jesus knows no bible

format_quote Originally Posted by asadsami

asalam o alaikum brother,,, the founder of Christianity was not so called "JESUS(pbuh)" but it was mainly SAINT PAUL... there is something in the bible called "RED LETTER BIBLE" which christians themselves claims that whatever is in red ink in the bible are the words uttered by Jesus(pbuh) himself and if u see or read the 27 books in the new testament there is only 20% or less verses written in red ink.... which means only 20% of what Jesus(pbuh) had spoken is kept preserved!!! but what about remaining 80% of the new testament???? who have written or collected them???? probably historians!!!! BIBLE CANNOT BE A WORD OF GOD!!! ITS NOT EVEN A WORD OF JESUS(PBUH) WHOLLY!!! so actually people have written the bible!!!!

This is an absurd argument that a printing company in the 20th century decided to highlight the words of Jesus is RED in a particular copy of the NT means that it cannot be the word of God. Where you get the idea that Paul was the founder of Christianity I have no idea and such a nonsense thought would be immediately dispelled if you took the trouble to read the letters of Paul found in the NT.

Of course people wrote the Bible how else could it get into book form. In the NT sometimes we know the author and sometimes it is not certain but in faith Christians accept those books as inspired by God. How can it be otherwise? Consider the Qu'ran - who wrote that - was it Prophet Mohammed or was it God - if it was God how can you show that to be true as it is impossible to trace the work back to him and all one can do is accept it in faith just as Christians do for the Bible.

format_quote Originally Posted by Gossamer skye

Paul(Saul) was no saint..

He is to the billion or so Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians around the world...

format_quote Originally Posted by Gossamer skye

and how is this of concern to the rest of humanity?

Very little. But I'm always ready to correct...

format_quote Originally Posted by Gossamer skye

lol.. whatever you have to say to yourself to quell your soul is ok with me.. however, what you believe in the scheme of things is irrelevant, and so to many christians as well.. it isn't Muslims that came up with this site..
http://www.justgivemethetruth.com/pa...a_deceiver.htm

although I found it quite comprehensive.. glad they did all the work!

all the best

Wait... I disproved you when you claimed St Paul was no saint by affirming that Paul is indeed a saint to millions... and you've linked me a website in response that claims he's the anti christ? Exactly what are your intentions? What do you hope to achieve? Also, please be aware, in my religion, Paul is not a saint and is nothing more than a good writer of letters, and therefore in****ing him is futile.

format_quote Originally Posted by An33za

Asalamu alikum! (Peace be on you!)

Jesus Christ said: "Seek ye the Truth and the Truth shall free you!" And you, dear brother I can see is actually searching for it. So here is what of a little help I can offer.

Hugo - If you want to quote then do it correctly and not as you do here and twist the meaning

John 8:31-33 (NIV) 31. To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, "If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. 32. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."

So the truth here is the one we find in the Gospels, the Gospels that record what Jesus said.

From the time of Jesus Christ to about 325 A.C, there was no link between from which the Christian Scholars can claim that they have "originals" with them. About O.T, it was not until 2 century A.C. that the Christian
scholars started to question and think that which books they should consider as holy![/B] Can you believe that?! Not B.C, but A.C!

Hugo - it is rather silly don't you think that it could be BC for the Gospels. In terms of the OT the cannon was fixed long before the birth of Jesus. But for both the OT and NT the cannon was fixed at a very early date and all that happened in 325 AC was that it was affirmed. They were recognised as being holy, no one forced it on them and the same applies today, one has to accept that the Bible is the revealed word of God.

There is no uniformity between the various Bibles of different Christian sects! If one sect has some chapters related to human attributes of Jesus, in other sect's Bible, you will find that whole chapter missing!

Hugo - what sects are you taking about then we can discuss what you have to say and whether those sects were heretical and altered or manufactured their own versions as for example was done by Marcion

People say that the Bible was written by inspired people. But who gives you the surety that these people were really inspired?

What surety would you like - the fact is that the books of the Bible we have today has been recognised as holy for 2000 years and more. What surety do you have for the Qu'ran because ultimately it comes down to one man saying a message was given to him and if that is what you believe why are you sceptical when many men say they were inspired by God and that is testified by a constant message through all 66 books of the Bible.

format_quote Originally Posted by asadsami

Asalam o alikum brother/sister,
thank you for your short speech in a written form. i just wanted to ask you that IS BIBLE THE WORD OF GOD OR NOT? because i presume that you are a Christian? is that right?

Yes, I am a Christian. The answer to your question is not so simple and might depend on whether we are speaking technically, metaphorically, or in common lay speach.


In common lay speach the Bible is often call the Word of God. No doubt that it how 95% of Christians on this forum will speak of it. The argument goes that God spoke to/through inspired authors who then composed the work under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit. Thus it is the product of the hand of God (via the intermediary of the Holy Spirit) and is therefore the Word of God as if he had written the book himself. Even most who don't believe in the dictation theory of the scriptures will still say something pretty close to this. Now this is not the universal opinion of Christendom, but it is the most common way that it is talked about.


Metaphorically, most certainly the Bible is the Word of God. It expresses what we understand God to be saying to his people and through them to the world at-large.


Technically, no, the Bible is NOT the Word of God. The Word of God is actually more appropriately identified as the second person of the Godhead, God the Son. This person is the Word of God which spoke all of creation into being.

The Bible isn't technically God's Word nor is it even a collection of God's words (though it does contain many things that God spoke through his prophets and others). It is more correct to say that it is human words expressing what they understand God to have revealed to them be it in words (as in the case of some prophets), experience (as in the case of the majority of the NT), or reflective thinking and contemplation (as in the case of many of the historical accounts of the OT). In the end, Christians except that the Bible contains within it God's message for humanity about God's nature, God's character, God's will for the world, and God's actions to bring about those purpose which are achieved primarily in and through God's redemptive acts of grace manifested in various ways over the course of human history. And because it contains all that is necessary for knowledge of salvation is without reference to any other message wholly sufficient to deliver God's message regarding the way of salvation, we will often speak of it as God's Word (i.e. for us). But it isn't God's Word in the same way that the Qur'an is Allah's message. That title is best reserved exclusively for Jesus himself.

format_quote Originally Posted by Uthmān

Greetings Hugo, We can prove that the Qur'an is the word of God by demonstrating it's miraculous nature - the fact that it cannot possibly have been the work of human hands. This is touched upon in this video: How is the Qur'an Miraculous? The Challenge of the Qur'an. Since this is a slightly different area of discussion, I suggest you create a thread in the Clarifications about Islam section if you wish to continue discussing it. Please do watch the video first though.

Regards

Fine I will create another thread and being it with a discussion of what is meant by proof. I looked at the video you suggested and essentially he take 20 minutes to state that the Qu'ran is a 'literary miracle' but as far as I could tell the only proof he offers is that the Meccan's could not reproduce anything like it and according to him that equals it cannot be done.

This to me seems a very weak argument but I would like to explore it and other in the new thread.

I would make one comment and that is I don't think Christians would ever think that say Moses parted the Red Sea, that Moses made it happen - that was the work of God. But in this video the speaker repeatedly says the Qu'ran was Prophet Mohammed's miracle?

format_quote Originally Posted by An33za

People say that the Bible was written by inspired people. But who gives you the surety that these people were really inspired?

format_quote Originally Posted by Hugo

What surety do you have for the Qu'ran because ultimately it comes down to one man saying a message was given to him.

Hugo makes a good point -- though I doubt only non-Muslims will agree with it.

In my experience, every religion gives special weight to their scriptures that they deny to others. Then having done so we often imbue our preferred texts with divine origins. Sometimes that takes the form of prophetic revelation (Mormonisn) other times there are claims of divine inspiration (Jehovah's Witnesses). And still others the incarnation of divine revealers of secret truth (gnosticism). And of course it is possible that among the many different claimants that a claim may indeed be true. But unless a religion is able to show that truth apart from their own text and experience and have it verified in the public forum, the veracity of any of our claims remains simply an article of faith, and unprovable except to those who already accept it as and need no such proof.

If all of the writers of the bible were truly inspired then why were there plenty of errors and contradictions in the bible, and in some cases, even contradicted the life and teachings of Jesus pbuh?

format_quote Originally Posted by An33za

That is debatable. Do the Gospels really contain what Jesus said? and Do the Gospels COMPLETELY give you all the teachings of Jesus Christ or not?! Does this mean that each and every teaching of Jesus Christ is important for you? Even if one of his (pbuh) teaching is missing in your Bible, you will not get the whole truth?

Well then there are like pages and pages missing in some versions of your Bible. Even some of the books, which are there in yopur sacred manuscripts e.g the Shepherd of Hermis, is not there anymore in the existing Bible.

Hugo - it is a matter of faith, we have what we have and to me it is complete. If something is missing there is no way anyone can know what it was - this is the same for the Qu'ran, you have what is there and as you must know there are numerous hadith that talk about missing verses.

The Shepherd of Hermas is a strange allegory written sometime in the second century and is included in some copies of the earliest NT. The Shepherd speaks of a Son of God; but this Son of God is distinguished from Jesus etc so its obviously heretical that is why it is excluded. Have you ever wondered why the writings of the Bahai is not included in the Qu'ran - its the same principle.

So don't you think that as a result, some teachings of Jesus Christ contained in this book is no more available to you? So what about the truth in this missing book?

Hugo - of course it available if I wish to read it

And may I ask what proof do you have for this? Fixed what? It was like 200 years after Jesus that the Christians started to question as to what they should consider as their sacred scriptures!

Hugo - You are stating this and it's as if in your mind the NT suddenly popped into view as if from nowhere. Have you no conception that NT books were circulating from perhaps as early as 35AD - indeed there is the well known Jesus fragment inn the Bodlien library at Oxford dated from this time.

Do you have any idea what is in these books, have you read them or is you only concern that they have a date of some kind.

Think about it what you are saying brother! O.T was not there before Jesus. N.T and O.T came like after 200 years of Jesus. So what about the interval in between? Did his disciples wrote nothing in that span? Can it be possible?

Hugo - this is total and absurd rubbish; have you never heard of for example of the famous Septuagint, the Koine Greek version/translation of the Hebrew Bible completed about 132 BCE (about 800 years before the Qu'ran).

They just out of their own wish choosed as to what book they should regard as Holy! What is this?! Some kind of game?

Hugo - it is best to pout your mind in gear before you speak. May I ask you is the Qu'ran Holy? so is what is holy holy because the God approves it, or does He approve it because it is holy?

There are many proofs which claim that the Bible is not in its original form. Many alterations has been done to it!

Hugo - there is a logical inconsistency here - how do you YOU know its not in the original form - do you have the original? How do you know the Qu'ran is original, no one was there except Prophet Mohammed so there is no verification is there?

Oh pleassseee! I am tired of this technique which some Christians use very often. Why are you turning on Quran and Islam? Is that you want to divert my attention to something else because you can't defend your own books?

Hugo - I am not 'turning on the Qu'ran and Islam - all I am doing is asking that you take the blinkers off before you speak

I think that one can only find out the truth if he or she puts their book to the test of time. Quran in each and every age has passed this test of time with triumph! Now as we know, it is the age of Science and technology. So should we put these two books to this test of time? Do you agree? Because this will be a way of testing acceptable to everyone! On the other hand, if you just say to me to believe that Bible is the true word of God ,without any proof, then why should I?

I am not sure what you mean by 'every age' since the OT is at least 1,600 years older than the Qu'ran and the NT almost 600 years older so the Qu'ran has a very long way to go just to keep up.

In terms of proof another thread has been set up so go there to pursue this line. For my own part I don't think there is proof in any scientific sense and faith does not demand it. For example, Abraham had no scriptures at all but acted on the call of God, he heard God speak, he had no proof he just acted in faith.

format_quote Originally Posted by naidamar

If all of the writers of the bible were truly inspired then why were there plenty of errors and contradictions in the bible, and in some cases, even contradicted the life and teachings of Jesus pbuh?

Let's be open handed about this, what would you say if I said - If the Qu'ran is really is the very timeless words of God why are so many verses abrogated - surely God did not make mistakes?