Is the New Testament a changed version of Jesus (pbuh)'s original teachings, or is it a fake book made up about Jesus (pbuh), with some quotes from him thrown in? I personally prefer the second idea, since we have very few copies of the New Testament that are significantly different. It also seems more likely since Jesus (pbuh)'s Injeel was not in the form of a written book but in the form of spoken teachings. It seems to me that early Christians did not follow a changed version of Jesus (pbuh)'s teachings, but a religion made up about Jesus (pbuh).
Is the New Testament a changed version of Jesus (pbuh)'s original teachings, or is it a fake book made up about Jesus (pbuh), with some quotes from him thrown in? I personally prefer the second idea, since we have very few copies of the New Testament that are significantly different. It also seems more likely since Jesus (pbuh)'s Injeel was not in the form of a written book but in the form of spoken teachings. It seems to me that early Christians did not follow a changed version of Jesus (pbuh)'s teachings, but a religion made up about Jesus (pbuh).
The original scrolls still exist, and can be studied by scholars today.
The original scrolls still exist, and can be studied by scholars today.
Exactly. It seems to me that Christianity never used to be the teachings of Jesus (pbuh), but is really a false religion invented about him, at least a few decades after his 'death'.
Exactly. It seems to me that Christianity never used to be the teachings of Jesus (pbuh), but is really a false religion invented about him, at least a few decades after his 'death'.
I'm not sure how the existence of scrolls supports your statement. Please explain.
Exactly. It seems to me that Christianity never used to be the teachings of Jesus (pbuh), but is really a false religion invented about him, at least a few decades after his 'death'.
So your saying there was such a thing called "Gospels" and you believe they are valid, but now there are another "Gospels" and they are compeltly false, and the true ones are competly gone.
It seems much easier for me to say, they were never true.
So your saying there was such a thing called "Gospels" and you believe they are valid, but now there are another "Gospels" and they are compeltly false, and the true ones are competly gone.
It seems much easier for me to say, they were never true.
I'm saying that Jesus (pbuh) first recieved the Injeel, which was revealed to the Israelis as a spoken message. Many quotes and passages from it were recorded. However, when various historians came to write about Jesus (pbuh), they wrote a book, that, whilst being threaded with true quotes from Jesus (pbuh) as well as some factual information, was filled with bits and pieces from popular mythology that had nothing to do with the life of the Prophet, such as the trinity, the resurection etc. The book became a best-seller among people who were interested in the story of Jesus (pbuh), a bit like a Roman Chariots of the Gods, a book about UFOs which combines history with fake mythology and has become popular with people following New Age lifestyles.
I'm saying that Jesus (pbuh) first recieved the Injeel, which was revealed to the Israelis as a spoken message. Many quotes and passages from it were recorded. However, when various historians came to write about Jesus (pbuh), they wrote a book, that, whilst being threaded with true quotes from Jesus (pbuh) as well as some factual information, was filled with bits and pieces from popular mythology that had nothing to do with the life of the Prophet, such as the trinity, the resurection etc. The book became a best-seller among people who were interested in the story of Jesus (pbuh), a bit like a Roman Chariots of the Gods, a book about UFOs which combines history with fake mythology and has become popular with people following New Age lifestyles.
The trinity and ressurection are nothing in popular mythology when compared to a "virgin birth". Basically every pagan prophet before jesus claimed to born from a "virgin". It was basically the pagan myth of the century, one Islam believes to if I may say so.
The trinity and ressurection are nothing in popular mythology when compared to a "virgin birth". Basically every pagan prophet before jesus claimed to born from a "virgin". It was basically the pagan myth of the century, one Islam believes to if I may say so.
I think that there were a number of false messiahs in Jesus time as well. The fact that others claimed to be the messiah who were obvioulsy not, does that make the comming of your future messiah a pagan myth as well?
I would prefer to think of it this way. Satan knows the scriptures. He desires to obstruct Gods work among His people. One way to do it is to influence individuals to make claims that will diminish the effectiveness of Gods Word. People will be so used to hearing such things that the real message will seem like an old myth and they will feel justified in ignoring it.
Well how many of them could also resurrect the dead?
btw Fishman, I agree with you on the second idea.
None of them, including jesus.
The fact that others claimed to be the messiah who were obvioulsy not, does that make the comming of your future messiah a pagan myth as well?
Nowhere in Jewish scripture does it suggest that a virign birth which has pagan origins in mythology, would be sometype of occurance for the Moshiach. Actually, the Moshiach is suppose to be born normaly with and be human.
Also, there is one person in every generation that has the capability to be Moshiach. The Moshiach will not be born from a virgin according to the scriptures, but born regularly.
Last edited by IzakHalevas; 01-15-2007 at 03:40 AM.
Nowhere in Jewish scripture does it suggest that a virign birth which has pagan origins in mythology, would be sometype of occurance for the Moshiach. Actually, the Moshiach is suppose to be born normaly with and be human.
Also, there is one person in every generation that has the capability to be Moshiach. The Moshiach will not be born from a virgin according to the scriptures, but born regularly.
It's interesting that part of your post does not show up unless I click on quote.
Does your version of Isaiah 9:6 not say "For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace"?
Well, the bible books, new and old were written by many different people, hence the conflicts you'll find in them. There does seem to be an overarching theme in the Old Testement though that seems to change come the new testament. God's very personality changes rather dramatically between the two.
I'm saying that Jesus (pbuh) first recieved the Injeel, which was revealed to the Israelis as a spoken message. Many quotes and passages from it were recorded. However, when various historians came to write about Jesus (pbuh), they wrote a book, that, whilst being threaded with true quotes from Jesus (pbuh) as well as some factual information, was filled with bits and pieces from popular mythology that had nothing to do with the life of the Prophet, such as the trinity, the resurection etc. The book became a best-seller among people who were interested in the story of Jesus (pbuh), a bit like a Roman Chariots of the Gods, a book about UFOs which combines history with fake mythology and has become popular with people following New Age lifestyles.
Doesn't the obvious implication of that theory, that somehow either God and/or Jesus must have messed up big-time to allow that to happen, bother you? Surely there was nothing stopping Jesus ensuring somebody wrote the whole lot down, or stopping God from intervening to prevent the 'corruption' of Jesus' teachings that you claim occured subsequently? I guess somebody will cobble up some pseudo-theological explanation involving 'free will', but to me it is that theory that makes no sense.
Is the New Testament a changed version of Jesus (pbuh)'s original teachings, or is it a fake book made up about Jesus (pbuh), with some quotes from him thrown in? I personally prefer the second idea, since we have very few copies of the New Testament that are significantly different. It also seems more likely since Jesus (pbuh)'s Injeel was not in the form of a written book but in the form of spoken teachings. It seems to me that early Christians did not follow a changed version of Jesus (pbuh)'s teachings, but a religion made up about Jesus (pbuh).
Wa Aleykum Salam,
We have threads about the Bible and whether it has changed, why not write there?
format_quote Originally Posted by SilentObserver
The original scrolls still exist, and can be studied by scholars today.
Are you telling me that the Original scrolls of the New Testament exist? Wow, me, along side biblical scholars have been looking for them, where exactly are they?
format_quote Originally Posted by IzakHalevas
The trinity and ressurection are nothing in popular mythology when compared to a "virgin birth". Basically every pagan prophet before jesus claimed to born from a "virgin". It was basically the pagan myth of the century, one Islam believes to if I may say so.
Would be nice to see some documentation, furthermore, I find it interesting that Islam, did not seem to adopt other so called 'popular pagan mythology' traits.
format_quote Originally Posted by Trumble
Doesn't the obvious implication of that theory, that somehow either God and/or Jesus must have messed up big-time to allow that to happen, bother you?
Maybe if one starts with a presumption that the message of Jesus was meanto be preserved for everyone.
Eesa
The path is long but I hope we meet,
After the grave and the Day, in paradise in bliss upon a reclined seat.
A traveler traveling - travelled from shirk to tawheed,
If I'm remembered for anything - let it be the Mercy I seek.
Doesn't the obvious implication of that theory, that somehow either God and/or Jesus must have messed up big-time to allow that to happen, bother you? Surely there was nothing stopping Jesus ensuring somebody wrote the whole lot down, or stopping God from intervening to prevent the 'corruption' of Jesus' teachings that you claim occured subsequently? I guess somebody will cobble up some pseudo-theological explanation involving 'free will', but to me it is that theory that makes no sense.
I agree with you. It makes absolutly no sense. There is no reason for God(swt) to have even created us. Much less make us rebelious, unappreciative creatures.
For the life of me I will never understand why he would even want something as stupid as us humans to worship Him(swt)
Yet, here we are. Standing here freely able to deny his existance, violate his laws and harm our fellow humans. How, can something as foul as us even pretend to love Allah(swt). Unless he has instilled in us a knowledge that one day we can share eternal life with him. Unless he has shown us his love for us and in return we can FREELY return a small portion of that love to him.
The original scrolls don't exist.
Jesus was oral, but so was Muhammad. Just because it takes some time to write it down doesn't mean it isn't true. The Mid-East memory is an amazing thing--think of all those (early and now) who memorized the whole Qur'an.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
New testament: Corrupted or fake?
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks