. A few manuscripts insert additional material after verse 14; one Latin manuscript adds 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. Other manuscripts include this same wording after verse 8, then continue with verses 9-20
The New Internation Version says,

Mark 16
The Resurrection
1When the Sabbath was over, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome bought spices so that they might go to anoint Jesus' body. 2Very early on the first day of the week, just after sunrise, they were on their way to the tomb 3and they asked each other, "Who will roll the stone away from the entrance of the tomb?"

4But when they looked up, they saw that the stone, which was very large, had been rolled away. 5As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed.

6"Don't be alarmed," he said. "You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7But go, tell his disciples and Peter, 'He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.' "

8Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.
((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.))
9When Jesus rose early on the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had driven seven demons. 10She went and told those who had been with him and who were mourning and weeping. 11When they heard that Jesus was alive and that she had seen him, they did not believe it.

12Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. 13These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.

14Later Jesus appeared to the Eleven as they were eating; he rebuked them for their lack of faith and their stubborn refusal to believe those who had seen him after he had risen.

15He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. 16Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

19After the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, he was taken up into heaven and he sat at the right hand of God. 20Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.

Again in case the difference was not noticed, in the King James Version, it seems the writers were oblivious to the later knowledge of the other two versions, but in the English Revised Version, we are told 'some' manuscripts do not have this and we are given a footnote to some alternative endings. Finally it is in the New Internation Version that we are told "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20"

Let our eyes again look at the King James Version, in the Gospel According to John Chapter 7 and 8,

50Nicodemus saith unto them, (he that came to Jesus by night, being one of them,)

51Doth our law judge any man, before it hear him, and know what he doeth?

52They answered and said unto him, Art thou also of Galilee? Search, and look: for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet.

53And every man went unto his own house.
John 8

1Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

12Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

13The Pharisees therefore said unto him, Thou bearest record of thyself; thy record is not true.

14Jesus answered and said unto them, Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true: for I know whence I came, and whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come, and whither I go.

15Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man.
Also the English Revised Version,

50Nicodemus, who had gone to him before, and who was one of them, said to them, 51"Does our law judge a man without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does?" 52They replied, "Are you from Galilee too? Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee."

[The earliest manuscripts do not include John 7:53-8:11]
The Woman Caught in Adultery
53[g] [[They went each to his own house,
John 8
1but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4they said to him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?" 6This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her." 8And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10Jesus stood up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" 11She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more."]]


I Am the Light of the World
12Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." 13So the Pharisees said to him, "You are bearing witness about yourself; your testimony is not true." 14Jesus answered, "Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going. 15You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one.
Also footnote G comments on,

John 7:53 Some manuscripts do not include 7:53-8:11; others add the passage here or after 7:36 or after 21:25 or after Luke 21:38, with variations in the text
And finally the New International Standard Version,

50Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus earlier and who was one of their own number, asked, 51"Does our law condemn anyone without first hearing him to find out what he is doing?"

52They replied, "Are you from Galilee, too? Look into it, and you will find that a prophet[e] does not come out of Galilee."
((The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11.))
53Then each went to his own home.
John 8

1But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" 6They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." 8Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?"

11"No one, sir," she said.
"Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."
The Validity of Jesus' Testimony
12When Jesus spoke again to the people, he said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

13The Pharisees challenged him, "Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid."

14Jesus answered, "Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid, for I know where I came from and where I am going. But you have no idea where I come from or where I am going. 15You judge by human standards; I pass judgment on no one.
A recap, the King James Version had no warning but ran smothly, whilst the English Revised Version stated "The earliest manuscripts do not include John 7:53-8:11" and it was closely followed by the New Internation Version which stated further that, "The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11."

It would only be logical for a person to then out of these three follow the NIV.

With regards to this comment made:

format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
I believe my Bible is the only word of God. Is God so small as to let man Corrupt it..Not the God I serve.
I as a Muslim, one who does Islam, which is one who Submits to G-d (as the Bible recomends in James 4:7), agree with you that if G-d wills, He can do anything He wants, including the presevation of Scripture, that is why I as a Muslim have reassurance that the Qu'ran will be preserved. For He states, in the english translation of the meaning:

Surah 15 Ayah 9
YUSUFALI: We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).
But also before Embracing Islam, checking whether the Qu'ran could be the same as it was revealed was neccesary, so it should be with anyone and their faith.

In Islam we do not see the fact that Jesus' and Moses', peace be upon them both, their families and those who follow them, teachings and scriptures were not preserved because G-d couldnt but rather because those were guidance for a time and period, and that time and period have passed, with regards to Jesus peace be upon him and his family and his followers, Almighty G-d says in the translation of the meaning:

Surah 3 ayah 49
YUSUFALI: "And (appoint him) a messenger to the Children of Israel, (with this message): "'I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave: And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead, by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe;

Thus, for example if I had a letter with a message to be delivered to 5 people. I would ensure that the message would be given to them in the same way I wrote it, but as soon as those people died or passed away or as soon as I needed to change the message, the letter containg old message could be thrown away or burnt, since the need for it is not there no more.

I hope this makes sense, and I am not asking you that you believe this, just that you understand my view point as I will try understand yours for that is the best we can do as fellow humans, the guidance and mercy of faith comes only from Almighty G-d.

Moving onto my last point G-d willing cos I have work soon:

format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
The oldest book of the OT was written approximately 80 years after Jesus,pbuh, was taken up, and the rest later. Absolutely nothing was written in the lifetime of Jesus, pbuh. And the OT books were not authored by the disciples of Jesus, pbuh. Again, these books were written on hearsay, folklore and tradition.
I am hoping here you mean NT for New Testament and not OT for Old Testament, InshAllah.

Also

format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Can you explain why John is so vastly different from the 4 synoptics?
3 sypnotic, Matthew, Mark and Luke.

I hope to learn more from both of you two, specially you sis! InshAllah.

I enjoyin everyone to keep the interfaith communication honourable please.

I also hope I have not come across as offensive or as if I have being trying to belittle the Bible, that was not my intention but only to share what I have learnt and my view point on the matter, if I am mistaken please anyone correct me, InshAllah, G-d willing.

May Jesus son of Mary be Immiune from any lies spread about him or his family by Christians or Muslims, and may he be blessed along with his family and his followers.

Muslims please remember what was said to the last Prophet peace be upon him by The Creator, in the translation of the meaning:

It is true thou wilt not be able to guide every one, whom thou lovest; but Allah guides those whom He will and He knows best those who receive guidance.
Reply

Phil12123
07-18-2006, 05:37 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by IsaAbdullah
Just would like to know if you could show us where it is stated or examples that Sin can only be cleansed through blood, show us that "G-d required Blood according to the Torah"
Some would say that the example of Cain and Abel shows the kind of sacrifice God wanted:
Genesis 4:
3. And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the Lord.
4. Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the Lord respected Abel and his offering,
5. but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.

But even before that, after Adam and Eve sinned, how was their sin cleansed? We are not specifically told, but notice how they tried to cover their nakedness with fig leaves and then notice how God did it:

Genesis 3:
7. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.
21. Also for Adam and his wife the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.

An animal had to die to provide "tunics of skin." That would have been the first blood sacrifice.

But perhaps more to the point of your question:

Exodus 12 tells of the institution of the Passover when the death angel would pass over houses where he saw the blood on the doorposts. That event, of course, did not specifically relate to sin or the cleansing of it, but did point to the importance blood would play later after the Law was given, at least in a symbolic way. The idea is sin brings death. Blood brings cleansing of sin, thereby avoiding sin's death penalty.

Leviticus 17:11 says, `For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.'

Hebrews 9:22 says, "And according to the law almost all things are purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission [i.e., forgiveness]."

I ask why would He not be just? G-d as you agree, I believe, is The Creator of the heavens and the earth, He is the law giver, the one who sets the law, He does not have to answer to any type of UN group.

Now G-d made us, he knows and made us not perfect, he has created us unable to be 100% obidient, thus it is only Just for G-d to have Mercy and forgive us. If he didnt then it would have been an unjust scenario.

So if G-d created us like this, weak and in knowledge that we are sinners, then why would He not forgive us without a need of sacrafice.

Now if your saying G-d made laws about this and He needs to keep to those laws to be Just then thats a different view point.
We can't really say God made us not perfect. We were born that way--- not perfect. Adam and Eve were the only ones made or directly created by God, and they were "very good" (Gen. 1:31) when first created. They were made "perfect" in terms of sinless, before they disobeyed God. But obviously things changed after they sinned. And their sin did not infect only them. We see their son, Cain, murdering his brother, Abel. What all of Adam's children, down to us, were born with is a sin nature---the tendency and inclination to commit willful acts of sin. Call it part of "original sin" or the effects of it or whatever. But it is undeniable that no one needs to be taught how to disobey. That comes naturally. What we need is, to be taught how to obey.

Nevertheless, God's standard is perfection. Jesus said, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matt. 5:48). His standard IS 100% obedience.

So, we don't get off the hook and have our sins simply overlooked by God. You sin, you pay for it. And all of us sin, perhaps daily, if not hourly, in word, thought or deed.

His justice requires punishment for ALL sin. To overlook a single sin without the person committing it being punished goes against His justice. Just as much so as punishing someone who did not commit that sin goes against His justice... UNLESS a person steps in and volunteers to take the punishment, so the real guilty party can go free. That is exactly what Jesus did on our behalf when He died on the Cross for our sins. He paid for them IN FULL!

Hebrew 9:
24. For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
25. not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another
26. He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.
27. And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,
28. so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many.

Peace
Reply

shaharoun
07-18-2006, 06:36 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sevenxtrust
I'll just let you know there is only one true God and one true Bible. But I guess you will find that out judgement day.
It seems you think you have already found the riht way,but still I advice you to find the right way before the day of judgement,Unless you wiil be among the losers.
Reply

Phil12123
07-18-2006, 02:02 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by shaharoun
It seems you think you have already found the right way, but still I advise you to find the right way before the day of judgment, unless you will be among the losers.
There are going to be billions of losers at the judgment, regardless of who has found the right way now. If Christianity is TRUTH and the Bible has not been corrupted (at least to the point that we can ignore everything it says), there will be billions of Muslims and non-Muslims who will be told by the Judge:

Matthew 7:23 --- ..."I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Matthew 25:
41. Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
46. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

And if the Quran is TRUTH, billions of Christians and non-Muslim non-Christians and countless Muslims who have not done whatever the Quran says, will have that same fate.

Either way, there will be billions of losers at the judgment. That conclusion is inescapable.

Peace
Reply

glo
01-25-2007, 04:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman
In NT , about Jesus ‘s (p) forgiving the prostitute , I was confused . Does it mean , Jesus (p) sanctioned adultery / prostitution ? It can’t be so .
Greetings, Muslim Woman

Just for clarification, Jesus did not condone adultery or prostitution, nor any other sin.
Forgiving and condoning are two very different things ...

Read Jesus' words:
The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her. "Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir," she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin." (John 8:3-15)
Jesus forgives her sins, but at the same time he tells her to stop sinning.
He frequently told people 'to leave their lives of sin' after he had healed them.

This reflects much of the Christian thinking:
Christians do not try to live good lives to earn God's favour - they have already gained it through faith.
Instead they try to live good lives, because they know it is what God wants them to do.
If you love God and want to please him, leading a good life seems a small sacrifice to make ...

There is a Christian motto which says: "Hate the sin, but love the sinner"
That's based on Jesus' example to us.

Peace

Christian Woman :)
Reply

- Qatada -
01-25-2007, 05:14 PM
Hey glo. :)


format_quote Originally Posted by glo

This reflects much of the Christian thinking:
Christians do not try to live good lives to earn God's favour - they have already gained it through faith.
Instead they try to live good lives, because they know it is what God wants them to do.

Can you clarify this abit more, because i read in a previous thread from a christian that faith has to have good deeds along with it? Thanks.


If you love God and want to please him, leading a good life seems a small sacrifice to make ...

There is a Christian motto which says: "Hate the sin, but love the sinner"
That's based on Jesus' example to us.

I totally agree with that! :)
Reply

glo
01-25-2007, 06:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Fi_Sabilillah

Can you clarify this abit more, because i read in a previous thread from a christian that faith has to have good deeds along with it? Thanks.
Christians believe that we cannot earn salvation by deeds (because we would never be good enough by God's standards). Therefore Christianity teaches that we gain salvation through faith. (I understand that protestants believe we gain salvation through faith alone, whereas catholics believe you need good deeds as well as faith - but I would rather leave it to my catholic friends to explain their own perspective)

Either way, both denominations teach that having gained salvation does not mean that we can behave in any way we like. God still requires good deeds and godly behaviour - and he will judge us accordingly.

Also, if you have really committed your life to God, you should wish to obey him ... so in that sense faith should lead to good deeds ...

Does that make it clearer?

I totally agree with that! :)
I always love to find areas where Islam and Christianity are in agreement! :)

Peace
Reply

- Qatada -
01-25-2007, 06:17 PM
Yeah, i understand kinda. How about the people who might have done alot of evil but still have faith, what happens to them? :)


Sorry for my ignorance.
Reply

Malaikah
01-26-2007, 12:56 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by glo
Christians believe that we cannot earn salvation by deeds (because we would never be good enough by God's standards). Therefore Christianity teaches that we gain salvation through faith.
Hi Glo,

If actions can never be enough to gain salvation, then are you saying faith itself can be enough to gain salvation?

In Islam, neither faith nor deeds are enough to save a person- because the blessing that God has given us are just too great for us to ever be fully appreciative of them. Instead, it is purely by the Mercy of God that people with both faith and good deeds will enter paradise...
Reply

snakelegs
01-26-2007, 02:51 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by glo
This reflects much of the Christian thinking:
Christians do not try to live good lives to earn God's favour - they have already gained it through faith.
Instead they try to live good lives, because they know it is what God wants them to do.
If you love God and want to please him, leading a good life seems a small sacrifice to make ...

There is a Christian motto which says: "Hate the sin, but love the sinner"
That's based on Jesus' example to us.

Peace

Christian Woman :)
hi glo,
doesn't the reward/punishment in the hereafter also play a strong role?
Reply

glo
01-26-2007, 07:29 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Malaikah
Hi Glo,

If actions can never be enough to gain salvation, then are you saying faith itself can be enough to gain salvation?

In Islam, neither faith nor deeds are enough to save a person- because the blessing that God has given us are just too great for us to ever be fully appreciative of them. Instead, it is purely by the Mercy of God that people with both faith and good deeds will enter paradise...
Greetings, cheese

Since we are going off topic, and there was already a very interesting thread on this topic (well, I thought so! :D ), perhaps you want to look here.

Peace
Reply

Muslim Woman
01-26-2007, 08:42 AM
Salaam/peace ;


format_quote Originally Posted by glo
...............Jesus forgives her sins, but at the same time he tells her to stop sinning.......

yap but the crowd who left them already got the message that aduletery is not a sin & they should not try to punish any one for it.
Thus , they might be encourged to do that sin. Is that the lady who later became his followers & some Christians believed Jesus (p) even married her ?


Anyway , what's the final situation here ? Is adultery a sin regarding Bible ? What's the punishment ?
Reply

glo
01-26-2007, 01:44 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman
Salaam/peace ;

yap but the crowd who left them already got the message that aduletery is not a sin & they should not try to punish any one for it. Thus , they might be encourged to do that sin.
That's an interesting point of view. :)

I will give you my take on this, but I welcome other Christians to contribute ...

I don't think those people walked away, thinking adultery was from now on permitted ... or even feeling encouraged to commit adultery themselves ... :uuh:
Read the story again:
The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her. "Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir," she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin." (John 8:3-15)
Notice that these were teachers of the law and Pharisees.
They were not asking Jesus for advice, they wanted two things:
  • Firstly, see justice done on the woman, i.e. have her stoned
  • Secondly - and more interestingly - they wanted to find a way of accusing Jesus.

During his ministry, Jesus' emphasis was on forgiveness. If he now publically declared that the woman should be let go, they could accuse him of breaking the law and have him arrested.
But Jesus knows what they are scheming, and therefore responds by saying "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her. "
Do you see what he is doing? The Bible says 'Judge not, or you will be judged yourself'. The Bible teaches us that we are all sinners.
Jesus is leaving them to search their own hearts and consciences, and to realise that none of them is without sin themselves.

So the people do not walk away because they suddenly think adultery is permitted. Instead they walk away because
  1. They have not managed to accuse Jesus of law-breaking, and
  2. He has reminded them painfully that they are sinners too!


Is that the lady who later became his followers & some Christians believed Jesus (p) even married her ?
I don't know if there is any Biblical evidence that this woman was Mary Magdalene ...

It may well be that there are people who believe Jesus was married, and some of them may even call themselves Christians, but I can assure you that none of the main Christian denominations believe this!
Anyway , what's the final situation here ? Is adultery a sin regarding Bible ? What's the punishment ?
Well, looking at Jesus' example I would say that adultery is sin and the punishment is forgiveness. :okay:
(I anticipate that this will seem a controversial if not offensive statement, so let me explain here and now what I mean:
According to Christianity, if you truly repent a sin and ask God for forgiveness, he will forgive you. But you will be expected to demonstrate your repentence and remorse by abstaining from your sin from them onwards! (Of course, in reality that is not always so easy. Sometimes it can be very difficult to leave a certain sinful habit ... but that's for another thread perhaps ...)
Just as Jesus said: "Go now and leave your life of sin."

Do you think that's soft? Do you think Jesus is unfair? Would you like to see justice being done and the woman stoned to death?
Well, that's not what Jesus teaches ...
Being forgiven can be a pretty humbling experience sometimes, and it can turn lives around. Many Christians can witness to this (I won't go any further on this, because it would not be appropriate in an Islamic forum)

Peace :)
Reply

Keltoi
01-26-2007, 01:56 PM
Very good perspective Glo
Reply

Muslim Woman
01-27-2007, 01:36 AM
Salaam/peace ;

format_quote Originally Posted by glo
......... those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there....


--This line gives a picture that all left that woman except Jesus (p). So , chances are high that they did not hear what Jesus (p) told her .


I also hear a lecture of Dr. Zakir Naik . he said something like this , the story was ignored by most Gospel writers & many Christian scholars think it could be fake.


adultery is sin and the punishment is forgiveness.
---- if the sinners repent sincerely , then may be it's ok . Otherwise , adultery could become a normal practice.

Also , i think , it’s better to get punishment in this world for our any sin/mistake ; so that on the Last Day , we don’t have to stand in front of God Almighty as a sinner & get punishment from Him.


Do you think that's soft? Do you think Jesus is unfair? Would you like to see justice being done and the woman stoned to death
----once a woman came to Prophet Muhammed (p) & asked him to punish her because of her adultery. He ignored her & turned his face .

The woman again came in front of him & requested him to give punishment . She also informed him that she is pregnant. Then the Prophet (p) told her to come after she gives birth.

Later , the woman again came & the Prophet (p) again let her go by saying that she must fulfill the time of giving milk ( breastfeeding ) to the baby.


When AGAIN the woman returned & told him that the time is over , only then the stoning took place. After the death of that lady , a man said something bad about her & the Prophet (p) scolded him by saying that ( not the exact words ) , one blood drop of this lady is enough to remove the sins of all who stoned him or something like that.


The lessons i learnt from that hadith is the Prophet (p) gave several chances to let her go . But as she repeatedly came back & wanted to get punishment in this world rather than be punished on the Last Day , the Prophet (p) punished her .

Also , regarding Islamic law , if a case is taken to the authority , then justice should be done. Otherwise , personal sin can be forgiven/ignored (most probably) if anybody does not compalin or take matter to the authority.



There is no stoning verse in Quran. So , may be , this punishment took place regarding previous law ( Taurat most probably ) when the specific verses on punishment did not revealed to the Prophet (p).


Anyway , i m not scholar . So , not 100 % sure about the punishment of adultery in Islam. I mean , i know there is no such verse in Quran but don't know why many think regarding only one hadith ( or more ??? ) that stoning to death is prescribed .
Reply

glo
01-27-2007, 04:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Woman
I also hear a lecture of Dr. Zakir Naik . he said something like this , the story was ignored by most Gospel writers & many Christian scholars think it could be fake.
You are right. The story of Jesus and the adulteress is not included in all Bible versions, and where it is included, it ususally comes with a comment that 'the earliest manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not contain it'

I scrolled through most of Grace Seeker's posts to find one very informative one he had written on the authenticity of this story:
Of this particular story, what the scholars say is: It is absent from such early and diverse manuscripts as p66, p75, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, and about 27 others of the best known and most reliable manuscripts. Plus it is also absent from the oldest of the syriac manuscripts, as well as the Sahidic and Bohairic manuscripts and all but 5 of the 30 Armenian manuscripts.

No Greek Church Father prior to the 12th century even comments on it. Though it is found as early as the fourth century, it isn't till the 6th century that it begins to appear regularly in the Latin church and around this same time in the syriac manuscripts.

So, how did it become some widespread in the church today? Well, Jerome included it in his translation of the Bible from Greek into Latin in his well known Vulgate. In 1516 Erasmus edited a text of the Greek New Testament. He had few Greek manuscripts available to him, and when in doubt used Jerome's Vulgate to guide him as to which to accept as most accurate. Sometimes even having to translate it himself back out of the Latin Vulgate into Greek because he had no Greek manuscript available to him for that portion of the Bible. It is Erasmus' edition of the Greek New Testament which Guttenberg used when printing the first book, the Bible, on a printing press. Subsequent to that historic event, Erasmus' text was given the moniker "Textus Receptus" (or received text) and for generations many thought it was the most accurate text available. The Textus Receptus is the text behind the King James Version of the Bible, which was the most popular English language Bible in the USA until just recently and still distributed by the millions across the globe.

So, given that it probably shouldn't be in the Bible, why is it included? It is undoubtedly an ancient story, at least as old as the 4th century, and probably older. It appears to come from an oral tradition about Jesus, even if not actually penned by John. Thus the story might be authentic. (I am still of the opinion that it is apocryphal.) The best answer is that all scholars recognize that it shouldn't be included. And some versions do not include it. But, most publishers are hesitant to completely remove such a well know story and take the tactic used by the NIV, they set it off either by brackets or a change in print type to indicate that readers should take note of something different about this passage, and then have a note that most reliable early manuscripts omit the passage.
So, given this we are discussing a story, which may or may not be authentic ... but hey, you brought it up ... :okay:
In NT , about Jesus ‘s (p) forgiving the prostitute , I was confused . Does it mean , Jesus (p) sanctioned adultery / prostitution ? It can’t be so .
Given that your post was expressing your confusion about Jesus' forgiveness, and how it may be perceived as condoning sinful behaviour, perhaps it would be useful to look at other Bible passages, where Jesus forgives and then instructs that person to leave the sinful life.
When I have more time I will look for other examples ...


---- if the sinners repent sincerely , then may be it's ok . Otherwise , adultery could become a normal practice.
But God alone knows if and to what extend somebody's repentance is sincere - all the more reason to leave the jdgement to God himself. Would you agree?

Also , i think , it’s better to get punishment in this world for our any sin/mistake ; so that on the Last Day , we don’t have to stand in front of God Almighty as a sinner & get punishment from Him.
I understand that that is very much an Islamic perspective on sin and punishment.

I'm not a scholar either. Just somebody who loves God's word.

Peace
Reply

Muslim Woman
01-28-2007, 01:52 AM
Salaam/peace;


..... leave the jdgement to God himself. Would you agree?


------ does it mean we won’t punish a child killer , we won’t punish a rapist ? We will leave the matter for the Last Day ?

In the mean time , how many innocent lives will be destroyed by those sinners ?


If u r specifically talking about adultery , then as I said earlier , personal sin can be ignored if nobody takes the matter to the court/authority. Otherwise , judge needs to give verdict regarding holy Book.



If a man accuses his wife of adultery without providing four good witnesses, and she denies it, he is to be whipped for slander unless he swears four times that he is telling the truth, and the fifth time that he invokes the curse of Allah on himself if he is lying.



The wife can avert the punishment by swearing four times that he is a liar, and a fifth time she invokes the wrath of Allah upon herself if he is telling the truth. After this, the marriage is dissolved forever, and they can never marry each other again.

It is recommended that a man divorce his wife rather than dissolving the marriage in this way."





Allah Almighty says: “As for those who accuse their wives but have no witnesses except themselves; let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies (swearing) by Allah that he is of those who speak the truth.



And yet a fifth invoking the curse of Allah on him if he is of those who lie.


And it shall avert the punishment from her if she bear witness before Allah four times that he is of those who are liars. And a fifth (time) that the wrath of Allah be upon her if he is of those who speak the truth.” (An-Nur: 6-9)






The above quotation is excerpted with slight modifications from

http://www.stanford.edu/group/ISSU/I...in/node55.html


Once a man asked permission from Prophet Muhammed (p) to do adultery. The Prophet (p) asked ( not the exact words ) : will u be happy if any man commits zina ( adultery ) with ur mother ? He said , no .


Then the Prophet (p) again asked , will u be happy if anybody commits zina with ur wife ? Again the man said , no. What about with ur sister & daughter ….each time , man answered no & no.



Then the Prophet (p) said , if u don’t want that somebody else does it with ur mother , wife , sister , daughter ; then how can do the same with other men’s mom , wife, sis , daughter ?

Then the man realized his mistake & promised not to do that.

To my knowledge , Jesus (p) in Bible forbid men to even look at the women ; it would considered as adultery ( can’t remember the exact verse ….meaning is like that ).



So, I don’t know , why adultery is so common in the west . May be , many Christians are not reading Bible properly
Reply

dougmusr
01-29-2007, 01:49 AM
So, I don’t know , why adultery is so common in the west . May be , many Christians are not reading Bible properly
This is based on the misconception that being a westerner is synonymous with being a Christian. In fact, most western countries are far from Christian. The EU is reluctant to put a reference to God in their constitution, many in the US want all government buildings purged of references to God, want the pledge taken out of schools, etc.
Reply

Umar001
01-29-2007, 01:54 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr
This is based on the misconception that being a westerner is synonymous with being a Christian. In fact, most western countries are far from Christian. The EU is reluctant to put a reference to God in their constitution, many in the US want all government buildings purged of references to God, want the pledge taken out of schools, etc.
That doesn't neccesarily show that they don't believe in God, maybe they have the understanding that 'Leave on to Ceaser which is of Ceaser and unto God that which is of God' or something like that, to mean that things should be without the mention of God in one area and in their personal life then they can have God.
Reply

rav
01-29-2007, 01:54 AM
If a man accuses his wife of adultery without providing four good witnesses, and she denies it, he is to be whipped for slander unless he swears four times that he is telling the truth, and the fifth time that he invokes the curse of Allah on himself if he is lying.
And if a women is raped and she has no witnesses then she is guilty of adultry???
Reply

Muslim Woman
01-29-2007, 02:01 AM
Salaam/peace ;


format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr
This is based on the misconception that being a westerner is synonymous with being a Christian. In fact, most western countries are far from Christian. The EU is reluctant to put a reference to God in their constitution, many in the US want all government buildings purged of references to God, want the pledge taken out of schools, etc.

sorry i did not write it to hurt anyone's feeling...let me clarify. In US , UK, Canada , France etc , most people are Chrisitans , right ?
So, does not matter what is in the constition....don't u think they should follow what their holy Books are commanding them ?

Yes , of Couse many Muslims are guilty of committing adultery , but most probably they know that they are doing wrong ; so try to do these secretly. But , living together , having love childs etc are so common / practised in the west where '' followers '' of Christ (p) live.

Why u think , they do it ? Surely Bible does not allow it .
Reply

dougmusr
01-29-2007, 02:06 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
That doesn't neccesarily show that they don't believe in God, maybe they have the understanding that 'Leave on to Ceaser which is of Ceaser and unto God that which is of God' or something like that, to mean that things should be without the mention of God in one area and in their personal life then they can have God.
The Bible says Satan believes in God. I would think a large portion of the world population believes in God. Belief in God does not make one a Christian.

So, I don’t know , why adultery is so common in the west . May be , many Christians are not reading Bible properly
The inference of the statement was that most of the western world is Christian, and Christians don't read their Bible, so thay feel adultry is OK.
Reply

Muslim Woman
01-29-2007, 02:06 AM
Salaam/peace ;


format_quote Originally Posted by rav
And if a women is raped and she has no witnesses then she is guilty of adultry???


4 men ( eye witneseed ) must testify against her that she commited zina . If a man complains against any woman but failed to bring witnesses & prove the accusation , he will be lashed for 80 or 100 times & his testimony will be invalid forever.


I 've to go now...if u want answer in details, Insha Allah will write later.
Reply

dougmusr
01-29-2007, 02:20 AM
In US , UK, Canada , France etc , most people are Chrisitans , right ?
I would say that if you polled them a majority would say they were Christian. Probe a bit further when asking the question. Ask what it takes to be a Christian. Ask when they became one. Ask how being a Christian has altered their life.
Reply

rav
01-29-2007, 02:23 AM
4 men ( eye witneseed ) must testify against her that she commited zina . If a man complains against any woman but failed to bring witnesses & prove the accusation , he will be lashed for 80 or 100 times & his testimony will be invalid forever.
Okay, now what if the women cannot prove she was raped because no one saw it. Is she punished because of sex before marriage?
Reply

Muslim Knight
01-29-2007, 12:22 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by rav
Okay, now what if the women cannot prove she was raped because no one saw it. Is she punished because of sex before marriage?
The woman who had been raped is not punished.

This has been discussed here
Reply

rav
01-29-2007, 07:50 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
The woman who had been raped is not punished.

This has been discussed here
Yeah, but she doesn;t have the witnesses so how do we know she was raped?
Reply

Umar001
02-01-2007, 01:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by dougmusr
The Bible says Satan believes in God. I would think a large portion of the world population believes in God. Belief in God does not make one a Christian.
Erm, I dont know if you were just confused in the situation.

Recap,

You said,

This is based on the misconception that being a westerner is synonymous with being a Christian. In fact, most western countries are far from Christian. The EU is reluctant to put a reference to God in their constitution, many in the US want all government buildings purged of references to God, want the pledge taken out of schools, etc.


Based on that I said,

That doesn't neccesarily show that they don't believe in God, maybe they have the understanding that 'Leave on to Ceaser which is of Ceaser and unto God that which is of God' or something like that, to mean that things should be without the mention of God in one area and in their personal life then they can have God.

So you raised the fact most western countries are from Christian, then you said the EU is reluctant to put reference to God...

So in reply to this I said, that not mixing the Goverment with Personal life does not show anything i.e. it does not support you statement that 'most western countries are far from Christian' so when I said believe in God, in context that it means Christian, as that was what we were talking about.

So in brief, when the fact that the EU does not reference to God was brought up, I just said that this did not show that those people did not believe in God, i.e. that they could be totally Christian and still be of those who seperate the goverment from personal life.

Regards

Eesa.
Reply

eagleye
02-05-2007, 08:30 PM
We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted and unreliable and is mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption! "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
a scrip that discriminating itself, that must be kind of phenomena.
if I'm not mistaken, it's called circular reasoning
I wonder does Koran also address itself?
Reply

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-24-2018, 03:25 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2011, 02:33 AM
  3. Replies: 100
    Last Post: 07-15-2009, 04:06 PM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-26-2009, 05:12 AM
  5. Replies: 100
    Last Post: 01-11-2007, 04:39 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!