Did Jesus (p) Deny Being God?

[Al-Mu'min]

May peace and blessings be upon you all.

Here are some debates by well known defenders of both the Christian and Muslim faiths. The topics are:

Qura'n & The Bible in the light of science. And more importantly:What the Quran says about the Bible: Corrupt or Uncorrupt?
http://www.examinethetruth.com/Debate_Video.htm

Debates on the authenticity of the Quran:
http://www.examinethetruth.com/page_evidence_01.htm

Peace and blessings.

 

[SolaChristo]

Check Mark 16:9-20

Here a Link: to the Online Bible

http://www.bible.org/NETbible/mar16_notes.htm
9tc The Gospel of Mark ends at this point in some witnesses (א B 304 sys sams armmss Eus Eusmss Hiermss), including two of the most respected mss (א B). The following shorter ending is found in some mss: “They reported briefly to those around Peter all that they had been commanded. After these things Jesus himself sent out through them, from the east to the west, the holy and imperishable preaching of eternal salvation. Amen.” This shorter ending is usually included with the longer ending (L Ψ 083 099 0112 579 al); k, however, ends at this point. Most mss include the longer ending (vv. 9-20) immediately after v. 8 (A C D W [which has a different shorter ending between vv. 14 and 15] Θ Ë13 33 2427 Ï lat syc,p,h bo); however, Jerome and Eusebius knew of almost no Greek mss that had this ending. Several mss have marginal comments noting that earlier Greek mss lacked the verses, while others mark the text with asterisks or obeli (symbols that scribes used to indicate that the portion of text being copied was spurious). Internal evidence strongly suggests the secondary nature of both the short and the long endings. Their vocabulary and style are decidedly non-Markan (for further details, see TCGNT 102-6). All of this evidence strongly suggests that as time went on scribes added the longer ending, either for the richness of its material or because of the abruptness of the ending at v. 8. (Indeed, the strange variety of dissimilar endings attests to the probability that early copyists had a copy of Mark that ended at v. 8, and they filled out the text with what seemed to be an appropriate conclusion. All of the witnesses for alternative endings to vv. 9-20 thus indirectly confirm the Gospel as ending at v. 8.) Because of such problems regarding the authenticity of these alternative endings, 16:8 is usually regarded as the last verse of the Gospel of Mark. There are three possible explanations for Mark ending at 16:8: (1) The author intentionally ended the Gospel here in an open-ended fashion; (2) the Gospel was never finished; or (3) the last leaf of the ms was lost prior to copying. This first explanation is the most likely due to several factors, including (a) the probability that the Gospel was originally written on a scroll rather than a codex (only on a codex would the last leaf get lost prior to copying); (b) the unlikelihood of the ms not being completed; and (c) the literary power of ending the Gospel so abruptly that the readers are now drawn into the story itself. E. Best aptly states, “It is in keeping with other parts of his Gospel that Mark should not give an explicit account of a conclusion where this is already well known to his readers” (Mark, 73; note also his discussion of the ending of this Gospel on 132 and elsewhere). The readers must now ask themselves, “What will I do with Jesus? If I do not accept him in his suffering, I will not see him in his glory.”

sn Double brackets have been placed around this passage to indicate that most likely it was not part of the original text of the Gospel of Mark. In spite of this, the passage has an important role in the history of the transmission of the text, so it has been included in the translation.

 

[Al-Mu'min]

Peace.

Guys if you want, i could give you a whole page full of evidence that the bible is corrupted. I'll be needing a day or two to highlight everything. What do you say i post in a separate thread?
I really recommend you to study the link about the debates above. If anyone is still unconvinced, then I'll start a new thread about the Bible's authenticity.

Thank you and peace.

 

[SolaChristo]

May peace and blessings be upon you all.

Here are some debates by well known defenders of both the Christian and Muslim faiths. The topics are:

Qura'n & The Bible in the light of science. And more importantly:What the Quran says about the Bible: Corrupt or Uncorrupt?
http://www.examinethetruth.com/Debate_Video.htm

Debates on the authenticity of the Quran:
http://www.examinethetruth.com/page_evidence_01.htm

Peace and blessings.

Im sorry to disappoint you but Im very unimpressed with Mr Deedat
Have you heard his debate where he was "tied up in knots ' by Josh McDowell?

 

[Skillganon]

(1) The author intentionally ended the Gospel here in an open-ended fashion;

Why would the athour intentionally leave bit's out?
What else has intentianally leave out?
Early christian writing don't have mark 16:9-20 indicate that the later bible's, what we have today had fabrication included into the bible!

(2) the Gospel was never finished; or ;

The Gospel was not finished?
Do you have an incomplete book or something?
As early christian writing does not contain it, again suggest fabrication!

(3) the last leaf of the ms was lost prior to copying. This first explanation is the most likely due to several factors, including
(a) the probability that the Gospel was originally written on a scroll rather than a codex (only on a codex would the last leaf get lost prior to copying); ;

Pure speculation! As early christian writing's, more than one, does not have it!

(c) the literary power of ending the Gospel so abruptly that the readers are now drawn into the story itself. E. Best aptly states, “It is in keeping with other parts of his Gospel that Mark should not give an explicit account of a conclusion where this is already well known to his readers” (Mark, 73; note also his discussion of the ending of this Gospel on 132 and elsewhere). The readers must now ask themselves, “What will I do with Jesus? If I do not accept him in his suffering, I will not see him in his glory.”;

Again, it does not adress the question, it's pure speculation, I repeat, the early christian writing does not have it!!!!!
Next how much of this incident where the author performs "the literary power of ending the Gospel so abruptly that the readers are now drawn into the story itself" that have occured prior to those earlier christian writings!

Double brackets have been placed around this passage to indicate that most likely it was not part of the original text of the Gospel of Mark. In spite of this, the passage has an important role in the history of the transmission of the text, so it has been included in the translation.

It was not part of the text of the original gospel i.e God's inspired book, but is a blatant fabrication,
but it is left now because of the important role in History of transmission?
Sometime I go home scratching my head, with such notion!!!

What all this does is beat's around the bush!!

It explain's nothing!!

Draw your conclusion and admit honestly that it is a blatant fabrication and have crept in all the major bible in the world, that every christian who owns a bible has that inserted fabrication and going about the world as it's God's own word, or inspired word!!

I am pleased that they have pointed it out because frankly many christian are going about handling poisonouse snakes and drinking poisin!!

 

[Al-Mu'min]

Im sorry to disappoint you but Im very unimpressed with Mr Deedat
Have you heard his debate where he was "tied up in knots ' by Josh McDowell?

Nope brother.
Mat peace abd blessings be with you.
What was that one about? I have seen some of Deedat's debates. Really impressive I must say. I have read about a lot of people who reverted after seeing his debates. Did you see the one with Jimmy Swaggart? I advise you brother to try and read any of Deedats books and get his videos.

Peace and blessings.

 

[ivanna25]

Al-Mumin, please do your best and take your time to show that bible is corrupt, i will use this to proove the falsity of bible.
you will have a great reward by Allah if you does so.

 

[ivanna25]

Well, Solochristo, you have to open your mind to understand that your Bible has been falsified. i m sure if you listen carefully to people who show the corruption of the bible, y ou will have doubts bout your religion. and im sure you will not show this to us because you show you are convinced. Please listen and read, and choose the right path, then.

 

[SolaChristo]

Well, Solochristo, you have to open your mind to understand that your Bible has been falsified. i m sure if you listen carefully to people who show the corruption of the bible, y ou will have doubts bout your religion. and im sure you will not show this to us because you show you are convinced. Please listen and read, and choose the right path, then.

The bible is an unbroken chain from Moses to the apostle John of revelation given by God to man, What is false is those who would claim that the gospel is false and that Christ did not come in the flesh. The gospel is the good news of Jesus who gave himself up so that all who believe in Him might be saved, He is the light that has come into the world to give light to all those that are in darkness. The gospel or the "good news" is that if you only believe in Him you will have eternal life.

 

[SolaChristo]

Why would the athour intentionally leave bit's out?
What else has intentianally leave out?
Early christian writing don't have mark 16:9-20 indicate that the later bible's, what we have today had fabrication included into the bible!



The Gospel was not finished?
Do you have an incomplete book or something?
As early christian writing does not contain it, again suggest fabrication!


Pure speculation! As early christian writing's, more than one, does not have it!



Again, it does not adress the question, it's pure speculation, I repeat, the early christian writing does not have it!!!!!
Next how much of this incident where the author performs "the literary power of ending the Gospel so abruptly that the readers are now drawn into the story itself" that have occured prior to those earlier christian writings!



It was not part of the text of the original gospel i.e God's inspired book, but is a blatant fabrication,
but it is left now because of the important role in History of transmission?
Sometime I go home scratching my head, with such notion!!!

What all this does is beat's around the bush!!

It explain's nothing!!

Draw your conclusion and admit honestly that it is a blatant fabrication and have crept in all the major bible in the world, that every christian who owns a bible has that inserted fabrication and going about the world as it's God's own word, or inspired word!!

I am pleased that they have pointed it out because frankly many christian are going about handling poisonouse snakes and drinking poisin!!

Isnt it refreshing to have an honest discussion. The link I provided said 99% of the bible is in agreement. You would dispute that because of 1% we should throw out the baby with the bathwater. There is no blatant fabrication. What is blatant is the False allegations that the bible is corrupt.

 

[cool_jannah]

Did Jesus (p) Deny Being God?

(a) "Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? . . ." (Matthew 27:46)
(b) "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)
(c) "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." (Mark 10:18).

 

[SolaChristo]

(a) "Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? . . ." (Matthew 27:46)
Psalms 22: 1 - 31 - Study This Chapter


Psalm 22:1 To the Chief Musician. Set to 'The Deer of the Dawn.' F16 A Psalm of David. My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me? Why are You so far from helping Me, And from the words of My groaning? 2 O My God, I cry in the daytime, but You do not hear; And in the night season, and am not silent. 3 But You are holy, Enthroned in the praises of Israel. 4 Our fathers trusted in You; They trusted, and You delivered them. 5 They cried to You, and were delivered; They trusted in You, and were not ashamed. 6 But I am a worm, and no man; A reproach of men, and despised by the people. 7 All those who see Me ridicule Me; They shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying, 8 "He trusted F17 in the Lord, let Him rescue Him; Let Him deliver Him, since He delights in Him!" 9 But You are He who took Me out of the womb; You made Me trust while on My mother's breasts. 10 I was cast upon You from birth. From My mother's womb You have been My God.

11 Be not far from Me, For trouble is near; For there is none to help. 12 Many bulls have surrounded Me; Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled Me. 13 They gape at Me with their mouths, Like a raging and roaring lion. 14 I am poured out like water, And all My bones are out of joint; My heart is like wax; It has melted within Me. 15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd, And My tongue clings to My jaws; You have brought Me to the dust of death. 16 For dogs have surrounded Me; The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me. They pierced F18 My hands and My feet; 17 I can count all My bones. They look and stare at Me. 18 They divide My garments among them, And for My clothing they cast lots. 19 But You, O Lord, do not be far from Me; O My Strength, hasten to help Me! 20 Deliver Me from the sword, My precious life from the power of the dog. 21 Save Me from the lion's mouth And from the horns of the wild oxen! You have answered Me.





(b) "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)

John20:28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
(c) "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." (Mark 10:18).

John 1:1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[Skillganon]

Isnt it refreshing to have an honest discussion. The link I provided said 99% of the bible is in agreement. You would dispute that because of 1% we should throw out the baby with the bathwater. There is no blatant fabrication. What is blatant is the False allegations that the bible is corrupt.

Word of God is 99% error free!
Meaning their is 1% error! Now remind me how many words are in the bible?

Next, you still fail to admit that fabrication MARK 16:9-20! Has crept in the bible!!

 

[Skillganon]

John 1:1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

This verses are only talking about duality at the best not trinity!!

Can you explain to me this verses?

 

[nimrod]

In fairness to Islamgyal she also did not know that Jesus was the Son of God and hence God as well. Clearly she was not so much a Christian as a "Christian".

You are most likely right, I had forgot Islam's views about the Archangel Gaberial. I had assumed she might have been J.W.

Thanks
Nimrod

 

[Muslim Knight]

Have you heard his debate where he was "tied up in knots ' by Josh McDowell?

Hahahaha... you wish.;D ;D ;D

 

[HeiGou]

Well, Solochristo, you have to open your mind to understand that your Bible has been falsified. i m sure if you listen carefully to people who show the corruption of the bible, y ou will have doubts bout your religion. and im sure you will not show this to us because you show you are convinced. Please listen and read, and choose the right path, then.

There is no point telling a Christian that the Bible has been falsified if the only evidence you have is the Quran. If he believed what the Quran said he would be a Muslim by now. Do you have any evidence independent of the Quran and Muslim tradition? A copy of the original? Pieces of it? References to it in the non-Muslim historical literature? If not simply saying "you would believe if you were a Muslim" is not going to be a very effective argument.

 

[HeiGou]

Re: Of course, Quran is full of scientific facts...

I do respect all religions, though I consider that believing that Jesus is the son of god or even god himself is foolish.

There is a simple contradiction here. You can claim to respect religions if you like, but if you think that the notion of Jesus being the Son of God is foolish, you cannot respect Christianity. It is like me saying I respect Islam and think Muhammed was a really good poet and an interesting person, but he didn't talk to Gabriel and the Quran was not revealed by God. There is a simple and obvious contradiction in those two claims. Now if you think that Jesus was not the Son of God or God, then you think Christianity is garbage. You cannot claim to respect it while denying its central and core belief.

Even if I agree with you and believe that really your bible is flawless and never been modified. why then in our quran which is from God , too, god says that whoever believes that son in the son of God is a disbeliever and whoever thinks that God is one of a three in trinity priciple is a disbeliever.

First of all, not my Bible. Second, obviously, there is a fundamental clash between Judaism and Christianity, between Judaism and Islam and between Christianity and Islam. As there is no objective proof of any of these claims and they are central to the three religions, this is a clash that can only be solved by violence. Now the Christians and the Jews are willing to put aside their intolerance and live and let live. It is not clear to me that Islam is. So you will have to decide.

If Bible hadnt been modified and it is really purely from God, why God would contradict himself by saying in one book Jesus is my son and say in Quran I m the Father of anyone.

Well if you are a Muslim you are obviously going to take the position you do. I do not think that Muslims are stupid and so they must be perfectly aware that both Books cannot be true and that the Bible came first. As it happens Christianity came first and so it does not need to pretend to respect Islam. It can just say it is false, but it has the same problem towards Judaism as Islam has to the Bible. So the Christians, knowing the OT came first, say that it is interpreted incorrectly and Jesus came to abrogate parts of it. A neat but different approach to the Muslim one. Now Judaism, which did come first of the three, has no such problems with either Christianity or Islam. It just says they are all false. Rather like how Muslim treat Bahais.

Yes, there are too many verses which talk about scientific facts have been discovered in the tweenith century and still havent discovered yet. I will do my best to mention most of them. but i will give some examples.

In surah "al-Rahman or The most gracious", God says: " He has let free the two Seas, meeting together: (19) Between them is a Barrier which they do not transgress20) Then which of the favors of your Lord will ye deny? (21) Out of them come Pearls and Coral: (22)" . The fact that there are two seas which are seperated by a barrier. the water of the first sea is sweet and the other is salty. This fact has been discovered by a western scientist in in the end of the tweenith century. if i am not wrong, this fact was discovered by Cousteau. He converted to islam after knowing this fact.

Jacques Cousteau did not convert to Islam. I wonder about the urban legends that float around the Islamic world - is your faith really so shaky that you have to invent these sorts of stories to butress it? I would think not, but if not, why are there so many false rumors about Cousteau, Neil Armstrong, Michael Jackson and so on? It is odd.

But that aside, what makes you think it took until the 20th century to discover this? The Portuguese discovered Brazil because they were sailing in the middle of the Atlantic, out of sight of land, going down to Africa, and they noticed that the sea had turned brown and when they tasted it, they noticed it was fresh, so they turned around and followed it until they reached the Amazon. And moreover of course there is a period in which the two seas do not meet, but there is no barrier and eventually rivers merge into the sea. Even the Amazon.

My friend Heigou, If Quran was not written by God, who do you think may mention this fact fourteen centuries ago.

Anyone who had sat by a river mouth and noticed that this is observable. I have seen it myself on quite small rivers.

 

[sumay28]

There is no point telling a Christian that the Bible has been falsified if the only evidence you have is the Quran. If he believed what the Quran said he would be a Muslim by now. Do you have any evidence independent of the Quran and Muslim tradition? A copy of the original? Pieces of it? References to it in the non-Muslim historical literature? If not simply saying "you would believe if you were a Muslim" is not going to be a very effective argument.

Most muslims know the bible better than a Christian! And I've seen on this thread alone, many quotes from the bible that I consider significant proof that 1.) Jesus is NOT God, and 2.) The Bible has been corrupted. ONE GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[the challenger]

Re: Of course, Quran is full of scientific facts...

There is a simple contradiction here. You can claim to respect religions if you like, but if you think that the notion of Jesus being the Son of God is foolish, you cannot respect Christianity. It is like me saying I respect Islam and think Muhammed was a really good poet and an interesting person, but he didn't talk to Gabriel and the Quran was not revealed by God. There is a simple and obvious contradiction in those two claims. Now if you think that Jesus was not the Son of God or God, then you think Christianity is garbage. You cannot claim to respect it while denying its central and core belief.



First of all, not my Bible. Second, obviously, there is a fundamental clash between Judaism and Christianity, between Judaism and Islam and between Christianity and Islam. As there is no objective proof of any of these claims and they are central to the three religions, this is a clash that can only be solved by violence. Now the Christians and the Jews are willing to put aside their intolerance and live and let live. It is not clear to me that Islam is. So you will have to decide.



Well if you are a Muslim you are obviously going to take the position you do. I do not think that Muslims are stupid and so they must be perfectly aware that both Books cannot be true and that the Bible came first. As it happens Christianity came first and so it does not need to pretend to respect Islam. It can just say it is false, but it has the same problem towards Judaism as Islam has to the Bible. So the Christians, knowing the OT came first, say that it is interpreted incorrectly and Jesus came to abrogate parts of it. A neat but different approach to the Muslim one. Now Judaism, which did come first of the three, has no such problems with either Christianity or Islam. It just says they are all false. Rather like how Muslim treat Bahais.



Jacques Cousteau did not convert to Islam. I wonder about the urban legends that float around the Islamic world - is your faith really so shaky that you have to invent these sorts of stories to butress it? I would think not, but if not, why are there so many false rumors about Cousteau, Neil Armstrong, Michael Jackson and so on? It is odd.

But that aside, what makes you think it took until the 20th century to discover this? The Portuguese discovered Brazil because they were sailing in the middle of the Atlantic, out of sight of land, going down to Africa, and they noticed that the sea had turned brown and when they tasted it, they noticed it was fresh, so they turned around and followed it until they reached the Amazon. And moreover of course there is a period in which the two seas do not meet, but there is no barrier and eventually rivers merge into the sea. Even the Amazon.



Anyone who had sat by a river mouth and noticed that this is observable. I have seen it myself on quite small rivers.

easy my man he respects chrisitianity but he thinks that way i respect you but i think you making this subject overrected