Christianity Debunked!

[Sami234]

But you didn't answer my question. In fact you proved my point!

First you say even the Unitarians, though they do not believe in the Trinity believe Jesus was crucified. Which supports my point that everyone believe he was crucified, that you don't even have to be fully Christian.

Second you said exactly what I said. It appeared that Jesus died on the cross and only God knew the truth. That is my entire point. It was a deception. A trick. God lied to us. No, I am not talking about Jesus being God. As you said many who believed him completely man also believed he died on the cross. My entire question is, why did God make it appear like he died on the cross? Why the deception?

As to it shaking the foundation of Islam. We are supposed to believe the entire Quran is true. This is in the Quran. Even to not believe one thing in the Quran is one doubt too many.

If this is a modern and past test to Christians, how? Why? Why would God trick us to test our faith? That would be like what some of the "Young Earth Creationists" believe, that God put signs on Earth, made the planet to appear older just to test our faith. We are supposed to believe in a God who would deceive us to test our faith? If we are to believe this once, what else is there?

Let me repeat, I am not a Christian. But this has been a matter that has been troubling me a lot. The key matter of Christianity is the crucifixion of Jesus, that is primarily from what it started it from, and yet we expect people to drop this because another prophet came along 600 years later telling people they have to believe otherwise. The equivalent would be, an analogy!, is if a later revelation came down saying it was not the Angel Gibreal that came to the prophet but Satan. Like with the crucifixion, in this case, the very foundation of Islam would be being attacked.

I think you missed the point.

There is absolutely no problem to beleive that he was killed before the Qur-an came.

If a christian believed that he was killed on a cross like people were saying, that does not challenge the faith since they are only supposed to worship God.

You understand?

God told us he was killed not killed on a cross. If he had not told us, that would not challenge our faith.

To resume with my poor english :

There is no trick since christians were allowed to believe he was killed on a cross since it has nothing to do with basics of faith. They just believed what they heard.

 

[Sami234]

Firstly we have the four Gospels, that are at present in the Bible. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. These were written within*†he first century. With Mark, the earliest, as early as 60-65 AD. Matthew and Luke were based on Mark and were written later.

Now people toss out casually that the Injil was changed. [The Injil or Gospels, which are the mentioned Matthew, Mark, Luke and John] however you cannot simply add the crucifixion of Jesus, you cannot simply make minor changes to these Gospels. Now I can understand the idea of Jesus as the Son of God but not the cross. Each Gospel was written with the cross as the primary focus. I have read Matthew and Mark and I can see, there was no reason for them to be written at all if Jesus did not end up on the cross.

According to the historians who wrote notes and commentary in the "La bible de Jérusalem" which is the most popular translation of the Bible in France, we don't really know who is the author of Matthew. John was probably rewritten 2 times and had several authors.

They said several things saying that he Gospels we read today was changed a lot.

The cross is a major theme of those books for a simple reason :

-Ppl thougth Jesus died on a cross (it does not matter if it's him or no)
-Some ppl began asking themselves "why that?"
-Some ppl had an answer : dead for our sins, other did not agree, etc.

And as you know, with time, theological debate had their influence on the "official" texts. Gnostics had theyr own Gospels. People believing he was not the son of God had diffrent passages in their books. Ultimately, trinitarian/redemption christiannity won the theological battle, and their gospels became became the gospels we read today.

Next comes the Epistles of Paul. This is about half of the Bible. Archeologist do know some parts that were changed. They can tell this by looking at the writing style. But nothing about the cross was changed. Primarily the changed parts deal with the role of women in the church, the Pastoral Epistles, called 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy and Titus. These were written between 50-60 AD, about 10-15 or so years after Jesus was crucified.

I am not convinced about the dates you give, but anyway, all it prove is that the pagan-like christiannity of today was already existing at the time.

Let me also make a note about Paul. Paul spent years of his life preaching. He was on the road. Numerous times he was beaten, thrown out of towns and eventually he was killed for preaching, as he put it in 1 Corinthians, "We preach Christ crucified" Here is a man who was actually well off, a good position in the Jewish temple who chose to preach Jesus dying on the cross, not decades later but only a few years.

Ok.
So?

Then there is Josephus, the Jewish historian, who lived between AD. 37-100 and who wrote in his works of Jesus, saying that some believed him to be the Christ, or Messiah, and that he was condemned to the cross by Pilate.

Ok.

Next comes, less a document fact, but the expectations of the Jews on who the Messiah, or Christ, would be. There are things that can be quoted supporting this but I cannot recall any at the moment. We do know, however, that those Jews of that time who were expecting a Messiah to come, were expecting someone great. Someone who would conquer the enemies of Israel and raise them to great power. A crucified Messiah makes no sense to them. In fact it is said in the Old Testament, that cursed is he who hangs on a tree [is crucified] A cursed Messiah? For them to preach that a crucified Messiah makes no sense. It defies all logic of that time. In fact it was almost suicidal. No Jew would want a crucified Messiah! Most would laugh at the idea. It is the equivalent of someone stepping forward now and preaching David Koresh was the Messiah! They had no reason to preach Jesus crucified.

The only evidence we have that Jesus was not crucified is the Quran, written 600 years later, hundreds of miles away. I don't think I blame the Christians of that time or even this time for not believing us.

There is no problem there.

Some people tryed to kill him. They thougth they killed him. The rumor was spread. Everyone was saying "He was killed" because some people claimed he was.

This is why Josephus wrote he was crucified. He is born after the event. Therefore, he is not a witness, he only repeated what he heard.

The information was credible. Some christians took the information and began some of them began believing he was dead for our sin etc.

You know that there were completely different christians in the first century? I am speaking about christians following most of Moses law. Nothing to do with Paul teachings.

 

[The Khan]

I would be curious as to what post that was in, for I never read it, and it doesn't sound like the Keltoi I know, unless you are mis-reading or mis-interpreting something else that he said.

What Christianity owes to polytheistic religions is some adaptation of a few pagan festivals that were re-interpreted to bring a Christian spin to something that already existed in the culture. But to say that Christianity has its roots in pagan culture for that is about as true as saying that since the Arabs were pagans before Muhammad, and since their language was Arabic, that the Qur'an is pagan because it was written in a pagan language. I don't think you would accept that syllogism, and you shouldn't, but you are applying that very same way of thinking to Christianity. Whether speaking of Christianty or Islam, the logic is faulty that because they borrowed things from those who were pagans, or use some of the same images that pagans use that such similarities proves either to be pagan. It just doesn't follow.

Here's where he said it: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...-what-sense-jesus-gods-son-2.html#post1025488

I'm not saying Christianity has its roots in paganism. Like you said, I believe paganism influenced Christianity to a great extent. The only argument is we is to have extent the pagan cults influenced Christianity.

The Romans preferred to control religions via their Imperial cult. They usually practiced religious tolerance, however, Christianity became a threat as it was a religion mainly of slaves, servants, and women initially. When it was finally admitted as the official religion of Rome, the role of the pontifex maximus changed to that of the pope, and as a claim that the pontifex maximus was never pope, the claim that St Peter was the first pope was added. I'm sure many protestants will agree with me...the main reason that MLK started the reformation was to escape the dogma of the vatican.

Peace.

 

[SixTen]

(O you to whom the Dhikr (the Qur'an) has been sent down! Verily, you are a mad man!) When Allah sent `Isa with proofs and guidance, the Jews, may Allah's curses, anger, torment and punishment be upon them, envied him because of his prophethood and obvious miracles; curing the blind and leprous and bringing the dead back to life, by Allah's leave. He also used to make the shape of a bird from clay and blow in it, and it became a bird by Allah's leave and flew. `Isa performed other miracles that Allah honored him with, yet the Jews defied and bellied him and tried their best to harm him. Allah's Prophet `Isa could not live in any one city for long and he had to travel often with his mother, peace be upon them. Even so, the Jews were not satisfied, and they went to the king of Damascus at that time, a Greek polytheist who worshipped the stars. They told him that there was a man in Bayt Al-Maqdis misguiding and dividing the people in Jerusalem and stirring unrest among the king's subjects. The king became angry and wrote to his deputy in Jerusalem to arrest the rebel leader, stop him from causing unrest, crucify him and make him wear a crown of thorns. When the king's deputy in Jerusalem received these orders, he went with some Jews to the house that `Isa was residing in, and he was then with twelve, thirteen or seventeen of his companions. That day was a Friday, in the evening. They surrounded `Isa in the house, and when he felt that they would soon enter the house or that he would sooner or later have to leave it, he said to his companions, "Who volunteers to be made to look like me, for which he will be my companion in Paradise'' A young man volunteered, but `Isa thought that he was too young. He asked the question a second and third time, each time the young man volunteering, prompting `Isa to say, "Well then, you will be that man.'' Allah made the young man look exactly like `Isa, while a hole opened in the roof of the house, and `Isa was made to sleep and ascended to heaven while asleep. Allah said,

(And (remember) when Allah said: "O `Isa! I will take you and raise you to Myself.'') When `Isa ascended, those who were in the house came out. When those surrounding the house saw the man who looked like `Isa, they thought that he was `Isa. So they took him at night, crucified him and placed a crown of thorns on his head. The Jews then boasted that they killed `Isa and some Christians accepted their false claim, due to their ignorance and lack of reason. As for those who were in the house with `Isa, they witnessed his ascension to heaven, while the rest thought that the Jews killed `Isa by crucifixion. They even said that Maryam sat under the corpse of the crucified man and cried, and they say that the dead man spoke to her. All this was a test from Allah for His servants out of His wisdom. Allah explained this matter in the Glorious Qur'an which He sent to His honorable Messenger, whom He supported with miracles and clear, unequivocal evidence. Allah is the Most Truthful, and He is the Lord of the worlds Who knows the secrets, what the hearts conceal, the hidden matters in heaven and earth, what has occurred, what will occur, and what would occur if it was decreed. He said,

(but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but it appeared as that to them,) referring to the person whom the Jews thought was `Isa. This is why Allah said afterwards,

and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture.) referring to the Jews who claimed to kill `Isa and the ignorant Christians who believed them. Indeed they are all in confusion, misguidance and bewilderment. This is why Allah said,

For surely; they killed him not.) meaning they are not sure that `Isa was the one whom they killed. Rather, they are in doubt and confusion over this matter

But Allah raised him up unto Himself. And Allah is Ever All-Powerful,) meaning, He is the Almighty, and He is never weak, nor will those who seek refuge in Him ever be subjected to disgrace,

All-Wise.) in all that He decides and ordains for His creatures. Indeed, Allah's is the clearest wisdom, unequivocal proof and the most glorious authority. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, "Just before Allah raised `Isa to the heavens, `Isa went to his companions, who were twelve inside the house. When he arrived, his hair was dripping water and he said, `There are those among you who will disbelieve in me twelve times after he had believed in me.' He then asked, `Who volunteers that his image appear as mine, and be killed in my place. He will be with me (in Paradise)' One of the youngest ones among them volunteered and `Isa asked him to sit down. `Isa again asked for a volunteer, and the young man kept volunteering and `Isa asking him to sit down. Then the young man volunteered again and `Isa said, `You will be that man,' and the resemblance of `Isa was cast over that man while `Isa ascended to heaven from a hole in the house. When the Jews came looking for `Isa, they found that young man and crucified him. Some of `Isa's followers disbelieved in him twelve times after they had believed in him. They then divided into three groups. One group, Al-Ya`qubiyyah (Jacobites), said, `Allah remained with us as long as He willed and then ascended to heaven.' Another group, An-Nasturiyyah (Nestorians), said, `The son of Allah was with us as long as he willed and Allah took him to heaven.' Another group, Muslims, said, `The servant and Messenger of Allah remained with us as long as Allah willed, and Allah then took him to Him.' The two disbelieving groups cooperated against the Muslim group and they killed them. Ever since that happened, Islam was then veiled until Allah sent Muhammad .'' This statement has an authentic chain of narration leading to Ibn `Abbas, and An-Nasa'i narrated it through Abu Kurayb who reported it from Abu Mu`awiyah. Many among the Salaf stated that `Isa asked if someone would volunteer for his appearance to be cast over him, and that he will be killed instead of `Isa, for which he would be his companion in Paradise.

Allah states that the Children of Israel tried to kill `Isa by conspiring to defame him and crucify him. They complained about him to the king who was a disbeliever. They claimed that `Isa was a man who misguided people, discouraged them from obeying the king, caused division, and separated between man and his own son. They also said other lies about `Isa, which they will carry on their necks, including accusing him of being an illegitimate son. The king became furious and sent his men to capture `Isa to torture and crucify him. When they surrounded `Isa's home and he thought that they would surely capture him, Allah saved him from them, raising him up from the house to heaven. Allah put the image of `Isa on a man who was in the house; when the unjust people went in the house while it was still dark, they thought that he was `Isa. They captured that man, humiliated and crucified him. They also placed thorns on his head. However, Allah deceived these people. He saved and raised His Prophet from them, leaving them in disarray in the darkness of their transgression, thinking that they had successfully achieved their goal. Allah made their hearts hard, and defiant of the truth, disgracing them in such disgrace that it will remain with them until the Day of Resurrection.

(source : Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

The Islam version is clear, the deception was to punish the wrongdoers, what the christians will call Christ killers.

Allah also accuses christians who took him as God - as misguided with poor reasoning.

 

[Keltoi]

I would be curious as to what post that was in, for I never read it, and it doesn't sound like the Keltoi I know, unless you are mis-reading or mis-interpreting something else that he said.

What I agreed with Khan about was primarily Eastern Christian iconography being influenced by earlier pagan artwork. Iconography is simply religious artwork and symbolism. During the Roman period, Christianity was at odds with Roman pagan cults. There was something akin to an add campaign going on with both sides using age old images to get their point across. It was a stepping stone to the eventual transformation of pagan festivals into Christian festivals. Let the people keep their cultural activity, but change the focus and intent.

 

[Keltoi]

Here's where he said it: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...-what-sense-jesus-gods-son-2.html#post1025488

The Romans preferred to control religions via their Imperial cult. They usually practiced religious tolerance, however, Christianity became a threat as it was a religion mainly of slaves, servants, and women initially. When it was finally admitted as the official religion of Rome, the role of the pontifex maximus changed to that of the pope, and as a claim that the pontifex maximus was never pope, the claim that St Peter was the first pope was added. I'm sure many protestants will agree with me...the main reason that MLK started the reformation was to escape the dogma of the vatican.

Peace.

Not entirely correct. The first pope was Stephen I from 254-257 AD. This was during the third wave of persecutions by the Romans. Christianity was legalized in 311 AD. The assertion that St. Peter was the first "pope"(the word wasn't used until much later) started long before Christianity was adopted as the official religion of the empire. St. Irenaeus makes the case for apostolic succession in 189 AD, in Against Heresies:

"With [the Church of Rome], because of its superior origin, all the churches must agree... and it is in her that the faithful everywhere have maintained the apostolic tradition."

 

[The Khan]

Thanks for correcting me. I still see the modern post of pope inherited from that of pontifex maximus, however. Both are the same - head of religion, in this case, Roman Catholicism.

The role of the Caliph in Islam is a combination of head of state, head of government, and head of religion. Not just head of religion alone.

Wait a minute...wasn't pope Stephen I Bishop of Rome?

 

[Keltoi]

Thanks for correcting me. I still see the modern post of pope inherited from that of pontifex maximus, however. Both are the same - head of religion, in this case, Roman Catholicism.

The role of the Caliph in Islam is a combination of head of state, head of government, and head of religion. Not just head of religion alone.

Wait a minute...wasn't pope Stephen I Bishop of Rome?

Yes he was the Bishop of Rome, and the first Pope. As an aside, he was beheaded by Roman authorites in a catacomb where he was hiding during Mass. Supposedly the chair he was sitting in was preserved with blood stains still on it.

The papacy was not inherited from the pontifex. The similarities are circumstantial to the Roman Empire. The use of the word "inherited" implies some form of succession, which is not the case.

 

[The Khan]

I see.