/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Do Muslims believe the original Bible is the word of God?



j4763
06-29-2006, 10:24 AM
Was the original Bible (the unchanged version/first ever one) the word of God/Allah?

If so who wrote it?

Or has it always been man.s words?
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
AvarAllahNoor
06-29-2006, 10:31 AM
I'm sure this topic has been covered many times!
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 10:34 AM
we believe Allah has sent revelation to Jesus. But we believe it got tainted very quikly so we cant take anything of the bible nor reject anything from the bible.


:peace:
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 10:36 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
we believe Allah has sent revelation to Jesus.

:peace:
So who wrote it then? (the first one)
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
IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 10:38 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
So who wrote it then? (the first one)
my guess is the disciples/companions of Jesus wrote it down and it got defiled/modified very quickly so we cant accept it or reject it, we stamp a "Maybe" with it. What agrees wiv the quran and sunnah, we accept, and reject everything else.

:peace:
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 10:40 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
my guess is the disciples/companions of Jesus wrote it down and it got defiled/modified very quickly so we cant accept it or reject it, we stamp a "Maybe" with it. What agrees wiv the quran and sunnah, we accept, and reject everything else.

:peace:
Forgetting all about the mod's of the bible. Do you think then it was written buy his disciples at the time jesus was alive?
Reply

Muslim Knight
06-29-2006, 10:40 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Was the original Bible (the unchanged version/first ever one) the word of God/Allah?

If so who wrote it?

Or has it always been man.s words?
Muslims believe in Injil i.e. words of revelation sent down to Nabi 'Isa 'alayhi salaam but they were never written down during his lifetime. These are parts of Bible which do not go against verses of the Quran. Some have been discarded to suit the desires of priests and clerics of Christianity. Those that contradicts the original teachings of Jesus are the ones written by men, one of them prolific writer "St." Paul whose writings contradicts so much of Jesus' teachings.
Reply

IceQueen~
06-29-2006, 10:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
So who wrote it then? (the first one)
are you asking who wrote the revelation sent to Jesus down on paper word-for-word? (without any addition or subtraction) that may be the true word of God but if someone wrote it with changes/additions/subtractions and other people's ideas and thoughts then NO, that is not the true original word of GOd.
Reply

lolwatever
06-29-2006, 10:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
So who wrote it then? (the first one)
I don't think we're told who wrote it, the important part is that Allah revealed it to Isa (Jesus) and that's the one we believe in completely...

However if Isa was with us today, he will follow the Quran because it is the latest reveleation of Allah, and not the bible. (Even though we all believe both where revelation sof Allah), infact when Isa returns, and he will be asked 'lead us' he will reply 'i have come as a follower and not a leader'.

salams
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 10:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Forgetting all about the mod's of the bible. Do you think then it was written buy his disciples at the time jesus was alive?
No it wasnt written while jesus was alive. Thats for sure, and i dont kno anything about how or when it was written. :peace:
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 10:46 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
No it wasnt written while jesus was alive. Thats for sure, and i dont kno anything about how or when it was written. :peace:
Yet muslims believe in the original bible, even though it was not written at the time of Jesus (unlike the quran and Mohammed)?
Reply

Muslim Knight
06-29-2006, 10:48 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Yet muslims believe in the original bible, even though it was not written at the time of Jesus (unlike Mohammed’s)?
We believe in the Injil that was revealed to Jesus and these were included in the Quran revealed to Prophet Muhammad salallahu 'alayhi wassalam. From the Quran we are able to discern which parts of the Bible belong to the original revelation to Jesus.
Reply

lolwatever
06-29-2006, 10:49 AM
Just because teh bible was written whenever it was, doesn't imply that there was no original bible that was revealed... even if it was in the form of words..
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 10:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by lolwatever
Just because teh bible was written whenever it was, doesn't imply that there was no original bible that was revealed... even if it was in the form of words..
I just cant understand, if the bible was revealed (i guess to jesus) and written after his death how can this be beleived (talking about the first ever bible) as the words of god if it was written by someone else other than the person it was revealed to (jesus).
Reply

lolwatever
06-29-2006, 10:57 AM
but we dont know of the specifics of how it was recorded, when and where etc..

perhaps it could hav been recorded the way hadiths where.. i dont know.. but we're not required to believe in any formo f the bible.. we're just asked to believe in whatever Allah revealed... the rest is irrelevent to us. alot of messages where very short lived, Isa was one of those.. taht's why he's coming back.. to finish it off (by preaching the Islam that Allah revealed to Muhammad)
Reply

Muslim Knight
06-29-2006, 10:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
I just cant understand, if the bible was revealed (i guess to jesus) and written after his death how can this be beleived (talking about the first ever bible) as the words of god if it was written by someone else other than the person it was revealed to (jesus).
You should probably ask this question to Christians rather than to Muslims. We'd stick to the Quran. Today's Bibles are not the our Guide-to-Life books.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 10:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Yet muslims believe in the original bible, even though it was not written at the time of Jesus (unlike the quran and Mohammed)?
like i sed, we believe a revelation was given to Jesus but it didnt have divine protection therefore it was tampered with.

The Quran was engraved in the hearts of many muslims, therefore it was preserved and remains in its original perfect condition.

:peace:
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 10:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
You should probably ask this question to Christians rather than to Muslims. We'd stick to the Quran. Today's Bibles are not the our Guide-to-Life books.
Exactly.
Reply

IceQueen~
06-29-2006, 11:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
I just cant understand, if the bible was revealed (i guess to jesus) and written after his death how can this be beleived (talking about the first ever bible) as the words of god if it was written by someone else other than the person it was revealed to (jesus).
it may contain some parts of the word of GOd remembered by those who were with Jesus. But then again it has been changed and revised so many times that you can't say it's excatly reliable anymore..
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 11:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by lolwatever
but we dont know of the specifics of how it was recorded, when and where etc..

perhaps it could hav been recorded the way hadiths where.. i dont know.. but we're not required to believe in any formo f the bible.. we're just asked to believe in whatever Allah revealed... the rest is irrelevent to us. alot of messages where very short lived, Isa was one of those.. taht's why he's coming back.. to finish it off (by preaching the Islam that Allah revealed to Muhammad)
Why do think God chose Jesus to come back and not any other messingers?
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 11:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Why do think God chose Jesus to come back and not any other messingers?

Becoz jesus never died yet :)
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 11:05 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
You should probably ask this question to Christians rather than to Muslims. We'd stick to the Quran. Today's Bibles are not the our Guide-to-Life books.
Why? Muslims beleave in the bible (the first one :rollseyes ) as much as christians beleave in the bible.
Reply

lolwatever
06-29-2006, 11:07 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Why? Muslims beleave in the bible (the first one :rollseyes ) as much as christians beleave in the bible.
lol yes we believe that the bible was revealed, but we don't believe that we take our commandments from it becasue we have the Quran... hwo it was recorded (or if it was recorded at all) is besides the point...
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 11:07 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
Becoz jesus never died yet :)
Did he not? Where is he now?
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 11:08 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Why? Muslims beleave in the bible (the first one :rollseyes ) as much as christians beleave in the bible.
there is a world of difference in the Injil we believe and the bible they believe. We ONLY 100% truelly believe in the Quran and Sahih Hadith! Nothing else do we put our complete faith and trust in.


You have your answer, we believe the Injil was given to Jesus but was changed over time.


:peace:
Reply

lolwatever
06-29-2006, 11:08 AM
Did he not? Where is he now?
Allah took him up to the heavens, and he'll return to live for 40 years and then die a normal death.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 11:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Did he not? Where is he now?
Allahu Allam! He is with God, waitin for dajjal to come (waiting for the anti-christ).


:peace:
Reply

Muslim Knight
06-29-2006, 11:09 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by j4763
Why? Muslims beleave in the bible (the first one :rollseyes ) as much as christians beleave in the bible.
Well, for starters, the Quran is more complete and it prescribes the whole complete Muslim way of life, second being the Sunnah of the Prophet. As I've said earlier, all the teachings of previous Prophets/Messengers (Jesus included) are contained in the Quran. We're reading the Injil the same time as we're reading the Quran, so why stick to Bible that is needing revision every now and then? Why, do we need to stick to second hand item?
Reply

j4763
06-29-2006, 11:14 AM
Ok, i think i get it, thanks :)
Reply

Umar001
06-29-2006, 01:37 PM
Sorry I just been away a while, interesting thread, am abit confused at some responses:

format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
we believe Allah has sent revelation to Jesus. But we believe it got tainted very quikly so we cant take anything of the bible nor reject anything from the bible.
and

format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
my guess is the disciples/companions of Jesus wrote it down and it got defiled/modified very quickly so we cant accept it or reject it, we stamp a "Maybe" with it. What agrees wiv the quran and sunnah, we accept, and reject everything else.
I think both views can be correct but they seem so confusing to read.

Then I read,

format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
Muslims believe in Injil i.e. words of revelation sent down to Nabi 'Isa 'alayhi salaam but they were never written down during his lifetime.
Just wondering is there any proof for that? I have never seen any before.

format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
No it wasnt written while jesus was alive. Thats for sure, and i dont kno anything about how or when it was written.
On what basis do you say this brother?

And

I was going to reply to some of the questions but J has said he gets it so, I hope that the brothers and sisters have been of benefit.

Forgive me yall for any mistakes,

Salam Aleykum
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 02:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by IsaAbdullah
On what basis do you say this brother?
Dr Zakir Naik had stated it with proof. i Apologise for not being able to provide said proof.
Reply

Umar001
06-29-2006, 02:10 PM
Akhi I think maybe Zakir Naik was refering to the Bible in our hands now, as in the Gospels and so forth, which were not written even in their original form in the presence of Jesus but rather quite a while later.

With regards to Jesus, the Bible says Jesus preached the Gospel.
Then Quran I think also says that Jesus was given the Gospel.

Whether it was written down, I dont know.

I am glad you werent angry with me.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
06-29-2006, 02:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by IsaAbdullah
I am glad you werent angry with me.
lol that part made me laugh, if you ask me questions i will not be angry InshaAllah!

i see bro , well my knowledge in this area is low, dont kno much about christianity at all really... lol shud watch more ahmed deedat :p

:salamext:
Reply

IceQueen~
06-29-2006, 02:25 PM
muslims believe that the basic message that GOd sent to mankind over and over generation after generation whenever it got distorted is the same:
absolute monotheism

all these messages just paved the way and prepared the world for the last and completed/perfected version of the message-the final message.
this is the quran which was revealed to the last prophet Muhammad (p).

since all the messages were basically the same ie-islam (which means submission to God) then all the prophets and their followers at the time were also muslims (ones who submit to GOd)
Reply

Umar001
06-29-2006, 06:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Abd'Majid
lol that part made me laugh, if you ask me questions i will not be angry InshaAllah!

i see bro , well my knowledge in this area is low, dont kno much about christianity at all really... lol shud watch more ahmed deedat :p

:salamext:

Well it is jus that sometimes I ask people for clarification or proof, and they seem to be a little offended, and that isnt my intention.

Thank you for your patience.
Reply

Woodrow
06-29-2006, 06:59 PM
Some how there was a confusion here as to what was the first Bible. The Injeel was not the first bible, prior to that was the Tauret (Torah) revealed to Moses. Prior to that there were the older scriptures revealed to prior Prophets such as Adam and Abraham (Peace be upon all of them)

An interesting claim by the Abrahamic religions, (Jew, Christian, Muslim, Sabia)
They all acknowldege the origianl source of the scriptures was the word of God(swt) Not one claims that God(swt) personaly wrote the words in a written form. It was always a dictation. Now, that may not seem so significant. But, wouldn't it be logical for a person trying to "invent" a religious belief to present some solid written documentation that they would claim to be the actual HANDWRITTEN word of God(swt) ? Would there not be a desire to produce that? Unless, the Word actually, was revealed verbaly to people. The method by which the Revealed Truths, defies the logic of a person trying to "invent" a religion. I doubt very much that a fraud would attempt to portray a happening as we believe. It would sound unbelievable from the start, unless it truly did happen in that manner.

The main difference with the Qur'an is the entire book was revealed to just one person and that person had and was able to oversee what would be written for future generations. Tools were put into place to prevent it from being changed by Human interpretation or translation.
Reply

Umar001
06-29-2006, 07:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Some how there was a confusion here as to what was the first Bible. The Injeel was not the first bible, prior to that was the Tauret (Torah) revealed to Moses. Prior to that there were the older scriptures revealed to prior Prophets such as Adam and Abraham (Peace be upon all of them)

An interesting claim by the Abrahamic religions, (Jew, Christian, Muslim, Sabia)
They all acknowldege the origianl source of the scriptures was the word of God(swt) Not one claims that God(swt) personaly wrote the words in a written form. It was always a dictation. Now, that may not seem so significant. But, wouldn't it be logical for a person trying to "invent" a religious belief to present some solid written documentation that they would claim to be the actual HANDWRITTEN word of God(swt) ? Would there not be a desire to produce that? Unless, the Word actually, was revealed verbaly to people. The method by which the Revealed Truths, defies the logic of a person trying to "invent" a religion. I doubt very much that a fraud would attempt to portray a happening as we believe. It would sound unbelievable from the start, unless it truly did happen in that manner.

The main difference with the Qur'an is the entire book was revealed to just one person and that person had and was able to oversee what would be written for future generations. Tools were put into place to prevent it from being changed by Human interpretation or translation.

Bare with me akhi,

I don't think Adam had a scripture, since Adam peace and blessings be upon him was only a Prophet. Abraham I think did since Surah Al Ala says in the last verses 'scriptures of old, scriptures of Ibrahim and Musa' something like that.
Reply

lolwatever
06-30-2006, 01:37 AM
^^ Ya i think you're right.
Reply

Muslim Knight
06-30-2006, 02:01 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by IsaAbdullah
Bare with me akhi,

I don't think Adam had a scripture, since Adam peace and blessings be upon him was only a Prophet. Abraham I think did since Surah Al Ala says in the last verses 'scriptures of old, scriptures of Ibrahim and Musa' something like that.
Maybe Adam 'alayhi salaam wasn't given a scripture, but he was sure given Signs from Allah to guide him and his family;

Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord Turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful. (Q 2:37)

We said: "Get ye down all from here; and if, as is sure, there comes to you Guidance from Me, whosoever follows My guidance, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. (Q 2:38)


About the previous post;

Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
Muslims believe in Injil i.e. words of revelation sent down to Nabi 'Isa 'alayhi salaam but they were never written down during his lifetime.
Just wondering is there any proof for that? I have never seen any before.
Sorry, I got that from Ahmed Deedat's books. But you can do me a favor by checking in the Bible and see whether there is any utterance of Jesus telling his disciples to write down the Gospel whenever he acquires it. My point of view is that the disciples wrote their own accounts after Jesus' Ascension to the Heavens. If they have written it down during Jesus' lifetime, the scripture would have said so. However, I'd be happy if you'd prove otherwise.


Reply

Joe98
06-30-2006, 06:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Not one claims that God(swt) personaly wrote the words in a written form. It was always a dictation.
It was never a dictation.

All the books of the bible were written by men. The books were written separately, spread out over many hundreds of years.

The first book was written many hundreds of years before Jesus.

No author has ever claimed that it was "revealed" to him in the way the Koran was revealed to the prophet (pbuh).

Rather, some of the authors claim they were "inspired" by god. But I don't believe this. I believe this claim was manufactured by priests and popes over the last 2,000 years.
Reply

Umar001
06-30-2006, 10:27 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
Maybe Adam 'alayhi salaam wasn't given a scripture, but he was sure given Signs from Allah to guide him and his family;

Then learnt Adam from his Lord words of inspiration, and his Lord Turned towards him; for He is Oft-Returning, Most Merciful. (Q 2:37)

We said: "Get ye down all from here; and if, as is sure, there comes to you Guidance from Me, whosoever follows My guidance, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. (Q 2:38)

I do agree. He sure was guided. peace be upon him.

format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
About the previous post;


Sorry, I got that from Ahmed Deedat's books. But you can do me a favor by checking in the Bible and see whether there is any utterance of Jesus telling his disciples to write down the Gospel whenever he acquires it. My point of view is that the disciples wrote their own accounts after Jesus' Ascension to the Heavens. If they have written it down during Jesus' lifetime, the scripture would have said so. However, I'd be happy if you'd prove otherwise.

Well the Bible we have now even in its original is not likely to be what Jesus peace be upon Truly preached.

But I was just wondering, because it seemed like you were certain thats all, I had never heard such a point made.

I personally don't have proof for either view points that was what interested me in your point.

If your looking at it from the Christian view point then your kinda right in the sense that you say "My point of view is that the disciples wrote their own accounts after Jesus' Ascension to the Heavens."

But the fact that you said Muslims believe was what made me think there was a statement in the Qu'ran or Sunnah to state such.
Reply

Woodrow
07-09-2006, 06:20 PM
A great difficulty in discussing the validity of the Bible is that it is impossible to prove a negative. No matter how much a person may believe something is not true, it is impossible to prove anything is wrong. We can state our reasons why we believe the Bible was wrong, and even show valid evidence. However, none of that is proof.

A person can and will say, "Yes, there have been many attempts at changing the Bible and some appear to have been done. However, God(swt) has prevailed and the word remains true."

It is because of the fact we can not prove anything is false, the burdan of proof is on the person to prove, what they believe, is true. We can not nor need to prove their statement is false. They need to prove it is true.

Those who believe the Bible is true, need to prove that. Those of us who believe the Qur'an is tru need to prove that. It is up to the seeker to judge which offeres the verifiable facts.

Any arguement trying to prove either one is false, is a futile arguement. The arguement needs to be concentrated on offering proof a claim is true.

My rant for the day. The schools no longer teach the basics of logic for debating any claims. My pet peeve, anyone who attempts to prove something is false.
Reply

Phil12123
07-11-2006, 04:28 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
A great difficulty in discussing the validity of the Bible is that it is impossible to prove a negative. No matter how much a person may believe something is not true, it is impossible to prove anything is wrong. We can state our reasons why we believe the Bible was wrong, and even show valid evidence. However, none of that is proof.

A person can and will say, "Yes, there have been many attempts at changing the Bible and some appear to have been done. However, God(swt) has prevailed and the word remains true."

It is because of the fact we can not prove anything is false, the burden of proof is on the person to prove, what they believe, is true. We can not nor need to prove their statement is false. They need to prove it is true.

Those who believe the Bible is true, need to prove that. Those of us who believe the Qur'an is true need to prove that. It is up to the seeker to judge which offers the verifiable facts.

Any argument trying to prove either one is false, is a futile argument. The argument needs to be concentrated on offering proof a claim is true.
Interesting. Let's take a specific teaching from each and see how your statements work.

Bible: "Christ died for our sins."

Quran: Christ did not die, but God took him to heaven and someone else died in his place.

If I can show from non-biblical, historical sources that Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, would that not be evidence of the truth of the biblical account and also evidence of the falsity of what the Quran says to the contrary? If I prove the Bible's teaching to be true, does that not also prove the Quran is false?

How could you possibly prove, or even offer evidence of, the statement that someone else died instead of Jesus? That might be a belief, but not something you can verify historically from non-quranic sources. You won't find that backed up by Josephus or any known historians. There is not one scrap of evidence in the first five centuries of history, A.D. or C.E., that someone else died in Jesus' place. Not until the Quran comes along hundreds of years later does anyone even suggest such an idea. In fact, the many, many volumes written by ALL the early church fathers as well as historians like Josephus, all testify to His death on the Cross. You might see a few debating WHO Jesus was (God or just man, etc.), but you NEVER see anyone saying He did not die on the Cross.

Peace
Reply

Woodrow
07-11-2006, 05:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
Interesting. Let's take a specific teaching from each and see how your statements work.

Bible: "Christ died for our sins."

Quran: Christ did not die, but God took him to heaven and someone else died in his place.

If I can show from non-biblical, historical sources that Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, would that not be evidence of the truth of the biblical account and also evidence of the falsity of what the Quran says to the contrary? If I prove the Bible's teaching to be true, does that not also prove the Quran is false?

How could you possibly prove, or even offer evidence of, the statement that someone else died instead of Jesus? That might be a belief, but not something you can verify historically from non-quranic sources. You won't find that backed up by Josephus or any known historians. There is not one scrap of evidence in the first five centuries of history, A.D. or C.E., that someone else died in Jesus' place. Not until the Quran comes along hundreds of years later does anyone even suggest such an idea. In fact, the many, many volumes written by ALL the early church fathers as well as historians like Josephus, all testify to His death on the Cross. You might see a few debating WHO Jesus was (God or just man, etc.), but you NEVER see anyone saying He did not die on the Cross.

Peace
One step at a time.

To keep with the topic of the thread. We will begin simply with you offering verification as to why you believe the Bible of today is the Word of God(swt)
Reply

muslim_friend
07-11-2006, 05:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
How could you possibly prove, or even offer evidence of, the statement that someone else died instead of Jesus? That might be a belief, but not something you can verify historically from non-quranic sources. You won't find that backed up by Josephus or any known historians. There is not one scrap of evidence in the first five centuries of history, A.D. or C.E., that someone else died in Jesus' place. Not until the Quran comes along hundreds of years later does anyone even suggest such an idea.
The Qur'an tells us that jesus(as) did not die on the cross, "but it was made to appear so" .. The ones who wanted Jesus(as) dead were deceived into believing he had really died, but the truth is that he did not die at all.

I suppose these historical accounts that you mention of, were written by these people who were deceived.. so we as muslims cannot take that as evidence as we know it is faulty. Seeing is always believing.. but this was a miracle of Allah swt. And if you find this hard to believe, you might as well reject the many miracles performed by Jesus(a.s) on similiar grounds.
Reply

Joe98
07-11-2006, 06:24 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by muslim_friend
The Qur'an tells us that jesus(as) did not die on the cross, "but it was made to appear so"
That was very convenient, wasn't it!
Reply

Joe98
07-11-2006, 06:28 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
why you believe the Bible of today is the Word of God(swt)
Phil12123 never said any such thing.

Every Christian knows the bible was written by men. By men who witnessed the events. And then wrote it down. After they saw it.

A bit like journalists who were on the spot.

Nobody witnessed the prophet (pbuh) talking to God.
Reply

Woodrow
07-11-2006, 08:29 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
Phil12123 never said any such thing.

Every Christian knows the bible was written by men. By men who witnessed the events. And then wrote it down. After they saw it.

A bit like journalists who were on the spot.

Nobody witnessed the prophet (pbuh) talking to God.
Quite true Joe, in reading back Phil never did say the Bible was the word of God(swt). So, in light of that Phil, let me rephrase what I said and just ask you to go with your actual statement.

If I can show from non-biblical, historical sources that Jesus of Nazareth died on a Roman cross, would that not be evidence of the truth of the biblical account and also evidence of the falsity of what the Quran says to the contrary? If I prove the Bible's teaching to be true, does that not also prove the Quran is false?
I would be interested in seeing what sources you have to show that I'sa(a.s.) did die on a Roman Cross. However, that would not falsify the Qur'an. We believe, it was made to appear that he did die on the cross. Therefore we would expect all physical evidence to show that he did die on a Roman Cross.

Any proof of the Bible being true, is just that; proof of the bible being true. It does not prove the Qur'an to be false.

An example, 2 men see the same car. One man says the car is green the other man says the car is red. The man who says the car is green, produces 16,000 eyewitnesses and 2,500 video's of the car all showing the car as green. That proves the man saw a green car, but it does not disprove that the car was red at the moment the other man saw it. Perhaps from some unknown atmosmpheric condition the wave lengths of the colors changed from where each man saw them. Possibly the car is actually yellow? Just the conditions at that moment altered what was seen at that moment.
Reply

Umar001
07-11-2006, 10:48 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
Phil12123 never said any such thing.

Every Christian knows the bible was written by men. By men who witnessed the events. And then wrote it down. After they saw it.

A bit like journalists who were on the spot.

Nobody witnessed the prophet (pbuh) talking to God.

But it seems that he does believe it is the word of G-d:

Someone once said, whenever you see God asking a question in His Word
that was http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...-answer-5.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/379957-post62.html

And:

Personally, I believe there are no contradictions whatsoever in the original autographs. It is Satan-inspired to claim contradictions in God's Word.
http://www.islamicboard.com/394531-post189.html

Anyhow, it think it will be better if our friend clarifies his position himself.

Woodrow
Just out of curiosity I still dont get this, wont be able to prove something wrong.

If someone says something is G-ds word, yet that something has a mistake in it then its proof that it isnt G-ds word right?
Reply

Joe98
07-11-2006, 12:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Any proof of the Bible being true, is just that; proof of the bible being true. It does not prove the Qur'an to be false.

Every post you make is designed with that intention.

This forum is named "comparitave religion" and your posts never live up to that name. Not one post.

Ultimately Muslims NEED to prove their faith is the true faith because if they cannot prove it then maybe it is not the true faith.

Christians have no need to prove their faith is the true faith because truth does not need to be proved.

Lucky for me there is no god so I win ;D
Reply

Joe98
07-11-2006, 01:01 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by IsaAbdullah

the word of G-d:

something is G-ds word,

it isnt G-ds word right?

What is a "G-d" ?
Reply

Ameeratul Layl
07-11-2006, 01:10 PM
You said the 'original' Bible. Then,yes, it is the word of God.
Reply

Woodrow
07-11-2006, 02:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by IsaAbdullah
But it seems that he does believe it is the word of G-d:



that was http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...-answer-5.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/379957-post62.html

And:



http://www.islamicboard.com/394531-post189.html

Anyhow, it think it will be better if our friend clarifies his position himself.

Woodrow
Just out of curiosity I still dont get this, wont be able to prove something wrong.

If someone says something is G-ds word, yet that something has a mistake in it then its proof that it isnt G-ds word right?
Woodrow
Just out of curiosity I still dont get this, wont be able to prove something wrong.
This is one reason religious arguements eventualy run into a never ending circle. Most people can not seem to grasp the concept that a false statement can not be proven false. The fact that a person can not present proof of a statement is true, can mean that the person lacks to ability to prove it is true. That is not proof that it is false. For this reason, the burdan of proof is for the person making a statement, to present proof that it is true.

No matter how far fetched a statement is, even a deliberate lie. No human can prove it is false. Somebody could say that you have a purple elephant in your refrigerator. It would be up to the person making that statement that you have one. You can not offer absolute proof you do not have a purple elephant in your refrigerator. The fact that nobody has seen it is not proof. That can simply mean the Elephant is crafty enough to escape detection.



If someone says something is G-ds word, yet that something has a mistake in it then its proof that it isnt G-ds word right?
This is the same problem. An attempt to prove a negative. We can not prove anything is a mistake. The burdan would be up to the person making the statement to prove he is right. If the person can not prove it is right, that still is not proof it is false. It just means the person can not prove it is true.

If a person can prove that an opposing statement is true, that would be strong evidence that the statement is false, but it still is not proof. That is the biggest difference between a falsehood and the truth. A person presenting a falsehood can not prove it is true
Reply

Woodrow
07-11-2006, 02:28 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
Every post you make is designed with that intention.

This forum is named "comparitave religion" and your posts never live up to that name. Not one post.

Ultimately Muslims NEED to prove their faith is the true faith because if they cannot prove it then maybe it is not the true faith.

Christians have no need to prove their faith is the true faith because truth does not need to be proved.

Lucky for me there is no god so I win ;D
Every post you make is designed with that intention.

This forum is named "comparitave religion" and your posts never live up to that name. Not one post.
Comparative religion is the comparision of different religious beliefs. The way you compare them is let Person A, state what his religion professes and for person B, to state what his religion professes. To view the differences in the statements is the comparision. A glance of both statements is a reasonably fair method for everybody to see in what areas they agree and in what areas they disagree.
Reply

Joe98
07-11-2006, 10:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Person A, state what his religion professes and for Person B, to state what his religion professes.

But you do not take that approach.

Your approach is to state what you believe and then tell Person B what he believes. ie that the bible is the word of g-d
Reply

Joe98
07-11-2006, 10:54 PM
What is the difference between G-d and Al--h?
Reply

Woodrow
07-12-2006, 02:36 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
What is the difference between G-d and Al--h?
There should not be. But apparantly some people think so. Although many of us Muslims believe we should spell out all of Allah(swt) rather then leave out some letters.
Reply

Phil12123
07-12-2006, 04:39 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by muslim_friend
The Qur'an tells us that jesus(as) did not die on the cross, "but it was made to appear so" .. The ones who wanted Jesus(as) dead were deceived into believing he had really died, but the truth is that he did not die at all.
Who are you talking about---"the ones who wanted Jesus dead were deceived into believing he had really died"? Who "wanted Jesus dead"? Not His disciples. The Pharisees and the other Jewish religious leaders "wanted Jesus dead." So THEY were "deceived into believing he had really died"?? So is THAT why they requested that guards stand watch over the tomb to make sure His disciples didn't steal His body and claim He rose from the grave?

Jesus' disciples did NOT want Him dead, but they all believed He was crucified. His dead body was taken down from the cross and laid in a tomb:

Mark's account:
Mark 15:
37. And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last.
38. Then the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.
39. Now when the centurion, who stood opposite Him, saw that He cried out like this and breathed His last, he said, "Truly this Man was the Son of God!''
43. Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent council member, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, coming and taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
44. Pilate marveled that He was already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him if He had been dead for some time.
45. And when he found out from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph.
46. Then he bought fine linen, took Him down, and wrapped Him in the linen. And he laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock, and rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.

John's account:
John 19:
32. Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him.
33. But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs.
34. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.
35. And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe.
36. For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, "Not one of His bones shall be broken.''
37. And again another Scripture says, "They shall look on Him whom they pierced.''
38. After this, Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly, for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate gave him permission. So he came and took the body of Jesus.
39. And Nicodemus, who at first came to Jesus by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds.
40. Then they took the body of Jesus, and bound it in strips of linen with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury.
41. Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid.
42. So there they laid Jesus, because of the Jews' Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby.

They took the dead body of Jesus, not someone else. They handled His dead body. They wrapped His dead body. They laid Jesus' dead body in a tomb. What do these verses mean, if not what they say?!?

Plus, He had told them several times BEFORE He was crucified that He WOULD be crucified. Did He lie to them?

Mark 9:31 (NASB)-- For He was teaching His disciples and telling them, "The Son of Man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill Him; and when He has been killed, He will rise three days later."

Furthermore, His death was fulfillment of prophecy, specifically, Isaiah 53:
5. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.
6. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not his mouth.
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9. And they made His grave with the wicked but with the rich at His death, because He had done no violence, nor was any deceit in His mouth.

That prophecy of Isaiah come as Isaiah was "moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21), and the Holy Spirit moved him to say or write of Christ's death, not some supposed rescue by God so someone else would die instead!!

After Jesus' death, it was His resurrection that His own disciples initially refused to believe. Not His death, but His resurrection. His death was a given. His resurrection had to be proved before they would believe.

Mark 16:
11. And when they heard that He was alive and had been seen by her, they did not believe.
12. After that, He appeared in another form to two of them as they walked and went into the country.
13. And they went and told it to the rest, but they did not believe them either.
14. Afterward He appeared to the eleven as they sat at the table; and He rebuked their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they did not believe those who had seen Him after He had risen.

And don't forget "doubting Thomas" who refused to believe He had risen:

John 20:
24. But Thomas, called Didymus, one of the twelve, was not with them when Jesus came.
25. The other disciples therefore said to him, "We have seen the Lord.'' But he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe.''
26. And after eight days His disciples were again inside, and Thomas with them. Jesus came, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, "Peace to you!''
27. Then He said to Thomas, "Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing.''
28. And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!''


I suppose these historical accounts that you mention of, were written by these people who were deceived.. so we as muslims cannot take that as evidence as we know it is faulty. Seeing is always believing.. but this was a miracle of Allah swt. And if you find this hard to believe, you might as well reject the many miracles performed by Jesus(a.s) on similiar grounds.
Please tell me --- what was the purpose of this supposed "miracle of Allah"?? To deceive people into thinking one thing when something else actually happened? And for what purpose? Why did Allah not want Jesus to pay for our sins? So we could pay for them ourselves for all eternity in the lake of fire?

No, it is obvious to me that the writer of the Quran was wrong, wrong, wrong. The whole account as given in the Quran makes no sense, has no reason, is totally inconsistent with everything else said in verse after verse in both Old Testament and New Testament. It is so out of place as to be obviously erroneous. In fact it creates a contradiction with every other statement, dozens and dozens, to the contrary.

But the saddest part of it all, is that your eternity hinges on this most crucial fact of history, that Jesus died for our sins. If He didn't, you have to pay for them. If He did, and you reject that, you'll have to pay for them. It is not the disciples and historians that were deceived. It is YOU if you believe He didn't die for YOUR sins.

Peace
Reply

Muslim Soldier
07-12-2006, 04:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
What is the difference between G-d and Al--h?
G-d can be made to G-ds and G-dess Allah cant
Reply

muslim_friend
07-12-2006, 05:01 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
Who are you talking about---"the ones who wanted Jesus dead were deceived into believing he had really died"? Who "wanted Jesus dead"? Not His disciples. The Pharisees and the other Jewish religious leaders "wanted Jesus dead." So THEY were "deceived into believing he had really died"?? So is THAT why they requested that guards stand watch over the tomb to make sure His disciples didn't steal His body and claim He rose from the grave?
Firstly i got a bit confused. i do know that it was the disciples who recorded the gospels. but the Bible cannot be trusted, because it has been altered. There was a gosple and it was the 'injeel' containing Allah's true message.

Jesus' disciples did NOT want Him dead, but they all believed He was crucified. His dead body was taken down from the cross and laid in a tomb:

Mark's account:
Mark 15:
37. And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last.
38. Then the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.
39. Now when the centurion, who stood opposite Him, saw that He cried out like this and breathed His last, he said, "Truly this Man was the Son of God!''
43. Joseph of Arimathea, a prominent council member, who was himself waiting for the kingdom of God, coming and taking courage, went in to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
44. Pilate marveled that He was already dead; and summoning the centurion, he asked him if He had been dead for some time.
45. And when he found out from the centurion, he granted the body to Joseph.
46. Then he bought fine linen, took Him down, and wrapped Him in the linen. And he laid Him in a tomb which had been hewn out of the rock, and rolled a stone against the door of the tomb.

John's account:
John 19:
32. Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him.
33. But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs.
34. But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out.
35. And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe.
36. For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, "Not one of His bones shall be broken.''
37. And again another Scripture says, "They shall look on Him whom they pierced.''
38. After this, Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly, for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate gave him permission. So he came and took the body of Jesus.
39. And Nicodemus, who at first came to Jesus by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds.
40. Then they took the body of Jesus, and bound it in strips of linen with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury.
41. Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid.
42. So there they laid Jesus, because of the Jews' Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby.
All i can say is that, if a single word in the Bible has been altered, then there is the possibility that paragraphs or even chapters have been fabricated.

Furthermore, His death was fulfillment of prophecy, specifically, Isaiah 53:
5. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.
6. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not his mouth.
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9. And they made His grave with the wicked but with the rich at His death, because He had done no violence, nor was any deceit in His mouth.

That prophecy of Isaiah come as Isaiah was "moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:21), and the Holy Spirit moved him to say or write of Christ's death, not some supposed rescue by God so someone else would die instead!!
I suppose those verses in OT were also fabricated by the Christians later to suit their idea of a saviour.

Please tell me --- what was the purpose of this supposed "miracle of Allah"?? To deceive people into thinking one thing when something else actually happened? And for what purpose? Why did Allah not want Jesus to pay for our sins? So we could pay for them ourselves for all eternity in the lake of fire?
Allah deceived these enemies of jesus(as), so that His Prophet could be saved from death. The disciples however were good followers of Jesus(as) and stuck to pure monotheism(without ascribing partners with Allah).. it looks like the real history of christianity starts with paul.

No, it is obvious to me that the writer of the Quran was wrong, wrong, wrong. The whole account as given in the Quran makes no sense, has no reason, is totally inconsistent with everything else said in verse after verse in both Old Testament and New Testament. It so out of place as to be obviously erroneous. In fact it creates a contradiction with every other statement, dozens and dozens, to the contrary.
If it creates contradictions with OT and NT, it doesn't mean that the Qu'ran is at fault or error. That's not logical.

But the saddest part of it all, is that your eternity hinges on this most crucial fact of history, that Jesus died for our sins. If He didn't, you have to pay for them. If He did, and you reject that, you'll have to pay for them. It is not the disciples and historians that were deceived. It is YOU if you believe He didn't die for YOUR sins.
Why would God want his only son dead for the sake of sinners?

To me, It's like a father throwing his son in jail, for the release of a criminal.

I see an angry tone in you, so relax and no offence intended in my post. I agree with Woodrow's post. we must discuss the authenticity of the bible, if we are to get somewhere, or else we shall all go in circles.
Reply

Muslim Soldier
07-12-2006, 05:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
But the saddest part of it all, is that your eternity hinges on this most crucial fact of history, that Jesus died for our sins. If He didn't, you have to pay for them. If He did, and you reject that, you'll have to pay for them. It is not the disciples and historians that were deceived. It is YOU if you believe He didn't die for YOUR sins. Peace
I thought God was just. If Jesus died for 'our sins' then God injustly punished him. And about Jesus' "death" from what I know (I may be wrong), Judas was made to look like Jesus and it was he who was crucified.
Reply

Phil12123
07-12-2006, 05:04 AM
By the way, my previous post would seem to be off-topic but I felt I had to follow up the post I was responding to. Perhaps someone should start a new thread, such as, Did Jesus die on the Cross? and move the posts that relate to that over to that new thread. Just a thought.

Peace
Reply

Phil12123
07-12-2006, 05:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Soldier
I thought God was just. If Jesus died for 'our sins' then God injustly punished him.
God is just. That means He must punish the guilty. But He is also love, and He is merciful. His being just would mean we (who are all sinners) must be punished for our sins. His mercy cannot simply overlook our sins. Our sins must be punished. But God in His great love for us, "laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isaiah 53:6). So HE was punished for OUR sins. 2 Cor. 5:21 says, "For He [God] made Him who knew no sin [Christ] to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 1 Peter 2:24 says, "[Christ] Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness..."

Now, at first glance, that would seem unjust of God to lay on Christ all OUR sins, when Christ was Himself sinless. But it was Christ Who voluntarily took on the role of our sin-bearer, knowing it was the only way any of us would ever be able to escape the punishment due us for our sins.

He said, "...I lay down My life for the sheep. Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.'' (John 10:15, 17-18). He also said, "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.'' (Mark 10:45)

We sinners don't want the justice of God---that would put US in hell forever. We want His love, mercy, and forgiveness. But that mercy and forgiveness is all based on payment for our sins having been made by Christ. Without His payment, we have no way around God's justice which spells our eternal doom because it requires punishment for our sins.

And about Jesus' "death" from what I know (I may be wrong), Judas was made to look like Jesus and it was he who was crucified.
No, Judas wasn't crucified; he hanged himself after realizing he had betrayed innocent blood:

Matthew 27:
1. When morning came, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put Him to death.
2. And when they had bound Him, they led Him away and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate the governor.
3. Then Judas, His betrayer, seeing that He had been condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,
4. saying, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.'' And they said, "What is that to us? You see to it!''
5. Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself.

Peace
Reply

Muslim Soldier
07-12-2006, 10:29 AM
No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.
Is it a command or optional?


And only the bible tells of Judas' suicide after Jesus' death. Do you have any other evidence for his sucicidal death?
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 12:55 AM
bismillah

Firstly, the Bible was not revealed as it is. The Bible (biblia) is just a simple word for "books". That serves to present the collection of books from Genesis-Revelation as "the Bible."

Firstly, we must remember that the original language of the Bible, Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek (Koine).

Secondly, let us call it what it is: the injil (gospel) was revealed to Jesus (as) "orally". His followers were not his scribes as the followers of Muhammad (saw).

Thirdly, the early Christian community relied heavily on books, however, amny were illiterate and from the poor. Many copiers were not adept in writing either. A book could be considered to be read by someone, if it was read to them by someone else.

Fourthly, most of the message that Jesus (as) brought was lost and indiscernable from the rest of the words that were intermingled within it.

I will end it here.
Reply

Joe98
07-15-2006, 01:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
Secondly, let us call it what it is: the gospel was revealed to Jesus "orally".
"The" gospel is the wrong word to begin with. There are 4 gospels, they were written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John.

God did not reveal anything to Jesus.


format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
...the message that Jesus (as) brought was lost....

He didn't bring any message from God. Jesus "message" is to be nice to people.


















His followers were not his scribes as the followers of Muhammad (saw).

Thirdly, the early Christian community relied heavily on books, however, amny were illiterate and from the poor. Many copiers were not adept in writing either. A book could be considered to be read by someone, if it was read to them by someone else.

Fourthly, most of the message that Jesus (as) brought was lost and indiscernable from the rest of the words that were intermingled within it.

I will end it here.[/QUOTE]
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 01:53 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Soldier
I thought God was just. If Jesus died for 'our sins' then God injustly punished him. And about Jesus' "death" from what I know (I may be wrong), Judas was made to look like Jesus and it was he who was crucified.

bismillah

Assalamu alaikum'

The theory of Judas being crucified is speculation. It is in the gospel of barnabas, however, the evidence for the Muslims is plain and simple: "they did not kill, nor crucify him, but it was made apparent to them."

Allaah (swt) tells us just what we need to know. We do not need to know who it was. Allah (swt) says, the time will come where He will inform of of that wherein we differed.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 01:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
By the way, my previous post would seem to be off-topic but I felt I had to follow up the post I was responding to. Perhaps someone should start a new thread, such as, Did Jesus die on the Cross? and move the posts that relate to that over to that new thread. Just a thought.

Peace
bismillah

Greetings,

I am sure that topic has been discussed before. However, of of what evidence would you speculate? The Qur'an says, "no he was not killed nor crucified." Your NT is interpreted to say that he was. Why debate from your own book? That is futile and a waste...
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 02:06 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
"The" gospel is the wrong word to begin with. There are 4 gospels, they were written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John.

God did not reveal anything to Jesus.





He didn't bring any message from God. Jesus "message" is to be nice to people.

His followers were not his scribes as the followers of Muhammad (saw).

Thirdly, the early Christian community relied heavily on books, however, amny were illiterate and from the poor. Many copiers were not adept in writing either. A book could be considered to be read by someone, if it was read to them by someone else.

Fourthly, most of the message that Jesus (as) brought was lost and indiscernable from the rest of the words that were intermingled within it.

I will end it here.
[/QUOTE]

bismillah

Greetings,

Where do you derive this information? There are uncertainties to whether those disciples actually composed the four books. All for differ in certain contents, however, they all were supposed to be 'witnesses' to the events.


Did Jesus (as) not seeking his will, but the ONE who sent him? Did Jesus (as) speak of the afterlife and the kingdom of God? Did Jesus (as) know this by himself, no! It was bestowed on him by God. And this is from the Bible. In the Qur'an it says more.

If gospel is the wrong word, what is the right one?
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 02:20 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
God is just. That means He must punish the guilty. But He is also love, and He is merciful. His being just would mean we (who are all sinners) must be punished for our sins. His mercy cannot simply overlook our sins. Our sins must be punished. But God in His great love for us, "laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isaiah 53:6). So HE was punished for OUR sins. 2 Cor. 5:21 says, "For He [God] made Him who knew no sin [Christ] to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 1 Peter 2:24 says, "[Christ] Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness..."

Now, at first glance, that would seem unjust of God to lay on Christ all OUR sins, when Christ was Himself sinless. But it was Christ Who voluntarily took on the role of our sin-bearer, knowing it was the only way any of us would ever be able to escape the punishment due us for our sins.

He said, "...I lay down My life for the sheep. Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.'' (John 10:15, 17-18). He also said, "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.'' (Mark 10:45)

We sinners don't want the justice of God---that would put US in hell forever. We want His love, mercy, and forgiveness. But that mercy and forgiveness is all based on payment for our sins having been made by Christ. Without His payment, we have no way around God's justice which spells our eternal doom because it requires punishment for our sins.



No, Judas wasn't crucified; he hanged himself after realizing he had betrayed innocent blood:

Matthew 27:
1. When morning came, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put Him to death.
2. And when they had bound Him, they led Him away and delivered Him to Pontius Pilate the governor.
3. Then Judas, His betrayer, seeing that He had been condemned, was remorseful and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,
4. saying, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood.'' And they said, "What is that to us? You see to it!''
5. Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself.

Peace

Greetings,

bismillah

Ezek. 18:20 "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

Ezek.33:20, "Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways."

Job 1:8 "...my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" (Job 2:3)

There is no need to believe in such an atonement, solely because it is not only unjust and illogical, but is not consistent with the Torah.

Judaism teaches the biblical way to repentance and reconciliation with God. Sincere repentance in which the sinner pledges to rectify his sinful ways and lead a righteous life is one means that is open at all times to all of humanity (Jonah 3:5-10, Daniel 4:27). God counsels Cain, "Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? If you do good [that is, change your ways], will it not be lifted up [that is, you will be forgiven]. But if you do not do good, sin rests at the door; and it desires you, but you may rule over it" (Genesis 4:6-7). God informs Cain that repentance and forgiveness are always open to him. The remedy for sin is clear. Biblically, God's loving-kindness depends on right conduct
According to the Christian doctrine of original sin, until Jesus, atonement for sins could only be received through a blood atonement offering at the altar of the Jerusalem Temple. Those (Jews and all Gentiles) who could not avail themselves of the atonement granted at the Jerusalem Temple's altar died by this sin, consigned to eternal punishment with no means of achieving atonement and heavenly blessings. Following Jesus' death, it is claimed, neither Jew nor Gentile could receive forgiveness of their sins without belief in him as savior from sin. Indeed, if what Christianity says is true billions of people since then have also suffered the same fate, unaware of Jesus as their "savior" or that there was even a need to be "saved." According to this rationalization, God created humankind with free will and the ability to sin then demanded superlative perfection from this imperfect being that He created. Then God took on the guise of humanity in the form of Jesus in order to rescue His imperfect creation. But, in the process consigned billions of lost souls before and after the advent of Jesus to eternal punishment for not knowing of Jesus and accepting the "grace" he allegedly provided. Billions of people, Christian doctrine teaches, have gone to eternal damnation for not accepting what they did not know about!
.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 02:26 AM
bismillah

By hanging (Matthew 27:3-8) - "Then when Judas, who had betrayed Him, saw that He had been condemned, he felt remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, 4saying, "I have sinned by betraying innocent blood." But they said, "What is that to us? See to that yourself!" 5And he threw the pieces of silver into the sanctuary and departed; and he went away and hanged himself. 6And the chief priests took the pieces of silver and said, "It is not lawful to put them into the temple treasury, since it is the price of blood." 7And they counseled together and with the money bought the Potter’s Field as a burial place for strangers. 8For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day."


By falling (Acts 1:16-19) - "Brethren, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit foretold by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. 17"For he was counted among us, and received his portion in this ministry." 18(Now this man acquired a field with the price of his wickedness; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. 19And it became known to all who were living in Jerusalem; so that in their own language that field was called Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)"

There is indeed a contradiction. It cannot be explained away that he was hung and he fell headlong and his bowels spilled out. It does refer to the hanging. There is something missing and it appears as if speculation played a part in determining that he was hung and fell down upon the ground.
Reply

Joe98
07-15-2006, 02:48 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
There is indeed a contradiction.
No, instead there is a decision by Muslims to pretend not to understand.

The story is Judas commited suicide after he betrayed Jesus.

How did he commit suicide? Nobody cares except Muslims trying to discredit the story.
Reply

Zionazi_Dissent
07-15-2006, 02:56 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe89
No, instead there is a decision by Muslims to pretend not to understand.

The story is Judas commited suicide after he betrayed Jesus.

How did he commit suicide? Nobody cares except Muslims trying to discredit the story.
Nice try, but no atheist is capable of speaking for Muslims. You statements are baseless and unfortunately, disciminatory.

Pretend? LMAO! I fail to see how you can possible support your arguments.

Its a fact that Bible was initially the word of God, to be lated distorted by corrupted individuals. Go read books of scholars like Bart D. Ehrman and James D. Tabor. Apparently you need the education.
Reply

Phil12123
07-15-2006, 04:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
I am sure that topic [Did Jesus die on the Cross?] has been discussed before. However, of of what evidence would you speculate? The Qur'an says, "no he was not killed nor crucified." Your NT is interpreted to say that he was. Why debate from your own book? That is futile and a waste...
Why debate from the Qur'an? It is only the Qur'an that denies that historical fact. No other source would agree with your book.

The New Testament teaching that Jesus died on the cross is not a matter of interpretation. It is a matter of fact, historical fact. It is so stated, clearly and unambiguously, in countless verses over and over again, as well as in various non-biblical books and sources.

I'm not limited in the debate to ONE book. You are.

Peace
Reply

Muslim Soldier
07-15-2006, 05:29 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
bismillah

Assalamu alaikum'

The theory of Judas being crucified is speculation. It is in the gospel of barnabas, however, the evidence for the Muslims is plain and simple: "they did not kill, nor crucify him, but it was made apparent to them."
I wonder why the theory presented in the gospel of barnabas not accepted. Is it because it does not support the orignal sin?
Reply

Phil12123
07-15-2006, 06:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
l
God is just. That means He must punish the guilty. But He is also love, and He is merciful. His being just would mean we (who are all sinners) must be punished for our sins. His mercy cannot simply overlook our sins. Our sins must be punished. But God in His great love for us, "laid on Him the iniquity of us all" (Isaiah 53:6). So HE was punished for OUR sins. 2 Cor. 5:21 says, "For He [God] made Him who knew no sin [Christ] to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. 1 Peter 2:24 says, "[Christ] Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness..."

Now, at first glance, that would seem unjust of God to lay on Christ all OUR sins, when Christ was Himself sinless. But it was Christ Who voluntarily took on the role of our sin-bearer, knowing it was the only way any of us would ever be able to escape the punishment due us for our sins.

He said, "...I lay down My life for the sheep. Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.'' (John 10:15, 17-18). He also said, "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.'' (Mark 10:45)

format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
Ezek. 18:20 "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

Ezek.33:20, "Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. O ye house of Israel, I will judge you every one after his ways."

Job 1:8 "...my servant Job, that there is none like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth evil?" (Job 2:3)

There is no need to believe in such an atonement, solely because it is not only unjust and illogical, but is not consistent with the Torah.

Judaism teaches the biblical way to repentance and reconciliation with God. Sincere repentance in which the sinner pledges to rectify his sinful ways and lead a righteous life is one means that is open at all times to all of humanity (Jonah 3:5-10, Daniel 4:27). God counsels Cain, "Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? If you do good [that is, change your ways], will it not be lifted up [that is, you will be forgiven]. But if you do not do good, sin rests at the door; and it desires you, but you may rule over it" (Genesis 4:6-7). God informs Cain that repentance and forgiveness are always open to him. The remedy for sin is clear. Biblically, God's loving-kindness depends on right conduct.
According to the Christian doctrine of original sin, until Jesus, atonement for sins could only be received through a blood atonement offering at the altar of the Jerusalem Temple. Those (Jews and all Gentiles) who could not avail themselves of the atonement granted at the Jerusalem Temple's altar died by this sin, consigned to eternal punishment with no means of achieving atonement and heavenly blessings. Following Jesus' death, it is claimed, neither Jew nor Gentile could receive forgiveness of their sins without belief in him as savior from sin. Indeed, if what Christianity says is true billions of people since then have also suffered the same fate, unaware of Jesus as their "savior" or that there was even a need to be "saved." According to this rationalization, God created humankind with free will and the ability to sin then demanded superlative perfection from this imperfect being that He created. Then God took on the guise of humanity in the form of Jesus in order to rescue His imperfect creation. But, in the process consigned billions of lost souls before and after the advent of Jesus to eternal punishment for not knowing of Jesus and accepting the "grace" he allegedly provided. Billions of people, Christian doctrine teaches, have gone to eternal damnation for not accepting what they did not know about!
Judaism teaches the Old Covenant and Christianity teaches the New Covenant. Under the Old Covenant forgiveness was based on blood sacrifices.

Leviticus 17:11. `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.'

The writer of Hebrews, in discussing and contrasting the Old and New covenants, says in 9:22:

22. And according to the law almost all things are purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission[forgiveness].

The Old Covenant (or Old Testament or O.T.) with all its animal sacrifices prefigured the ultimate sacrifice that Jesus, "the Lamb of God," made at Calvary, never to be repeated. Destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. did not destroy the law that required such sacrifices for forgiveness.

You mentioned Job. Notice Job 1:4-5:

4. Now his sons would go and feast in their houses, each on his appointed day, and would send and invite their three sisters to eat and drink with them.
5. So it was, when the days of feasting had run their course, that Job would send and sanctify them, and he would rise early in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to the number of them all. For Job said, "It may be that my sons have sinned and cursed God in their hearts.'' Thus Job did regularly.

Under Judaism, sin always required some payment, either in the form of a sacrificed animal, where the sin is symbolically transferred to the animal who dies, or punishment of the sinner himself. Today, not having a temple in which to sacrifice animals does not nullify or cancel the Law's demands, which includes all God said through Moses to the people concerning all the many sacrifices they were told to offer through the priests for an atonement for their souls.

Under the New Covenant, Christ's shedding of His Blood provides a full and complete atonement for our souls today.

1 Peter 1:
18. knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers,
19. but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.

1 John 1:
7. But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

Revelation 1:5
...Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood

You say, "The remedy for sin is clear. Biblically, God's loving-kindness depends on right conduct." Wrong. Right conduct might show repentance, but it never cancels out wrong conduct. And we are all sinnners, constantly doing wrong conduct. God is loving, for sure. That is why we read in John 3:16---

16. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

Think about this: Man sins, rebelling against God. Man in his fallen, rebellious state cannot offer anything of value to God to himself atone for his sins, so God sends His Son ("He gave His only begotten Son" at Calvary) as the remedy for man's sins. But what do most men, including you, do? You reject the very remedy that God Himself has provided for your sins. If you die doing that then you will pay for your own sins for all eternity.

John 3:36 --- "He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.''

If billions have gone to eternal damnation it is because they are all sinners and deserving that fate. It is only by the grace of God that we all don't go there. I will leave to a Just, Holy, Righteous, and Loving God the fate of those who have not heard the Gospel. They, like all people, are sinners. "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?'' (Gen. 18:25).

But YOU, who HAVE heard the Gospel, have a far worse fate if you continue to reject the payment Christ has made for your sins. You have no excuse.

Peace
Reply

Phil12123
07-15-2006, 06:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
"The" gospel is the wrong word to begin with. There are 4 gospels, they were written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John.
We can rightly refer to "The Gospel" as defined by Paul in 1 Cor. 15:

1. Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand,
2. by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you unless you believed in vain.
3. For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4. and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,

"Gospel" simply means "good news" and when we say, "The Gospel of John" or "the Gospel According to Matthew" we are simply referring to the good news about Jesus Christ---of His coming into the world, living a perfect, sinless life, going to the Cross and dying for our sins, and rising from the dead.

God did not reveal anything to Jesus. He didn't bring any message from God. Jesus "message" is to be nice to people.
No, everything He said was a message from God.

John 3:34. "For He whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God does not give the Spirit by measure."

When He prayed in Gethsemane, He said in
John 17:
7. "Now they have known that all things which You have given Me are from You.
8. "For I have given to them the words which You have given Me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came forth from You; and they have believed that You sent Me.

His message was much more than simply being nice to people, although that is certainly there, as in the "Golden Rule" (Matt. 7:12). For example, he talked more about hell than anyone else in the entire Bible. He exposed the sin of the self-righteous religious leaders. He said He came to serve and give His life a ransom for many. He claimed equality with God, when He said things like, "Before Abraham was, I AM" (John 8:58) using the O.T. name for God from Ex. 3:14--

Exodus 3:
13. Then Moses said to God, "Indeed, when I come to the children of Israel and say to them, `The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they say to me, `What is His name?' what shall I say to them?''
14. And God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM.'' And He said, "Thus you shall say to the children of Israel, `I AM has sent me to you.' ''

He also said if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins (John 8:24). By the way, that's the worst thing that can happen to anyone.

Now, when He said all that, the Jews understood He was claiming equality with God, because they took up stones to stone Him for blasphemy (John 8:59). But most people today do not understand the significance of it.

Peace
Reply

Joe98
07-15-2006, 01:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
No, everything He said was a message from God.
You have fallen into their trap.

The Muslim belief is that God gave a verbal mesage to the prophet(pbuh).

And the Muslim belief is that by the same method that he gave a message to Jesus - verbally. And that message has been corrupted.

You are re-inforcing their belief instead of your own belief.

They ask every Christian here the same question with the same trap in mind.
Reply

Ghazi
07-15-2006, 01:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
You have fallen into their trap.

The Muslim belief is that God gave a verbal mesage to the prophet(pbuh).

And the Muslim belief is that by the same method that he gave a message to Jesus - verbally. And that message has been corrupted.

You are re-inforcing their belief instead of your own belief.

They ask every Christian here the same question with the same trap in mind.
:sl:

Whats with your lies what trap it's our belief so please don't accuse of us setting up traps.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 04:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
No, instead there is a decision by Muslims to pretend not to understand.

The story is Judas commited suicide after he betrayed Jesus.

How did he commit suicide? Nobody cares except Muslims trying to discredit the story.
bismillah

Greetings Joe98,

So the story says that Judas Thomas Iscariot commited suicide. (That is the Biblical position.) The point of knowing how is irrelevant. The point is which one is it? How did he die? If the Bible can't get the small matter correct, what about the bigger matters?

Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 04:31 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
Why debate from the Qur'an? It is only the Qur'an that denies that historical fact. No other source would agree with your book.

The New Testament teaching that Jesus died on the cross is not a matter of interpretation. It is a matter of fact, historical fact. It is so stated, clearly and unambiguously, in countless verses over and over again, as well as in various non-biblical books and sources.

I'm not limited in the debate to ONE book. You are.

Peace
bismillah

Greetings, Phil

I do not wish to debate from the Qur'an. The qur'an is staunch in its position and I abide by it. There are other sources which indirectly points to the Qur'anic position of this mighty messenger Jesus (as), nonetheless, you label them "apocrypha." Even some early Christian groups did not hold the position as Jesus (as) being crucified or the belief as him (as) being God incarnate.

The NT position of the crucifixion is spoken of in the NT. But any critical analysis from your Bible can be seen that it was not so.

Say: "O people of the Book! exceed not in your religion the bounds (of what is proper), trespassing beyond the truth, nor follow the vain desires of people who went wrong in times gone by,- who misled many, and strayed (themselves) from the even way."

Qur'an 5.77

"Behold! Allah said: O Jesus! I will take thee And raise thee to Myself And clear thee (of the falsehoods) Of those who blaspheme; I will make those Who follow thee superior To those who reject faith, To the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, And I will judge Between you of the matters wherein ye dispute."

Qur'an 3.55

“And concerning their saying, 'We killed the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah's Messenger.' They killed him not, nor crucified, but it appeared so to them. Indeed those who disagree concerning it are in doubt about it. They have no (true) knowledge about it except that they follow conjecture. Surely, they did not kill him. But Allah did take him up unto Himself. Allah is ever Mighty, Wise.” (An-Nisaa’: 157-158)

It appeared to them. But sadly, they were mistaken.

You say it is stated in the Bible. I know what you are referring to. Your NT the Old Testament.

Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 04:43 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Soldier
I wonder why the theory presented in the gospel of barnabas not accepted. Is it because it does not support the orignal sin?
bismillah

assalamu alaikum' brother

There were many of these so-called gospels to choose from when the collection was being formulated, however, the four we have today were chosen only through a painstaking effort.

But to say why it wasn't chosen, one reason could be Isa ibn Maryam (as) was not crucified.

Original sin is a Christian concept and it is the setup to the belief of the atonement. Hence, without original sin there can be no blood atonement through Isa (as). Thus, humanity having to work for its own salvation through the grace of Allaah (swt).

Original Sin and Atonement are essential to their creed.

Thw Qur'an says so as well. Why don't the Nasara believe we Muslims do not have the hope of salvation? Because we don't believe in Isa (as) as our personal Lord and savior and we deny the crucifixion.

Judas scourged excerpt from the Gospel of Barnabas

It is long, but it presents Judas as the Nasara presents Isa (as).

The soldiers took Judas ;and bound him, not without derision. For he truthfully denied that he was Jesus; and the soldiers, mocking him, said: 'Sir, fear not, for we are come to make you king of Israel, and we have bound you because we know that you do refuse the kingdom.' Judas answered: 'Now have you lost your senses! You are come to take Jesus of Nazareth;, with arms and lanterns as [against] a robber; and you have bound me that have guided you, to make me king!'

Then the soldiers lost their patience, and with blows and kicks they began to flout Judas, and they led him with fury into Jerusalem. John ;and Peter ;followed the soldiers afar off; and they affirmed to him who writes that they saw all the examination that was made of Judas by the high priest, and by the council of the Pharisees, who were assembled to put Jesus to death. Whereupon Judas spoke many words of madness, insomuch that every one was filled with laughter, believing that he was really Jesus, and that for fear of death he was feigning madness. Whereupon the scribes bound his eyes with a bandage, and mocking him said: 'Jesus, prophet of the Nazarenes ;(for so they called them who believed in Jesus), 'tell us, who was it that smote you?' And they buffeted him and spat in his face.

When it was morning there assembled the great council of scribes and elders of the people; and the high priest with the Pharisees sought false witness against Judas, believing him to be Jesus: and they found not that which they sought. And why say I that the chief priests believed Judas to be Jesus? No all the disciples, with him who writes, believed it; and more, the poor Virgin mother of Jesus, with his kinsfolk and friends, believed it, insomuch that the sorrow of every one was incredible.

As God lives, he who writes forgot all that Jesus had said: how that he should be taken up from the world, and that he should suffer in a third person, and that he should not die until near the end of the world. Wherefore he went with the mother of Jesus and with John to the cross. The high priest caused Judas ;to be brought before him bound, and asked him of his disciples and his doctrine. Whereupon Judas, as though beside himself, answered nothing to the point. The high priest then adjured him by the living God of Israel that he would tell him the truth.

Judas answered: 'I have told you that I am Judas Iscariot, who promised to give into your hands Jesus the Nazarene; and you, by what are I know not, are beside yourselves, for you will have it by every means that I am Jesus.' The high priest answered: 'O perverse seducer, you have deceived all Israel, beginning from Galilee ;even to Jerusalem here, with your doctrine and false miracles: and now think you to flee the merited punishment that befits you by feigning to be mad?

As God lives,' you shall not escape it!' And having said this he commanded his servants to smite him with buffetings and kicks, so that his understanding might come back into his head. The derision which he then suffered at the hands of the high priest's servants is past belief. For they zealously devised new inventions to give pleasure to the council. So they attired him as a juggler, and so treated him with hands and feet that it would have moved the very Canaanites to compassion if they had beheld that sight. But the chief priests and Pharisees and elders of the people had their hearts so exasperated against Jesus that, believing Judas to be really Jesus, they took delight in seeing him so treated.

Afterwards they led him bound to the governor, who secretly loved Jesus. Whereupon he, thinking that Judas was Jesus, made him enter into his chamber, and spoke to him, asking him for what cause the chief priests and the people had given him into his hands. Judas answered: 'If I tell you the truth, you will not believe me; for perhaps you are deceived as the (chief) priests and the Pharisees are deceived.'

The governor answered (thinking that he wished to speak concerning the Law): 'Now know you not that I am not a Jew? but the (chief) priests and the elders of your people have given you into my hand; wherefore tell us the truth, wherefore I may do what is just. For I have power to set you free and to put you to death.' Judas answered: 'Sir, believe me, if you put me to death, you shall do a great wrong, for you shall slay an innocent person; seeing that I am Judas ;Iscariot, and not Jesus, who is a magician, and by his are has so transformed me.'

When he heard this the governor marvelled greatly, so that he sought to set him at liberty. The governor therefore went out, and smiling said: 'In the one case, at least, this man is not worthy of death, but rather of compassion.' 'This man says,' said the governor, 'that he is not Jesus, but a certain Judas who guided the soldiery to take Jesus, and he says that Jesus the Galilean has by his are magic so transformed him. Wherefore, if this be true, it were a great wrong to kill him, seeing that he were innocent. But if he is Jesus and denies that he is, assuredly he has lost his understanding, and it were impious to slay a madman.'

Then the chief priests and elders of the people, with the scribes and Pharisees, cried out with shouts, saying: 'He is Jesus of Nazareth;, for we know him; for if he were not the malefactor we would not have given him into your hands. Nor is he mad; but rather malignant, for with this device he seeks to escape from our hands, and the sedition that he would stir up if he should escape would be worse than the former.' Pilate (of such was the governor's name), in order to rid himself of such a case, said: 'He is a Galilean, and Herod is king of Galilee: wherefore it pertains not to me to judge such a case, so take you him to Herod.'

Accordingly they led Judas to Herod, who of a long time had desired that Jesus should go to his house. But Jesus had never been willing to go to his house, because Herod was a Gentile, and adored the false and lying gods, living after the manner of the unclean Gentiles. Now when Judas had been led thither, Herod asked him of many things, to which Judas gave answers not to the purpose, denying that he was Jesus. Then Herod mocked him, with all his court, and caused him to be clad in white as the fools are clad;, and sent him back to Pilate, saying to him, 'Do not fail in justice to the people of Israel!' * And this Herod wrote, because the chief priests and scribes and the Pharisees had given him a good quantity of money. The governor having heard that this was so from a servant of Herod, in order that he also might gain some money, feigned that he desired to set Judas at liberty.

Whereupon he caused him to be scourged by his slaves, who were paid by the scribes to slay him under the scourges. But God, who had decreed the issue, reserved Judas for the cross, in order that he might suffer that horrible death to which he had sold another. He did not suffer Judas to die under the scourges, notwithstanding that the soldiers scourged him so grievously that his body rained blood. Thereupon, in mockery they clad him in an old purple garment;, saying: 'It is fitting to our new king to clothe him and crown him': so they gathered thorns and made a crown, like those of gold and precious stones which kings wear on their heads. And this crown of thorns they placed upon Judas' head, putting in his hand a reed for sceptre;, and they made him sit in a high place.

And the soldiers came before him, bowing down in mockery, saluting him as King of the Jews. And they held out their hands to receive gifts, such as new kings are accustomed to give; and receiving nothing they smote Judas, saying: 'Now, how are you crowned, foolish king, if you will not pay your soldiers and servants?' *The chief priests with the scribes and Pharisees, seeing that Judas died not by the scourges, and fearing lest Pilate should set him at liberty, made a gift of money to the governor, who having received it gave Judas to the scribes and Pharisees as guilty to death. Whereupon they condemned two robbers with him to the death of the cross.

So they led him to Mount Calvary, where they used to hang malefactors, and there they crucified him naked;, for the greater ignominy. *Judas truly did nothing else but cry out: 'God, why have you forsaken me, seeing the malefactor has escaped and I die unjustly?' *Truly I say that the voice, the face, and the person of Judas were so like to Jesus, that his disciples and believers entirely believed that he was Jesus; wherefore some departed from the doctrine of Jesus, believing that Jesus had been a false prophet, and that by art magic he had done the miracles which he did: for Jesus had said that he should not die till near the end of the world; for that at that time he should be taken away from the world.

But they that stood firm in the doctrine of Jesus were so encompassed with sorrow, seeing him die who was entirely like to Jesus, that they remembered not what Jesus had said. And so in company with the mother of Jesus they went to Mount Calvary, and were not only present at the death of Judas, weeping continually, but by means of Nicodemus and Joseph of Abarimathia; they obtained from the governor the body of Judas to bury it. Whereupon, they took him down from the cross with such weeping as assuredly no one would believe, and buried him in the new sepulchre of Joseph; having wrapped him up in an hundred pounds of precious ointments.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 05:03 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
Judaism teaches the Old Covenant and Christianity teaches the New Covenant. Under the Old Covenant forgiveness was based on blood sacrifices.

Leviticus 17:11. `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.'

The writer of Hebrews, in discussing and contrasting the Old and New covenants, says in 9:22:

22. And according to the law almost all things are purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission[forgiveness].

The Old Covenant (or Old Testament or O.T.) with all its animal sacrifices prefigured the ultimate sacrifice that Jesus, "the Lamb of God," made at Calvary, never to be repeated. Destruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. did not destroy the law that required such sacrifices for forgiveness.

You mentioned Job. Notice Job 1:4-5:

4. Now his sons would go and feast in their houses, each on his appointed day, and would send and invite their three sisters to eat and drink with them.
5. So it was, when the days of feasting had run their course, that Job would send and sanctify them, and he would rise early in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to the number of them all. For Job said, "It may be that my sons have sinned and cursed God in their hearts.'' Thus Job did regularly.

Under Judaism, sin always required some payment, either in the form of a sacrificed animal, where the sin is symbolically transferred to the animal who dies, or punishment of the sinner himself. Today, not having a temple in which to sacrifice animals does not nullify or cancel the Law's demands, which includes all God said through Moses to the people concerning all the many sacrifices they were told to offer through the priests for an atonement for their souls.

Under the New Covenant, Christ's shedding of His Blood provides a full and complete atonement for our souls today.

1 Peter 1:
18. knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless conduct received by tradition from your fathers,
19. but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.

1 John 1:
7. But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

Revelation 1:5
...Jesus Christ, the faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, and the ruler over the kings of the earth. To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood

You say, "The remedy for sin is clear. Biblically, God's loving-kindness depends on right conduct." Wrong. Right conduct might show repentance, but it never cancels out wrong conduct. And we are all sinnners, constantly doing wrong conduct. God is loving, for sure. That is why we read in John 3:16---

16. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life."

Think about this: Man sins, rebelling against God. Man in his fallen, rebellious state cannot offer anything of value to God to himself atone for his sins, so God sends His Son ("He gave His only begotten Son" at Calvary) as the remedy for man's sins. But what do most men, including you, do? You reject the very remedy that God Himself has provided for your sins. If you die doing that then you will pay for your own sins for all eternity.

John 3:36 --- "He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.''

If billions have gone to eternal damnation it is because they are all sinners and deserving that fate. It is only by the grace of God that we all don't go there. I will leave to a Just, Holy, Righteous, and Loving God the fate of those who have not heard the Gospel. They, like all people, are sinners. "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?'' (Gen. 18:25).

But YOU, who HAVE heard the Gospel, have a far worse fate if you continue to reject the payment Christ has made for your sins. You have no excuse.

Peace
bismillah

Greetings,

I know your verses well. However, these are also relevant:

Deuteronomy 24:16 - Fathers shall not be put to death because of children, nor shall children be put to death for fathers; each person shall be put to death for his own sin. [See also Exod 32:31-33; Num 35:33.]

2 Kings 14:6 - And the sons of the assassins he did not execute, as it is written in the book of the Torah of Moses, which the L-rd commanded saying: "Fathers shall not be put to death for sons, nor shall sons be put to death for fathers, but each man shall be put to death for his own sin." [See also Jer 31:29{30 in Christian Bibles}; Ezek 18:4,20; Ps 49:7-8.]

There are three methods of atonement clearly defined in the Jewish scriptures: the sin sacrifice, repentance, and charity. Moreover, the sin sacrifice did not atone for all types of sin, but rather, only for man's most insignificant iniquity: unintentional sins. The sin sacrifice was inadequate to atone for a transgression committed intentionally. The brazen sinner was kept from the sanctuary, and had to bear his own iniquity because of his rebellious intent to sin against God. The Old Testament teaches this fundamental principle in Numbers 15:27-31.

If a person sins unintentionally, then he shall offer a one-year-old female goat for a sin offering. The priest shall make atonement before the LORD for the person who goes astray when he sins unintentionally, making atonement for him that he may be forgiven . . . . The person who does anything defiantly, whether he is native or an alien, that one is blaspheming the LORD; and that person shall be cut off from among his people, because he has despised the word of the LORD and has broken His commandment, that person shall be completely cut off; his guilt shall be on him.


Christians assert that for the past 19 centuries, since the destruction of the second Temple in 70 C.E., Jews have lacked the essential and indispensable animal sacrificial system for atonement. Consequently, they maintain, God must have provided a blood atonement in place of the animal sacrifices of the past. This sacrifice, they insist, is the death of Jesus (as) on the cross.

Jesus (as) could not die for anyone's sins, whether they were committed intentionally or unintentionally. The Jewish people were strictly prohibited from offering human sacrifices under any circumstances. There is not one place throughout the entire Jewish scripture where human sacrifices are condoned. In fact, over and over again the Bible warns the Jewish people that it is a grave sin to bring a human being as a sacrifice. In the Book of Leviticus, only distinct species of animals are permitted for use in blood sacrifices.

Hosea 14:2-3 states,

Take words with you, and return to the LORD. Say to Him, "Take away all iniquity; receive us graciously, for we will render for bulls the offering of our lips."

Hosea 3:4-5 reads,

. . . for the children of Israel shall abide many days without king or prince, without sacrifice or sacred pillar, without ephod or teraphim. Afterward the children of Israel shall return and seek the LORD their God and David their king. They shall fear the LORD and His goodness in the latter days.

There will be hellfire for any who associate anything with God Almighty. That will not be forgiven after you die. You will have no excuse to why you worshipped others than the ONE TRUE GOD ALONE.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-15-2006, 05:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
You have fallen into their trap.

The Muslim belief is that God gave a verbal mesage to the prophet(pbuh).

And the Muslim belief is that by the same method that he gave a message to Jesus - verbally. And that message has been corrupted.

You are re-inforcing their belief instead of your own belief.

They ask every Christian here the same question with the same trap in mind.

bismillah

Greetings,

We know the message to Jesus (as) was an oral message. We know this for sure whether or not you believe it. Are belief is already fortified through our Qur'an and the ONE TRUE GOD whom we worship.
Reply

Joe98
07-16-2006, 04:02 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
We know the message to Jesus (as) was an oral message.

Please quote the paragraph from the Koran that states this.
Reply

Joe98
07-16-2006, 04:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
If the Bible can't get the small matter correct, what about the bigger matters?

A team plays in the final of an important football competition. 30 years later they are asked questions about the match.

They will always get the big things right: who one the match, the score, who scored the goals.

But they will often get the small details wrong: were the goals scored in the 10th minute, 20th minute, 30th minute???

The gospels record that Christ entered a temple to clean it. THE BIG THING is that he cleaned it to show it was not beneath him to do so.

THE LITTLE THING is: when did he enter the temple??? Afternoon or early morning?
Reply

Zionazi_Dissent
07-16-2006, 07:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe89
And the Muslim belief is that by the same method that he gave a message to Jesus - verbally. And that message has been corrupted.
Joe, stop making a fool of yourself. If you want to know why the Bible has been corrupted, do a google search.

I hate it when a mere uneducated atheist speaks for Muslims. Go do something productive than show ignorance here.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-16-2006, 08:21 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
Please quote the paragraph from the Koran that states this.
The word 'kitab' in the arabic language does not denote to written book specifically. As with Muhammad (peace be upon him) once the revelation was bestowed upon him (peace be upon him) he had it instilled within his memory. Thus reciting it to his companions and them in turn reciting it over and over.

In the case with Jesus, son of Mary (peace be upon him) did he command his followers to write? Does the Bible elaborate on this information? Does it tell us?

There is a major difference. The Qur'an was written in the 'lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon).

On the other hand, Jesus, son of Mary (peace be upon him) recited what he heard from Allaah (God). It was not a new message, it was a revival of the old. To oppose those Pharisees who formalised the religion of Moses (peace be upon him).

"We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms."

4.163


"And remember, jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

61.06
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-16-2006, 08:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
A team plays in the final of an important football competition. 30 years later they are asked questions about the match.

They will always get the big things right: who one the match, the score, who scored the goals.

But they will often get the small details wrong: were the goals scored in the 10th minute, 20th minute, 30th minute???

The gospels record that Christ entered a temple to clean it. THE BIG THING is that he cleaned it to show it was not beneath him to do so.

THE LITTLE THING is: when did he enter the temple??? Afternoon or early morning?
bismillah

Interesting analogy, but that does not suffice. We are not speaking of sports, we are speaking of God.

Lets take the acension of Jesus (peace be upon him) for example. I noticed that throughout time some have saw fit to exclude that verse. Other have kept it. Others have reinserted it. You see it is not merely a matter of a contradiction between small things, but more of the human interpreters the Biblical scripture to translate specific words correctly from the text.

Jesus (peace be upon him) spoke Aramaic correct? Do we have any Aramaic texts? Throughout history people have seen it fit, to create gospels which others within the Christian community reject and others likewise. The nature of Jesus (peace be upon him) was and still is a crucial issue for many Christian sects. Catholics believe in the sacraments and the Chusrch institution that can play a part in ones salvation, the born-agains say mere belief in Jesus (peace be upon him) will suffice.

There is a crucial debate among the basics of the Christian faith. Who is to say who is right when they all claim to be possessed by the Holy Spirit?
Reply

PrIM3
07-16-2006, 11:35 PM
sorry this is out of order. but do you not believe in the Sacrifice of God because it doesn't fit? or because the Quran says so?
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-16-2006, 11:48 PM
bismillah

Greetings,

We Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the Word of Allaah (God). If the Qur'an says so, we believe it. We hear and we obey.

Muslims follow the Qur'an and the example of Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). There is no other source of guidance.

Why do you believe in this blood atonement? Is it because it makes sense or because the NT tells you that this is so?
Reply

PrIM3
07-16-2006, 11:52 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
bismillah

Greetings,

We Muslims believe that the Qur'an is the Word of Allaah (God). If the Qur'an says so, we believe it. We hear and we obey.

Why do you believe in this blood atonement? Is it because it makes sense or because the NT tells you that this is so?
Because it fits perfectly with what God does. through out the Bible God makes sacrifices to save His people. it wasn't something that was made up out of thin air.

God Bless,
PrIM3
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-17-2006, 12:06 AM
bismillah

Greetings,

You are correct, brother.

The "sin" of Adam and Eve was it intentional or unintentional?
Reply

PrIM3
07-17-2006, 06:36 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
bismillah

Greetings,

You are correct, brother.

The "sin" of Adam and Eve was it intentional or unintentional?

I myself don't know --- I know that God has a Divine plan which is His perfect plan or will for us to do. But I think when sin entered the world we kind of made Gods plan shift a little bit and through out History God has been trying to bring back man on to His Divine Plan (atleast that is what I think).
like Jonah and the whale God told him what He wanted (His Divine plan) but Jonah didn't want to go. so God sent a storm so that Jonah might re-think about what he was doing. and at the end of the story we know that the city Jonah preached at repented from their sins.
So I would like to say that it was intentional but it wasn't part of His Divine plan.
Reply

Umar001
07-17-2006, 02:31 PM
Peace be upon those who Submit to the G-d of Abraham.

Bro Muslim Friend,

format_quote Originally Posted by muslim_friend
The Qur'an tells us that jesus(as) did not die on the cross, "but it was made to appear so" .. The ones who wanted Jesus(as) dead were deceived into believing he had really died, but the truth is that he did not die at all.
This gives the impression as also Phil states that only those who wanted Jesus dead were decieved, thus Phil went into a whole new level of showing us that Jesus' disciples didnt want him dead. Insh'Allah in the future please try be more precise as there are people who are not acquainted with the Ideas in the Qu'ran.

Following,

format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
Plus, He had told them several times BEFORE He was crucified that He WOULD be crucified. Did He lie to them? Peace
Now I will for a second assume that the Gospels are written by Jesus' disciples, how do we know that Jesus said this (That he would be crucified) to his disciples? Because they told us in their Gospels, do the writers of the Gospels write word for word what Jesus said? Not in all cases so it is easy that if these disciples were already decieved that they could take what they heard Jesus say before and interpret it to mean that he predicted his death and then write it in this manner.

format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
It is not the disciples and historians that were deceived.
Please feel free to quote us some historians, so that we can increase our knowledge in such matters.

Again Bro Muslim you said,

format_quote Originally Posted by muslim_friend
Firstly i got a bit confused. i do know that it was the disciples who recorded the gospels.
How do you know it was the Disciples of Jesus who wrote the Gospels, please show me how you came to this conclusion.

Brother Isa Abdullah,

format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
Secondly, let us call it what it is: the injil (gospel) was revealed to Jesus (as) "orally". His followers were not his scribes as the followers of Muhammad (saw).
What makes you take such a stance? What proof is there that Jesus' disciples or Jesus himself did not write it down or that his Disciples were not scribes.

Mr. Joe,
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
"The" gospel is the wrong word to begin with. There are 4 gospels, they were written by Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. God did not reveal anything to Jesus.
This is not the first time I have seen you make such statements, which undoubtly makes me wonder how much Biblical reading you have done.

Joe again you say,

format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
No, instead there is a decision by Muslims to pretend not to understand.

The story is Judas commited suicide after he betrayed Jesus.

How did he commit suicide? Nobody cares except Muslims trying to discredit the story.
But I don't think you fully understand, I as a Muslim do not claim not to understand it, I fully understand it, I understand that we have two different accounts of one incident which both tell me that Judas died but both are different in details.

The Problem here is that if someone tells me the Bible is the Word of G-d that G-d told these people what to write, then I have the problem in understanding that if G-d told these people to write this then why is there a contradiction, even in detail.

That's what I as a Muslim do not understand.

Brother Isa Abdullah I hope you can clarify something, you stated this,

format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
The word 'kitab' in the arabic language does not denote to written book specifically. As with Muhammad (peace be upon him) once the revelation was bestowed upon him (peace be upon him) he had it instilled within his memory. Thus reciting it to his companions and them in turn reciting it over and over.

In the case with Jesus, son of Mary (peace be upon him) did he command his followers to write? Does the Bible elaborate on this information? Does it tell us?

There is a major difference. The Qur'an was written in the 'lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon).

On the other hand, Jesus, son of Mary (peace be upon him) recited what he heard from Allaah (God). It was not a new message, it was a revival of the old. To oppose those Pharisees who formalised the religion of Moses (peace be upon him).

"We have sent thee inspiration, as We sent it to Noah and the Messengers after him: we sent inspiration to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob and the Tribes, to jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and solomon, and to David We gave the Psalms."

4.163

"And remember, jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

61.06

I understand three things from this, you claim:

1. The Bible doesnt tell us of any command by Jesus to write scripture down, and from this you derive that so Jesus' message was only oral?

2.From the previous you also seem to derive that Jesus' message was wrote after his departing, I understand that from you saying "There is a major difference. The Qur'an was written in the 'lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon)."

3.You claim Jesus' message was not a new message but only a reminder/revival of Moses' message, "It was not a new message, it was a revival of the old." From what do you derive this understanding, Islamicly.

Salam Aleykum.

Peace be upon those who follow guidance.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-17-2006, 08:16 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by PrIM3
I myself don't know --- I know that God has a Divine plan which is His perfect plan or will for us to do. But I think when sin entered the world we kind of made Gods plan shift a little bit and through out History God has been trying to bring back man on to His Divine Plan (atleast that is what I think).
like Jonah and the whale God told him what He wanted (His Divine plan) but Jonah didn't want to go. so God sent a storm so that Jonah might re-think about what he was doing. and at the end of the story we know that the city Jonah preached at repented from their sins.
So I would like to say that it was intentional but it wasn't part of His Divine plan.
bismillah

Greetings,

I understand exactly what you are saying. But the only reason I ask is to whether or not the Almighty God would need a human sacrifice for sin. An 'intentional' sin at that. We are told when the offering that Cain and Abel gave to Allaah (God), Abel's offering was recieved and Cains was not.

Of course, we know why Cain's offering was rejected. Let's take a look into your Book.

God counsels Cain, "Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? If you do good [that is, change your ways], will it not be lifted up [that is, you will be forgiven]. But if you do not do good, sin rests at the door; and it desires you, but you may rule over it" (Genesis 4:6-7).

Now, I understand the logic and implications of the Original Sin concept and its call for being rectified through another. However, Allaah (God) tells us one thing and I believe His (swt) messenger Jesus (as) did not contradict what God has sent down from the beginning of time about sincere repentance and following His (swt) guidance being able to set us aright.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-17-2006, 08:28 PM
bismillah

assalaamu alaikum', brother Isa.

We can first and foremost refer it to al Qur'an and then ahadith. Then we can analyze the Christian scripture and commentaries on each verse. Then lastly, we can read the history of Christianity from unbiased sources, but not overly evangelical sources. Thus we read that scripture was very important the Christian community, but many were illiterate.

I do not want to add a twist on the Bible, but I read it for what it is. Of course, much of it is allegorical, but where can one deduce that this was the exact message? The further that these scholars delve in order to seek the most "original" manuscripts, they find something different. Isa ibn Maryam (may he be blessed), spoke to the people and delivered his message Allaah (swt) sent with him.

Does the NT point to any scribes composing the message? Al-Qur'an tells us that each message was given to their people. For their people.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-17-2006, 08:42 PM
bismillah

...continuing...

brother Isa asked:

1. The Bible doesnt tell us of any command by Jesus to write scripture down, and from this you derive that so Jesus' message was only oral?

2.From the previous you also seem to derive that Jesus' message was wrote after his departing, I understand that from you saying "There is a major difference. The Qur'an was written in the 'lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon)."

3.You claim Jesus' message was not a new message but only a reminder/revival of Moses' message, "It was not a new message, it was a revival of the old." From what do you derive this understanding, Islamicly.



1. To answer the first question, yes. Some Christians that I speak to reiterate the same claim. Why? They take the Bible to be "infallible". That is the sole source of guidance. And to use the same logic, one can deduce and in conclusion arrive at the same end.

2. Indeed. You are correct. There were hundreds of Gospels reaccounting the life of Isa ibn Maryam (as), but with different contents. E.G. such ideas of the crucifixion, his nature, his teaching, etc.

3. "And in their footsteps We sent jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah."

5.46

"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

61.6


In a sense it was 'new' it was more of a reinterpretation. He did not come to abolish all of the law. But to make the strict law more lenient.
Reply

PrIM3
07-17-2006, 08:50 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
bismillah

Greetings,

I understand exactly what you are saying. But the only reason I ask is to whether or not the Almighty God would need a human sacrifice for sin. An 'intentional' sin at that. We are told when the offering that Cain and Abel gave to Allaah (God), Abel's offering was recieved and Cains was not.

Of course, we know why Cain's offering was rejected. Let's take a look into your Book.

God counsels Cain, "Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? If you do good [that is, change your ways], will it not be lifted up [that is, you will be forgiven]. But if you do not do good, sin rests at the door; and it desires you, but you may rule over it" (Genesis 4:6-7).

Now, I understand the logic and implications of the Original Sin concept and its call for being rectified through another. However, Allaah (God) tells us one thing and I believe His (swt) messenger Jesus (as) did not contradict what God has sent down from the beginning of time about sincere repentance and following His (swt) guidance being able to set us aright.
Hey Isa Abdullah,

before I try saying anything is this part a question? just wondering

God Bless,
PrIM3
Reply

Umar001
07-17-2006, 09:49 PM
Salam Aleykum Bro Isa,

format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
1. To answer the first question, yes. Some Christians that I speak to reiterate the same claim. Why? They take the Bible to be "infallible". That is the sole source of guidance. And to use the same logic, one can deduce and in conclusion arrive at the same end.
I am totally lost, be patient with me, I am totally confused and do not see how this answers my question.

format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
2. Indeed. You are correct. There were hundreds of Gospels reaccounting the life of Isa ibn Maryam (as), but with different contents. E.G. such ideas of the crucifixion, his nature, his teaching, etc.
Though there is not any Islamic text which says Jesus' message was wrote after his departure and not in his life time. Just because people started to write Gospels and so forth does not mean that Jesus' message was not written in his life time and then lost.

format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
3. "And in their footsteps We sent jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah."

5.46

"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

61.6


In a sense it was 'new' it was more of a reinterpretation. He did not come to abolish all of the law. But to make the strict law more lenient.
Again I do not see how you derive to the understanding that Jesus' message was not new as such but a carried on type of message from the Taurah to make it more linient, what gives you this Idea.

The Qu'ran from what I read says that Jesus' Injeel came to confirm the Torah, is this not the same as the Qu'ran coming to confirm the previous revelations?

I hope you can be patient with me

Salam ALeykum,

Also note to Forum, we (me and Isa) Are two different people, I hope it doesnt confuse yall.
Reply

Phil12123
07-18-2006, 05:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Isa Abdullah
brother Isa asked:
3.You claim Jesus' message was not a new message but only a reminder/revival of Moses' message, "It was not a new message, it was a revival of the old." From what do you derive this understanding, Islamicly.

3. "And in their footsteps We sent jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah."

5.46

"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!"

61.6


In a sense it was 'new' it was more of a reinterpretation. He did not come to abolish all of the law. But to make the strict law more lenient.
Two comments, one a statement and the other a question.

First, in the Bible, specifically, Matthew, chapter 5, Jesus actually makes the Law MORE STRICT by extending it or reinterpreting it to include not merely outward actions but also attitudes of the heart. The Pharisees were great for appearing outwardly pious while inwardly they were evil. Jesus addressed this by applying the Law to their evil hearts. For example, He said in

Matthew 5:
21. "You have heard that it was said to those of old, `You shall not murder,' and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.
22. "But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, `Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, `You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.

27. "You have heard that it was said to those of old, `You shall not commit adultery.'
28. "But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

31. "Furthermore it has been said, `Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.'
32. "But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

38. "You have heard that it was said, `An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'
39. "But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

43. "You have heard that it was said, `You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
44. "But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,
45. "that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
46. "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
47. "And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so?
48. "Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

Secondly, a question: In the quote of the Quran above (5.46), "the Gospel" is mentioned. What does "the Gospel" consist of? The word means "good news". What "good news" is it referring to in 5.46?

Peace
Reply

Woodrow
07-19-2006, 08:27 PM
Secondly, a question: In the quote of the Quran above (5.46), "the Gospel" is mentioned. What does "the Gospel" consist of? The word means "good news". What "good news" is it referring to in 5.46?
The "Good News" that God (swt) revealed to I'sa(a.s.) was his word and his promises and desires for us. This was the Gospel, that no longer seems to exist. In what remains of the Bible we only have some references to it in the words of John, Mark, Matthew and Luke. What the full Gospel was we had lost until Allah(SWT) revealed it again to Mohammad.
Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-20-2006, 12:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
The "Good News" that God (swt) revealed to I'sa(a.s.) was his word and his promises and desires for us. This was the Gospel, that no longer seems to exist. In what remains of the Bible we only have some references to it in the words of John, Mark, Matthew and Luke. What the full Gospel was we had lost until Allah(SWT) revealed it again to Mohammad.
bismillahir rahmanir rahim
Good answer.

Reply

Isa Abdullah
07-20-2006, 12:21 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
Two comments, one a statement and the other a question.

First, in the Bible, specifically, Matthew, chapter 5, Jesus actually makes the Law MORE STRICT by extending it or reinterpreting it to include not merely outward actions but also attitudes of the heart. The Pharisees were great for appearing outwardly pious while inwardly they were evil. Jesus addressed this by applying the Law to their evil hearts. For example, He said in

Matthew 5:
21. "You have heard that it was said to those of old, `You shall not murder,' and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.
22. "But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, `Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, `You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire.

27. "You have heard that it was said to those of old, `You shall not commit adultery.'
28. "But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

31. "Furthermore it has been said, `Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.'
32. "But I say to you that whoever divorces his wife for any reason except sexual immorality causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a woman who is divorced commits adultery.

38. "You have heard that it was said, `An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.'
39. "But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.

43. "You have heard that it was said, `You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
44. "But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you,
45. "that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
46. "For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?
47. "And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so?
48. "Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.

Secondly, a question: In the quote of the Quran above (5.46), "the Gospel" is mentioned. What does "the Gospel" consist of? The word means "good news". What "good news" is it referring to in 5.46?

Peace
Yes, Jesus (as [Isa]) came to confirm the law before him. Brother Woodrow answered your second question.
Reply

Phil12123
07-20-2006, 12:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
The "Good News" that God (swt) revealed to I'sa(a.s.) was his word and his promises and desires for us. This was the Gospel, that no longer seems to exist. In what remains of the Bible we only have some references to it in the words of John, Mark, Matthew and Luke. What the full Gospel was we had lost until Allah(SWT) revealed it again to Mohammad.
So, can you summarize the "Good News" as revealed to Mohammad, according to your understanding? Paul summarized it in 3 verses (1 Cor. 15:1-3). Can you do the same, or perhaps "in 26 words or less"?

Peace
Reply

Woodrow
07-20-2006, 01:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Phil12123
So, can you summarize the "Good News" as revealed to Mohammad, according to your understanding? Paul summarized it in 3 verses (1 Cor. 15:1-3). Can you do the same, or perhaps "in 26 words or less"?

Peace
Very good challange. For myself I'm satisfied with Surah One, Al-Fatihah.

1: 1. In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. S P
1: 2. Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds; S P C
1: 3. Most Gracious, Most Merciful; S P
1: 4. Master of the Day of Judgment. S P
1: 5. Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek. S P C

1: 6. Show us the straight way, S P C
1: 7. The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray. S P C

Yusuf Ali's Quran Translation

Quite simply put it tells us Allah(SWT) provides all and forgives all.
(In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful)
Then he shows us the clear directions on what he wishes.
(Show us the straight way)
(14 words for the basic message)

Now turn about is fair play. Where did Jesus(a.s.) ever say he came to die for our sins?
Reply

Phil12123
07-20-2006, 02:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Where did Jesus(a.s.) ever say he came to die for our sins?
Excellent question. It consists of two parts actually: 1. He came to die, and 2. His death would be for our sins. Consider these verses:

In support of Part 1, He came to die:

Matthew 20:28. "just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.''

John 10:
11. "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.
12. "But he who is a hireling and not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them.
13. "The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep.
14. "I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own.
15. "As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep.
17. "Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again.
18. "No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.''

In support of Part 2, His death would be for our sins:

Matthew 26:
26. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed it and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, "Take, eat; this is My body.''
27. Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, "Drink from it, all of you.
28. "For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

In addition, the concept of His giving His life a ransom (quoted first above) involves a payment for the release of one held captive or held in bondage. As sinners we are all in bondage to sin, held captive to it. In speaking of people being slaves or servants of sin, Jesus said, "If the Son therefore shall make you free, you shall be free indeed" (John 8:36). He makes us free by paying that ransom, paying for our sins so that we are no longer subject to the sentence of death we deserve for them. On the cross when breathing His last, He said, "It is finished!" which is the Greek word, tetelestai, which can signify, "PAID IN FULL!" Hallelujah!! What a Savior!!

Peace
Reply

Phil12123
07-20-2006, 03:06 AM
Woodrow, another thought to follow-up my above post.

After Jesus rose from the dead, he appeared to two on the road to Emmaus (Luke 24:13-35). In that account, the two showed they had no idea why He had to die. They said to Him in verse 21, "But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel." They were expecting a Messiah who would deliver them from Roman bondage, rather than a Savior Who would deliver them from the bondage of sin.

Notice what He said to them, verses 25-26:
25. Then He said to them, "O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!
26. "Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?''
27. And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.

Then when He appeared in the midst of the disciples, we read, verses 44-48:

44. Then He said to them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me.''
45. And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures.
46. Then He said to them, "Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day,
47. "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations
, beginning at Jerusalem.
48. "And you are witnesses of these things.

It was necessary for Him to die in fulfillment of all that is written in the Old Testament concerning Him. That would certainly include Isaiah 53:

5. But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement for our peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed.
6. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned, every one, to his own way; and the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7. He was oppressed and He was afflicted, yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not his mouth.
8. He was taken from prison and from judgment, and who will declare His generation? For He was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9. And they made His grave with the wicked but with the rich at His death, because He had done no violence, nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him; He has put Him to grief. When You make His soul an offering for sin, He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.
11. He shall see the travail of His soul, and be satisfied. by His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, for He shall bear their iniquities.
12. Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great, and He shall divide the spoil with the strong, because He poured out His soul unto death, and He was numbered with the transgressors, and He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.

Peace
Reply

Woodrow
07-20-2006, 03:07 AM
Thank you for your replies Phil.

At the moment I will refrain from asking another question. I do have more questions for you, you gave a good specific question for what I asked.

I do not wish to carry this thread further off topic . Any debate I may have for your answer I will reserve for another thread.Now to return to the original topic, which is:

Do Muslims believe the original Bible is the word of God?

For my self I do believe the original Bible was the word of Allah(swt) We are commanded to believe the words of that which came before which is:

Tauret (The Old Testament)
Zaboor (Book of Psalms)
Injeel (The Gospel of Jesus a.s.)

we also believe none of these exist in their original form.
Reply

lolwatever
07-20-2006, 03:15 AM
^^ yeh i agree with Woodrow..

i can't b bothered reading the previous 8 pages... but i'm surprised how it's taking more than a page to simply say "yes we do believe the original bible is the word of god".

this thread should be closed lol, the answer was made clear i think by bro woodrow, if not already in the previous pages
Reply

Woodrow
07-20-2006, 03:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by lolwatever
^^ yeh i agree with Woodrow..

i can't b bothered reading the previous 8 pages... but i'm surprised how it's taking more than a page to simply say "yes we do believe the original bible is the word of god".

this thread should be closed lol, the answer was made clear i think by bro woodrow, if not already in the previous pages
I agree the thread has run it's course and should be closed. However, I am not going to close it immediatly as I am one of those guilty of leading it astray. I will close the thread tomorrow(July 20) unless another mod sees fit to close it sooner.

Those of us who got side tracked can continue our debates on a new thread.
Reply

MUNIRAH
07-20-2006, 03:31 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by lolwatever
^^ yeh i agree with Woodrow..

i can't b bothered reading the previous 8 pages... but i'm surprised how it's taking more than a page to simply say "yes we do believe the original bible is the word of god".

this thread should be closed lol, the answer was made clear i think by bro woodrow, if not already in the previous pages

Yup! u right the original bible is indeed the words of Allah.....
Tawraat=Pentateuch
Injiil=Gospel
Zabuur=Psalms
Reply

Phil12123
07-20-2006, 12:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Thank you for your replies Phil.

At the moment I will refrain from asking another question. I do have more questions for you, you gave a good specific question for what I asked.

I do not wish to carry this thread further off topic . Any debate I may have for your answer I will reserve for another thread.Now to return to the original topic, which is:

Do Muslims believe the original Bible is the word of God?

For my self I do believe the original Bible was the word of Allah(swt) We are commanded to believe the words of that which came before which is:

Tauret (The Old Testament)
Zaboor (Book of Psalms)
Injeel (The Gospel of Jesus a.s.)

we also believe none of these exist in their original form.

Woodrow, our recent posts related to the "Gospel" part of the above ("Injeel"). What I wanted to know was, what that consists of, if not what Paul tells us. Jesus' dying for our sins is part of what Paul defines as the Gospel. So we didn't go too far off topic, but if you'd like to start a different thread and continue our discussion there, that is fine.

Peace
Reply

Woodrow
07-21-2006, 03:55 AM
Peace Phil,

We will continue on another thread. In the mean time the original question of this topic has been answered more then a few times so it is time to let this thread rest.




:threadclo
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: 127
    Last Post: 09-30-2011, 06:07 PM
  2. Replies: 83
    Last Post: 05-01-2008, 01:24 PM
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-07-2006, 03:34 PM
  4. Replies: 42
    Last Post: 05-31-2006, 10:32 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!