/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Does the Bible need a defense?



Redeemed
05-08-2007, 01:31 AM
Some say that the Bible is not reliable and the Qur'an is. It may be true that we no longer have any perfect copy of the inerrant original manuscripts of the Bible. But that would be true of us having an imperfect view of Christ Jesus, because He is not here to talk to in the flesh so to speak. All we Christians have is our faith in Him and what He said. As I have mentioned in a previous thread, it is not so much reliability as validity that is important. For instance, we could have a Newspaper that is totally accurate (reliable) and free from any errors whatsoever even free of typos, that doesn't make it the word of God. I think we Christians are chasing rabbits to try to defend the Bible. We don't have to. All we have to do is unleash it. The Bible in its entirety points to Jesus as the total spiritual sum of all things. Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties might be of interest to any scholar. It has shown me in so many words the following statements above and the following: Defend the Bible, no, I don't think so. "A roaring Lion does not need to be defended from a mouse." The Bible is living; it is a live wire; it's a seed when mixed with water and the light of truth brings forth fruit leading to eternal life in Jesus Christ.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Woodrow
05-10-2007, 03:11 AM
this question was asked in another thread. At first it did not appear to generate much interest. However, now it does seem the interest is there. so to keep the other thread from straying off topic the thread is now approved.
Reply

Redeemed
05-10-2007, 03:14 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
this question was asked in another thread. At first it did not appear to generate much interest. However, now it does seem the interest is there. so to keep the other thread from straying off topic the thread is now approved.
Thank you
Reply

Woodrow
05-10-2007, 03:24 AM
To get things started. It is difficult to think that the Bible is inerrent when some of the most noted Bible Scholars and translators have come to the conclusion that it is not inerrent and it is not the Divine revelation of God(swt)

The most famous and the best known is Dr. Bruce Metzger who recently passed away. He is most known for having done the best Greek translations into English. He is also the Author of several best selling Bibles and a contributor to the RSV.

Bruce Manning Metzger (born 1914) is a professor emeritus at Princeton Theological Seminary and Bible editor who serves on the board of the American Bible Society. He is a scholar of Greek, New Testament and Old Testament Bible, and has written prolifically on these subjects.

Metzger has edited and provided commentary for many Bible translations and has written dozens of books. He was a contributor to the Apocrypha of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, editor of the Reader's Digest Bible (a condensed version of the RSV) and general editor of the New Revised Standard Version. He was also one of the editors of the United Bible Societies' standard Greek New Testament, the starting point for nearly all translations of the New Testament in recent decades.

Metzger's commentaries often utilize historical criticism and higher criticism, which attempt to explain the literary and historical origins of the Bible and the biblical canon. For instance, Metzger argues that the early church which assembled the New Testament did not consider divine inspiration to be a sufficient criterion for a book to be canonized. Metzger says that for the early church, it was very important that a work describing Jesus' life be written by a follower of or an eyewitness to Jesus, and in fact considered other works such as The Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistles of Clement to be inspired but not canonical. Because of such views, he has been criticized by some evangelicals who believe Metzger's views contradict the idea that the Bible is inerrant in its original manuscripts.[1]
Source: http://www.answers.com/topic/bruce-metzger
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
Redeemed
05-10-2007, 03:54 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
To get things started. It is difficult to think that the Bible is inerrent when some of the most noted Bible Scholars and translators have come to the conclusion that it is not inerrent and it is not the Divine revelation of God(swt)

The most famous and the best known is Dr. Bruce Metzger who recently passed away. He is most known for having done the best Greek translations into English. He is also the Author of several best selling Bibles and a contributor to the RSV.



Source: http://www.answers.com/topic/bruce-metzger
I am not that knowledgeable but I am fully persuaded that although I may not be able to answer some of your points and questions that there is an adequate explanation. As Gleason says: "the aerodynamic engineer may not understand how a bumble bee can fly; yet he trusts that there must be an... explanation for its fine performance since, as a matter of fact, it does fly!" Look at it this way; to us Christians the Lord Jesus is final and supreme. If there are errors in any of His teachings, then Christianity would be a hoax. So we Christians must contradict any thing that says that the Bible is flawed in theory. Gleason also states that "a careful examination of Christ's references to the Old Testament makes it unmistakably evident that He fully accepted as factual even the most controversial statements in the Hebrew bible pertaining to history and science." Some of these in question are Jonah and the story of Noah and the Exodus.
Reply

Woodrow
05-10-2007, 03:58 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I am not that knowledgeable but I am fully persuaded that although I may not be able to answer some of your points and questions that there is an adequate explanation. As Gleason says: "the aerodynamic engineer may not understand how a bumble bee can fly; yet he trusts that there must be an... explanation for its fine performance since, as a matter of fact, it does fly!" Look at it this way; to us Christians the Lord Jesus is final and supreme. If there are errors in any of His teachings, then Christianity would be a hoax. So we Christians must contradict any thing that says that the Bible is flawed in theory. Gleason also states that "a careful examination of Christ's references to the Old Testament makes it unmistakably evident that He fully accepted as factual even the most controversial statements in the Hebrew bible pertaining to history and science." Some of these in question are Jonah and the story of Noah and the Exodus.
I can agree with this.

If there are errors in any of His teachings, then Christianity would be a hoax.
However, I do not believe his teachings were a Hoax, I believe that what is presented as his teachings is a hoax.
Reply

Redeemed
05-10-2007, 04:21 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
I can agree with this.



However, I do not believe his teachings were a Hoax, I believe that what is presented as his teachings is a hoax.
Again, what your saying by that is Christianity is a hoax. We cannot allow that thought to be entertained much less spoken. :omg:

If Christianity is a hoax as you say, I choose to follow it till the end and face Allah the Great Judge with the responsibility of my choice. At least I have a good advocate. Many will face the Judge without one.:enough!:
Reply

Hemoo
05-10-2007, 04:34 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
If Christianity is a hoax as you say, I choose to follow it till the end and face Allah the Great Judge with the responsibility of my choice. At least I have a good advocate. Many will face the Judge without one.:enough!:
but you still have the chance to chose what Allah want you to follow.

you still have the chance to research different ideas untill you reach the right way that surely leads you to Paradise and make you deserve the mercy of Allah the Almighty.

I wish you and I and every one to be Always Guided to the right path that pleases our Creator.

and here is a little gift to you, i hope it is usefull.

in the Authintic book of Sahih Muslim

Abu Dharr reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying that Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, said: My servants, I have made oppression unlawful for Me and unlawful for you, so do not commit oppression against one another. My servants, all of you are liable to err except one whom I guide on the right path, so seek right guidance from Me so that I should direct you to the right path. O My servants, all of you are hungry (needy) except one whom I feed, so beg food from Me, so that I may give that to you. O My servants, all of you are naked (need clothes) except one whom I provide garments, so beg clothes from Me, so that I should clothe you. O My servants, you commit error night and day and I am there to pardon your sins, so beg pardon from Me so that I should grant you pardon. O My servants, you can neither do Me any harm nor can you do Me any good. O My servants, even if the first amongst you and the last amongst you and even the whole of human race of yours, and that of jinns even, become (equal in) God-conscious like the heart of a single person amongst you, nothing would add to My Power. O My servants, even if the first amongst you and the last amongst you and the whole human race of yours and that of the Jinns too in unison become the most wicked (all beating) like the heart of a single person, it would cause no loss to My Power. O My servants, even if the first amongst you and the last amongst you and the whole human race of yours and that of jinns also all stand in one plain ground and you ask Me and I confer upon every person what he asks for, it would not in any way, cause any loss to Me (even less) than that which is caused to the ocean by dipping the needle in it. My servants, these for you I shall reward you for them, so he who deeds of yours which I am recording finds good should praise Allah and he who does not find that should not blame anyone but his own-self. Sa'id said that when Abu Idris Khaulini narrated this hadith he knelt upon his knees.
Reply

Philosopher
05-10-2007, 04:40 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I am not that knowledgeable but I am fully persuaded that although I may not be able to answer some of your points and questions that there is an adequate explanation. As Gleason says: "the aerodynamic engineer may not understand how a bumble bee can fly; yet he trusts that there must be an... explanation for its fine performance since, as a matter of fact, it does fly!" Look at it this way; to us Christians the Lord Jesus is final and supreme. If there are errors in any of His teachings, then Christianity would be a hoax. So we Christians must contradict any thing that says that the Bible is flawed in theory. Gleason also states that "a careful examination of Christ's references to the Old Testament makes it unmistakably evident that He fully accepted as factual even the most controversial statements in the Hebrew bible pertaining to history and science." Some of these in question are Jonah and the story of Noah and the Exodus.
When you are not knowledgeable but are fully persuaded, it means you are following your faith blindly.
Reply

Woodrow
05-10-2007, 05:04 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
Again, what your saying by that is Christianity is a hoax. We cannot allow that thought to be entertained much less spoken. :omg:

If Christianity is a hoax as you say, I choose to follow it till the end and face Allah the Great Judge with the responsibility of my choice. At least I have a good advocate. Many will face the Judge without one.:enough!:
I sincerly believe this statement:

Again, what your saying by that is Christianity is a hoax.
I know that you are still misguided and it sounds blasphemous to you. But, it is the truth.

Paul did not bring Christianity to the World, He brought Greek Paganism to Christianity and interpreted the writings of the true apostles to be acceptable to the Greeks.

Very little of the NT has any of the Injil that God(swt) revealed to Isa(as) . In fact trying to find anything in the NT that was told to Isa(as) by God(as) is very difficult to find.

I am quite certain God(as) would have spoken to Isa(as) many times. But, where does the NT tell anything God(swt) said to Isa(as)?
Reply

Redeemed
05-10-2007, 05:54 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Philosopher
When you are not knowledgeable but are fully persuaded, it means you are following your faith blindly.
What I meant was that I am not that knowledgeable about Islam and what all the scholars say in regards to pro and cons leading to Bible history and translations, but I am knowledgeable about the true spirit of the Bible. Yes, I admit I follow my faith blindly or not being able to see clearly, but one day, I will see clearly and know even as I am known. You see, faith is the evidence of the unseen and the substance of things hoped for. It's like the pilot that trusts his instruments instead of his feelings. You follow reason and logic and I go by faith. It is like one who goes by feelings and the other by faith. Feelings make a good servant but a very poor leader.:statisfie
Reply

Joe98
05-10-2007, 05:55 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
I am quite certain God(as) would have spoken to Isa(as) many times. But, where does the NT tell anything God(swt) said to Isa(as)?
This is a fiction invented by Muslims to discredit Christains.

No Christain has ever claimed that any such thing ever happened. Yet Muslims claim it over and over and over again.

Ultimately all you ever succeed in doing is discrediting Islam.

-
Reply

Redeemed
05-10-2007, 06:05 AM
[QUOTE=Woodrow;734640]I sincerly believe this statement:



I know that you are still misguided and it sounds blasphemous to you. But, it is the truth.

Paul did not bring Christianity to the World, He brought Greek Paganism to Christianity and interpreted the writings of the true apostles to be acceptable to the Greeks.

Very little of the NT has any of the Injil that God(swt) revealed to Isa(as) . In fact trying to find anything in the NT that was told to Isa(as) by God(as) is very difficult to find.

He said to Peter, "This is My Son in whom I am well pleased hear ye him" Jesus said on an occasion that this voice came for your sake. Why would God need to speak to His own word?
Can you prove that Paul brought in pagan things to Christianity. Don't forget the Bereans all searched out Paul's teaching to see if it lined up with the word. Paul passed their test. Paul didn't bring Greek teaching to the Bible. The Greeks copied and perverted Biblical doctrine. You already sent me that refuted article that didn't hold water.:)
Reply

Philosopher
05-10-2007, 06:28 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
What I meant was that I am not that knowledgeable about Islam and what all the scholars say in regards to pro and cons leading to Bible history and translations, but I am knowledgeable about the true spirit of the Bible. Yes, I admit I follow my faith blindly or not being able to see clearly, but one day, I will see clearly and know even as I am known. You see, faith is the evidence of the unseen and the substance of things hoped for. It's like the pilot that trusts his instruments instead of his feelings. You follow reason and logic and I go by faith. It is like one who goes by feelings and the other by faith. Feelings make a good servant but a very poor leader.
What pro and cons are you talking about? It is a given that the Bible is not textually reliable (even the Catholic Church admits this). It is also a fact that the Bible consists of forged verses (ex. Mathew 6:13 and John 7:53 to 8:11).

Also, you need to realize that there are over 4200 religions in the world. Why do you think Christianity is the truth?? You cannot follow a pre-medieval dogma that has absolutely no evidence backing it whatsover.

Also, human beings progressed through reason, not by faith. Furthermore, your pilot analogy is flawed since instruments are empirical. Is faith empirical?? Why do you believe in Jesus and not Zeus?? Like Carl Sagan said, "I don't want to believe, I want to know."

Warmest regards :)
Reply

E'jaazi
05-10-2007, 06:47 AM
Christianity as it is practiced today is a hoax. The original Christians were monotheistic in their beliefs. Remember, Isa (Jesus) and his Apostles were Jews (that is what they were called) and did not invent or start a new religion. The teachings of Paul contradict those of Isa. Matthew 5:17 is a perfect example.
Reply

Philosopher
05-10-2007, 07:08 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
This is a fiction invented by Muslims to discredit Christains.

No Christain has ever claimed that any such thing ever happened. Yet Muslims claim it over and over and over again.

Ultimately all you ever succeed in doing is discrediting Islam.

-
So you have a logical explanation for the Trinity?? I'm interested in hearing your thoughts :D lol
Reply

Trumble
05-10-2007, 07:17 AM
alapiana1,

Again, what your saying by that is Christianity is a hoax.
He is, but has yet to provide anything credible to back up Paul's claimed introduction of 'Greek Paganism'. Most unlike him, actually. Woodrow, not Paul, that is!

You will see a lot of that here, from all sides. People only present the side an argument that suits them and their own beliefs; you need to read rather wider, both posters and elsewhere before you will get anywhere near the 'truth'. In particular this is a muslim forum after all, and the great majority of posters will be doing so from a muslim perspective.


format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

Paul did not bring Christianity to the World, He brought Greek Paganism to Christianity and interpreted the writings of the true apostles to be acceptable to the Greeks.
What 'writings of the true apostles'?
Reply

Joe98
05-10-2007, 07:20 AM
-
This thread is titled “Does the bible need a defence”


format_quote Originally Posted by Philosopher;
So you have a logical explanation for the Trinity??

If you cannot locate a reference to the Trinity in the Bible then you question is off topic.
Reply

Woodrow
05-10-2007, 01:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
alapiana1,



He is, but has yet to provide anything credible to back up Paul's claimed introduction of 'Greek Paganism'. Most unlike him, actually. Woodrow, not Paul, that is!

You will see a lot of that here, from all sides. People only present the side an argument that suits them and their own beliefs; you need to read rather wider, both posters and elsewhere before you will get anywhere near the 'truth'. In particular this is a muslim forum after all, and the great majority of posters will be doing so from a muslim perspective.




What 'writings of the true apostles'?
What 'writings of the true apostles'?

That is what I asked. Where are they? All we have is some Greek writings that say the Apostles said something. But, Where is the verification they said anything?

He is, but has yet to provide anything credible to back up Paul's claimed introduction of 'Greek Paganism'. Most unlike him, actually. Woodrow, not Paul, that is!
Trumble, You enjoy making me work. You are probably more familiar with Greek Mythology than I am.

Although it is not limited to Greek Mythology but entails many ancient beliefs.

CHRISTIANITY DREW HEAVILY ON MITHRAISM

The main body of Christian belief is in fact not originally Christian at all, and a surprisingly large part of it was drawn from the Persian cult of Mithras, which originated around 2000 BC. Known throughout Europe and Asia by the names Mithra, Mitra, Meitros, Mihr, Mehr, and Meher, the cult spread east through India to China, and reached all parts of the Roman Empire, from Scotland to the Sahara Desert, and from Spain to the Black Sea. The remains of Mithraic temples can be found in Britain, Italy, Romania, Germany, Hungary, Bulgaria, Turkey, Persia, Armenia, Syria, Israel, and North Africa.

The similarities between this pre-Christian religion and Christianity itself are too obvious to ignore:

- Mithras was born of a virgin given the title 'Mother of God'”;

- The Mithraic cult believed in a celestial heaven and a hell;

- The Mithraic cult taught that its followers would have immortality and eternal salvation;

- The Mithraic cult taught that there would be a final day of judgment in which the dead would resurrect, and a final conflict between good and evil that would destroy the existing order;

- The Mithraic cult required its followers to be baptized;

- The Mithraic cult had a ceremony in which followers drank wine and ate bread to symbolize the body and blood of Mithras;

- The Mithraic cult held Sundays as a sacred day;

- The Mithraic cult celebrated the birthday of their god annually on December the 25th;

- The Mithraic cult taught that after their god's earthly mission had been accomplished, he took part in a Last Supper with his companions before ascending to heaven, to forever protect the faithful from above.

(Sources: Cumont, Franz. Les Mystères de Mithra. Dover Publications, Inc. New York, 1956; Cumont, Franz. The Oriental Religions in Roman Paganism. Dover Publications, Inc. New York, 1956.)

OTHER RESURRECTION CULTS

The list of pre-Christian resurrection cults is long: Osiris; Tammuz; Adonis; Balder; Attis; and Dionysus - all of these gods were said to have died and been resurrected. Many classical heroic figures, such as Hercules, Perseus, and Theseus, were said to have been born through the union of a virgin mother and divine father.

It is thus apparent that almost all pagan religions, feasts or practices, which Christianity could not suppress, were simply incorporated into Christianity.



The crucifixion theme, which forms the very core of Christianity, is yet another object that is non-Christian in origin. Above right, the writing on this Greek amulet, identifies the crucified figure as the Greek god-man Orpheus-Dionysus, who rose from the dead in that culture's mythology. The parallels with the Christian crucifixion, as illustrated right, are obvious, and it must come as a shock to Christians to learn that the crucifixion story is not theirs, and was incorporated from other non-Christian religions
OTHER RESURRECTION CULTS

The list of pre-Christian resurrection cults is long: Osiris; Tammuz; Adonis; Balder; Attis; and Dionysus - all of these gods were said to have died and been resurrected. Many classical heroic figures, such as Hercules, Perseus, and Theseus, were said to have been born through the union of a virgin mother and divine father.

It is thus apparent that almost all pagan religions, feasts or practices, which Christianity could not suppress, were simply incorporated into Christianity.
Source: http://www.stormfront.org/whitehistory/hwr17a.htm
Reply

Umar001
05-10-2007, 01:25 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
Some say that the Bible is not reliable and the Qur'an is. It may be true that we no longer have any perfect copy of the inerrant original manuscripts of the Bible. But that would be true of us having an imperfect view of Christ Jesus, because He is not here to talk to in the flesh so to speak. All we Christians have is our faith in Him and what He said.
The question is though, is that you place your faith that the Biblical writings are accurate accounts of what Jesus said, so the question is why? Is there a logical reasoning for believing this, if so, then what is it? And if not then how does this make you different from a follower of any other religion who follows it for no reason but a desire.

format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
As I have mentioned in a previous thread, it is not so much reliability as validity that is important. For instance, we could have a Newspaper that is totally accurate (reliable) and free from any errors whatsoever even free of typos, that doesn't make it the word of God. I think we Christians are chasing rabbits to try to defend the Bible. We don't have to. All we have to do is unleash it.
You dont have to do anything, but if someone says something it would be cool to back it up, else all we would have on this forum is:

Muslim: Quran is right...
Christian: Bible is right...
Jew: Torah is right...
and when asked why they believe those claims they say ' I dont have to back it up, I just unleash it'

And you keep saying about the reliability, and again noone claims that being free from change = being Gods word, but being free from change is a prerequisite of being Gods word.

Its existances does not neccesitate existance, but its non exsitances neccesitates non existance.


format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
Look at it this way; to us Christians the Lord Jesus is final and supreme. If there are errors in any of His teachings, then Christianity would be a hoax. So we Christians must contradict any thing that says that the Bible is flawed in theory.
You are skipping possabilities, it's not just two options, either Jesus is right or Jesus is wrong, there is a third option you fail to recognise, i.e. that the Scripture representing Jesus is wrong but not Jesus himself!

If I say, Alapiana says 'I am Muslim!' does this mean that you are Muslim? No it just means that I, the person writing have written a wrong account, similarly, I believe that Jesus is not wrong, but those who have written on him are!

format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
If Christianity is a hoax as you say, I choose to follow it till the end and face Allah the Great Judge with the responsibility of my choice. At least I have a good advocate. Many will face the Judge without one.:enough!:
What's your good advocate, please reveal that to me.
Reply

Trumble
05-10-2007, 06:42 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Woodrow!

'March of the Titans - A History of the White Race'. Did you actually check that site? When I said credible source I meant a respected historian of early Christianity or a scholarly journal, not a bunch of neo-Nazi white supremicists!!


That is what I asked. Where are they? All we have is some Greek writings that say the Apostles said something. But, Where is the verification they said anything?
There is no 'verification'. Any more than there is verification that the Buddha said anything. Or that the the angel Gabriel spoke to Mohammed. In all three cases people believe those things happened because the religious teachings to which they were exposed make sense to them. It's about faith, not 'verification'.
Reply

Woodrow
05-10-2007, 08:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
Woodrow!

'March of the Titans - A History of the White Race'. Did you actually check that site? When I said credible source I meant a respected historian of early Christianity or a scholarly journal, not a bunch of neo-Nazi white supremicists!!




There is no 'verification'. Any more than there is verification that the Buddha said anything. Or that the the angel Gabriel spoke to Mohammed. In all three cases people believe those things happened because the religious teachings to which they were exposed make sense to them. It's about faith, not 'verification'.
I deliberatly selected that site as it definetly is not pro-Islam. This concept of current Christianity being astray from What Christianity was supposed to be is not an exclusive Islamic thing.
Reply

Trumble
05-10-2007, 08:26 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
I deliberatly selected that site as it definetly is not pro-Islam. This concept of current Christianity being astray from What Christianity was supposed to be is not an exclusive Islamic thing.
I never claimed that it was. But is that really the best you can do to support your claim? The issue is not who is, or is not, making that claim; it is whether the claim is true, or at least if there is any credible evidence to support it.
Reply

Woodrow
05-10-2007, 09:20 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
I never claimed that it was. But is that really the best you can do to support your claim? The issue is not who is, or is not, making that claim; it is whether the claim is true, or at least if there is any credible evidence to support it.
It is in agreement with what I have studied about Greek Mythology. I am trying to find some very short concepts about Greek and Mid Eastern Mythology. For those desiring to learn more about Greek mythology i suggest they take a course in it.


The similarities betwenn the mythological beliefs and Christianity are very hard to ignore.


the worship of Mithras and Mithraism is a study in itself. The link I gave although of dubious source did give a good synopsis of Mitraism ,

Here are some more links for further reading. It is hard to find any one link that is complete.

this first link does not show much more than the fact that Mithras was worshiped in Rome in the Year 208 and had a following.

http://museums.ncl.ac.uk/archive/mithras/text.htm

some of the earlier mideastern practices of Mithraism

There was a hymn to Mithra in the Zarathustrian holy work, the Avesta. It is a beautiful hymn or Yast, and Ilya Gershevitch is right to lament that it is not more widely known. In it, Ahura Mazda addresses the prophet Zarathustra, saying that when he created Mithra, he made him as worthy of worship as himself. This accolade is given to no other Amenta Spenta or Yazata. Historians have argued that this distinction indicates only that the cult of Mithra was so important that Zarathustra had to give its god special concessions to convert its members. Some have even argued the popularity from the concessions. But there is another theological reason for the special attention given to Mithra by Zarathustra...

Mithra is a much more fully developed image than the rather ethereal Mitra. Unlike the Indian god, we actually have a relief of the Iranian deity. Reconstruction shows Mithra shaking hands with King Antiochus. It is Mithra's attire, however, that is important to the current study. Mithra wears the Phrygian cap, Persian trousers, and a cape. His hat is star speckled (from textual evidence his chariot is similarly decorated). Rays of light emerge from Mithra's head much like a halo. His choke collar is a serpent. This image, or one very like it, will appear again in Rome.
Source: http://www.iranian.com/History/Sept97/Mitra/index.html


this next article does have some very good reference material to it's statements.

Mithra: The Pagan Christ

Mithra or Mitra is even worshipped as Itu (Mitra-Mitu-Itu) in every house of the Hindus in India. Itu (derivative of Mitu or Mitra) is considered as the Vegetation-deity. This Mithra or Mitra (Sun-God) is believed to be a Mediator between God and man, between the Sky and the Earth. It is said that Mithra or [the] Sun took birth in the Cave on December 25th. It is also the belief of the Christian world that Mithra or the Sun-God was born of [a] Virgin. He travelled far and wide. He has twelve satellites, which are taken as the Sun's disciples.... [The Sun's] great festivals are observed in the Winter Solstice and the Vernal Equinox--Christmas and Easter. His symbol is the Lamb....
Source: http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm


the early Catholic Church gave a very good refutation to mirthraism. Although they claim Mithraism borrowed from Christianity.

Although it is an early refutation, it is interesting in that it acknowledgesA similarity between Mithra and Christ struck even early observers, such as Justin, Tertullian, and other Fathers, and in recent times has been urged to prove that Christianity is but an adaptation of Mithraism, or at most the outcome of the same religious ideas and aspirations (e.g. Robertson, "Pagan Christs", 1903). Against this erroneous and unscientific procedure, which is not endorsed by the greatest living authority on Mithraism, the following considerations must be brought forward. (1) Our knowledge regarding Mithraism is very imperfect; some 600 brief inscriptions, mostly dedicatory, some 300 often fragmentary, exiguous, almost identical monuments, a few casual references in the Fathers or Acts of the Martyrs, and a brief polemic against Mithraism which the Armenian Eznig about 450 probably copied from Theodore of Mopsuestia (d. 428) who lived when Mithraism was almost a thing of the past -- these are our only sources, unless we include the Avesta in which Mithra is indeed mentioned, but which cannot be an authority for Roman Mithraism with which Christianity is compared. Our knowledge is mostly ingenious guess-work; of the real inner working of Mithraism and the sense in which it was understood by those who professed it at the advent of Christianity, we know nothing. (2) Some apparent similarities exist; but in a number of details it is quite probable that Mithraism was the borrower from Christianity. Tertullian about 200 could say: "hesterni sumus et omnia vestra implevimus" ("we are but of yesterday, yet your whole world is full of us"). It is not unnatural to suppose that areligion which filled the whole world, should have been copied at least in some details by another religion which was quite popular during the third century. Moreover the resemblances pointed out are superficial and external. Similarity in words and names is nothing; it is the sense that matters. During these centuries Christianity was coining its own technical terms, and naturally took names, terms, and expressions current in that day; and so did Mithraism. But under identical terms each system thought its own thoughts. Mithra is called a mediator; and so is Christ; but Mithra originally only in a cosmogonic or astronomical sense; Christ, being God and man, is by nature the Mediator between God and man. And so in similar .....
Source: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10402a.htm

the point of this being that in reference to the topic where the topic starter placed a challenge, I would say the Bible does need a defense. there is evidence that it is not unique and that the teachings in it are very similar to ancient pagan beliefs.

I strongly doubt the alleged origin of todays bible and that it is not what Christianity taught.

Now it is up to the Author of the topic to ofer evidence that what is called the Bible is not a re
rewriting of pagan beliefs and a pagan version of Christianity.
Reply

Redeemed
05-11-2007, 02:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Philosopher
What pro and cons are you talking about? It is a given that the Bible is not textually reliable (even the Catholic Church admits this). It is also a fact that the Bible consists of forged verses (ex. Mathew 6:13 and John 7:53 to 8:11).

Also, you need to realize that there are over 4200 religions in the world. Why do you think Christianity is the truth?? You cannot follow a pre-medieval dogma that has absolutely no evidence backing it whatsover.

Also, human beings progressed through reason, not by faith. Furthermore, your pilot analogy is flawed since instruments are empirical. Is faith empirical?? Why do you believe in Jesus and not Zeus?? Like Carl Sagan said, "I don't want to believe, I want to know."

Warmest regards :)
Peace to you:
Let me explain. It is not flawed. It is a known fact that pilots can get disoriented when flying. In other words, their feelings may tell them they are flying straight and right side up, but their instruments are may be telling them telling something else that they are upside down. They need to trust the instruments, which is tantamount to putting your faith in the word of God. There is an old Chinese proverb that says: He that flies upside down cracks up. :rollseyes
Reply

Kashnowe
05-11-2007, 03:03 AM
my humble opinions is that it would be nice if the bible had physical proof like an aunaltered digital video recording showing everything that is written. it would be nice but not going to happen. it would be nice if the quran had a video too. it would be nice if we didn't have to depend on heresay for both of these books but in fact that is what people are doing. yet each religion relies on faith that their religion's basis for their beliefs is fact

the muslims say angel gabriel spoke to mohammed. well how do you know that? were you there when this happened? no. oh but close followers of mohammed knew this to be true. and a lot of reputable people said so. well how do you know these people's reputation? they could have been liars. (don't mean to insult anyone) and how is that? and every exact word that mohammed spoke was remembered for a few hundred years before someone decided to write it down. this leaves muuuuuuuuuuuch room for words to get tangled.

the same with the bible. everything is written by the hand of a person. and then rewritten and so on and so on. of course there will be some inconsistencies. if you read charlotte's web and see a few typos where the pig is called a cow but 98% of the time hes called a pig then you can infer that the is in fact a pig and someone made the mistake of typing cow. (my examples make me :giggling: )

forgive me if this is confusing but i have a baby and i was just singing this to him and it made me think of this example.

"twinkle twinkle little star how i wonder what you are..."
gets passed on throughout generations then someone slips and says it wrong. just an honest mistake but the context changes dramatically
"twinkle twinkle little star how i know what you are..."
Reply

Woodrow
05-11-2007, 03:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
my humble opinions is that it would be nice if the bible had physical proof like an aunaltered digital video recording showing everything that is written. it would be nice but not going to happen. it would be nice if the quran had a video too. it would be nice if we didn't have to depend on heresay for both of these books but in fact that is what people are doing. yet each religion relies on faith that their religion's basis for their beliefs is fact

the muslims say angel gabriel spoke to mohammed. well how do you know that? were you there when this happened? no. oh but close followers of mohammed knew this to be true. and a lot of reputable people said so. well how do you know these people's reputation? they could have been liars. (don't mean to insult anyone) and how is that? and every exact word that mohammed spoke was remembered for a few hundred years before someone decided to write it down. this leaves muuuuuuuuuuuch room for words to get tangled.

the same with the bible. everything is written by the hand of a person. and then rewritten and so on and so on. of course there will be some inconsistencies. if you read charlotte's web and see a few typos where the pig is called a cow but 98% of the time hes called a pig then you can infer that the is in fact a pig and someone made the mistake of typing cow. (my examples make me :giggling: )

forgive me if this is confusing but i have a baby and i was just singing this to him and it made me think of this example.

"twinkle twinkle little star how i wonder what you are..."
gets passed on throughout generations then someone slips and says it wrong. just an honest mistake but the context changes dramatically
"twinkle twinkle little star how i know what you are..."
Now you are going to make me work.

and every exact word that mohammed spoke was remembered for a few hundred years before someone decided to write it down. this leaves muuuuuuuuuuuch room for words to get tangled.
Actully it was written down while Muhammad(PBUH) was alive and he approved of ever word as it was read back to him.

Now, at the moment I am brain dead as to where i saw the verification of that.

I'll try to remember and come back and post it.
Reply

Kashnowe
05-11-2007, 03:37 AM
i saw on previous posts that the quran wasn't written down until 800 years later. it was memorized by mohammed's fans rather.

the quran is long. i myself have a wonderful memory and i know people who remember all the words to many of their favorite movies.......but the true nature of humans is that we make mistakes. so in my opinion both muslims and christians base every single thing they believe in on faith from heresay a couple thousand years old.

mormons too. sheesh.

no they are not christians!!!
Reply

Woodrow
05-11-2007, 03:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
i saw on previous posts that the quran wasn't written down until 800 years later. it was memorized by mohammed's fans rather.

the quran is long. i myself have a wonderful memory and i know people who remember all the words to many of their favorite movies.......but the true nature of humans is that we make mistakes. so in my opinion both muslims and christians base every single thing they believe in on faith from heresay a couple thousand years old.

mormons too. sheesh.

no they are not christians!!!
I wont deny that my memory is not what it used to be. But, I'll look a bit further before giving up that I had seen it was written while Muhammad(PBUH) was alive
Reply

Woodrow
05-11-2007, 03:58 AM
I still can't find the exact stuff I had seen before. But I did find this in Wiki:

First written accounts

Sahaba began recording suras in writing before Muhammad died in 632. Written copies of various suras during his lifetime are frequently alluded to in the traditions. For example, in the story of the conversion of Umar ibn al-Khattab (when Muhammad was still at Mecca), his sister is said to have been reading a text of sura Ta-Ha. At Medina, about sixty-five companions are believed to have acted as scribes for him at one time or another. The prophet would regularly call upon them to write down revelations immediately after they were revealed to him. However, Muhammad's revelations were not bound into one single book during his lifetime.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_and_development_of_the_Qur'an

And the Hadith written at that time:

Volumn 006, Book 060, Hadith Number 117.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Al-Bara : When the Verse: "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home)" (4.95) was revealed, Allah Apostle called for Zaid who wrote it. In the meantime Ibn Um Maktum came and complained of his blindness, so Allah revealed: "Except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame..." etc.) (4.95)


Volumn 006, Book 060, Hadith Number 118.
-----------------------------------------
Narated By Al-Bara : When the Verse: "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home)," (4.95) was revealed, the Prophet said, "Call so-and-so." That person came to him with an ink-pot and a wooden board or a shoulder scapula bone. The Prophet said (to him), "Write: 'Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah." Ibn Um Maktum who was sitting behind the Prophet then said, "O Allah's Apostle! I am a blind man." So there was revealed in the place of that Verse, the Verse: "Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home) except those who are disabled (by injury, or are blind or lame etc.) and those who strive and fight in the Cause of Allah." (4.95)
Reply

Redeemed
05-11-2007, 04:25 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
my humble opinions is that it would be nice if the bible had physical proof like an aunaltered digital video recording showing everything that is written. it would be nice but not going to happen. it would be nice if the quran had a video too. it would be nice if we didn't have to depend on heresay for both of these books but in fact that is what people are doing. yet each religion relies on faith that their religion's basis for their beliefs is fact

the muslims say angel gabriel spoke to mohammed. well how do you know that? were you there when this happened? no. oh but close followers of mohammed knew this to be true. and a lot of reputable people said so. well how do you know these people's reputation? they could have been liars. (don't mean to insult anyone) and how is that? and every exact word that mohammed spoke was remembered for a few hundred years before someone decided to write it down. this leaves muuuuuuuuuuuch room for words to get tangled.

the same with the bible. everything is written by the hand of a person. and then rewritten and so on and so on. of course there will be some inconsistencies. if you read charlotte's web and see a few typos where the pig is called a cow but 98% of the time hes called a pig then you can infer that the is in fact a pig and someone made the mistake of typing cow. (my examples make me :giggling: )

forgive me if this is confusing but i have a baby and i was just singing this to him and it made me think of this example.

"twinkle twinkle little star how i wonder what you are..."
gets passed on throughout generations then someone slips and says it wrong. just an honest mistake but the context changes dramatically
"twinkle twinkle little star how i know what you are..."
I am not sure what your point is.:? Are you trying to say that because of this you don't need to be accountable to God?
Reply

Umar001
05-12-2007, 11:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
my humble opinions is that it would be nice if the bible had physical proof like an aunaltered digital video recording showing everything that is written. it would be nice but not going to happen. it would be nice if the quran had a video too. it would be nice if we didn't have to depend on heresay for both of these books but in fact that is what people are doing. yet each religion relies on faith that their religion's basis for their beliefs is fact

the muslims say angel gabriel spoke to mohammed. well how do you know that? were you there when this happened? no. oh but close followers of mohammed knew this to be true. and a lot of reputable people said so. well how do you know these people's reputation? they could have been liars. (don't mean to insult anyone) and how is that? and every exact word that mohammed spoke was remembered for a few hundred years before someone decided to write it down. this leaves muuuuuuuuuuuch room for words to get tangled.
Maybe your doubts comes from misinformation i.e. people remembering the words of muhammad for few hundreds of years before writing it down.

format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
the same with the bible. everything is written by the hand of a person. and then rewritten and so on and so on. of course there will be some inconsistencies.
The compilation of the Bible and the Qu'ran are totally different cases. For example, the Qu'ran was compiled and written within the life time of it's deliverer, the Bible was compiled a while later, were the books of the Bible even selected by disciples who walked with Jesus, furthermore, the bulk of the NT is written by someone who didnt even meet Jesus, and the Gospels are likely to have had been influenced by his teachings, this and more makes the compilation of the Qu'ran and the Bible very different.

format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
i saw on previous posts that the quran wasn't written down until 800 years later. it was memorized by mohammed's fans rather.

the quran is long. i myself have a wonderful memory and i know people who remember all the words to many of their favorite movies.......but the true nature of humans is that we make mistakes. so in my opinion both muslims and christians base every single thing they believe in on faith from heresay a couple thousand years old.
Well actually it was written down within the life of Muhammad and compiled into one book within a year or so of his death.

Furthermore ther are people who not only memorise the whole Qu'ran but other books ontop of that, including some hadith literature, and this is inthese days, imagine in the earlier generations where the success of muslims was higher, add to this that it was not one or two people but many all cross checking each other, add to that the fact that there were also written materials.

Anyhow,

Regards,
Eesa.
Reply

Kashnowe
05-12-2007, 02:02 PM
i'll have to look back at other posts....i'm sure i read somewhere that the quran wasn't written down until 800 years later....hrm.

my point was saying that we all rely on faith in the end.
Reply

Umar001
05-12-2007, 02:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
i'll have to look back at other posts....i'm sure i read somewhere that the quran wasn't written down until 800 years later....hrm.

my point was saying that we all rely on faith in the end.
Faith, but the difference is how we choose where to place the faith, right?

Some just guess where they put their faith, other place it because they are born in a religion and others chose various other reasons.
Reply

Redeemed
05-12-2007, 04:46 PM
[QUOTE=Al Habeshi;735890]Faith, but the difference is how we choose where to place the faith, right?

Exactly, those that guess what religion to put their faith in especially if they guess Christianity are the ones who easily revert to other religions. On the other hand, when someone responds to God drawing him or her to Christ, they begin to develop an actual relationship with the Lord on a personal level; that is what is missing in Islam. When one is rooted and ground in Christ they become oaks, and out of them flow rivers of living water. That is why the Bible says to know Him is to have eternal life. To have a Religion and not relationship is death; it is a drug that keeps its adherents addicted to it. It appeals to the senses, which is a work of the flesh that is confused for a spiritual relationship with God. God is love and you cannot have more love than to lay down your life for a friend. That is what Jesus did for us. He shed His blood for the remission of our sins. Without the shedding of Blood there is no forgiveness for our past, present and future sins. That doesn’t mean we can live in sin, NO heaven forbid, but it does mean we have been set free from them. Anyone who continues to live in sin is a slave to it and God is not mock. That person will reap as he sows. It is written: He that has the Son has life; he that does not has not life, but the wrath of God is on him or her.
Reply

Woodrow
05-12-2007, 08:18 PM
[QUOTE=alapiana1;736015]
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
Faith, but the difference is how we choose where to place the faith, right?

Exactly, those that guess what religion to put their faith in especially if they guess Christianity are the ones who easily revert to other religions. On the other hand, when someone responds to God drawing him or her to Christ, they begin to develop an actual relationship with the Lord on a personal level; that is what is missing in Islam. When one is rooted and ground in Christ they become oaks, and out of them flow rivers of living water. That is why the Bible says to know Him is to have eternal life. To have a Religion and not relationship is death; it is a drug that keeps its adherents addicted to it. It appeals to the senses, which is a work of the flesh that is confused for a spiritual relationship with God. God is love and you cannot have more love than to lay down your life for a friend. That is what Jesus did for us. He shed His blood for the remission of our sins. Without the shedding of Blood there is no forgiveness for our past, present and future sins. That doesn’t mean we can live in sin, NO heaven forbid, but it does mean we have been set free from them. Anyone who continues to live in sin is a slave to it and God is not mock. That person will reap as he sows. It is written: He that has the Son has life; he that does not has not life, but the wrath of God is on him or her.
I'm just curious about this part.

they begin to develop an actual relationship with the Lord on a personal level; that is what is missing in Islam.
There are quite a few people in this world, in fact about 1.5 Billion who will say that is not missing. Do you not understand that every Muslim enters into personal conversation with Allah(swt) at least 5 times a day and we feel his presence even more than we feel the presence of our Parents or children. He is with each of us on a very close personal level.

That is a very naive statement or you actually believe people will willingly surrender their lives to the service of Allah(swt), give up all to follow him and have every thought and deed dedicated to him, unless they they personally know his presence.
Reply

Redeemed
05-12-2007, 09:52 PM
[QUOTE=Woodrow;736142]
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1

I'm just curious about this part.



There are quite a few people in this world, in fact about 1.5 Billion who will say that is not missing. Do you not understand that every Muslim enters into personal conversation with Allah(swt) at least 5 times a day and we feel his presence even more than we feel the presence of our Parents or children. He is with each of us on a very close personal level.

That is a very naive statement or you actually believe people will willingly surrender their lives to the service of Allah(swt), give up all to follow him and have every thought and deed dedicated to him, unless they they personally know his presence.
:hmm: Sorry about that. I am still learning. I got the impression from others (Muslims) that they weren't sure what their eternal destiny was going to be (heaven or hell). That Allah will make that call on their last day. I know where I am going, and I didn't know you feel the same about yourself. The only problem, however, is that according to the Qur'an, I am judged unworthy, and according to the Bible, you are too. You pray 5 times a day in communion with God; we are told to pray without ceasing!!^o)
peace
Reply

Redeemed
05-12-2007, 10:13 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
The question is though, is that you place your faith that the Biblical writings are accurate accounts of what Jesus said, so the question is why? Is there a logical reasoning for believing this, if so, then what is it? And if not then how does this make you different from a follower of any other religion who follows it for no reason but a desire.



You dont have to do anything, but if someone says something it would be cool to back it up, else all we would have on this forum is:

Muslim: Quran is right...
Christian: Bible is right...
Jew: Torah is right...
and when asked why they believe those claims they say ' I dont have to back it up, I just unleash it'

And you keep saying about the reliability, and again noone claims that being free from change = being Gods word, but being free from change is a prerequisite of being Gods word.

Its existances does not neccesitate existance, but its non exsitances neccesitates non existance.




You are skipping possabilities, it's not just two options, either Jesus is right or Jesus is wrong, there is a third option you fail to recognise, i.e. that the Scripture representing Jesus is wrong but not Jesus himself!

If I say, Alapiana says 'I am Muslim!' does this mean that you are Muslim? No it just means that I, the person writing have written a wrong account, similarly, I believe that Jesus is not wrong, but those who have written on him are!



What's your good advocate, please reveal that to me.
I understood you perfectly; I don't beleve that there are any errors in the recorded words of Jesus. I believe that the devil would want people to believe that there is, because he hates God's creation and wants them destroyed. My advocate is none other than Jesus before the Judge. I am guilty, but when Jesus comes to my defense, I will not have to give an account for all my sins; I would have already been justified. That is what Muslims are missing.:nervous:
Reply

Umar001
05-12-2007, 10:30 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
Exactly, those that guess what religion to put their faith in especially if they guess Christianity are the ones who easily revert to other religions. On the other hand, when someone responds to God drawing him or her to Christ, they begin to develop an actual relationship with the Lord on a personal level;
But they do not have any actual logical reason for that, they just 'feel' God calling them, just as a Muslim has had the feeling, Just as a Jew has had that feeling, I have spoken to people from all three and all of them tell me, and by far the most amazing one was the Jewish testimony where my friend claimed God kissed him when he went to the temple.

Does this mean that because he 'feels' he has a relletionship with God he is right, no! Just becaue one THINKS or Feels he is having a reletionship with God doesnt mean he is, for all he knows he could be dancing with the devil!!

This is why I prefer not to go on feelings alone, specially since we know that satan can effect us in that area.

format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
that is what is missing in Islam.
No my friend, this is what you feel is missing in Islam!!


format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
:hmm: Sorry about that. I am still learning. I got the impression from others (Muslims) that they weren't sure what their eternal destiny was going to be (heaven or hell).
Let me ask you a question, can God chose to send you to hell?

format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I know where I am going, and I didn't know you feel the same about yourself. The only problem, however, is that according to the Qur'an, I am judged unworthy, and according to the Bible, you are too. You pray 5 times a day in communion with God; we are told to pray without ceasing!!^o)
peace
Mistake after mistake,

1. You think you know where you going, let me give u an example, if someone gives me a bus time table, the bus time table says the bus is taking me such and such a place, and I sit at the bus stop SURE I am going to that place, but in reality for all I know the Bus Time Table could be wrong.

In a same way, you are here sitting saying 'I know where I am going' because of what you 'feel' and what the Bible says, but in reality your Bible could be, and in reality is wrong!!


2. You misunderstand Islamic Salaah with your prayer, your prayer is a non ceasing invocation or talking with God, actually in Islam we do have that 24/7 too!! Our prayer is something extra, so in reality, we have the never ceasing part, and on top we have 5 extra mandatory appointments with God to keep us in check. ;)

format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I understood you perfectly; I don't beleve that
there are any errors in the recorded words of Jesus.
And what makes you derive to the conclusion that there are not any errors in the Biblical accounts of Jesus' life?

format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I believe that the devil would want people to believe that there is, because he hates God's creation and wants them destroyed.
Anyone can say that about any book/scripture.

format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
My advocate is none other than Jesus before the Judge. I am guilty, but when Jesus comes to my defense, I will not have to give an account for all my sins; I would have already been justified. That is what Muslims are missing.:nervous:
Jesus aint coming to your defense and when God asks you why you believed he would you will claim that you believed in a text which was written by people you dont even know the life of, and a text which had contradictions in it, blatant additions, and causes of worry within it, yet you chose to take this text anyway.

A child who plays with fire will get burnt, saying 'I thought these gloves were fire proof' even though everything before hand indicated that they were not will not help you but rather be a witness against you!!

As for what Muslims are missing then you surely havent heard of Allah's mercy!!
Reply

Redeemed
05-12-2007, 10:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
But they do not have any actual logical reason for that, they just 'feel' God calling them, just as a Muslim has had the feeling, Just as a Jew has had that feeling, I have spoken to people from all three and all of them tell me, and by far the most amazing one was the Jewish testimony where my friend claimed God kissed him when he went to the temple.
The things of God and our faith have nothing to do with feelings or logic; it is my faith that is the substance of the things I hope for and the evidence of the things not seen as it is written.

Does this mean that because he 'feels' he has a relletionship with God he is right, no! Just becaue one THINKS or Feels he is having a reletionship with God doesnt mean he is, for all he knows he could be dancing with the devil!!Again I say to you it has nothing to do with feelings or logic. Feelings, logic and good intentions pave the way to hell.

This is why I prefer not to go on feelings alone, specially since we know that satan can effect us in that area. I agree with you here.



No my friend, this is what you feel is missing in Islam!!




Let me ask you a question, can God chose to send you to hell?
Not when I am covered by the blood of the Lamb. :happy:
Mistake after mistake,

1. You think you know where you going, let me give u an example, if someone gives me a bus time table, the bus time table says the bus is taking me such and such a place, and I sit at the bus stop SURE I am going to that place, but in reality for all I know the Bus Time Table could be wrong. Just because you don't know, doesn't mean I can't! That is your limitation not mine. I have the faith to back up my statements or I wouldn't say them. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin!
In a same way, you are here sitting saying 'I know where I am going' because of what you 'feel' and what the Bible says, but in reality your Bible could be, and in reality is wrong!! Have you not heard and haven't I told you from the begining, I go by faith not feelings. The just shall live by faith!!!
2. You misunderstand Islamic Salaah with your prayer, your prayer is a non ceasing invocation or talking with God, actually in Islam we do have that 24/7 too!! Our prayer is something extra, so in reality, we have the never ceasing part, and on top we have 5 extra mandatory appointments with God to keep us in check. ;) We have nothing mandatory put on us. We are free to love and serve God. Our God doesn't want us to be compliant automatons. His youke is easy and His burden is light.

And what makes you derive to the conclusion that there are not any errors in the Biblical accounts of Jesus' life? It is what I choose to believe and the Bible needs no defense!

Anyone can say that about any book/scripture.



Jesus aint coming to your defense and when God asks you why you believed he would you will claim that you believed in a text which was written by people you dont even know the life of, and a text which had contradictions in it, blatant additions, and causes of worry within it, yet you chose to take this text anyway.
I can say that Allah aint coming to your defense and when God asks you why you believed he would you will claim that you believed in a text which was written by people you dont even know also for sure, and a text which has reliability, but where is the validity when it contradicts the Bible?A child who plays with fire will get burnt, saying 'I thought these gloves were fire proof' even though everything before hand indicated that they were not will not help you but rather be a witness against you!! There is no thought about it; it is what I know because God said so!
As for what Muslims are missing then you surely havent heard of Allah's mercy!!
You haven't heard God's justice!:eek:
Peace to you
Reply

Umar001
05-12-2007, 11:10 PM
The things of God and our faith have nothing to do with feelings or logic; it is my faith that is the substance of the things I hope for and the evidence of the things not seen as it is written.

You again seem to be confused, I do not say that you need logic in faith, but you need logic or reason to know where to place your faith.

For example, you see a time table for the bus, you want to get the Bus 32, but the time table says 35, are you going to just have faith in that time table , no, you decide to logically put your faith in the time table entitled Bus 32!

Again I say to you it has nothing to do with feelings or logic. Feelings, logic and good intentions pave the way to hell.

lol, no problem, what your saying is that you dont have to think of which religion to choose, just choose any for any reason, no logic or thinking behind it.

I agree with you here.


Butthat's all you go on, feelings, I 'believethis or I believe that'!

Not when I am covered by the blood of the Lamb.


But if you turn away then from the sacrafise then he could? Right?

Just because you don't know, doesn't mean I can't! Rhat is your limitation not mine. I have the faith to back up my statements or I wouldn't say them. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin!

You know what, that's ok, since you dont have no discussion to bear, all you have is 'I believe this you believe it or your such and such' preaching and you have no basic reasoning then there's no point of you being here unless to preach is there.

Have you not heard and haven't I told you from the begining, I go by faith not feelings. The just shall live by faith!!!


Your faith is based on feelings 'I believe this' and so forth, no other reason.

We have nothing mandatory put on us. We are free to love and serve God. Our God doesn't want us to be compliant automatons. His youke is easy and His burden is light.

This is the most illogical statement ever, can a person who is not saved by the blood of Jesus go heaven? No, so then it is mandatory that he believes that, and accepts Jesus as his saviour, so then YOU DO HAVE THAT MANDATORY THING ON YOU!!

It is what I choose to believe and the Bible needs no defense!

Well feel free to believe it where ever you want, but no need to come here preaching when you have no substance for discussion.

There is no thought about it; it is what I know because God said so!


Lol and how you know God said it? Because the Bible said it, and how you know the Bible is right because I just believe. And round and round we go.


You haven't heard God's justice!

Justice does not mean punishment, lol.



Anyhow, I dont think theres any point in us carrying our conversation further, I like to think that God sent us a Message and a way taht would be easy to recognise otherwise if chosing religion was based on just blind faith anyone would have the right to chose any religion.

For this reason I dont see any fruitful discussion occouring since it seems clear you feel there is no reason behind placing faith in something other than just having blind faith in the first place.

I have tried and tried to explain myself and maybe this is my problem.

All the best in life,

Eesa.
Reply

Woodrow
05-12-2007, 11:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I understood you perfectly; I don't beleve that there are any errors in the recorded words of Jesus. I believe that the devil would want people to believe that there is, because he hates God's creation and wants them destroyed. My advocate is none other than Jesus before the Judge. I am guilty, but when Jesus comes to my defense, I will not have to give an account for all my sins; I would have already been justified. That is what Muslims are missing.:nervous:
Look carefully at what you said above.

now, listen carefully to what you said in there.

I believe that the devil would want people to believe that there is, because he hates God's creation and wants them destroyed.
In that case wouldn't a misleading of the nature of Christ(as) be the greatest tool Shaytan has ever devised and it has brought about the loss of over 2 billion people? Since to believe that Jesus(as) is God(swt) is an error, wouldn't Shaytan make people feel good, warm and fuzzy over worshiping Jesus(as)
Reply

جوري
05-12-2007, 11:57 PM
Might I suggest Alapiana1 work on the Atheist members instead of the Muslims... I believe it would be more fruitful... seems the "devil" really got a hold of them.

peace!
Reply

Redeemed
05-13-2007, 02:25 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Look carefully at what you said above.

now, listen carefully to what you said in there.



In that case wouldn't a misleading of the nature of Christ(as) be the greatest tool Shaytan has ever devised and it has brought about the loss of over 2 billion people? Since to believe that Jesus(as) is God(swt) is an error, wouldn't Shaytan make people feel good, warm and fuzzy over worshiping Jesus(as)
I understand where you are coming from. One of us is following a false religion that is an abomination to God. In light of this, what does it take to reach that lost someone? I get judge by you guys if I preach or try to teach some things about Christianity or the true flowerers of Christ. Let me be honest with you Woodrow. You have been the most gracious and patient Muslim on this forum. Maybe that was because you used to be a Christian; nevertheless, I have been able to talk to you, even when you tell me how misguided you think I am, without concern for my head being chopped off. The others have patronized me; laughed at me; mocked me; criticized me; dislike me and reject me by wanting me off this forum. I have never been offended at any of your statement and you didn't seem to be offended at any of mine. If you were, you hide it well. I haven't been offended by anything or anyone even though my character was attacked on this forum, but that doesn't mean someone can't hurt me. I haven't had any of these negative reactions that your Muslim brothers and sisters have had toward me. This speaks volumes to me. My responses and actions on this forum tells me that I have a security in God that keeps me patient and full of compassion of wanting to reach them with the truth and show that I have an understanding that they are not the enemy. This battle is spiritual. I feel like I have something that they don't have. I ask you how can I know the truth about which religion is from God? Jesus said, "It is by their fruits you shall know them. A good tree doesn't bring forth bad fruit (sorry but that is what I see) and bad tree doesn't bring good fruit. These are the words of Jesus that are not recordered in the Qur'an, at least not to my knowledge. I never heard words or any prophet speak with such power and anointing. For me to change to any religion other than being a follower of Christ would be to downgrade spiritually. I hope you can understand that I truly wish blessings on every person on this forum. I wish and pray for everyone to have eternal life in the presents of God Almighty and His angels.
Sincerely
AJ

:statisfie
Reply

Redeemed
05-13-2007, 02:42 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
The things of God and our faith have nothing to do with feelings or logic; it is my faith that is the substance of the things I hope for and the evidence of the things not seen as it is written.

You again seem to be confused, I do not say that you need logic in faith, but you need logic or reason to know where to place your faith.

For example, you see a time table for the bus, you want to get the Bus 32, but the time table says 35, are you going to just have faith in that time table , no, you decide to logically put your faith in the time table entitled Bus 32!

Again I say to you it has nothing to do with feelings or logic. Feelings, logic and good intentions pave the way to hell.

lol, no problem, what your saying is that you dont have to think of which religion to choose, just choose any for any reason, no logic or thinking behind it.

I agree with you here.


Butthat's all you go on, feelings, I 'believethis or I believe that'!

Not when I am covered by the blood of the Lamb.


But if you turn away then from the sacrafise then he could? Right?

Just because you don't know, doesn't mean I can't! Rhat is your limitation not mine. I have the faith to back up my statements or I wouldn't say them. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin!

You know what, that's ok, since you dont have no discussion to bear, all you have is 'I believe this you believe it or your such and such' preaching and you have no basic reasoning then there's no point of you being here unless to preach is there.

Have you not heard and haven't I told you from the begining, I go by faith not feelings. The just shall live by faith!!!


Your faith is based on feelings 'I believe this' and so forth, no other reason.

We have nothing mandatory put on us. We are free to love and serve God. Our God doesn't want us to be compliant automatons. His youke is easy and His burden is light.

This is the most illogical statement ever, can a person who is not saved by the blood of Jesus go heaven? No, so then it is mandatory that he believes that, and accepts Jesus as his saviour, so then YOU DO HAVE THAT MANDATORY THING ON YOU!!

It is what I choose to believe and the Bible needs no defense!

Well feel free to believe it where ever you want, but no need to come here preaching when you have no substance for discussion.

There is no thought about it; it is what I know because God said so!


Lol and how you know God said it? Because the Bible said it, and how you know the Bible is right because I just believe. And round and round we go.


You haven't heard God's justice!

Justice does not mean punishment, lol.



Anyhow, I dont think theres any point in us carrying our conversation further, I like to think that God sent us a Message and a way taht would be easy to recognise otherwise if chosing religion was based on just blind faith anyone would have the right to chose any religion.

For this reason I dont see any fruitful discussion occouring since it seems clear you feel there is no reason behind placing faith in something other than just having blind faith in the first place.

I have tried and tried to explain myself and maybe this is my problem.

All the best in life,

Eesa.
Your right lets not argue. This is not getting us anywhere. I do use some discernment look at my note to Woodrow>:omg:
Reply

Woodrow
05-13-2007, 02:43 AM
I have no doubt about your sincerity. Like you I too desire to see all people on the right path to gain eternal life.

I truly do believe that Christ(as) by being part of my early life, was a guiding force that lead me to Islam. By giving my life to Allah(swt) I did not forsake Isa(as) I learned what his true message was and as a Muslim I believe and feel I am on the path Christianity was meant to be on.

There is no need to be in love with the feeling of being in love. To truly love Allah(swt) removes any need for any falseness.
Reply

Redeemed
05-13-2007, 04:07 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
I have no doubt about your sincerity. Like you I too desire to see all people on the right path to gain eternal life.

I truly do believe that Christ(as) by being part of my early life, was a guiding force that lead me to Islam. By giving my life to Allah(swt) I did not forsake Isa(as) I learned what his true message was and as a Muslim I believe and feel I am on the path Christianity was meant to be on.

There is no need to be in love with the feeling of being in love. To truly love Allah(swt) removes any need for any falseness.
I have four questions:
1. How did Christianity lead you to Islam?
2. How did the others find it without Christianity?
3. I have studied the Bible carefully and continue to so. How come it doesn't lead me to Islam; in fact, it leads me away from it?
4. What do you mean there is no need to be in love with the feeling of being love?
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-13-2007, 06:51 AM
Some interesting stuff in this thread (some not so). Where should I jump in? Back in the beginning which was interesting or with the stuff it has moved on to which is less so?
Reply

Woodrow
05-13-2007, 11:22 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I have four questions:

1. How did Christianity lead you to Islam?
For about 25 years Christ(as) was the central most figure in my life. I "felt" His presence in all things and the gift of the "Holy Spirit" coming upon me each time I thought of him was a feeling of pure exstacy. I KNEW I was saved and Jesus(as) would never abandon me. M y love of Him showed me the error of Catholochism and how the Early church had corrupted worship by bringing in touches of idolatry, veneration of the saints etc. This started me on a 40+ year Journey to give my life to Jesus(as) and to live my life for him and through Him. that journey lead me through Buddhism, Agnosticism and several Christian denominations. The more I learned about Jesus(as) the more I learned that he was a true servent of God(swt) and that it was his desire to teach us to worship God(swt) alone. The final end of this journey was when I woke up and realized that Jesus(as) was truly teaching the Message of Islam and that his beautiful words are the message of Islam.


2. How did the others find it without Christianity?
We are all born Muslim. It is only when we stop fighting the truth that we come to understand that. Nobody converts to Islam, it is simply an awakening and accepting what you see and honestly know. Allah(swt) has given guidence to all, it is our own choice as to if we follow his guidance or throw it aside.

3. I have studied the Bible carefully and continue to so. How come it doesn't lead me to Islam; in fact, it leads me away from it?
Perhaps, because you enjoy the feeling of savation so strongly, that you fail to see that it is not salvation, but is a false security that is a down ward trap from which you can not escape without giving your life to Allah(swt) and truly submitting your life to him.

4. What do you mean there is no need to be in love with the feeling of being love?
This is similar to the concept of puppy love. Teenagers fall so much in love with the thought of being in love, that it makes a barrier to actually understanding love. Some people are in love with the thoughts of what they percieve Jesus(as) to be, that they have cut themselves off from the ability to love God(swt) alone. To love Jesus(as) for what he is not is a very effective method to keep a person from worshiping the One true God(swt)
Reply

Redeemed
05-13-2007, 08:26 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
For about 25 years Christ(as) was the central most figure in my life. I "felt" His presence in all things and the gift of the "Holy Spirit" coming upon me each time I thought of him was a feeling of pure exstacy. I KNEW I was saved and Jesus(as) would never abandon me. M y love of Him showed me the error of Catholochism and how the Early church had corrupted worship by bringing in touches of idolatry, veneration of the saints etc. This started me on a 40+ year Journey to give my life to Jesus(as) and to live my life for him and through Him. that journey lead me through Buddhism, Agnosticism and several Christian denominations. The more I learned about Jesus(as) the more I learned that he was a true servent of God(swt) and that it was his desire to teach us to worship God(swt) alone. The final end of this journey was when I woke up and realized that Jesus(as) was truly teaching the Message of Islam and that his beautiful words are the message of Islam.




We are all born Muslim. It is only when we stop fighting the truth that we come to understand that. Nobody converts to Islam, it is simply an awakening and accepting what you see and honestly know. Allah(swt) has given guidence to all, it is our own choice as to if we follow his guidance or throw it aside.



Perhaps, because you enjoy the feeling of savation so strongly, that you fail to see that it is not salvation, but is a false security that is a down ward trap from which you can not escape without giving your life to Allah(swt) and truly submitting your life to him.



This is similar to the concept of puppy love. Teenagers fall so much in love with the thought of being in love, that it makes a barrier to actually understanding love. Some people are in love with the thoughts of what they percieve Jesus(as) to be, that they have cut themselves off from the ability to love God(swt) alone. To love Jesus(as) for what he is not is a very effective method to keep a person from worshiping the One true God(swt)
Ever since I was a child as far back as I could remember I believed in God and knew deep in my heart He existed. I tried to establish contact with Him. I used to think that He made all the buildings in the city, and I used to tell other kids "Look how great and powerful God is He made all these buildings" I didn't know that mere men built them and the pride involved in the works of man's hands which eventually leads to his downfall. I use to pray to God I said, “God I know you’re there, and I would like to talk to you. I know you made all these buildings, and I am not so important, but could you still give me a little sign that your around? I know that you don’t have to, but I would appreciate it so much." I didn’t hear God tell me or show me anything; nevertheless, I went my way and didn’t stop believing, but when things went wrong in my life as a child I would blame God. As I grew into adulthood, I got caught into experimenting with drugs. On day I took the wrong combination and was losing my mind, and I knew it. I ran to church and asked God to heal me. I was healed instantaneously, but I never pursued God after that, but I always pondered that miracle in my heart. When I went into the military, I remember seeing a verse on a wall that really jump out to me: “If you abide in me and my words abide in you, you can ask me for anything and I will do it.” (John 15) After reading that verse, I thought wow; I started to seek him for selfish reasons. I wanted things, but as I sought Him more and more I begin to realize that seeking Him is its own reward. I had a good picture of how ungodly I was and how much evil and sin was in my life and I thought, “How unworthy I am.” I understood though the Bible that all have sinned and come short of God’s glory and that the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ. I also read where it says, “If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thine heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believes unto righteous and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.”(Ro.10: 9-10) I invited Jesus to come into my life, and it has never been the same since. When I understood my depraved state and the need for a savior, God gave me a dream to confirm my salvation. I wrote a song and painted a picture of that dream, which is posted on my profile page. Nevertheless, I knew how weak I was and how far I had to go. I began climbing the mountainous obstacles in my life by His grace and reached the top only to discover that there were many unscaled mountains. But, God has promised me that He will finish what He started in me through the power of the Holy Spirit. It is the Holy Spirit that leads us to the truth.
Reply

Umar001
05-13-2007, 08:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Some interesting stuff in this thread (some not so). Where should I jump in? Back in the beginning which was interesting or with the stuff it has moved on to which is less so?
The Beggining, does the Bible need a defense?
Reply

Redeemed
05-13-2007, 09:11 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
It is in agreement with what I have studied about Greek Mythology. I am trying to find some very short concepts about Greek and Mid Eastern Mythology. For those desiring to learn more about Greek mythology i suggest they take a course in it.


The similarities betwenn the mythological beliefs and Christianity are very hard to ignore.


the worship of Mithras and Mithraism is a study in itself. The link I gave although of dubious source did give a good synopsis of Mitraism ,

Here are some more links for further reading. It is hard to find any one link that is complete.

this first link does not show much more than the fact that Mithras was worshiped in Rome in the Year 208 and had a following.

http://museums.ncl.ac.uk/archive/mithras/text.htm

some of the earlier mideastern practices of Mithraism



Source: http://www.iranian.com/History/Sept97/Mitra/index.html


this next article does have some very good reference material to it's statements.



Source: http://www.truthbeknown.com/mithra.htm


the early Catholic Church gave a very good refutation to mirthraism. Although they claim Mithraism borrowed from Christianity.



Source: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10402a.htm

the point of this being that in reference to the topic where the topic starter placed a challenge, I would say the Bible does need a defense. there is evidence that it is not unique and that the teachings in it are very similar to ancient pagan beliefs.

I strongly doubt the alleged origin of todays bible and that it is not what Christianity taught.

Now it is up to the Author of the topic to ofer evidence that what is called the Bible is not a re
rewriting of pagan beliefs and a pagan version of Christianity.
You are confusing Catholicism with what is written in the Bible and perhaps Christianity. I was born and raised Catholic. Most Catholics have pagan traditions as part of their theology. The Bible, however, is like a seed, man can make a seed that looks like a natural one, smells like it, taste like it, and is the same color shape and weight even with the same anatomical structure. You plant them both. One will grow and produce fruit and bear other seeds, but the other won't be able to match that, even though it may appear to do so. In order to catch the counterfeit moneymakers the detectives study the real money not the counterfeit. When you study the real the imposter is easily spotted. The Bible is the real deal. If one doesn’t believe the report in it as it stands now, even if it could be proved true, it wouldn’t change that person’s heart. There are none so:blind:as those who won't see!
Reply

Woodrow
05-13-2007, 10:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
You are confusing Catholicism with what is written in the Bible and perhaps Christianity. I was born and raised Catholic. Most Catholics have pagan traditions as part of their theology. The Bible, however, is like a seed, man can make a seed that looks like a natural one, smells like it, taste like it, and is the same color shape and weight even with the same anatomical structure. You plant them both. One will grow and produce fruit and bear other seeds, but the other won't be able to match that, even though it may appear to do so. In order to catch the counterfeit moneymakers the detectives study the real money not the counterfeit. When you study the real the imposter is easily spotted. The Bible is the real deal. If one doesn’t believe the report in it as it stands now, even if it could be proved true, it wouldn’t change that person’s heart. There are none so:blind:as those who won't see!
Quite interesting. With that said you have just removed over one half of the world's professed Christians from Being Christian as that means Catholics and Orthodox would not be practicing what you consider to be Christianity.

you have also shed strong doubt upon the Protestent religions as they too hold basic Catholic beliefs with the exception of Papal authority.

So based on that, your concept of Christianity will be a modern belief that gained a following in 19th Century rural Southern USA.

Keep in mind the Bible as you see was made up of books selected to support the Roman Catholic Church. the various councils were all Catholic councils and designed to strengthen Catholicism.

The Bible was the seed that produced the Catholic Church. the Protestant denominations are the fruits that fell from it's branches as it grew.

the Closest the Bible can lead a person to Christianity is Catholochism.

True Christianity is the Worship of one God(swt) so the Teachings of Christ(as) if followed will lead a strong Christian to Islam. It takes a strong Christian to be able to accept Islam. A weak Christian will continue to flounder in false beliefs.
Reply

poga
05-13-2007, 11:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I am not that knowledgeable but I am fully persuaded that although I may not be able to answer some of your points and questions that there is an adequate explanation. As Gleason says: "the aerodynamic engineer may not understand how a bumble bee can fly; yet he trusts that there must be an... explanation for its fine performance since, as a matter of fact, it does fly!" Look at it this way; to us Christians the Lord Jesus is final and supreme. If there are errors in any of His teachings, then Christianity would be a hoax. So we Christians must contradict any thing that says that the Bible is flawed in theory. Gleason also states that "a careful examination of Christ's references to the Old Testament makes it unmistakably evident that He fully accepted as factual even the most controversial statements in the Hebrew bible pertaining to history and science." Some of these in question are Jonah and the story of Noah and the Exodus.
LORD JESUS IS FINAL AND SUPREME
only god is final and supreme now you may say jesus is god some say krisna is god some say buddha is god
now we know god is our creator and he is just he is mercyful god is good and god is not biased to his creatures
now if you take jesus as god i have to ask what is the reason for him to take human form
you may say he wanted to share love with human as human being
now we must remember he is in human form but he is still god and god is just and he came to save the whole humanity not just section of humanity
and as god he knew before his crucifixion it will hapen because as god he decreed it
now i ask you if he came to save the humanity why he did not finish the job
as god he had the power to convey his message to the whole of humanity instead he die's at the hand of one group of hamans and leaves them for ever divided fighting each other for eternity
is it godly thing to do is it even human thing to do
even if a father leaves his children in similar circumstance would you call him good father if that father had the power to do anything surly he would see to it that after he passes away his children lives in peace and harmony just think about it if creator do come as human at least all human in this earth should knew about his visit about his message and we know jesus did not visit usa or other newfound lands even ancient land like china and japan what was theirs foult are they too not his children
Reply

Redeemed
05-14-2007, 02:28 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
Quite interesting. With that said you have just removed over one half of the world's professed Christians from Being Christian as that means Catholics and Orthodox would not be practicing what you consider to be Christianity.

you have also shed strong doubt upon the Protestent religions as they too hold basic Catholic beliefs with the exception of Papal authority.

So based on that, your concept of Christianity will be a modern belief that gained a following in 19th Century rural Southern USA.

Keep in mind the Bible as you see was made up of books selected to support the Roman Catholic Church. the various councils were all Catholic councils and designed to strengthen Catholicism.

The Bible was the seed that produced the Catholic Church. the Protestant denominations are the fruits that fell from it's branches as it grew.

the Closest the Bible can lead a person to Christianity is Catholochism.

True Christianity is the Worship of one God(swt) so the Teachings of Christ(as) if followed will lead a strong Christian to Islam. It takes a strong Christian to be able to accept Islam. A weak Christian will continue to flounder in false beliefs.
Please don't put words in my mouth. I believe there are Catholics who are God's children, but I no longer identify with Catholicism in general, because the church's traditional ways are not following major Bible doctrine. I don’t want to get into what they are, but they are numerous. The Catholic Church did start off as the true church, but they ignored the warnings of Jesus. Therefore, by there traditions they have made the laws of God to no affect, just as Islam is doing in my opinion. In other words, I see both are in error from a Scriptural perspective!
:phew
BY the way, to say that it takes a strong Christian to accept Islam is like saying it takes a total crook to be honest or the other way around might be more appropriate.
Reply

Woodrow
05-14-2007, 02:35 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
Please don't put words in my mouth. I believe there are Catholics who are God's children, but I no longer identify with Catholicism in general, because the church's traditional ways are not following major Bible doctrine. I don’t want to get into what they are, but they are numerous. The Catholic Church did start off as the true church, but they ignored the warnings of Jesus. Therefore, by there traditions they have made the laws of God to no affect, just as Islam is doing in my opinion. In other words, I see both are in error from a Scriptural perspective!
:phew
BY the way, to say that it takes a strong Christian to accept Islam is like saying it takes a total crook to be honest!
All I can do is pray that your love of Isa(as) will be strong enough that you will let it lead you to the truth.
Reply

Redeemed
05-14-2007, 02:38 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
LORD JESUS IS FINAL AND SUPREME
only god is final and supreme now you may say jesus is god some say krisna is god some say buddha is god
now we know god is our creator and he is just he is mercyful god is good and god is not biased to his creatures
now if you take jesus as god i have to ask what is the reason for him to take human form
you may say he wanted to share love with human as human being
now we must remember he is in human form but he is still god and god is just and he came to save the whole humanity not just section of humanity
and as god he knew before his crucifixion it will hapen because as god he decreed it
now i ask you if he came to save the humanity why he did not finish the job
as god he had the power to convey his message to the whole of humanity instead he die's at the hand of one group of hamans and leaves them for ever divided fighting each other for eternity
is it godly thing to do is it even human thing to do
even if a father leaves his children in similar circumstance would you call him good father if that father had the power to do anything surly he would see to it that after he passes away his children lives in peace and harmony just think about it if creator do come as human at least all human in this earth should knew about his visit about his message and we know jesus did not visit usa or other newfound lands even ancient land like china and japan what was theirs foult are they too not his children
I believe that God is a Spirit; in fact, the Bible says that He is and that those who worship Him must do it in spirit and in truth. I, however, have no problem believing that God can inhabit a human person or be in more that more place at a single moment in time. We do not limit what God can do. We do not look at God as if He is limited to the confines of time and space, as we know it. I have no problem believing that God's word could be made flesh, nor to I have a problem seeing God as all wise, merciful and Holy. Since He is Holy and a Spirit, I have no problem as seeing Him as the Holy Spirit and yet the same one true God. To try to understand the essence of God in terms of human dimensions only leads to horrible heresies of which Muslims think us guilty of. I look at Jesus who was the only prophet (Son of Man) to be sinless and conceived of a virgin (Son of Mary). That alone should be a sign and I hint as to the true nature of Jesus Christ. Since He did not have an earthly father, it only confirms that through the prophets and even Jesus Himself the Bible speaks absolute truth has His Father being God. It is written in the Scriptures, "He that has the Son has life; he that has not the Son, as not life, but the wrath of God abides on him." I do not want the wrath of God abiding on me. I would have to be spiritually dead to believe that He is not who He says. The Bible is the inerrant word of God to the true believers and follows of Christ there are no mistakes in it pertaining to who Jesus really is. :thumbs_up
Reply

Kashnowe
05-14-2007, 03:56 AM
now i ask you if he came to save the humanity why he did not finish the job
as god he had the power to convey his message to the whole of humanity instead he die's at the hand of one group of hamans and leaves them for ever divided fighting each other for eternity
ok so why didn't God send a man like mohammed to every townand village in the whole world to spread islam around? this argument is silly.

now we must remember he is in human form but he is still god and god is just and he came to save the whole humanity not just section of humanity
and as god he knew before his crucifixion it will hapen because as god he decreed it
yes God is just. Amen. Jesus was sent as a savior to EVERYONE :)

now if you take jesus as god i have to ask what is the reason for him to take human form
do muslims ever pray to God and ask him this same question? like "dear God why do christians believe in Jesus as they do? please help me understand..."

you may say he wanted to share love with human as human being
yes you may say that. but to me thats not really the point. its much deeper than that. b/c God is love and he always has and always will share love with us. so thats not really relevant to the 'why did God send himself in human form argument'

even if a father leaves his children[...]
whoaaa Our Father did not leave us. he has always been with us and always will be. in fact Jesus dying on the cross brought us as humans closer to God. we now know exactly what to do in order to be saved and that is something to rejoice in.

creator do come as human at least all human in this earth should knew about his visit about his message and we know jesus did not visit usa or other newfound lands even ancient land like china and japan what was theirs foult are they too not his children
yes this is funny you write this because christianity has made its way t o china and japan all corners of the earth infact........ so why aren't you also asking why didnt God spread islam throughout the world in one years time so that everyone could know about it? the ignorant are going to heaven anyway. God doesn't punish those who never even heard the Truth .




chrisitians believe Jesus=God=Holy Spirit therefore...
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-14-2007, 04:08 AM
This thread sounds more like, does Christianity represent true religion than anything about the Bible needing a defense or not.

You all let me know when you're ready to get back on topic and I'll jump in. Till then I'll surf in other threads.
Reply

poga
05-14-2007, 08:57 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
I believe that God is a Spirit; in fact, the Bible says that He is and that those who worship Him must do it in spirit and in truth. I, however, have no problem believing that God can inhabit a human person or be in more that more place at a single moment in time. We do not limit what God can do. We do not look at God as if He is limited to the confines of time and space, as we know it. I have no problem believing that God's word could be made flesh, nor to I have a problem seeing God as all wise, merciful and Holy. Since He is Holy and a Spirit, I have no problem as seeing Him as the Holy Spirit and yet the same one true God. To try to understand the essence of God in terms of human dimensions only leads to horrible heresies of which Muslims think us guilty of. I look at Jesus who was the only prophet (Son of Man) to be sinless and conceived of a virgin (Son of Mary). That alone should be a sign and I hint as to the true nature of Jesus Christ. Since He did not have an earthly father, it only confirms that through the prophets and even Jesus Himself the Bible speaks absolute truth has His Father being God. It is written in the Scriptures, "He that has the Son has life; he that has not the Son, as not life, but the wrath of God abides on him." I do not want the wrath of God abiding on me. I would have to be spiritually dead to believe that He is not who He says. The Bible is the inerrant word of God to the true believers and follows of Christ there are no mistakes in it pertaining to who Jesus really is. :thumbs_up
:sl: dear alapiana i urge you to go even deeper then spirit
even spirit is created by god
he is god who created time matter and space and sound
he is beyond all created things
and just think what you are implying
if he was god then when he died on cross he knew thats going to happen that makes his action premeditated
therefore he planned this feud between jews and christians what took place after his so called death
is this godly act no this is evil act and we know jesus was not evil
he was the person who cast out devil from human in to swine
and as for muhammad sallel la hu alahi wa sallim
no muslim have ever climed muhammad was god rather we all say he was slave of god
and god send him in arab but his message is for not only for humans of this planet but for whole creation
Reply

poga
05-14-2007, 09:06 AM
re: cooloonka
jesus god holy spirit
ok what is unholy spirit
you may satan
who created satan you have to say god
so it is god who creates holy and unholy spirits
therefore spirits are created things and no created thing can be the uncreated creator
Reply

Muslim Knight
05-14-2007, 11:01 AM
Christians,


A'uzubillahi minas shaitan Ar-Rajim
I seek the protection of God, against Satan the Rejected

Kind words and forgiving of faults are better than Sadaqah (CHARITY) followed by injury. And Allah is Rich (Free of all wants) and He is Most-Forbearing. (Quran, Suraah Al-Baqarah 2:263)

And (remember) when We took a covenant from the Children of Israel, (saying): Worship none but Allah (Alone) and be dutiful and good to parents, and to kindred, and to orphans and Al-Masakin (the poor) (Quran, Suraah Al-Baqarah 2:83)

They believe in Allah and the Last Day; they enjoin good and forbid evil; and they hasten in (all) good works; and they are among the righteous. (Quran, Suraah Al-Imran 3:114)

O you who believe! Take care of your ownselves, [do righteous deeds, fear Allah much (abstain from all kinds of sins and evil deeds which He has forbidden) and love Allah much (perform all kinds of good deeds which He has ordained)]. If you follow the right guidance and ENJOIN what is right (the good, Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam orders one to do) and forbid what is wrong (polytheism, disbelief and all that Islam has forbidden) no hurt can come to you from those who are in error. The return of you all is to Allah, then He will inform you about (all) that which you used to do. (Quran, Suraah Al-Ma'idah 5:105)
Know the teaching of Islam and the true Muslims by their fruits of labor. By the fruits of their labor, this is what Jesus commanded you to do, is it not?
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-14-2007, 05:28 PM
Does the Bible need a defense?

I think that is still the question that we are to be addressing in this thread -- though one would never guess that based on the last few pages.

SO, in what is likely going to be a vain attempt to get back on topic.....



No. The Bible needs no defense. As God's revelation of himself to humanity, it is not dependent on human actions in any way. It is what it is, and humanity's willingness or lack thereof to accept it does not in any way add or detract from it.

Though the Bible should come under attack and though the whole world should reject it and walk away from the truth of its teachings, it would not do any damage to the Bible. And though the whole world accept it and voluntarily submit to its authority as a source of faith and practice, it would not make the Bible anything else than what it already is. No, the Bible needs no defense any more than God needs a defense.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-14-2007, 06:03 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

alapiana1
If there are errors in any of His [Jesus'] teachings, then Christianity would be a hoax.

However, I do not believe his teachings were a Hoax, I believe that what is presented [in the Bible] as his teachings is a hoax.
This becomes a question about reliability of the documents.
1) Do the copies that we have available to be read today accurately reflect the text of the original manuscripts from which they were derived?
2) Do those original manuscripts in reporting what Jesus said and did do so accurately?
3) Did those original manuscripts report what needed to be reported, or did the authors (even if accurately recording) present a picture of Jesus so skewed by their prefences that it doesn't accurately portray the real person or message of Jesus?


I think the answer to all three questions is that the received record can be trusted.

Now of course there are those who would disagree with that statement. They do so either out of doubt and skepticism or because they already believe something contrary to what is in the Bible record and the human mind will not allow itself to hold two contradicting beliefs at the same time.

There is no answer for the person who has another previously assumed belief system. They believe what they believe, and it is not my intention to go around attacking other's beliefs on this forum. I will defend my own, but I will not attack anothers.

For the skeptic, one must ask the skeptic to examine the source of his/her skepticism. If one is genuinely searching and has not found answers, then one would presuppose an openness to considering the possibiltiy that the Bible is indeed an accurate record. If, on the other hand, one presupposes that it is an inaccurate record and needs to be proven true -- it might be that one is not open, but has simply made the position of skepticism one's basic belief system.

Of course, the true doubter is indeed looking for "proof", but is also willing to accept proofs rather than rejecting all such offerings. I find it amazing how little we doubt the integrity of much of ancient literature. Who doubts the authenticity of Homer's Iliad or Julius Caesar's Gallic Wars? Yet compare them with the New Testament.

For the New Testament the evidence is overwhelming. There are 5,366 manuscripts to compare and draw information from, and some of these date from the second or third centuries. To put that in perspective, there are only 643 copies of Homer's Iliad, and that is the most famous book of ancient Greece! No one doubts the existence of Caesar's Gallic Wars, but we have only 10 copies of it and the earliest of those was made 1000 years after it was written. To have such an abudance of copies of the New Testament, the earliest from dates within 70 years after their writing, is amazing. Indeed the New Testament is the most well-preserved and authenticated of all ancient Greek manuscripts ever to have been written.

As for the Hebrew Old Testament, the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls in the mid 1900s showed how well its text had been maintained. Scholars were able to make comparison between the 800 CE Masoretic text used by Jews today and compare it with the 200 BCE texts found written on the scrolls and the differences were primarily in the form of changes in word spellings.

To date, where people have doubted the historicity of the Bible and archaeology has been able to make a definitive statement, the facts of the Bible have proven to be true.
Reply

poga
05-14-2007, 06:52 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Does the Bible need a defense?

I think that is still the question that we are to be addressing in this thread -- though one would never guess that based on the last few pages.

SO, in what is likely going to be a vain attempt to get back on topic.....



No. The Bible needs no defense. As God's revelation of himself to humanity, it is not dependent on human actions in any way. It is what it is, and humanity's willingness or lack thereof to accept it does not in any way add or detract from it.

Though the Bible should come under attack and though the whole world should reject it and walk away from the truth of its teachings, it would not do any damage to the Bible. And though the whole world accept it and voluntarily submit to its authority as a source of faith and practice, it would not make the Bible anything else than what it already is. No, the Bible needs no defense any more than God needs a defense.
does bible needs defense

is tale of jesus part of bible if it is then first denfend your jesus
if you can save jesus the false god then you can save your false bible too
Reply

Woodrow
05-14-2007, 07:09 PM
Thank You for bringing this thread back on topic. We did manage to stray far from the original question. I believe you did bring up three very valid questions are are the Key to answering the topic question


format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
This becomes a question about reliability of the documents.

1) Do the copies that we have available to be read today accurately reflect the text of the original manuscripts from which they were derived?
2) Do those original manuscripts in reporting what Jesus said and did do so accurately?
3) Did those original manuscripts report what needed to be reported, or did the authors (even if accurately recording) present a picture of Jesus so skewed by their prefences that it doesn't accurately portray the real person or message of Jesus?
In my opinion this is the main question, in regards to the NT. I believe that here is a case of selection based to support a desired end. What I find interesting is the number of books that were rejected as sources. They were also written in the same era and by people with no less credibility than the authors of the accepted Manuscripts.

What eventually became today's NT did not take form until the "Council of Trent" 1545-1563 The Modern KJV and Protetent versions did not come about until later.

The canon of the Bible was solemnly defined and made dogmatic by the Fourth Session of the Ecumenical Council of Trent of the Catholic Church held in northern Italy 1545-1563 A.D. by the Decree "De Canonicis Scripturis" on April 8th, 1546. Pope Pius IV formally confirmed all of its decrees in 1564 A.D. This put the canonicity of the whole Traditional Bible (LV) beyond the permissibility of doubt on the part of Catholics. The books of the canon were listed individually and agreed with the earlier listing already infallibly taught (for about 1000 years prior to the Council of Trent) by the Ordinary Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
Source: http://www.catholicevangelism.org/h-canon1.shtml


The final result is a form of Christianity that was not what the Early Christians believed and only the material which supports the findings of the Council of Trent and later have been preserved properly and even those can be questionable as they are only found in the Vatican Achieves.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-14-2007, 08:01 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
What eventually became today's NT did not take form until the "Council of Trent" 1545-1563 The Modern KJV and Protetent versions did not come about until later.



Source: http://www.catholicevangelism.org/h-canon1.shtml


The final result is a form of Christianity that was not what the Early Christians believed and only the material which supports the findings of the Council of Trent and later have been preserved properly and even those can be questionable as they are only found in the Vatican Achieves.
Despite your Catholic background, Woodrow, I think you are misunderstanding what the Council of Trent did. Realize this is 100 years after Guttenburg is printing the Bible for the masses. The Council was basically an affirmation of what had been decided more than 1000 years before.

There are copies of ancient New Testaments in the British Museum, in Paris, and in Cairo that date from shortly after the time of Constantine. These Bibles have the same books in them that modern day Bibles do. This understanding of what is and isn't the New Testament is centuries older than Trent and is far more than just what is preserved in the Vatican Archives.
Reply

Redeemed
05-14-2007, 08:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
re: cooloonka
jesus god holy spirit
ok what is unholy spirit
you may satan
who created satan you have to say god
so it is god who creates holy and unholy spirits
therefore spirits are created things and no created thing can be the uncreated creator
With all due respect, what is your point? Yes, God did create angels which are spirit beings. Are you trying to say that because God is a Spirit, He created himself?:?
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-14-2007, 08:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
does bible needs defense

is tale of jesus part of bible if it is then first denfend your jesus
if you can save jesus the false god then you can save your false bible too

I doubt if Jesus needs some sort of defense? Either he is:
1) dead and gone
2) alive and well


In either case he needs no defense from me or anyone else. What I say or do not say in defense of him or what another says or does not say in attacking him isn't going to change the reality of who, what and where Jesus is.


Or are you suggesting that one defend my view of who Jesus is? That is a very worthy topic. It just does not happen to be the topic of this thread.
Reply

vpb
05-14-2007, 08:59 PM
Actually we as muslims need to defend Esa (Jesus) a.s more than christians do and from christians also, we need to defend him for the incorrect grade he gets from people.

Sahih Bukhari , Volume 4, Book 55, Number 654:

Narrated 'Umar:

I heard the Prophet saying, "Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians praised the son of Mary, for I am only a Slave. So, call me the Slave of Allah and His Apostle."
Reply

Umar001
05-14-2007, 09:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
For the New Testament the evidence is overwhelming. There are 5,366 manuscripts to compare and draw information from, and some of these date from the second or third centuries. To put that in perspective, there are only 643 copies of Homer's Iliad, and that is the most famous book of ancient Greece! No one doubts the existence of Caesar's Gallic Wars, but we have only 10 copies of it and the earliest of those was made 1000 years after it was written. To have such an abudance of copies of the New Testament from dates within 70 years after their writing is amazing.
I prematurely had to stop you there, I was going to bring forth various points one being the dating of these 5,000 manuscripts, what you wrote, To have such an abudance of copies of the New Testament from dates within 70 years after their writing is amazing. I find this statement abit confusing, someone who had not read on this would have thought you'd mean that all 5.000 and so forth were written within that, rather, what we do have is less than 500 within the first 900 years right or wrong?

And what is interesting is the earliest is dated about 125-150? And is fragmentary, it is like this size:



format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Indeed the New Testament is the most well-preserved and authenticated of all ancient Greek manuscripts ever to have been written.
What you also fail to see is that all the manuscript evidence could ever ever show is what was first written by the authors of the 4 Gospels, but this is of itself not enough, since the Gospels now testify to changes made by the authors themselves to make Jesus look better as time went on, we find in the Gospel of Mark a Jesus which is then made to look more Lord like in Matthew which scholars hold to be written later, so as it went on the author of Matthew made changes to the same stories, this is a shattering blow to the reliability of these unknown authors. So even if we had the originals, we would then have to ask;

1. Did the authors convey truly what they heard sincerily and

2. If they done it sincerly how do we know they were not sincerly wrong and got it from the many oral traditions running around at the time.

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
As for the Hebrew Old Testament, the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls in the mid 1900s showed how well its text had been maintained. Scholars were able to make comparison between the 800 CE Masoretic text used by Jews today and compare it with the 200 BCE texts found written on the scrolls and the differences were primarily in the form of changes in word spellings.
As for the Dead Sea scrolls I am currently trying to read up on these findings, but what I have read, maybe you can clarify is that between the Masoretic Hebrew text and the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint there are 6000 discrepancies, i.e. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septaugint agreed against the Masoretic Hebrew text.

Regards,

Eesa

EDIT: As for the Archeology, is there not a statement that Jesus was baptised at betheny beyond the jordan but people tried to change it to bethebara since betheny is apparently incorrect?

King James Version (KJV)
28These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing.

New International Version (NIV)
28This all happened at Bethany on the other side of the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

21st Century King James Version (KJ21)
28These things were done in Bethabara beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing.

Young's Literal Translation (YLT)
28These things came to pass in Bethabara, beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing,

New Living Translation (NLT)
28 This encounter took place in Bethany, an area east of the Jordan River, where John was baptizing.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-14-2007, 10:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
I prematurely had to stop you there, I was going to bring forth various points one being the dating of these 5,000 manuscripts, what you wrote, To have such an abudance of copies of the New Testament from dates within 70 years after their writing is amazing. I find this statement abit confusing, someone who had not read on this would have thought you'd mean that all 5.000 and so forth were written within that, rather, what we do have is less than 500 within the first 900 years right or wrong?

And what is interesting is the earliest is dated about 125-150? And is fragmentary, it is like this size:

Yes, the very, very earliest are fragemtary pieces of papyri. There are about 75 papyri such as this. I mistakenly left out the word "some" in the sentence you "prematurely" stopped at. It is a significant omission, and changes how one might read the line. It was accidental, and I have gone back to correct my mistake. And the apparent size of that particular fragment will very with your computer monitor. I understand its actual size to be about that of a postage stamp. If it is the one I think it is that is a fragment of a papyrus codex containing John 18:31-33, 37 ff now in the John Rylands University Library, Manchester, England, dated on palaeographical grounds around 130 AD.


The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri consist of paortions of eleven papyrus codices, three of which contain most of the New Testament writings. One of these contain the four Gospels along with Acts, belongs to the first half of the third century (200-250 AD). And, in addition to these scriptures themselves, we have them quoted extensively in the writings of the early church fathers, showing that written
scriptures existed for them to use in the first half of the second century, and giving us samples of that writing consistent with what we still have today.

What you also fail to see is that all the manuscript evidence could ever ever show is what was first written by the authors of the 4 Gospels, but this is of itself not enough, since the Gospels now testify to changes made by the authors themselves to make Jesus look better as time went on, we find in the Gospel of Mark a Jesus which is then made to look more Lord like in Matthew which scholars hold to be written later, so as it went on the author of Matthew made changes to the same stories, this is a shattering blow to the reliability of these unknown authors. So even if we had the originals, we would then have to ask;

1. Did the authors convey truly what they heard sincerily and

2. If they done it sincerly how do we know they were not sincerly wrong and got it from the many oral traditions running around at the time.
I don't fail to see this at all. I listed those as questions that need to be addressed in my own post in speaking of the reliability of the documents.




As for the Dead Sea scrolls I am currently trying to read up on these findings, but what I have read, maybe you can clarify is that between the Masoretic Hebrew text and the Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septuagint there are 6000 discrepancies, i.e. The Samaritan Pentateuch and the Septaugint agreed against the Masoretic Hebrew text.

Regards,

Eesa
I can't give you a number. The largest figure I have come across is 5% discrepancies with the vast majority of those being spellings. Given that the dead sea scrolls are from a community not in line with the Masoretic text, this means that we have to go even farther back than 1000 years to find a common ancestor for them, making such similarity after more than an eon of hand copying truly an amazing degree of accuracy. (Go ahead, I've set you up for a comment on the pefection of the Qur'an after 1400 years. :) )
Reply

Walter
05-14-2007, 11:01 PM
Hi All:

For completion, I thought that I should address the earlier assertion that Christianity borrowed some aspects of Mithraism. The recorded historical evidence would support the argument that Mithraism borrowed from the many copies of New Testament Biblical manuscripts around at the time.

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

poga
05-14-2007, 11:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
With all due respect, what is your point? Yes, God did create angels which are spirit beings. Are you trying to say that because God is a Spirit, He created himself?:?
i did not say god is spirit i said spirit or soul is creation of god it is simple
yet i know simple things hard to grasp for learned they want complex they talk tons what weigh less then a tear drop in poga's eyebrow
if you like talking so much why don't you meet Mrs Be Aql Khan Usta visit her SWEETSWORDS at www.poetrypoem.com/poga you will meet your match
Reply

poga
05-14-2007, 11:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I doubt if Jesus needs some sort of defense? Either he is:
1) dead and gone
2) alive and well


In either case he needs no defense from me or anyone else. What I say or do not say in defense of him or what another says or does not say in attacking him isn't going to change the reality of who, what and where Jesus is.


Or are you suggesting that one defend my view of who Jesus is? That is a very worthy topic. It just does not happen to be the topic of this thread.
i agree with vpb we muslim we will defend honor of our prophets may it be eesha musha krisna or MUHAMMAD PEACE BE UPON THEM ALL we will unveil your lie's and hold you accountable for your ignorance
Reply

Umar001
05-15-2007, 12:13 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri consist of paortions of eleven papyrus codices, three of which contain most of the New Testament writings. One of these contain the four Gospels along with Acts, belongs to the first half of the third century (200-250 AD). And, in addition to these scriptures themselves, we have them quoted extensively in the writings of the early church fathers, showing that written scriptures existed for them to use in the first half of the second century, and giving us samples of that writing consistent with what we still have today.
Am still reading on the early fathers, but I have heard such statements before.

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I don't fail to see this at all. I listed those as questions that need to be addressed in my own post in speaking of the reliability of the documents.
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
This becomes a question about reliability of the documents.
1) Do the copies that we have available to be read today accurately reflect the text of the original manuscripts from which they were derived?
2) Do those original manuscripts in reporting what Jesus said and did do so accurately?
3) Did those original manuscripts report what needed to be reported, or did the authors (even if accurately recording) present a picture of Jesus so skewed by their prefences that it doesn't accurately portray the real person or message of Jesus?


I think the answer to all three questions is that the received record can be trusted.
I fail to see how then such a certainty would be concluded.
Reply

NoName55
05-15-2007, 12:52 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
i agree with vpb we muslim we will defend honor of our prophets may it be eesha musha krisna or MUHAMMAD PEACE BE UPON THEM ALL we will unveil your lie's and hold you accountable for your ignorance
Greetings

Only people I know who regard hindu god krishna as a prophet of Islam are ahmadis. The Muslims have no clue to the origins of hindu mythology.

Ma'asalaama

Edit:
Krishna is a deity worshipped across many traditions of Hinduism. He is usually depicted as a young cowherd boy

Edit 2:

This post is not off topic because it is a refutation to Ahmadi misinformation in an earlier post!
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 01:41 AM
question for poga. if your logic is that the spirits are all created by God therefore the holy spirit is a creation seperate from God...then what/who created God?
Reply

Joe98
05-15-2007, 01:41 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
we muslim..........will unveil your lie's and hold you accountable for your ignorance

I don't know if english is your first language but this sounds like the Gestapo talking to a prisoner.

This style by Muslim posters is common on this forum and I wonder why it is allowed.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 02:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi

Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
This becomes a question about reliability of the documents.
1) Do the copies that we have available to be read today accurately reflect the text of the original manuscripts from which they were derived?
2) Do those original manuscripts in reporting what Jesus said and did do so accurately?
3) Did those original manuscripts report what needed to be reported, or did the authors (even if accurately recording) present a picture of Jesus so skewed by their prefences that it doesn't accurately portray the real person or message of Jesus?


I think the answer to all three questions is that the received record can be trusted.



I fail to see how then such a certainty would be concluded.
Well, I have already testified as to why I trust the existant documents to accurately reflect the original documents.


Why do I think that the original documents accurately report what Jesus said and did?

Note: I said, I think they do. I can't prove they do. It would probably be more correct to say, I think that we can show that they reflect what the writers genuinely believed to be true. (They of course could have gotten it wrong, and misheard or misunderstood and then misreported.) However, among the New Testament authors at least, the general message is consistant so that one would have to assume that all of the writers were similiarly misinformed.

The Bible didn't just appear on the shelf one day. What we have is a living document. The first pieces were letters written by Paul to the churches he helped to found. These were kept by people who knew Paul, his message and his character.

Later the gospels began to appear. But again, they already had a background that they could be checked against. The purpose of the gospels was not to provide some new message, but to preserve the oral proclamation of the Good News that was already a part of the church's life. A gospel that would have told a different story than that already known would not have been received. Indeed, we even see that this is exactly what happened with some gospels that are considered false or fakes. The existence of this other writings that the early church rejected tell us that there was a standard already in existence. Those who knew and had been with Jesus were still alive when the gospels were written. They served as a check and balance to the veracity of what was written.


Do the gospels tell the right story? Or is there another story that is left untold? Well, undoubtedly the gospels do tell a story skewed with a purpose. John as much confesses that he edited what he did and did not include with a particular purpose in mind in his writing. I don't think this is a bad thing. They had a message. Where as Muslims think that the Gospels out to be a record about what Jesus had to say about God, that misses the point that such a story would not be good news. It would just be knowledge. Jesus came for a completely different purpose.

Though he could speak for God, that was not his primary reason in coming. Those who believe it to be true, are basing thair interpretation of the purpose of Jesus' ministry on a book that was not written by anyone who knew Jesus. Or who even had 2nd or 3rd hand knowledge of Jesus. Those who wrote the gospels knew the purpose of Jesus' life was not to be a messenger, but a savior, and so they elected to tell that story. What he did was more important than what he said. And that message comes through clearly in the New Testament. That fact is behind every bood, by every author. And that unified testimony stands starkly against any other source that by itself purports to tell a different story.
Reply

Redeemed
05-15-2007, 03:48 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
i did not say god is spirit i said spirit or soul is creation of god it is simple
yet i know simple things hard to grasp for learned they want complex they talk tons what weigh less then a tear drop in poga's eyebrow
if you like talking so much why don't you meet Mrs Be Aql Khan Usta visit her SWEETSWORDS at www.poetrypoem.com/poga you will meet your match
But God is a Spirit, and those who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth, I still don't understand the point your trying to make. We both agree that God created spirits.
Reply

poga
05-15-2007, 10:49 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by NoName55
Greetings

Only people I know who regard hindu god krishna as a prophet of Islam are ahmadis. The Muslims have no clue to the origins of hindu mythology.

Ma'asalaama

Edit:
Krishna is a deity worshipped across many traditions of Hinduism. He is usually depicted as a young cowherd boy

Edit 2:

This post is not off topic because it is a refutation to Ahmadi misinformation in an earlier post!
ASSALAMUALAIKUM
AHAMADIS ARE LIARS THEY ARE KAFFIR NEVER COMPARE ME WITH THEM GO TO POETRY SECTION AND READ MY POST SWEETSWORDS [ GREAT TRAITOR]
MANY PROPHET ARE WORSHIPED AS GOD LIKE JESUS AND WAZIR[ AS] PEACE BE UPON THEM ALL
Reply

poga
05-15-2007, 10:59 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
But God is a Spirit, and those who worship Him must do so in spirit and in truth, I still don't understand the point your trying to make. We both agree that God created spirits.
:sl: IF YOU AGREE GOD IS CREATOR OF THE SPIRIT THEN HOW GOD CAN BE SPIRIT AS WELL YOU MUST UNDERSTAND CREATED THINGS IS UNLIKE THE UNCREATED CREATOR THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE ISSUE:w:
Reply

NoName55
05-15-2007, 11:06 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
ASSALAMUALAIKUM
AHAMADIS ARE LIARS THEY ARE KAFFIR NEVER COMPARE ME WITH THEM GO TO POETRY SECTION AND READ MY POST SWEETSWORDS [ GREAT TRAITOR]
MANY PROPHET ARE WORSHIPED AS GOD LIKE JESUS AND WAZIR[ AS] PEACE BE UPON THEM ALL
Then don't say similar things to them! Only mention The Prophets' named in Qura'an. Rest of the names are known only to Allah ta'ala. you, I or mirza qadiani have no authority to say who was or was not a messenger.
:w:
Reply

poga
05-15-2007, 11:16 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Joe98
I don't know if english is your first language but this sounds like the Gestapo talking to a prisoner.

This style by Muslim posters is common on this forum and I wonder why it is allowed.
ENGLISH IS NOT MY FIRST OR SECOND LANGUAGE IT IS THIRD THEREFORE THERE ARE GRAMMATICAL MISTAKES IN MY WRITTINGS PLUS MY ACADEMIC BACK GROUND IS UP TO CLASS FIVE IN PRIMARY SCHOOL IN BANGLADESH IF YOU TAKE THIS INTO CONSIDERATION MAY BE YOU WILL FIND IN YOUR HEART TO OVER LOOK MY ERRORS
YOU SAY YOU CAME FROM MAD COW STAKE HOUSE ACTUALLY THERE WAS NO NEED TO MENTION IT YOUR POST IS PROOF ENOUGH THAT IT IS FROM SOME MAD CATTLE
Reply

poga
05-15-2007, 11:22 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooloonka
question for poga. if your logic is that the spirits are all created by God therefore the holy spirit is a creation seperate from God...then what/who created God?
GOD IS THE CREATOR IF SOME ONE HAD CREATED HIM THEN HE TOO WILL BECOME CREATED THING NOT THE UNCREATED CREATOR
Reply

Muslim Knight
05-15-2007, 11:50 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
GOD IS THE CREATOR IF SOME ONE HAD CREATED HIM THEN HE TOO WILL BECOME CREATED THING NOT THE UNCREATED CREATOR
Salaams brother, is your keyboard CAPS LOCK damaged or whatnot? LOLs.


format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Well, I have already testified as to why I trust the existant documents to accurately reflect the original documents.


Why do I think that the original documents accurately report what Jesus said and did?

Note: I said, I think they do. I can't prove they do. It would probably be more correct to say, I think that we can show that they reflect what the writers genuinely believed to be true. (They of course could have gotten it wrong, and misheard or misunderstood and then misreported.) However, among the New Testament authors at least, the general message is consistant so that one would have to assume that all of the writers were similiarly misinformed.

The Bible didn't just appear on the shelf one day. What we have is a living document. The first pieces were letters written by Paul to the churches he helped to found. These were kept by people who knew Paul, his message and his character.
This is one reason why the Bible needed defense so greatly because it isn't the Word of God. God tells us in the Quran about people who write falsehoods and ascribe them to be the Word of God;

Then woe to those who WRITE the Book with their own hands and then say, "This is from Allah," to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby. (Al-Quran, Suraah Al-Baqarah 2:79)
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 12:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
This is one reason why the Bible needed defense so greatly because it isn't the Word of God. God tells us in the Quran about people who write falsehoods and ascribe them to be the Word of God;

Then woe to those who WRITE the Book with their own hands and then say, "This is from Allah," to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby. (Al-Quran, Suraah Al-Baqarah 2:79)
Very true that the Bible is a book that allows for human hands to have a role in what is written. This is probably one of the places where what Christians and Muslims diverge on understanding the purpose and nature of not just inspiration, but even revelation.

As a Christian I understand God to reveal himself to individuals and they report on their experience of revelation, only rarely to they report an actual message that was revealed to them. If God simply wanted to get his message out, he could write it in the sky for all the world to see and read. He would not need a messenger at all. But God wants also to connect with us, and so he speaks to those who are open to receiving his revelation, encourages them in their walk with him, and from that encouragement they then continue to encourage others by sharing as they have been inspired by that revelation.

Yep, it makes information second hand. And in that sense maybe you can say the Qur'an is better. But in either case, we are trusting the person who shares the revelation they have received to do so correctly. Who would know if Muhammad (pbuh) got any of the recitation wrong? How could anyone correct him if he just made an honest mistake in what he heard and memorized incorrectly. You see the Qur'an has a single original and then many copies have been made from it. But no one can read the original, because the original is that which Muhammad (pbuh) heard, and the first copy was that which he recited. If there was an error in it, there is no way to even realize it, let alone correct it. You simply have to trust that Muhammad (pbuh) made no mistakes, which of course I am sure you do.

Christians have the records of many who had similar experiences to help us see if their is a consistent message about the nature and character of God, the work of Jesus Christ, and other content in our scriptures. As I see it, that human element given to one man would increase the likelihood of error, given to many decreases it.
Reply

Muslim Knight
05-15-2007, 12:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Very true that the Bible is a book that allows for human hands to have a role in what is written. This is probably one of the places where what Christians and Muslims diverge on understanding the purpose and nature of not just inspiration, but even revelation.

As a Christian I understand God to reveal himself to individuals and they report on their experience of revelation, only rarely to they report an actual message that was revealed to them. If God simply wanted to get his message out, he could write it in the sky for all the world to see and read. He would not need a messenger at all. But God wants also to connect with us, and so he speaks to those who are open to receiving his revelation, encourages them in their walk with him, and from that encouragement they then continue to encourage others by sharing as they have been inspired by that revelation.

Yep, it makes information second hand. And in that sense maybe you can say the Qur'an is better. But in either case, we are trusting the person who shares the revelation they have received to do so correctly. Who would know if Muhammad (pbuh) got any of the recitation wrong? How could anyone correct him if he just made an honest mistake in what he heard and memorized incorrectly. You see the Qur'an has a single original and then many copies have been made from it. But no one can read the original, because the original is that which Muhammad (pbuh) heard, and the first copy was that which he recited. If there was an error in it, there is no way to even realize it, let alone correct it. You simply have to trust that Muhammad (pbuh) made no mistakes, which of course I am sure you do.

Christians have the records of many who had similar experiences to help us see if their is a consistent message about the nature and character of God, the work of Jesus Christ, and other content in our scriptures. As I see it, that human element given to one man would increase the likelihood of error, given to many decreases it.

If there was error in it, cross-referencing with other memorizers could have produced inconsistencies. But this did not happen in the case between the Prophet and his Companions. Also, the Quranic challenge to disbelievers to find discrepancies in it still stands. If the Prophet hadn't got it right, this would have failed even immediately.


Preservation of the Noble Quran

PRESERVATION OF THE NOBLE QURAN

By Sabeel Ahmed
http://thetruereligion.org

There are hundreds of religions flourishing around the world: Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Bahaism, Babism, Zoroastrianism, Mormonism, Jehovas Witnesses, Jainism, Confucianism etc. And each of these religions claim that their scripture is preserved from the day it was revealed (written) until our time. A religious belief is as authentic as the authenticity of the scripture it follows. And for any scripture to be labeled as authentically preserved it should follow some concrete and rational criteria.

Imagine this scenario: A professor gives a three hour lecture to his students. Imagine still that none of the students memorized this speech of the professor or wrote it down. Now forty years after that speech if these same students decided to replicate professor’s complete speech word for word, would they be able to do it? Obviously not. Because the only two modes of preservation historically is through writing and memory. Therefore, for any claimants to proclaim that their scripture is preserved in purity, they have to provide concrete evidence that the Scripture was written in its entirety AND memorized in its entirety from the time it was revealed to our time, in a continuous and unbroken chain. If the memorization part doesn’t exist parallel to the written part to act as a check and balance for it, then there is a genuine possibility that the written scripture may loose its purity through unintentional and intentional interpolations due to scribal errors, corruption by the enemies, pages getting decomposed etc, and these errors would be concurrently incorporated into subsequent texts, ultimately loosing its purity through ages.

Now, of all the religions mentioned above, does any one of them possess their scriptures in its entirety BOTH in writing AND in memory from the day of its revelation until our time. None of them fit this required criteria, except one: This unique scripture is the Qur’an – revelation bestowed to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) 1,418 years ago, as a guidance for all of humankind. Lets analyze the claim of the preservation of the Quran…

Memorization

‘In the ancient times, when writing was scarcely used, memory and oral transmission was exercised and strengthened to a degree now almost unknown’ relates Michael Zwettler.(1)

Prophet Muhammad (S): The First Memorizer

It was in this ‘oral’ society that Prophet Muhammad (S) was born in Mecca in the year 570 C.E. At the age of 40, he started receiving divine Revelations from the One God, Allah, through Archangel Gabriel. This process of divine revelations continued for about 22.5 years just before he passed away.

Prophet Muhammad (S) miraculously memorized each revelation and used to proclaim it to his Companions. Angel Gabriel used to refresh the Quranic memory of the Prophet each year.

‘The Prophet (S) was the most generous person, and he used to become more so (generous) particularly in the month of Ramadan because Gabriel used to meet him every night of the month of Ramadan till it elapsed. Allah’s Messenger (S) use to recite the Qur’an for him. When Gabriel met him, he use to become more generous than the fast wind in doing good’. (2)

‘Gabriel used to repeat the recitation of the Qur’an with the Prophet (S) once a year, but he repeated it twice with him in the year he (Prophet) died’. (3)

The Prophet himself use to stay up a greater part of the night in prayers and use to recite Quran from memory.

Companions of the Prophet: The First Generation Memorizers

Prophet Muhammad (S) encouraged his companions to learn and teach the Quran:

‘The most superior among you (Muslims) are those who learn the Qur’an and teach it’. (4)

‘Some of the companions who memorized the Quran were: ‘Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Ibn Masud, Abu Huraira, Abdullah bin Abbas, Abdullah bin Amr bin al-As, Aisha, Hafsa, and Umm Salama’. (5)

‘Abu Bakr, the first male Muslim to convert to Islam used to recite the Quran publicly in front of his house in Makka’. (6)

The Prophet also listened to the recitation of the Qur’an by the Companions: ‘Allah Apostle said to me (Abdullah bin Mas’ud): "Recite (of the Quran) to me". I said: "Shall I recite it to you although it had been revealed to you?!" He Said: "I like to hear (the Quran) from others". So I recited Sura-an-Nisa’ till I reached: "How (will it be) then when We bring from each nation a witness and We bring you (O Muhammad) as a witness against these people?"’ (4:41) ‘Then he said: "Stop!" Behold, his eyes were shedding tears then’. (7)

Many Quranic memorizers (Qurra) were present during the lifetime of the Prophet and afterwards through out the then Muslim world.

‘At the battle of Yamama, many memorizers of the Quran were martyred. ‘Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al Ansari, who was one of those who use to write the Divine Revelations: Abu Bakr sent me after the (heavy) casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle of) Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra (those who memorized the entire Quran) at other place…"’ (8 )

‘Over the centuries of the Islamic Era, there have arisen throughout the various regions of the Islamic world literally thousands of schools devoted specially to the teaching of the Quran to children for the purpose of memorization. These are called, in Arabic, katatib (singular: Kuttab). It is said that the Caliph ‘Umar (634-44) first ordered the construction of these schools in the age of the great expansion’. (9)

Second Generation Memorizers

"…Quranic schools were set up everywhere. As an example to illustrate this I may refer to a great Muslim scholar, of the second Muslim generation, Ibn ‘Amir, who was the judge of Damascus under the Caliph Umar Ibn ‘Abd Al-Aziz. It is reported that in his school for teaching the Quran there were 400 disciples to teach in his absence". (10 )

Memorizers in Subsequent Generations

The Number of Katatib and similar schools in Cairo (Egypt) alone at one time exceeded two thousand. (11)

Currently both in the Muslim and non-Muslim countries thousands of schools with each instructing tens of hundreds of students the art of memorizing the entire Quran. In the city of Chicago itself, there are close to 40+ Mosques, with many of them holding class for children instructing them the art of Quranic memorization.

Further Points of Consideration

- Muslims recite Quran from their memory in all of their five daily prayers.

- Once a year, during the month of Fasting (Ramadan), Muslims listen to the complete recitation of the Quran by a Hafiz (memorizer of the entire Quran)

- It’s a tradition among Muslims that before any speech or presentation, marriages, sermons, Quran is recited.

Conclusion

Quran is the only book, religious or secular, on the face of this planet that has been completely memorized by millions. These memorizers range from ages 6 and up, both Arabic and non-Arabic speakers, blacks, whites, Orientals, poor and wealthy.

Thus the process of memorization was continuous, from Prophet Muhammad’s (S) time to ours with an unbroken chain.

"The method of transmitting the Quran from one generation to the next by having he young memorize the oral recitation of their elders had mitigated somewhat from the beginning the worst perils of relying solely on written records…" relates John Burton (12)

"This phenomenon of Quranic recital means that the text has traversed the centuries in an unbroken living sequence of devotion. It cannot, therefore, be handled as an antiquarian thing, nor as a historical document out of a distant past. The fact of hifz (Quranic Memorization) has made the Qur’an a present possession through all the lapse of Muslim time and given it a human currency in every generation never allowing its relegation to a bare authority for reference alone" reflects Kenneth Cragg (13)

Written Text of the Quran

Prophet’s Lifetime

Prophet Muhammad (S) was very vigilant in preserving the Quran in the written form from the very beginning up until the last revelation. The Prophet himself was unlettered, did not knew how to read and write, therefore he called upon his numerous scribes to write the revelation for him. Complete Quran thus existed in written form in the lifetime of the Prophet.

Whenever a new revelation use to come to him, the Prophet would immediately call one of his scribes to write it down.

‘Some people visited Zaid Ibn Thabit (one of the scribes of the Prophet) and asked him to tell them some stories about Allah’s Messenger. He replied: "I was his (Prophet’s) neighbor, and when the inspiration descended on him he sent for me and I went to him and wrote it down for him…" (14 )

Narrated by al-Bara’: There was revealed ‘Not equal are those believers who sit (home) and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah’ (4:95). The Prophet said: ‘Call Zaid for me and let him bring the board, the ink pot and scapula bone.’ Then he (Prophet) said: ‘Write: Not equal are those believers…’ (15)

Zaid is reported to have said: ‘We use to compile the Qur’an from small scraps in the presence of the Apostle’. (16)

‘The Prophet, while in Madinah, had about 48 scribes who use to write for him’. (17)

Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar relates:… ‘The Messenger of Allah (S) said: "Do not take the Qur’an on a journey with you, for I am afraid lest it should fall into the hands of the enemy"’ (18 )

During the Prophet’s last pilgrimage, he gave a sermon in which he said: ‘I have left with you something which if you will hold fast to it you will never fall into error – a plain indication, the Book of God (Quran) and the practice of his Prophet…’ (19)

‘Besides the official manuscripts of the Quran kept with the Prophet, many of his companions use to possess their own written copies of the revelation’. (20)

‘A list of Companions of whom it is related that they had their own written collections included the following: Ibn Mas’ud, Ubay bin Ka’b, Ali, Ibn Abbas, Abu Musa, Hafsa, Anas bin Malik, Umar, Zaid bin Thabit, Ibn Al-Zubair, Abdullah ibn Amr, Aisha, Salim, Umm Salama, Ubaid bin Umar’. (21)

‘The best known among these (Prophet’s Scribes) are: Ibn Masud, Ubay bin Kab and Zaid bin Thabit’. (22)

‘Aisha and Hafsa, the wives of the Prophet had their own scripts written after the Prophet had died’. (23)

Conclusion

The complete Quran was written down in front of the Prophet by several of his scribes and the companions possess their own copies of the Quran in the Prophet’s lifetime. However the written material of the Quran in the Prophet’s possession were not bounded between the two covers in the form of a book, because the period of revelation of the Qur’an continued up until just a few days before the Prophet’s death. The task of collecting the Qur’an as a book was therefore undertaken by Abu Bakr, the first successor to the Prophet.

Written Quran in First Generation

At the battle of Yamama (633 CE), six months after the death of the Prophet, a number of Muslims, who had memorized the Quran were killed. Hence it was feared that unless a written official copy of the Quran were prepared, a large part of revelation might be lost.

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed). Umar was present with Abu Bakr who said: "Umar has come to me and said, the people have suffered heavy casualties on the day of (the battle) of Yamama, and I am afraid that there will be some casualties among the Qurra at other places, whereby a large part of the Quran may be lost, unless you collect it (in one manuscript, or book)…so Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah’s Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur’an and collect it (in one manuscript)’…So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)…" (24)

Now, a committee was formed to under take the task of collecting the written Quranic material in the form of a book. The committee was headed by Zaid bin Thabit, the original scribe of the Prophet, who was also a memorizer of the complete Quran.

‘…Zaid bin Thabit had committed the entire Quran to memory…’ (25)

The compilers in this committee, in examining written material submitted to them, insisted on very stringent criteria as a safeguard against any errors.

1. The material must have been originally written down in the presence of the Prophet; nothing written down later on the basis of memory alone was to be accepted. (26)

2. The material must be confirmed by two witnesses, that is to say, by two trustworthy persons testifying that they themselves had heard the Prophet recite the passage in question. (27)

‘The manuscript on which the Qur’an was collected, remained with Abu Bakr till Allah took him unto Him, and then with Umar (the second successor), till Allah took him unto Him, and finally it remained with Hafsa, ‘Umar’s daughter (and wife of the Prophet)’. (28 )

This copy of the Quran, prepared by the committee of competent companions of the Prophet (which included Memorizers of the Quran) was unanimous approved by the whole Muslim world. If they committee would have made a error even of a single alphabet in transcribing the Quran, the Qurra (memorizers of the Quran) which totaled in the tens of hundreds would have caught it right away and correct it. This is exactly where the neat check and balance system of preservation of the Quran comes into play, but which is lacking for any other scripture besides the Quran.

Official written copy by Uthman

The Quran was originally revealed in Quraishi dialect of Arabic. But to facilitate the people who speak other dialects, in their understanding and comprehension, Allah revealed the Quran finally in seven dialects of Arabic. During the period of Caliph Uthman (second successor to the Prophet) differences in reading the Quran among the various tribes became obvious, due to the various dialectical recitations. Dispute was arising, with each tribe calling its recitation as the correct one. This alarmed Uthman, who made a official copy in the Quraishi dialect, the dialect in which the Quran was revealed to the Prophet and was memorized by his companions. Thus this compilation by Uthman’s Committee is not a different version of the Quran (like the Biblical versions) but the same original revelation given to the Prophet by One God, Allah.

Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham (Syria) and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia and Azherbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their differences in the recitation of the Quran, so he said to Uthman, ‘O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and Christians did before’. So Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, ‘Send us the manuscripts of the Quran so that we may compile the Quranic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you’. Hafsa sent it to Uthman. ‘Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Said bin Al-As and Abdur Rahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, ‘In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Quran, then write it in their (Quraishi) tongue’. They did so, and when they had written many copies, Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied and ordered that all the other Quranic materials whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt…" (29)

Again a very stringent criteria was set up by this Committee to prevent any alteration of the Revelation.

1. The earlier recension (Original copy prepared by Abu Bakr) was to serve as the principal basis of the new one. (30 )

2. Any doubt that might be raised as to the phrasing of a particular passage in the written text was to be dispelled by summoning persons known to have learned the passage in question from the Prophet. (31)

3. Uthman himself was to supervise the work of the Council. (32)

When the final recension was completed, Uthman sent a copy of it to each of the major cities of Makka, Damascus, Kufa, Basra and Madina.

The action of Uthman to burn the other copies besides the final recension, though obviously drastic, was for the betterment and harmony of the whole community and was unanimously approved by the Companions of the Prophet.

Zaid ibn Thabit is reported to have said: "I saw the Companions of Muhammad (going about) saying, ‘By God, Uthman has done well! By God, Uthman has done well!" (33)

Another esteemed Companion Musab ibn Sad ibn Abi Waqqas said: "I saw the people assemble in large number at Uthman’s burning of the prescribed copies (of the Quran), and they were all pleased with his action; not a one spoke out against him". (34)

Ali ibn Abu Talib, the cousin of the Prophet and the fourth successor to the Prophet commented: "If I were in command in place of Uthman, I would have done the same". (35)

Of the copies made by Uthman, two still exist to our day. One is in the city of Tashkent, (Uzbekistan) and the second one is in Istanbul (Turkey). Below is a brief account of both these copies:

1. The copy which Uthman sent to Madina was reportedly removed by the Turkish authorities to Istanbul, from where it came to Berlin during World War I. The Treaty of Versailles, which concluded World War I, contains the following clause:

‘Article 246: Within six months from the coming into force of the present Treaty, Germany will restore to His Majesty, King of Hedjaz, the original Koran of Caliph Othman, which was removed from Madina by the Turkish authorities and is stated to have been presented to the ex-Emperor William II". (36)

‘This manuscript then reached Istanbul, but not Madina (Where it now resides)’. (37)

2. The second copy in existence is kept in Tashkent, Uzbekistan. ‘It may be the Imam (master) manuscript or one of the other copies made at the time of Uthman’. (38 )

It Came to Samarkand in 890 Hijra (1485) and remained there till 1868. Then it was taken to St.Petersburg by the Russians in 1869. It remained there till 1917. A Russian orientalist gave a detailed description of it, saying that many pages were damaged and some were missing. A facsimile, some 50 copies, of this mushaf (copy) was produced by S.Pisareff in 1905. A copy was sent to the Ottoman Sultan ‘Abdul Hamid, to the Shah of Iran, to the Amir of Bukhara, to Afghanistan, to Fas and some important Muslim personalities. One copy is now in the Columbia University Library (U.S.A.). (39)

‘The Manuscript was afterwards returned to its former place and reached Tashkent in 1924, where it has remained since’. (40)

Conclusion

‘Two of the copies of the Qur’an which were originally prepared in the time of Caliph Uthman, are still available to us today and their text and arrangement can be compared, by anyone who cares to do, with any other copy of the Quran, be it in print or handwritten, from any place or period of time. They will be found identical’. (41)

It can now be proclaimed, through the evidences provided above, with full conviction and certainty that the Prophet memorized the entire Quran, had it written down in front of him through his scribes, many of his companions memorized the entire revelation and in turn possess their own private copies for recitation and contemplation. This process of dual preservation of the Quran in written and in the memory was carried in each subsequent generation till our time, without any deletion, interpolation or corruption of this Divine Book.

Sir William Muir, Orientalist of the 19th century states, "There is probably no other book in the world which has remained twelve centuries (now fourteen) with so pure a text". (42)

This divine protection provided to the Quran, the Last Reveled Guide to Humanity, is proclaimed by One God in the Quran:

We* (Allah) have, without doubt, send down the Message; and We will assuredly Guard it (from corruption)’ (Quran – Chapter 15, Verse 9).

*(‘We’ is the plural of Majesty, and not the Christian plural of trinity)

Compare this divine and historical preservation of the Quran with any literature, be it religious or secular and it becomes evident that none possess similar miraculous protection. And as states earlier, a belief is as authentic as the authenticity of its scripture. And if any scripture is not preserved, how can we be certain that the belief arising out of this scripture is divine or man made, and if we are not sure about the belief itself, then our salvation in the hereafter would be jeopardized.

Thus the above evidence for the protection of the Quran from any corruption is a strong hint about its divine origin. We request all open hearted persons to read, understand and live the Quran, the ‘Manual for Mankind’. Welcome to Islam…


References
(1) (Michael Zwettler, The Oral Tradition of Classical Arabic Poetry, p.14. Ohio State Press: 1978 )

(2) (Transmitted by Ibn Abbas, collected in Sahih Al-Bukhari, 6.519, translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan)

(3) (Transmitted by Abu Hurayrah, collected in Sahih Al-Bukhari, 6.520, translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan)

(4) (Transmitted by Uthman bin Affan, collected in Sahih Bukhari, 6.546, translated by Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan).

(5) (Jalal al-Din Suyuti, ‘Al-Itqan fi-ulum al-Quran, Vol. I, p.124)

(6) (Ibn Hisham: Sira al-nabi, Cairo, n.d., Vol.I, p. 206).

(7) (Bukhari, 6.106)

( 8 ) (Al-Bukhari, 6.201)

(9) ( Labib as-Said, the Recited Koran, Translated by Bernard Weiss, M.A.Rauf, and Morroe Berger, The Darwon Press, Princton, New Jersey, 1975, pg. 58 ).

(10) (Ibn al Jazari, Kitab al-Nash fi al-Qir’at al-Ashr, (Cairo, al-Halabi, n.d._ vol. 2, p. 254, also Ahmad Makki al-Ansari, al-Difa’ ‘An al-Qur’an. (Cairo, Dar al-Ma’arif, 1973 C.E.), part I, p. 120)

(11) (Labib as-Said, the Recited Koran, Translated by Bernard Weiss, M.A.Rauf, and Morroe Berger, The Darwon Press, Princeton, New Jersey, 1975, pg .59 )

(12) (John Burton, An Introduction to the Hadith, p.27. Edinburgh University Press: 1994)

(13) (Kenneth Cragg, The Mind of the Qur’an, p.26. George Allah & Unwin: 1973)

(14) (Tirmidhi, Mishkat al-Masabih, No. 5823)

(15) (Bukhari, 6.512 )

(16) (Suyuti, Itqan, I, p. 99 )

(17) (M.M.Azami, Kuttab al-Nabi,Beirut, 1974)

(18 ) (Muslim, III, NO. 4606, also 4607, 4608; Bukhari, 4.233)

(19) (Ibn Hisham, Sira al-nabi, p.651).

(20) (Suyuti, Itqan, I, p.62).

(21) (Ibn Abi Dawud: Masahif, p.14 )

(22) (Bayard Dodge: The fihrist of al-Nadim: A Tenth Century Survey of Muslim Culture, New York, 1970, pp.53-63)

(23) (Muwatta Imam Malik, Lahore, 1980, no.307, 308, translation by M. Rahimuddin).

(24) (Bukhari 6.201)

(25) (Labib as-Said, The Recited Koran, translated by Bernard Weiss, et al. 1975, p.21.

(26) (Ibn Hajar, Fath, Vol. IX, p.10 )

(27) (ibid., p.11 )

(28 ) (Bukhari, 6.201)

(29) (Bukhari, 6.510)

(30) (Ibn Hajar, Bath, IX, p. 15 )

(31) (Suyuti, Itqan, Vol.I, p.59 )

(32) (ibid., p.59 ).

(33) (Naysaburi, al-,Nizam al-Din al-Hasan ibn Muhammad, Ghara’ib al-Quran wa-ragha’ib al-furqan. 4 vols. To date. Cairo, 1962).

(34) (Ibn Abi Dawud, p.12 )

(35) (Zarkashi, al-, Badr al-Din, Al-Burhan fi-ulum al-Quran, Cairo, 1957, Vol. I, p. 240.

(36) (Fred L. Israel, Major Peace Treaties of Modern History, New York, Chelsea House Pub., Vol. II, p. 1418 )

(37) (Makhdum, op.cit., 1938, p.19 ).

(38 ) (Ahmad Von Denffer, Ulum Al-Qur’an, Islamic Foundation, revised ed., 1994, p.63)

(39) (The Muslim World, Vol.30(1940), pp. 357-8 )

(40) (Ahmad von Denffer, Ulum Al-Quran, Islamic Foundation, revised Ed., 1994, p.63).

(41) (ibid., p,64)

(42) (Sir Williams Muir, Life of Mohamet, Vol.I. Introduction)

Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 01:10 PM
It is worth noting, that the afore conjectured scenario:
Imagine this scenario: A professor gives a three hour lecture to his students. Imagine still that none of the students memorized this speech of the professor or wrote it down. Now forty years after that speech if these same students decided to replicate professor’s complete speech word for word, would they be able to do it? Obviously not. Because the only two modes of preservation historically is through writing and memory. Therefore, for any claimants to proclaim that their scripture is preserved in purity, they have to provide concrete evidence that the Scripture was written in its entirety AND memorized in its entirety from the time it was revealed to our time, in a continuous and unbroken chain. If the memorization part doesn’t exist parallel to the written part to act as a check and balance for it, then there is a genuine possibility that the written scripture may loose its purity through unintentional and intentional interpolations due to scribal errors, corruption by the enemies, pages getting decomposed etc, and these errors would be concurrently incorporated into subsequent texts, ultimately loosing its purity through ages.
IS NOT how the Gospel accounts came to be written.

From the beginning, the stories of Jesus were told and retold. They were cross-referenced among first the disciples and a larger group of followers beyond the disciples. Peter, John, Stephen, Philip and others were all preaching the same message within weeks after Jesus crucifixion and resurrection. The early church did collect and write down stories about Jesus. There was the didache (which means the teachings) that was produced by the early church, a handbook for new Christian converts, consisting of instructions derived directly from the teachings of Jesus. This work was in regular use less than 20 years after the time of Christ. Reading the Gospels of Luke and Matthew, it appears that they had access to another piece of Christian writing that they both used as background in writing their gospels. It is very true that the manner in which the gospels (and other Christian scripture) came into being is significantly different than that by which the Qur'an is purported to have been written. However, I fail to see that is giving them less credibility. And in some cases I think it gives them more -- remember for Christians the key point of scripture is not to communicate to us the exact words of God, but to communicate to us the work of God. I think that could be credibily remembered even at the end of one's lifetime, without notes, just go and visit an old folks home and talk with them if you have any doubts about their ability to do that. And in this case, not only did some writers have their own personal memories of the events, they had the collective memory of the church and some written stories which they were able to compile and refer to as they then wrote their Gospel proclamations. Remember too, the Gospels are not history nor biography. They were never intended for that purpose. Those who look to them for that will be sorely disappointed. They were then and remain today a proclamation of God's good news, his grace revealed to us and worked out for us in Jesus Christ's life, death, and resurrection. That is why when you read the gospel accounts over 1/2 of the material convers only the final week of Jesus' life on earth. Only bits and pieces from the rest of his life, his ministry, his sermons, his miracles, etc are even noted at all. Those who look to the Gospels for a message from God or Jesus will not find it there, that is not what the purpose was in writing them, because that is not what Jesus' purpose was when he came here. His purpose in coming was to die. And that is the story that they tell. Any bood that tells you different than this does not know about the real Jesus. Woe to them who would write such a book and claim it is from God:
And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
(Revelation 22:19)
Reply

poga
05-15-2007, 03:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by NoName55
Then don't say similar things to them! Only mention The Prophets' named in Qura'an. Rest of the names are known only to Allah ta'ala. you, I or mirza qadiani have no authority to say who was or was not a messenger.
:w:
:sl: there are only twenty five prophets named in al quran
but according to hadith of MUHAMMAD SALLEL LA HU ALAHI WA SALLIM
there are 124000 prophets ALLAH sent to guide humanity
so who were those other 123975 prophets to know them we need to go to older holy scrpitures
we know over the time they have been corrupted by men but even then there are truth in them what confirems oneness of ALLAH
and one of those book is holy GEETHA if one reads it in the light of AL QURAN he can then very well come to know those part what does not contradict
AL QURAN must have came from divine source therefore from ALLAH to his prophet
so GEETHA is my evidence as it is atributed as saying of krisna
now what is your evidence that he is not prophet:w:
Reply

NoName55
05-15-2007, 03:49 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
:sl: there are only twenty five prophets named in al quran
but according to hadith of MUHAMMAD SALLEL LA HU ALAHI WA SALLIM
there are 124000 prophets ALLAH sent to guide humanity

so who were those other 123975 prophets to know them we need to go to older holy scrpitures
we know over the time they have been corrupted by men but even then there are truth in them what confirems oneness of ALLAH
and one of those book is holy GEETHA if one reads it in the light of AL QURAN he can then very well come to know those part what does not contradict
AL QURAN must have came from divine source therefore from ALLAH to his prophet
so GEETHA is my evidence as it is atributed as saying of krisna
now what is your evidence that he is not prophet:w:
there are only twenty five prophets named in al quran
but according to hadith of MUHAMMAD SALLEL LA HU ALAHI WA SALLIM
there are 124000 prophets ALLAH sent to guide humanity
So does it mean that you have the authority to allot pagan deity names to our Prophets?
GEETHA if one reads it in the light of AL QURAN
why on earth do I need to read hindu tripe when I have Quraan to teach me all I need to know? I am not zakir nor do I live in India thus I do not need to appease those killers of Muslims by trying to find similarities between Islam and hinduism!

:w:
Reply

poga
05-15-2007, 05:54 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by NoName55
So does it mean that you have the authority to allot pagan deity names to our Prophets?why on earth do I need to read hindu tripe when I have Quraan to teach me all I need to know? I am not zakir nor do I live in India thus I do not need to appease those killers of Muslims by trying to find similarities between Islam and hinduism!

:w:
brother may i recommend hindu ayurvedic tonic it will cure your senality for good
you say why on earth
exactly it is because we live on earth
may be not india or arabia but mother earth
thats binds us as brothers if we try to learn from each other we gain if you don't want to thats your loss
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 05:59 PM
I can't believe I'm asking for this. But,

Mods, please, close this thread.



It appears that there is little desire to stay on topic. Arguments about hindu gods and the names of the prophets listed in the Qur'an hardly seem to have anything to do with whether or not the Bible needs a defense. Even reading this thread I can't make the connection.
Reply

NoName55
05-15-2007, 06:21 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I can't believe I'm asking for this. But,

Mods, please, close this thread.



It appears that there is little desire to stay on topic. Arguments about hindu gods and the names of the prophets listed in the Qur'an hardly seem to have anything to do with whether or not the Bible needs a defense. Even reading this thread I can't make the connection.
looking at size of type, one could be forgiven for believing that you think something is wrong with their eyesight.

Regarding hindu gods vs names of prophets: Do you think that when someone sneaks in misinfo in between on-topic posts, I should leave it uncorrected?

first they say krisna is Muslim Prophet
2nd Jesus Is dead
then comes Mirza was Massiah and his chief priest is represention of God on earth.

by the way this cult was started during the Raj to pacify Muslims who wanted to overthrow their Christian rulers

By God, all these demands from trintarians on this forum and some mods obeying their every command is getting on my nerves, sometimes I start to hallucinate that I'm at a pagan forum!
Reply

Redeemed
05-15-2007, 10:28 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
:sl: IF YOU AGREE GOD IS CREATOR OF THE SPIRIT THEN HOW GOD CAN BE SPIRIT AS WELL YOU MUST UNDERSTAND CREATED THINGS IS UNLIKE THE UNCREATED CREATOR THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE ISSUE:w:
If He is not Spirit, then what is He? He is not flesh and blood accept for His Word only. You are not making any sense to me. Of course He can create spirits. He is the Spirit of all spirits and over all spirits along with being over flesh and blood. Everything is held together by the Word of His power. That is Jesus.
:)
Reply

poga
05-16-2007, 12:00 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
If He is not Spirit, then what is He? He is not flesh and blood accept for His Word only. You are not making any sense to me. Of course He can create spirits. He is the Spirit of all spirits and over all spirits along with being over flesh and blood. Everything is held together by the Word of His power. That is Jesus.
:)
:sl: we know our body is physical and our soul spiritual
we also know devils are bad spirits and angels are good spirits
and we know they are created by all mighty ALLAH
now if ALLAH is also the absolute spirit
then those angels and devils can claim we too are part of your spirit therefore we are part of you therefor we are small god and you are big god
but we also know god teaches as in all scriptures that he have no partner
so oh alapiana will you not understand please come to the common term between me and you and what is the first term the first term is there is no but god and we worship him alone
you try this tonight when you go to bed you pray to one god the creator and send your salutation to your prophet jesus[ may peace and blessing of ALLAH be upon him] and hold the desire to see him in your dream and when you see him in your dream ask him about MUHAMMAD [SALLAEL LA HU ALAHI WA SALLIM]:w:
Reply

Redeemed
05-16-2007, 09:48 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
:sl: we know our body is physical and our soul spiritual
we also know devils are bad spirits and angels are good spirits
and we know they are created by all mighty ALLAH
now if ALLAH is also the absolute spirit
then those angels and devils can claim we too are part of your spirit therefore we are part of you therefor we are small god and you are big god
but we also know god teaches as in all scriptures that he have no partner
so oh alapiana will you not understand please come to the common term between me and you and what is the first term the first term is there is no but god and we worship him alone
you try this tonight when you go to bed you pray to one god the creator and send your salutation to your prophet jesus[ may peace and blessing of ALLAH be upon him] and hold the desire to see him in your dream and when you see him in your dream ask him about MUHAMMAD [SALLAEL LA HU ALAHI WA SALLIM]:w:
God has already shown me Muhammad, but not because I asked. Why would I want to ask about a person to begin with? He was a prophet but just a man. I am not a respecter of any human flesh unless of course that flesh is the WORD OF GOD INCARNATED.
Reply

Umar001
05-17-2007, 03:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
As for the Hebrew Old Testament, the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls in the mid 1900s showed how well its text had been maintained. Scholars were able to make comparison between the 800 CE Masoretic text used by Jews today and compare it with the 200 BCE texts found written on the scrolls and the differences were primarily in the form of changes in word spellings.
I have been skimmin some stuff about the Dead sea scrolls, I will ask you, under what evidences were the scrolls dated at 200 BCE?

Also as a General Reminder any new posts from Friday, meaning about 8 hours from now, which are off topic will be deleted.
Reply

poga
05-17-2007, 03:49 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
I have been skimmin some stuff about the Dead sea scrolls, I will ask you, under what evidences were the scrolls dated at 200 BCE?

Also as a General Reminder any new posts from Friday, meaning about 8 hours from now, which are off topic will be deleted.
AL QURAN speaks of living people of caves
are there any connection with them and dead sea scroll
Reply

poga
05-17-2007, 04:10 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by alapiana1
God has already shown me Muhammad, but not because I asked. Why would I want to ask about a person to begin with? He was a prophet but just a man. I am not a respecter of any human flesh unless of course that flesh is the WORD OF GOD INCARNATED.
every thing is word of god
but just as our echo lives without any of my physical part being in it
so doe's word of god as prerecorded continious sustenence for this creation
i think what you want to know is what is the singular reason of this creation
in many belief there is mention of one universal men
even those who worship femenine deity they too believe she was created by the first male essence
what i ask you to do is go through every candidate with unbiased judgement and categorise theirs deeds
and who ever passes all the spiritual and physical test take him as the best of the creation
we know human are best of creation so we only have look for who is the best of human being
Reply

Umar001
05-17-2007, 04:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
AL QURAN speaks of living people of caves
are there any connection with them and dead sea scroll
Akhi I do not understand what you mean,

this thread is supposed to be about the defense of the Bible, part of that is the evidence brought forth of the Dead sea scrolls.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-17-2007, 05:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Al Habeshi
I have been skimmin some stuff about the Dead sea scrolls, I will ask you, under what evidences were the scrolls dated at 200 BCE?
That date is just something that is filed under general knowledge in the back of my brain. I'm sure that if you've been reading about the currently you probably have better access to answering that question than do I.

If you're not finding the answer in what you are reading, I might suggest Biblical Archaeology magaize, Biblical Review, Christian History, and other similar magazines as places to find up to day articles about them.


Also as a General Reminder any new posts from Friday, meaning about 8 hours from now, which are off topic will be deleted.
Yeah!!! I've never seen a thread go so far afield from it's stated topic.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-17-2007, 05:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
AL QURAN speaks of living people of caves
are there any connection with them and dead sea scroll


The dead sea scrolls were a collection of papyri scrolls found in clay jars in a cave near the dead sea -- hence the name. The community they were believed to have come from was a group that lived in the area, but not in caves, they just put the scrolls there. One suspects for safe keeping. It is highly unlikely that the Qur'an was referring to them, or that Muhammed or any of the rest of the Ummah was even aware of this community at the time the Qur'an was written.
Reply

Redeemed
05-17-2007, 09:02 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by poga
every thing is word of god
but just as our echo lives without any of my physical part being in it
so doe's word of god as prerecorded continious sustenence for this creation
i think what you want to know is what is the singular reason of this creation
in many belief there is mention of one universal men
even those who worship femenine deity they too believe she was created by the first male essence
what i ask you to do is go through every candidate with unbiased judgement and categorise theirs deeds
and who ever passes all the spiritual and physical test take him as the best of the creation
we know human are best of creation so we only have look for who is the best of human being
I understand what you are trying to say, I think; however, this is where the Bible and the Koran clash. The Bible says that all things were made by Him and for Him (Jesus). I don't believe the Bible is as corrupt as Muslims say; however, I do understand why they say that. It is because they can't except the Bible is true and remain Muslim. I can't prove that the Bible is God's word, but I believe it by faith. All the titles that were given to Allah Jesus had claimed for himself and others (prophets and Apostles) have declared it so as well. Yes, I know that He also took the humble position too. That was because He was also a man (flesh and blood), but the spirit part of Him is God in the flesh. How do you know that it's true that God is not a begetter nor is He begotten? Do you think that it is impossible for God who created life not to be a begetter even if He wants to beget Himself in human flesh? Think about it. Ask God to show this doctrine through His eyes. Have you done that?
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-18-2007, 09:20 PM
Of all criticisms levelled at the Bible, there is one to which I would offer not a defense, but an instructive parry. The criticism is the one of the countless different copies of the Bible that one can find today.

I understand this issue. I once worked in a Christian bookstore where we sold King James Version bibles, New International Version bibles, Revised Standard Version bibles, New American Standard Bibles, Jerusalem Bibles, Living Bibles, Philips' Bibles, and more.

There were annotated bibles, study bibles, children's bibles, giant print bibles, and reference bibles. We had bibles with Scoffield's notes, Drake's annotations, Thompson's references, Nelson's illustrations, and an unknown person's amilpifications. There are bibles with copyright dates of 1611, 1947, 1978, and 2001. There are bibles translated by Coverdale, Tyndale, Wycliffe and whole committees. There are some bibles that claim to be "Authorized", others are "Open", and some proclaim the "Good News" or will tell you "The Way".

And that is just Bibles in English. There are also Spanish, French, German, Chinese, Urdu. I have a friend who is right now in the midst of translating the bible into the native language of a tribe of only a few thousand people in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

So, which one of these is the right Bible? Answer: none of them are, and all of them are.

None of them are the original Bible, and none of them claim to be. Each of them was translated, annotated, supplied with notes and other material such as maps or charts or explanatory commentaries, and printed with a particular audience in mind. For a child it might have lots of pictures. For a student it might have notes to answer questions, for someone with failing eyesight it is in large print, for some who speaks English it is in that language and is maybe even in Elizabethean English for those who grew up using it and in a more modern rendering for more modern English speakers. Each one of these things makes it the "right" bible for a particular person and the "wrong" Bible for someone else. Yet, of course, while they appear to be so many different Bibles they are in reality all just one Bible.

How can this be? How can many Bibles with all these different variations, really be all just one Bible? I might ask how many different translations have been made available of the Qur'an? How many different translations are there in English alone? Does that mean that there are many different Qur'ans? Of course not. And why not? Because the real Qur'an, the true one is that one which was given to Muhammad, not the book which was made from a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of that Qur'an and then translated into English and now sits on my shelf. What I possess is at best an interpretation of the Qur'an.

And so it is with all of these Bibles we speak of. They are not the real Bible, but they do convey the essence of God's message revealed to us in the Bible to those who can't read the Bible in its original form and who depend on the work of others to get it to us to read today.

My friend in the Democratic Republic of the Congo knows that the book he will put into the hands of eager readers is but an interpretation of what was originally written. He knows it very well, for he has spent 20 years of his life doing that interpretaion. He can't just go grab and English copy off of a bookstore shelf and then translate it quickly like he could do with a letter. No, he has to start with as close to the copy of the original text as can be determined. And then learning both the original languages and the new language into which it shall be placed he has to be sure to translate more than just the words on the page, but even the meaning behind them. Is the building you live in a house or a home? In one sentence the two terms mean the same thing, but in another we recognize that a house is just a building, but a home is where the heart is. Or does house mean tribal family and home mean an institution that old people are kept in when they are no longer able to care for themselves? And how do any of these concepts translate to people who live in grass huts that they tear down and rebuild in new places as needed?

And when he gets done, there will no doubt be someone who will truthfully say that they might have chosen a different word or an alternate turn of a phrase in this place or that one. And indeed they might be right if thinking about a different person in a different context than my friend was thinking of at the time he chose the word he did. The process of translating and making the bible available to people to read today will never be complete. As people and language and the meaning behind words change, the interpretation provided must change along with them or we shall loose their meaning all together.

Yes, there are thousands of choices when one goes to select a Bible to read from today. But these many different productions of the Bible are not different Bibles anymore than Mohammad Asad's The Message of the Qur'an Translated and Explained!, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran by Mohammad Marmaduke Pickthall, or translations by Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, Ph.D. and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan or Yusuf Ali are different Qur'ans. And so, the many versions and translations and special editions do not mean that there are thousands or millions of different Bibles. Indeed there is really just one Bible, that which God revealed to his servants, that they recorded, that the early Church preserved, and has now been passed on to us by the hand of God and the hands of many different men.
Reply

poga
05-18-2007, 10:04 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Of all criticisms levelled at the Bible, there is one to which I would offer not a defense, but an instructive parry. The criticism is the one of the countless different copies of the Bible that one can find today.

I understand this issue. I once worked in a Christian bookstore where we sold King James Version bibles, New International Version bibles, Revised Standard Version bibles, New American Standard Bibles, Jerusalem Bibles, Living Bibles, Philips' Bibles, and more.

There were annotated bibles, study bibles, children's bibles, giant print bibles, and reference bibles. We have bibles with Scoffield's notes, Drake's annotations, Thompson's references, Nelson's illustrations, and an unknown person's amilpifications. There are bibles with copyright dates of 1611, 1947, 1978, and 2001. There are bibles translated by Coverdale, Tyndale, Wycliffe and whole committees. There are some bibles that claim to be "Authorized", others are "Open", and some proclaim the "Good News" or will tell you "The Way".

And that is just Bibles in English. There are also Spanish, French, German, Chinese, Urdu. I have a friend who is right now in the midst of translating the bible into the native language of a tribe of only a few thousand people in the Democratice Republic of the Congo.

So, which one of these is the right Bible? Answer: none of them are, and all of them are.

None of them are the original Bible, and none of them claim to be. Each of them was translated, annotated, supplied with notes and other material such as maps or charts or explanatory commentaries, and printed with a particular audience in mind. For a child it might have lots of pictures. For a student it might have notes to answer questions, for someone with failing eyesight it is in large print, for some who speaks English it is in that language and maybe even is in Elizabethean English for those who grew up using it and a more modern rendering for more modern English speakers. Each one of these things makes it the "right" bible for a particular person and the "wrong" Bible for someone else. Yet, of course, while they appear to be so many different Bibles they are in reality all just one Bible.

How can this be? How can many Bibles with all these different variations, really be all just one Bible? I might ask how many different translations have been made available of the Qur'an? How many different translations are there in English alone? Does that mean that there are many different Qur'ans? Of course not. And why not? Because the real Qur'an, the true one is that one which was given to Muhammad, not the book which which was made from a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of that Qur'an and then translated into English and now sits on my shelf. What I possess is at best an interpretation of the Qur'an.

And so it is with all of these Bibles we speak of. They are not the real Bible, but they do convey the essence of God's message revealed to us in the Bible to those who can't read the Bible in its original form and who depend on the work of others to get it to us to read today.

My friend in the Democratic Republic of the Congo knows that the book he will put into the hands of eager readers is but an interpretation of what was originally written. He knows it very well, for he has spent 20 year of his life doing that interpretaion. He can't just go grab and English copy of a bookstore shelf and then translate it quickly like he could do with a letter. No, he has to start with as close to the copy of the original text as can be determined. And then learning both the original languages and the new language into which it shall be placed he has to be sure to translate more than just the words on the page, but even the meaning behind them. Is the building you live in a house or a home. In one sentence they mean the same thing, but in another we recognize that a house is just a building, but a home is where the heart is. Or does house mean tribal family and home mean an institution that old people are kept in when they are no longer able to care for themselves? And how do any of these concepts translate to people who live in grass huts that they tear down and rebuild in new places as needed?

And when he gets done, there will no doubt be someone who will truthfully say that they might have chosen a different word or turn of a phrase in this place or that. And indeed they might be right if thinking about a different person in a different context than my friend was thinking of at the time he chose the one he did. The process of translating and making the bible available to people to read today will never be complete. As people and language and the meaning behind words change, the interpretation provided must change along with them or we shall loose there meaning all together.

Yes, there are thousands of choices when one goes to select a Bible to read from today. But these many different productions of the Bible are not different Bibles anymore than Mohammad Asad's The Message of the Qur'an Translated and Explained!, The Meaning of the Glorious Koran by Mohammad Marmaduke Pickthall, or translations by Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali, Ph.D. and Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan or Yusuf Ali are different Qur'ans. And so, the many versions and translations and special editions do not mean that there are thousands or millions of different Bibles. Indeed there is really just one Bible, that which God revealed to his servants, that they recorded, that the early Church preserved, and has now been passed on to us by the hand of many different men.
:sl:
bible quran thora puran all are book of belief they all need defense against unbeliever
they all claim book of god yet only AL QURAN have god as defender
rest needs alapiana or........:w:
Reply

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

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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-24-2018, 03:25 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2011, 02:33 AM
  3. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-06-2007, 10:55 PM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-29-2007, 10:52 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-22-2006, 09:55 AM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!