Peace be upon yall
As a former christian I do not see how this would change anyone's mind alone, if I saw this I would not be shaken in faith.
Christianity is Man made! PROOF!
Salam Alaikum
One of the users on my board masha'Allah who is studying Islam posted this so I would like to Quote the thread in parts for everyone here...
This is pure proof that Christianity is man made and can not be from God because the Church Changes it as they please!!!
Allah swt says in the Quran:I'm not sure who of you have heard this already - the story is a few weeks old, but I heard about it just tonight and thought it was something important to post. Apparently theologians congregated in Rome in December to discuss the validity of 'Limbo' - a place best known as the home to unbaptized babies. This has been possibly the least liked part of Christianity (although I'm not sure if it is limited only to Catholicism - I apologize if it is). This is where all of the unbaptized babies go, as a result of Original Sin, also one of the more controversial areas of Christianity. Apparently this was becoming a real problem in Africa where the infant mortality rate is quite high and some babies were just not being baptized in time. So they decided it is no longer applicable.
Ok, I don't know about the rest of you, but does anyone else find this a little bizarre? Christian or not, the fact that people gathered and threw out a 'netherworld' because it was unpopular. Uhh... ? Could you imagine deciding you didn't like the idea of Hell and saying, well now it doesn't exist? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this, and I apologize if this has been discussed already. Original Sin and the idea of this Limbo was definitely a huge problem for me when I was younger (brought up as a Catholic). I never understood it, and was subsequently never given a proper explanation for it - my guess is the people selling it didn't quite buy it either.
If anyone wants to read more about the decision, you can find it here...
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...ationworld-hed
Peace!
-----------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 2
Verses
79 - Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say: "This is from Allah" to traffic with it for a miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write and for the gain they make thereby.
80 - And they say: "The fire shall not touch us but for a few numbered days"; Say: "Have ye taken a promise from Allah for He never breaks His promise? Or is it that ye say of Allah what ye do not know?"
81 - Nay those who seek gain in Evil and are girt round by their sins they are Companions of the Fire therein shall they abide (for ever).
82 - But those who have faith and work righteousness they are Companions of the Garden therein shall they abide (for ever).
-----------------------------------------------------------
If this is not proof enough for people then I dont know what will be!
Last edited by akulion; 01-17-2006 at 08:08 AM. Reason: edit title
Peace be upon yall
As a former christian I do not see how this would change anyone's mind alone, if I saw this I would not be shaken in faith.
i heard that the first bible was right
then the so called christians changed it so many time.
[BANANA][/BANANA]
Salam
Well it was mentioned in da bible, that Prophet isa or in other words Jesus Christ used to fast, and pray in a manner that he touches the ground with his forehead (Sujood). How many Christians fast? How many Christians pray that way? So, temme which is the right path? No offence everyone
H A N U
format_quote Originally Posted by ma541
I have heard people as in shaiks say that, I mean, check brother Yusuf Estes, I think says the bible in its Original form is or was a revelation, I personally dont think it was, not the Bible, but I think brother Estes has more knowledge than me, so maybe he has seen and read some statements that I have not.
But one thing is sure, some people are changing something.
Peace
Salam Alaikum:
I'm not sure what you mean by "the first bible". I can't understand how any bible, be it the first one produced or last, could be considered "more accurate", when, as far as I know, they all contain the false doctrine of Paul.
Maybe you're right in that he meant the original revelation...that would make sense.
But, regardless, with constant changes to church doctrine and biblical scriptures, one thing is for sure, there are no Christians following the true teachings of Jesus, pbuh.
After showing one guy a clear contradiction to verses he posted, he actually came back with a response similar to this: "well, you can only show there is a contradiction, but you can't prove which one is the corrupted verse."
So, tell me, does it really matter at that point which one is corrupt? :confused: So, with that kind of mentality, it makes no wonder the church can do whatever it wants. The flock will continue to follow blindly.
May Allah, swt, guide them to the truth. Ameen
Wa'alaikum salam,
Hana
Hana
I don't exactly see what you mean by "the church". Christianity is deeply divided in sometimes feuding denominations.
Nobody speaks of "the church" but of the Christians churches.
You only speak of "the church" when you refer to the church you belong to.
Mansio:
When you can properly address brother Ansar Al-'Adl, in the "A review of baseless assertions" thread that he so generously started just for you, then you can address me and I will explain my use of the word church. Until then, I have nothing to say to you.
Maybe by then you can learn to speak with proof instead of just babbling useless information.
Good luck in the research you're suppose to be doing to prove your false accusations to brother Ansar Al-'Adl.
Hana
Regarding the quote supplied by Akulion regarding the theologians meeting in Rome in December to discuss the validity of Limbo (guess who does'nt know how to quote the messages in a reply lol) This is a belief held by the Roman Catholic Church and not by all Christians, how can a baby be born in or with sin!.
I agree Jalo
As far as i know it is only a catholic belief that babies are born from sin.
How can any one look at an angelic baby and ever think that something so innocent needs to be cleansed?
i also feel that it is wrong to baptize a baby or child if they dont have the knowledge......parents can guide their children who may then choose their own path when they are deemed adults........strange though how many christians lose their faith as teenagers but Muslims generally become mor spritual..........Allah is great.......he sees our hearts.......and guides in the correct path.....
hello james and peaceformat_quote Originally Posted by james
based on what you said I don't agree not because I am a christian and you are a muslim its just because I truely don't agree with you..
yeah I like the idea of a child not getting babtized when he/she is young of course they are already underneath the protection of Gods hands..
the reason why a teenager loses faith is because satan pulls them away. I for one would suggest getting baptized after you hear about evolution in schools. though that is my suggestion..
First off, I would like to say hello to everyone!
Now back to topic,
I agree, since the start of The Roman Catholic Religion, they have incorporated many Pagan beliefs/rituals in Christianity and have made up their own rules etc. That is why there is such a thing as “Purgatory” and “Limbo” in their religion but the main FACT about Limbo, Purgatory, worship of Idols, etc. Are that none of these things are in the bible, They are all part of/ creation of ONLY the Catholic religion and Not part of Christianity at all, Therefore saying “ how much more proof do you need to see that it is Man made” is correct when Talking ONLY about Roman Catholics, not all Christianity.
If anybody has any proof of the bible being manipulated into something completely different than what it originally was, I would like to see this proof. Sure, there are many translations of the bible but none of them lose their meaning, hence they all say the same thing with different words. Ex. Either a Modern language translation or a old English translation.
As for the validity of the Bible vs. Koran, I have conjured up some arguments.
i. The Bible documents are well attested as being reliable and accurate by historians and Scholars.
ii. Regarding the Koran, Muhammad couldn't read or write, so he recited the Koran to people who then wrote it down. There is no evidence at all that the Koran was written down in its entirety in Muhammad's lifetime and compiled as a unit. So how could he have verified its truth?
iii. Shortly after Muhammad's death, the Muslim Uthman ordered all sets of the Koran manuscripts to be destroyed except the codex of Zaid. Why? Is it because Zaid's copy was better? If so, how do we know? Did differences in the copies arise so quickly that discrepancies were evident and Uthman recognized the need for a standardized copy lest Islam suffer division? It raises doubt on the Koran's supposed incorruptibility.
iv. Muslims claim that Allah said the Koran would be preserved. But, the mere claim is not enough. It is using the Koran to substantiate the Koran which is circular reasoning.
As u can see the Bible has a great deal of evidence to support it: archaeology, fulfilled prophecy, etc. It claims to be the self-revelation of God and it is accompanied by extraordinary events and many miracles. For example, Moses parting the Red Sea, Enoch going to heaven, Jesus walking on water. In the other hand, Muslims have no evidence that the Qur'an is inspired and from God. They simply believe it is. Also, notice how you say the Bible was changed. This is what Muslim are taught. They have to believe this; otherwise, they would have many problems since they claim Jesus is one of their prophets. If the Bible were NOT corrupted, in their minds, then they would be forced to deal with many contradictions within the Koran, Jesus crucifixion, and His resurrection -- all, of which, they deny.
After all, even the Koran itself says the bible is not corrupt. (Sura 2:87) (4:163) (3:3) (5:46).
When Muhammed (570 - 632) was alive, he claimed to receive the revelation of the Qu'ran from Allah. This means that at that time, the Bible which was in existence, could not have been corrupted because the Qu'ran states that God's word cannot be corrupted. The question I have for the Muslims is "When and where was the Bible corrupted, since the Qu'ran says that the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel are from Allah and Allah's words cannot be changed?"
Falsoprofeta, Hello:
I see we read the same Christian sites that are not very trustworthy in depicting the truth about Islam
You have a lot of accusations in there....care to choose one at a time and we can deal with it. I actually responded with a looong post, then accidently closed the window.
I will respond to a couple here, but your accusations are not just one word responses.
First, can you tell me where the original revelations are so we can analyze them? They've never surfaced. So, there is no one alive on this planet that knows what the exact revelation are, and there are no written manuscripts, documents, etc., that have ever been found or preserved.If anybody has any proof of the bible being manipulated into something completely different than what it originally was, I would like to see this proof
However, that being said, there have been many revisions/deletions, etc. to all versions of the bibles. How do you know which one is the truth? If you claim all are true with no errors or contradictions, we can discuss that.
Funny, I can find hundreds that say the opposite. I've listed just a few here:i. The Bible documents are well attested as being reliable and accurate by historians and Scholars.
Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, Dr. Frederic Kenyon, Eyre and Spottiswoode, p. 3
In the latter part of the second century, Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth says: "As the brethren desired me to write epistles(letters), I did so, and these the apostles of the devil have filled with tares (changes), exchanging some things and adding others, for whom there is a woe reserved. It is not therefore, a matter of wonder if some have also attempted to adulterate the sacred writings of the Lord, since they have attempted the same in other works that are not to be compared with these."
Rev. Professor David Jenkins, the fourth highest-ranking Bishop in the Church of England and the Bishop of Durham had the following admission to make:
"[some of the events in the early mission of Jesus] were not strictly true but were added to the story of Jesus by the early Christians to express their faith in him as a Messiah." [London Daily Mail, page 12, 15/July/1984]
"The Five Gospels," is a 550 page book containing translations of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. It was the result of a six year study by 24 Christian scholars from a number of Western universities. They decided to produce a translation of the Gospels which would be uncolored by the translator's personal faith. Their conclusion (page 5) was:
"Eighty-two percent of the words ascribed to Jesus in the gospels were not actually spoken by him."
"1 John 5:7 in the Textus Receptus (represented in the KJV) makes it appear that John had arrived at the doctrine of the trinity in explicit form ('the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost'), but this text is clearly an interpolation since no genuine Greek manuscript contains it." [The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary, Edited by Allen C. Myers, p. 1020]
"The Dictionary of the Bible," bears the Nihil Obstat, Imprimatur, and Imprimi Potest (official Church seals of approval).
Before making such accusations, you need to provide proof. But, because I know you can't, I will respond:iii. Shortly after Muhammad's death, the Muslim Uthman ordered all sets of the Koran manuscripts to be destroyed except the codex of Zaid. Why? Is it because Zaid's copy was better? If so, how do we know? Did differences in the copies arise so quickly that discrepancies were evident and Uthman recognized the need for a standardized copy lest Islam suffer division? It raises doubt on the Koran's supposed incorruptibility.
After the death of the Prophet, pbuh, Umar and Bakr noticed that many of the hufaz (disciples that committed the entire Qur’an to memory), were being killed in battles, etc. They called for the Chief Scribe of the Prophet, Zayed Ibn Thabit, to gather all the written surahs (chapters), as well as 2 witnesses (per verse) that were present at the exact time they were revealed to Muhammed, pbuh. Not that this was really required as there were many, many people that had the Qur’an memorized at this time.
It was then codified as a single book and was given out to different Arab communities. By the time Uthman became Caliph, he realized there was a problem. The problem that it was written in shorthand and many non-arab believers were reciting the Qur’an incorrectly due to the difference in languages and dialect. Example: The lack of diacritical vowel notations. The word “bed” would appear in the text as “bd.” Those who were not familiar with Arabic would either say “bad,” “bud,” “bod,” or “bid.” (example provided by Ali Ataie, Defense of Islam).
To correct this problem, Uthman had Zayad gather all of the shorthand Qur’ans and burn them to avoid it from becoming corrupted due to misquotes, etc. He followed the same process as before and this is the official text of the Muslims. The Qur’an, as it was revealed to Prophet Muhammed, is the exactly same as is recited all over the word today. There is not one shred of evidence that any word, let alone verse, was altered in any way. Remember, the Qur’an was committed to memory by thousands and not ONE person ever made that accusation. There is absolutely NO evidence to support such a claim.
Where is your proof that it was not written down in its entirety?? Again, because I know you can't provide the proof, I will post from the book, In Defense of Islam, by Ali Ataie, as he provides a short, clear explanation:There is no evidence at all that the Koran was written down in its entirety in Muhammad's lifetime and compiled as a unit. So how could he have verified its truth?
It is in the Sunni tradition that the entire Qur’an was written down during the lifetime of the Prophet. Verses were penned on paper, stones, palm leaves, ribs, shoulder blades, and sheets of leather. There was actually a group of scribes called As-habbus-suffah whose sole purpose was to record the divine revelations as Muhammad uttered them. We also believe that the Prophet recited the entire Qur’an once a year to Gabriel and twice in his final year to ensure accuracy. Even with this said, there were hundreds of disciples that had the entire revelation committed to memory (hufaz) as there are thousands today ranging from age five to eighty-five.
Please provide your proof and I will be more than happy to discuss it.As u can see the Bible has a great deal of evidence to support it:
Please provide your proof and I will be more than happy to discuss it.forced to deal with many contradictions within the Koran
You really have to stop reading those christian sites.After all, even the Koran itself says the bible is not corrupt.If you actually read the verses you would understand Allah, swt, is telling us that if we want to know the truth in previous revelation, all we have to do is look at the previous scriptures and where they agree with the Qur'an, they are truth, where they don't....they are false. Simple.
Jesus, pbuh, was clear when He said he was not here to abolish the old law: In Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus stated: “17 Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the [way of] the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. 18For, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.”When and where was the Bible corrupted
However, Paul, who claimed to be a disciple of Jesus, systematically cancelled the laws. In his letter to the Romans, chapter 7:6, he stated, “But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit.”
When and how the bible started to be corrupt is written in the bible itself, as you can see from the above. You follow Paul.....not Jesus, pbuh. Unless, of course, you can show me the Gospel according to Jesus that agrees with Pauline doctrine??? I don't think you'll find it.
Ok, I answered far more than I intended in this post. Please, for the sake of time and short posts, let's address one thing at a time. And, for your own benefit....don't follow those Christian sites. Go to Islamic sites and learn for yourself. Then, if you disagree with something or don't understand, ask.
Peace,
Hana
Hello everyone again, I have gathered the following information from an online book I found here which should answer some of the topics of discussion.
The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, survives to this day. It serves as irrefutable proof that nothing was changed. It was translated 275 years before the Christian era. It matches today’s Old Testament with astonishing fidelity. Then you have the Dead Sea scrolls. They were found by a Bedouin shepherd boy in the caves of Qumran. They date between 250 B.C. and 70 A.D., and were thus written during the very period Muhammad claims the Bible was corrupted. These 2,000-year-old scrolls prove that the foundation of Islam is fictitious. They are virtually indistinguishable from today’s text.
The New Testament condemns Islamic theory as well. By the time Muslims said it was corrupted, there were hundreds of translations and as many as a hundred thousand copies distributed throughout the civilized world. Do you suppose that they were all brought together and altered in identical fashion just to spite Muhammad? Or is it more likely that Allah doesn’t know what he is talking about? That’s the crux of the issue. If the Bible wasn’t corrupted in a massive and conspiratorial fashion, Islam can’t be trusted. Correcting the Torah and Gospels, setting the record straight, returning to the true religion, were central to Muhammad’s mission. If the scripture wasn’t garbled, Islam loses its justification. If the Bible wasn’t massively degraded—to the point that it would be unrecognizable—the cornerstone of Islam is a lie.
To believe that team Islam was right and the Hebrew prophets were wrong, one has to dismiss the fact that most of the Qur’anic stories and characters were lifted from Jewish oral traditions in the Talmud. Additionally, the Median surahs say that Muhammad had to pay Jews for access to their scriptures during the formation of his religion. “O Children of Israel, call to mind My [Allah’s] favor which I bestowed on you….and believe in what I have revealed, verifying [the Torah] which is with you. Be not the first to deny [the Qur’an], neither take a mean price in exchange for My scriptures. [Don’t sell Bible stories to Muhammad—give them to him.] Do not mix up the truth with the falsehood, nor hide the truth while you know it.” [Qur’an 2:40] There are a dozen more verses like this, all designed to demean the Jews for charging Muhammad when he needed more scripture to call his own.
The Jews recognized the discrepancies between the accounts they had read to Muhammad and his convoluted revisions. It was obvious that the alterations were attributable to crises in his life rather than consistent with the lives of the Biblical characters they had described. So, they mocked Muhammad, as you and I might have done had we been in their shoes.
The Judeo-Christian faiths are wholly independent and separate from Islam. They neither gain nor lose any authenticity from a comparison. The Bible doesn’t mention Muhammad, Muslims, Islam, Allah, Mecca, or the Ka’aba, although there are some foreboding predictions about these people, their doctrine, and spirit.
But the reverse is not true. For reasons we shall discuss, Muhammad fancied himself a Jewish prophet—the Messiah even. He claimed that Islam was the original religion of Abraham. He professed that Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus were really Muslims. And as we have seen, he claimed that the Hebrew Bible and Christian Gospels were inspired scripture, directly from his god. Then he said that they were corrupt, which made his message necessary.
This is underscored in the 163rd verse of the 4th surah: 004.163 “Surely We [Allah] have revealed to you [Muhammad] as We revealed to Noah, and the prophets after him, and We revealed to Abraham and Ishmael and Isaac and Jacob and their offspring and the tribes [of Israel], and Jesus and Job and Jonah and Aaron and Solomon. We gave to David the Book of Psalms, and We sent apostles…and Moses, to whom Allah spoke His Word directly. All of these apostles of good news and warners were sent so that people should not have a plea against Allah.” None of these men were apostles. Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Job, Aaron, and Solomon weren’t even prophets. David was one of many writers of Psalms. And Moses spoke to Yahweh, not Allah.
In Qur’an 3:3 we read: 003.003 “He [Allah] has verily revealed to you this Book [the Qur’an] in truth and confirmation of the Books revealed before, as indeed He had revealed the Torah and the Gospel.” This is reconfirmed: 005.046 “Later, in the train of the prophets, We [Allah] sent Jesus, son of Mary, confirming the Torah which had been sent down before him, and gave him the Gospel containing guidance and light, which corroborated the earlier Torah.” Then...005.047 “Let the people of the Gospel [Christians] judge by what has been revealed in it by Allah.” And...005.048 “To you We have revealed the Qur’an containing the truth, confirming the earlier revelations [Torah, Psalms, and Gospels], and preserving them from change and corruption. So judge between them by what has been revealed by Allah.”
Allah wasn’t the least bit ambiguous when he said that the Torah, Psalms, and Gospels were his divinely inspired scriptures. But that’s not possible since the Torah and Qur’an contradict each other on most every page. The message of salvation proclaimed in the Gospels is the antithesis of Islam. To say that they were all inspired by the same God is irrational, a logical impossibility.
In Qur’an 2:59 Allah lambasted the Jews: 002.059 “The wicked [Jews] changed and perverted the word We [Allah] had spoken to a word distorted.” Because of their egregious behavior, the Jews “became like apes despised.” But then, in the 5th surah, Allah says of the “earlier revelations,” the “Torah and Gospels,” that he “preserved them.” So which is it? Why correct that which has been preserved from change? And more importantly, why are they so different if they are from the same God? All this makes you wonder why someone didn’t have the presence of mind to edit the Qur’an before they claimed it was divine.
Really?? Care to explain just this ONE little part, and there are more, many, many more.The Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, survives to this day. It serves as irrefutable proof that nothing was changed. It was translated 275 years before the Christian era. It matches today’s Old Testament with astonishing fidelity.
The Christians claim that Jesus uses the Divine Name “Yahweh” that God gave to Moses in Exodus 3:14 as referring to himself in this oft-repeated verse. Let’s examine this claim more closely. The New Jerusalem Bible has translated this phrase “I am that I am” from “Ehe’ye asher ehe’ye” (Hebrew) as “I am He who is: Ego emi, Ho on” (Greek). The commentary of this verse states that this rendering of the original Hebrew of Exodus 3:14 is exactly how the seventy translators of the Greek Septuagint (LXX)2 understood the meaning to be, and these were highly educated Greek-speaking Hebrew scholars. Essentially God is telling Moses that “He who is” or He that can never die has sent him unto Pharaoh. The Divine attribute is the phrase “Ho on” (He who is), yet Jesus in John 8:58 simply says, “Before Abraham was, ego emi.” He does not claim the divine attribute used in the Septuagint which educated Jews at the time of Jesus would have been aware of. Again, we have Christian word games being played here.
Today is your lucky dayhey date between 250 B.C. and 70 A.D., and were thus written during the very period Muhammad claims the Bible was corrupted. These 2,000-year-old scrolls prove that the foundation of Islam is fictitious. They are virtually indistinguishable from today’s text.Oh, and the books I'm reading, they are neither Christian nor Muslim scholars....they are independents with no outside interests or motives.
And, that's as far as I'm going to go on that.
but, it does tell me the kind of person I'm talking to and I prefer to talk to someone that has their own mind and not copy/pasting from an Islamic hate site. It's a total waste of time because people that do that don't have a clue what they're saying....just copy and paste because it sounds good.
So, do have yourself a lovely day, and try spending your spare time getting a real education from reputable sites.
Hana
I just checked, and you copied and pasted every single word except the hello part of your message. LOOOOOL
Last edited by *Hana*; 01-23-2006 at 04:19 AM.
Christianity is man made? What kind of a stupid statement is that, its full of implications.
For your information, before muhammad (saw) was born, christanity (or more aptly, following isa (as) (jesus)) was the religion of Allah. So the roots of christianity is not man made.
Also its more accurate to use different wording. Modern christanity is altered. Not man made. Clarity is an essential pre-requisite to achieve the truth. Not ego-ism. There seems to be an ongoing imbalance of refuting other religions in contrast to perfecting one's islam. Tragic really.
Salam Alaikum:
Relax Brother...I think you're over reacting a bit.
The word "Christians" was originally used as a derogatory remark in the time of Jesus, pbuh, to the people who followed Him, and not the name of the religion. Allah, swt, never taught what Christians follow today. Paul, a man, created that...so yes, in that respect the roots of present day Christianity are man-made, and that's the point the brother was trying to make. They are nothing like what Jesus, pbuh, taught and practiced. Jesus, pbuh, as you know, taught Islam as all the Prophets did.
Wa'alaikum Salam
Hana
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Today is your lucky day
And, that's as far as I'm going to go on that.
So, do have yourself a lovely day, and try spending your spare time getting a real education from reputable sites.
Hana
I just checked, and you copied and pasted every single word except the hello part of your message. LOOOOOL
Hello Hana, very beautiful name btw.
Obviously, I took the previous post I wrote from the website, I made that clear by providing the link before the article where everyone could read it. If for any reason, I would of tried to pass it off as my own I simply wouldn’t of put the link.
Now as to whether or not it is a “muslim hate” site is your opinion, but it has a lot of the truth behind Islam and the life of your prophet. When I looked at that website, I did it the way I try to do mostly everything,with an unbiased observation. If by a "Hate" site u mean that he is agressive when he speaks, than I agree, but he quotes the different verses from the koran and sunnah so it is not as if he is making this up. If u have any good website btw that u think I should read, by any means feel free to provide them.
I would like you to enlighten me in what manner the dead sea scrolls are more in line with the teachings of Islam? It seems like you know a lot about scriptures yet you blind yourself from the truth. From what I have read so far about the dead sea scrolls, Critical scholars, using the most rigorous historical-critical criteria, have concluded that the following statements of Jesus from the Synoptic tradition are unquestionably authentic. This is not to say that other materials are necessarily inauthentic, but that these particular sayings are at the core of the unedited tradition. It contains parts of the Gospels, The Torah, etc. Nowhere have I read anything about these scrolls holding any compatibility with the Koran, but as I said before, if this does exist, I would like u to show me some evidence. :thankyou:
format_quote Originally Posted by Hana_Aku
Its a good point, poorly addressed. Thats the thing the only reason why im being brutually critical with these kind of things is because the margin of error has to be very short if you wanna say things are actually true.
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks