Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Orthodox

Jesus Can't Be The Last Messenger...

Recommended Posts

Why would I turn to a biased Islamic source when this information is readily available?

Its not a ridiculous request, I can provide you a snapshot of an ancient NT fragment, why is the same so difficult to produce for the Quran?

Nothing has been refuted, there are variants between texts.

But you can confidently say those passages were omitted from early manuscripts? Clearly such an insertion or omition did not affect all manuscripts, thats precisely why a textual scholar can say so-and-so passage was not part of the original, and therefore even though *a* text may have been altered, the overal preservation of the NT has not been affected, get it? Now even if the story of the adulteress wasn't originally part of the Gospel of John, does that mean its a fabrication? The answer is no. There is evidence it was known to early Christians and some non-canonical texts and it very well could be a real episode from the life of Christ that was passed on orally, and then finally preserved in writing. But even if it's not, how does it alter our view of Jesus?

 

The point, and I keep getting back to this over and over and over... is that there is no question over the fact that the crucifixion is part of the text, and secondly, despite the existence of variants, modern scholarship has determined certainty for 99% of the text.

"Drastic"? Interesting use of the word... I wonder whether believing that Jewish Rabbi was ascended into heaven while a disciple of his was crucified in his place is considered a drastic position.

Are you reading what you're quoting? Here is what you posted:

 

"Moreover even if scholars have by and large succeeded in reconstructing the New Testament, this, in itself, has no bearing on the truthfulness of the message."

 

Do you not see that he admits scholars have "by and large succeeded in reconstructing the NT"? He admits this! But being that he is Bart Ehrman the skeptic, he throws a curve ball and says that doesn't mean what we have is truthful! So what that scholars have reconstructed what Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote... maybe those guys werent truthful! That's the point he's making.

 

So all the variants you Muslims fuss about, turn out to be meaningless... because these variants are resolvable, and we CAN know precisely what the original text had said. And what does the original text say? That Jesus was just a prophet, that ascended before his execution? Nope! Even the so called original confirms what we Christians believe.

 

Another loss for Muslim polemic!

It is true that during the life of Christ his Apostles were often found lacking understanding, or even weak willed, but we have to remember that Christ was developing and continuing the revelation of God, and so it was necessarily mind blowing at times. What I think is more important, is to focus on the Apostles after the Comforter had entered their hearts (and clearly I'm not talking about Muhammad!) They were very zealous and courageous... most of the Apostles and disciples died in the most horrible of ways... crucifixion upside down, being skinned alive, burned alive, stoned to death, thrown in boiling oil... etc etc etc... their deaths witnessed to the Gospel of Christ and help it spread to the whole world, thats why we call them martyrs (since the word derives from "witness.") So please akhi, you trying to compare these genuine martyrs of Christ to a bunch of tribal worriors who were willing to die in battle for the booty they were after is simply LAME. Muhammad and his few followers barely survived 13 years of being ostricized from the Mekkan community, imagine THREE HUNDRED YEARS of persecution... had your deen faced what Christianity went through I assure you it would not have survived.

Uh yea... just like most people joined the Nazi party after the rise of Hitler, because if you didn't you're caput!

Uhh yea... after numerous battles, expelling the remaining non-Muslims, and killing those who apostacized or preached differently... yeah...

Yea I know akhi, virtually every Muslim household has a copy of that lame book... but I can't agree with it. The Message of Jesus is far more sublime, and a guy like St Paul could outpreach Muhammad any day...

 

Oh... and as for a man rising to power and fame... remember the Devil helps out with that too ;-)

wa salaam

Where do you get your twisted history of Muhammad and ancient middle east from? And you might want to read your bible more closely because you come off as a hostile person. The slander you post about Muhammad and especially the devil part shows that you are a narrow-minded person, which is what I expected as most Christians such as yourself are. You are not here to learn about Islam you are here to slander and chastise it. If you want to learn I suggest you start with a tabula rasa and open your mind. Of course we both know you will never do this so please if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything. You give Christians a bad name the way you slander other religions and prophets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

And I cannot believe you converted from Islam to Christianity. I'm sorry but even a former Muslim would not talk like that about the prophet. Who are you trying to fool?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, congratulations Orthodox, you attracted 2155 hopefuls.

Keep up the good work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam on who are followers of the GUIDENCE: EIASA ALYHIS SALAM is the lost prophet of Bani israel. And MOhmmad solalaho alyha wassalm is the last of all.

Thanks,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, when I read that ancient manuscripts ommit critical passages such as the ending of the Gospel of Mark, the story of the adulteress and "let him who is without sin to cast the first stone", the famous quote "Forgive them Father for they do not know what they are doing", then I cannot really say that I am confident that information was copied down accurately from someone who originally heard it.

And just what do these minor details of yours have to do with the major important doctrines,

which are repeated many times?

 

This is similar to rejecting Jesus' gospel just because most Christians believe in the triune God

(the Bible has 80+ verses about the triune God)

when the basic gospel has nothing at all to do with the triune God.

 

People need to focus on Jesus' simple basic gospel, and realize that they don't believe it ...

He came to die for your sins, He was without sin, He was qualified to take your place, etc.

 

It's time for people to be honest and admit that they just don't believe in Jesus and His basic gospel,

instead of Prouding Parading their dog and pony shows of excuses before everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And just what do these minor details of yours have to do with the major important doctrines,

which are repeated many times?

 

This is similar to rejecting Jesus' gospel just because most Christians believe in the triune God

(the Bible has 80+ verses about the triune God)

when the basic gospel has nothing at all to do with the triune God.

 

People need to focus on Jesus' simple basic gospel, and realize that they don't believe it ...

He came to die for your sins, He was without sin, He was qualified to take your place, etc.

 

It's time for people to be honest and admit that they just don't believe in Jesus and His basic gospel,

instead of Prouding Parading their dog and pony shows of excuses before everyone.

 

i know your post is meant for mr YOUNES IBN ABD' AL-AZIZ. me wanna make comment nonetheless. all christians and muslims abide by jesus' teachings. that goes without saying. what unitarians and muslims even judaism followers reject is the notion that jesus is god. you may think the 80+ verses in the bible's gonna prove him god beyond reasonable doubt. you're mistaken. for there're also verses (dont know how many) that prove him a man beyond reasonable doubt.

 

romans 5 below talks about god's wrath and that we're gonna be saved through jesus. it would be odd if you were to perceive jesus as god coz its gonna look as such - 'we shall be saved from (god) wrath through (god) jesus'. see? if jesus is god romans 5 gonna be like soap opera. you know god's angry with us for being sinful, he loves us nonetheless so he switches to man jesus to save us. we've playful or shall i say theatrical god right? :sl:

 

Romans 5:6-9 “For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.â€

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jesus son of Mary (peace be upon him) couldn't have been the final Messenger of God, since the people throughout history have differed about him.

 

That is not a good premise to start from. I could use it against you. Many people differ about Mohammed (peace be on him), the most obvious example being that some (you) believe he was a true prophet, and others (I myself) do not. From there I could also conclude that Mohammed (peace be on him) was not the last prophet. Indeed, I would always be waiting for the last prophet because there would always be differing views on whoever God sends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
all christians and muslims abide by jesus' teachings. that goes without saying.

Thanks, Tommy, for giving me the opportunity to present ...

 

"... if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins." (John 8:24)

 

There's no "he" after "I AM" in the original Greek manuscripts.

I guess the translators put it in there for readability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks, Tommy, for giving me the opportunity to present ...

 

"... if you do not believe that I AM, you will die in your sins." (John 8:24)

 

There's no "he" after "I AM" in the original Greek manuscripts.

I guess the translators put it in there for readability.

 

indeed I AM to trinitarians gonna mean jesus' declaring himself almighty god butt not to unitarians who consider him SON OF MAN. you know (i've said this before) when god truly wanna become his creation man inorder to defeat his creation satan, he's gonna tell us in plain words and without contradictions. indeed there are contradictions - 'father and i are one' vs 'father is greater than i' etc. (trinitarians gonna attribute contradictions to jesus' dual nature nonetheless). consequently there're people (me dont specify) who wanna claim the bible is corrupt perhaps because of these contradictions. nonetheless christians be they trinitarians, binitarians or unitarians gonna stick to their belief that jesus is god/jesus no god till kingdom come thy will be done. :sl:

 

john 8

24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am he, you will indeed die in your sins.â€

 

28 So Jesus said, “When you have lifted up[a] the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me

 

29 The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.â€

Edited by tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×