Jump to content
Islamic Forum
LifeInChrist

Is The Bible Corrupted?

Recommended Posts

Since I can get no answer in my own thread I will try asking it here.  What is the Islamic take on the messianic scriptures? What do we use to determine that Jesus, pbuh, was the messiah? Tell me that we do not simply dismiss all the messianic scriptures.  I am referring to scriptures such as Isaiah 40..... (there are hundreds more) all of these seem to be in line with the concept of a messiah who atones for man and as is seen in verse 3 of Isaiah 40 he is referred to as lord and even as God.  I find this most peculiar.  Also how can both Jesus, pbuh, and Muhammad (s.a.w.) be considered the seal of the prophets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

I could be mistaken here but I believe it was this thread that brought up the concept of forgiveness and it being as simple as saying I am sorry and I forgive you but then the question must come into play why the need for sacrifice?  I mean like ever... if it is that simple for one to just ask for forgiveness why the sacrifices throughout history?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you *sure* you're a Muslim? You sound like either an extremely ill-disguised Christian evangelist *posing* as a Muslim, a Christian at heart kidding himself about being a Muslim, or a genuine Muslim dangerously on the verge of apostasy via turning Christian. Perhaps your wife is getting to you.

I apologize, I've just been in a bad mood (especially since my dad had a stroke today) and may not be on this forum much longer. In any event I've gotten very tired of discussing all of these matters.

 

Okay, let me try to be quick. As for sacrifices you will find that their historical purpose has always been a purely symbolic one. In fact they have often been literal *sacrifices*—as in a worshiper showing his devotion to a deity by letting an otherwise useful animal go to waste. Even when the animal is used the sacrifice is still symbolic, as when the death is watched for the purposes of reminding the viewers of the mortality of earthly life, things like that. The whole idea behind the near-sacrifice of Abraham’s son (P), for instance, was that it proved Abraham’s (P) devotion and seriousness. Always it’s *some* kind of symbol. Sin is not some trait that can be passed from one entity to another like a transfusion of diseased blood. Rather sin is an *act*, a kind of choice: specifically, the wrong or impious kind.

 

If animal sacrifices *were* supposed to quite literally remove sin, and the Crucifixion replaced them, then we could have either (1) have the sacrifices continue permanently, unto Judgment Day, without the Crucifixion ever being required to take place at *all*, or (2) have the sacrifices never be established to begin with, with the Crucifixion being set very soon after the forbidden fruit was eaten. (Actually I have recently posted an excellent refutation of modern Christianity called “The Lowdown on God’s Showdown” which gives a biblical reference at one point stating pretty explicitly that, according to the Bible, the Crucifixion was supposed to have taken place very soon before Judgment Day so that a lot of sins wouldn’t have piled up since. It is now almost two millennia later. Check it out: http://www.gawaher.com/topic/740192-the-lowdown-on-gods-showdown/)

 

And none of this takes away the fact that forgiveness *is* every bit as simple as, “Please forgive me,” and, “I forgive you.” (That, and the sincerity of the one speaking the former statement.) Well, it *is*.

 

As for Jesus (P) being the Messiah I have already given this link but here it is again: http://www.understanding-Islam.com/q-and-a/islamic-beliefs/why-does-the-qur-an-call-jesus-pbuh-al-maseeh-5252 As for the “Messianic scriptures” most of them are just retroactively established by Christians well after the fact and were never once thought of as such by Jews before the advent of Christianity. Many other passages that Jews *did* think of as Messianic prophecies were never even claimed to be fulfilled by the Bible’s Gospels, and several prophecies marked as fulfilled by them cannot be found anywhere in the Old Testament, including that all-crucial “third day resurrection” verse from Luke. I’d take the whole thing with a grain of salt. None of it is our business anyway: the Koran is silent on all of these things and says nothing about whether Isaiah was ever an inspired scripture to begin with. It *does* speak of a lot of Jewish scriptures being corrupted, though, in surah 2, verses 75-79—but let’s not beat a dead horse, shall we? No parallel passages with Isaiah spring to mind either. If you are a Muslim then Isaiah should not matter to you. If it bothers you that much, however, there are an awful lot of refutations of the Christian interpretation of Isaiah 40 available via a quick Google search, if memory serves.

Edited by Yahya Sulaiman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abdullahfath is a revert to Islam. Please remember that reverts can go through moments where they are unsure of the meaning of something in Islam. As a revert I know this can happen and the worse thing is to be faced with Muslims who don't believe you are a true Muslim because you have questions. It is best not to respond by criticizing their faith and instead help them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I apologize profusely. I didn't know. But all the same I do think he needs to be careful whom he lets influence him.


 


Anyway, if he has any more concerns then he can feel free to let me know. I guess I need to be good for *something* other than moping.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, this is an excellent article (by a Jew, I think) on why Isaiah 40 is not a Messianic prophecy which I found with just a few seconds of searching:

 

http://shemaantimissionary.tripod.com/id3.html

 

The others are usually in the same boat. Often all you have to do is read a single sentence or two ahead or behind the Old Testament verse cited to see how context changes everything. It's seldom more than a chapter or two. Sometimes the passage *itself* doesn't even sound like it's meant to refer to anything outside of the present situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 
You are indeed correct, in todays western societies there are very few people who actually believe in the authority of the Bible - worst of all even most Christians are also guilty of this! - but you'll notice that in tandem with this, western societies are also falling apart, and whilst Islam is becomming the fastest growing religion within this spiritual vaccum, it's not making society any better. 

 

 

I am glad you have accepted that your people have thrown bible long back

But you are blaming Christians for this

I am sorry, extreme; it is the bible which is to be blamed

Bible miserably failed the test of time

It fell short to the demands of this modern world long ago, at least from 2nd world war

So .make one thing very clear, bible failed and not the Christians

You cannot held Christians responsible for the short coming of bible

 

 

But this is what happens when a nation turns it's back on God, it was the same for the Children of israel and it's the same for countries such as the UK and the US today, what remains though is the truth of the Bible

 

 

Lol, your bible is a greatest lie ever told

This is not the scripture given to Jesus (pbuh) by GOD

Rather it was a book of compromise made by the scholars’ of different sects

Otherwise ,pl prove me that jesus preached the same book that you are holding as bible

 

 

 

 

which actually documents the very processes that the western nations are currently going through! –

 

 

 

 

wow! wow !wow!  ,lol  look here , my dear extreme

Can give one such document of your  bible, lol

 

 

 

 

 

the Koran does not do this, and due to restrictions here, I shan't comment further!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Quran actually does every thing

Muslims are royally living in front of your eyes

You are yet another victim of your church

You are programmed in the way you are

Otherwise, Quran gives solution to everything at any time

Islam is the most modern religion not only modern but even it is ahead of this times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So we are to accept that messianic scripture is not about Jesus and then say that Jesus is the messiah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you read that link? What we are to accept was that he was a "chosen one" (which is essentially the literal meaning of the term "Christ" or "Messiah"). What the angel was saying was, “Mary, good news: you’re going to have a son and he’s been singled out by God to be a leader to his people—in the very same way a king would be!” It’s all in the link.

 

According to the footnotes of Maulana Muhammad Ali’s translation: “The literal significance of ‘Masih’ is either ‘one who travels much’ or ‘one wiped over with some such thing as oil’ (LL). It is the same word as the Aramaic ‘Messiah’, which is said to mean ‘the anointed’. Jesus Christ is said to have been so called because ‘he used to travel much (Rz, R), or because ‘he was anointed with a pure blessed ointment with which the prophets are anointed’ (Rz). It is, however, the first significance, viz., that ‘Masih’ means ‘one who travels much’ that finds the foremost acceptance with the commentators as well as the lexicologists, and this lends support to the evidence recently discovered which shows that Jesus travelled in the East after his unfortunate experience at the hands of the Syrian Jews, and preached to the lost ten tribes of the israelites who had settled in the East, in Afghanistan and Kashmir.” (Pages 148-9)

 

One way or another the term “Messiah” did not pick up all these connotations of “son of God” and “redeemer of mankind” until well after Christianity began. Like I said, retroactive reinterpretation. Ask any Jew in the world. Again, just read a little ahead or a little behind, or a little more carefully. For each “fulfilled Old Testament prophecy” article by a Christian evangelist you can find plaguing the net you can also find an extremely sensible refutation by a Jew, Muslim or religious skeptic a single Google search away. Meanwhile that verse Luke mentions twice (18:31-33 and 24:46, see also 1 Corinthians 15:34) about the Christ suffering and dying and rising on the third day has still yet to be uncovered anywhere. Neither have the prophecies cited in Matthew 2:23, Mark 1:2, or John 7:38. (Matthew 27:9-10 also cites the *wrong* prophecy, referring to the book of Jeremiah when it seems to mean Zechariah 11:12-13 instead. Assuming that was a prophecy either.) Let’s face it, The Bible does not by any means have a perfect track record here.

 

Remember: we have our own scriptures. The Koran does speak of a couple of things that ended up in the Bible as having once been inspired, but also says that they have been corrupted (again, let’s not beat a dead horse), and that now there has come to us a new scripture, making clear to the people of the old ones what they have been concealing of it, and effacing many things (surah 5, verse 15). We have what we need in the Koran. We don’t need the psalms or the Torah or the Talmud anymore, and we most certainly don’t need Isaiah. Although they might make for interesting reading material, and a certain amount of “guidance and light”, I’m sure, should remain. Just be careful that you don’t assume that you know where that light is and where the corruption is. Even scholars can’t agree on what the specific plurality of sources is in the authorship Torah and psalms, only that there almost certainly *is* a plurality of sources. Only Allah knows for sure.

 

Do me a favor, would you? Because I still think that, although you may not have consciously realized it yet, you *are* letting yourself start to be tempted by the Christian religion. I will give you a “like this” if you make a post promising me that you’ve read every word of that “Lowdown on God’s Showdown” article, including the follow-up post with the rest of the footnotes. (I don’t mean the parts citing the page numbers of each book, just the actual *notes* notes, because there are a few extra arguments Babinksi has to squeeze in at the end.) I know it’s long but it’ll get you reputation points and it’ll fortify you, not just against belief in Christianity, but at least for *arguing* against it, better than anything else I’ve ever seen in my life. What do you say? http://www.gawaher.com/topic/740192-the-lowdown-on-gods-showdown/

Edited by Yahya Sulaiman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother abdullah, why do you need the bible to confirm if Jesus pbuh was the messiah. As a Muslim, the quran should be enough unless you have issues with the quran too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brother abdullah, why do you need the bible to confirm if Jesus pbuh was the messiah. As a Muslim, the quran should be enough unless you have issues with the quran too?

 

As-salamu 'alaikum wa rahmatu Allahi wa barakatuh

 

As sister ParadiseLost, who's an ex-Christian (I assume that she is since she is from Ireland), the Qur'an is enough for us. We don't need previous Scripture to tell us that Jesus (pbuh) is the Messiah. Just as we don't need a Scripture pre-dating Noah (pbuh) and Abraham (pbuh) telling us that they are Prophets. Or how about a Scripture pre-dating Adam (pbuh) telling us he was the first human? We don't need that.

 

Is it possible that there are prophecies in the Old Testament prophecising the Messiah? It is possible. For example, the Jews say that the Messiah (pbuh) will be a ruler who will establish world peace. That's how Jesus (pbuh) is described in Islam when he kills the False Messiah and rules the Earth. During his reign even animals won't humans (if I remember correctly). That sounds similar to what has been described in the Bible. 

 

However, we should apply the standard that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) taugh us in regards to the Bible: "don't reject something lest it be true and don't confirm something lest it be false". Of course this applies to things that are not directly supported by Islamic sources or refuted by them and don't have evidence for nor against them.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, I realize I’ve been too glib about Deuteronomy 18. And I’m certainly not going to let that other article have the last word on the matter. So here you go.

 

First off it doesn’t matter one tiny whit to a Muslim if the New Testament claims that Jesus (P) was this “prophet like unto Moses” mentioned in Deuteronomy 18. There isn’t a single *mention* of the New Testament anywhere in the Koran, let alone an endorsement. As I’ve explained to people a trillion times before, the Gospel the Koran *does* endorse is not any of the biblical Gospels but rather one of the many lost Gospels outside of the Bible. Surah 5, verse 110 and surah 57, verse 27 explains that this Gospel was revealed directly to Jesus himself and as such he had some sort of hand in its writing: obviously this does not apply to any of the four canonical Gospels. If it had been one of them then the parable in surah 48, verse 29 would have had a biblical parallel. It doesn’t. The New Testament hardly has a good track record when it comes to understanding Old Testament prophecy anyway. For example Matthew 27:9-10 cites the wrong book altogether, referring to Jeremiah when it seems to mean Zechariah 11:12-13. Assuming that was even meant to be a prophecy, which in context it doesn’t look like it was. Very few of them ever do look like prophecies in context.


And when you think about it, it shouldn’t even be a supreme priority to a *Christian* if the New Testament says that the Deuteronomy passage refers to Jesus. The New Testament doesn’t even consider *itself* to be inerrant. Oh yeah, I’ll bet you didn’t know *that*, did you? Don’t throw 2 Timothy 3:16 at me: that’s referring to whatever was considered “scripture” in Paul’s *own* time and place. The New Testament couldn’t very well have existed while it was still being written, now could it? And on three different occasions (1 Corinthians 7:12 and 7:25, 2 Corinthians 11:17) St. Paul announces that what he’s about to tell us is all him and most definitely *not* inspired by God. Or is it an error when he implies that there might be errors? Besides, look at how the Testament seems to contradict itself on the issue of this prophet’s identity in John 1:

 

When the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask [John the Baptist], “Who are you?” he confessed, and didn’t deny, but he confessed, “I am not the Christ.”
They asked him, “What then? Are you Elijah?”
He said, “I am not.”
“Are you the Prophet?”
He answered, “No.”
They said therefore to him, “Who are you? Give us an answer to take back to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”
He said, “I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord,’ as Isaiah the prophet said.”


Now let me ask you this: if John’s job was to make “the Lord’s” way straight, and if Jesus and this prophet were the same person, then why did John just stand there and say nothing *about* it? Why didn’t he correct these guys when they spoke of the two as different people? It was his job! And *he* was a prophet too, wasn’t he? As in, a person whose purpose is to teach people the truth? The unmistakable tone throughout the entire conversation was one of mutual consent on the matter! No one reading this passage with no biases coloring his perceptions would follow the standard Christian interpretation.

 

 

Speaking of which, who else do we know who still hadn’t come along by that point and who went by the designation “The Prophet”? Just throwing it out there. Again, it’s not my book.

 

Second, regarding what the Deuteronomy passage means by “from among your brothers” a “brother” was a follower of Jahweh as opposed to one of those enemy pagans, and this is a category which Muhammad *definitely* fit into. “Allah” and “Jahweh” are just the same word in two different languages. Arabic Tanakhs and Bibles use “Allah” in place of the Tetragrammaton. Remember, Muhammad was not an Ishmaelite from the age of Genesis but a medieval Saudi descendant and this passage is a reference to an unidentified future time. It doesn’t give any hints as to where this prophet will come from. It doesn’t say when this all will happen or what foreign relations with anybody will be like then. But one thing it most definitely does *not* refer to is an ethnic group. The concept didn’t even exist back then: “race” is a modern idea that people fabricated a couple of centuries ago and which has little basis in objective genetic reality. Some verses in the Torah, I’ll grant, do make the ancient Jews come across as cliquishly using the term “brother” as an appellation to separate each other from foreigners but that’s because they had formed a nation and were often at war with those enemy pagans I spoke of. At that time this nation was the only game in town; by Muhammad’s own time it was different. Really, think about this: do you actually suppose that their sense of togetherness boiled down to things like whether someone mixed milk with meat and not which deity he believed in? From very early on it was explicit in the Old Testament that belief in the oneness of God is what is important. This is why the very first commandment was to not have any other gods before Him. This is why the most *important* commandment, even according to the Gospels, is supposed to be, “Hear, o israel, The Lord our God, the Lord is one.” This is why numero uno on every list of complaints with the rival nations was always the pagan gods they worshiped. In fact in Genesis 35 the very *name* “israel” was coined in the first place as a reward for Jacob cleansing the Bethel area of its paganism. Before the advent of Christianity *any* servant of the one true God was a “son” of God and therefore by implication a brother to the others. “Son of God” and “servant of God” were understood to mean the same thing. If you don’t believe me then read Exodus 4:22-23: “Thus says Jahweh, ‘israel is my son, my firstborn, and I have said to you, Let my son go, that he may serve me.” See how the term “son” is defined functionally as a servant here? But it’s not just israel: the book of Job, for instance, repeatedly refers to the angels as “sons of God” too. If you don’t even have to belong to the same *species* to qualify, why would you have to be a member of the same nation?

 

Third, it’s theoretically possible—again I’m just throwing it out there—that the “like Moses” part isn’t even very meaningful to begin with. That could just be an extension of the “among your brothers” part, i.e. “I’m going to raise up a prophet from among your fellow believers in Myself the one true god—just as you, Moses, are a prophet of the one true god.” One way or another Muhammad *does* fit the analogy better. Moses was sent to *establish* a set of laws, not fulfill them, and to free his people from pagan tyrants and flee from one region into another, and also establish among his people the worship of Jahweh-Or-Whatever-You-Want-To-Call-The-God-Of-Abraham. Does that sound more like the life of Jesus to *you*?

Edited by Yahya Sulaiman
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Salams

 

its being very long since i have spent time on forums

i thinks things have changed considerably changed

I should appreciate each and everyone here . you people are gving your heart out for Islam

may Allah accept your deeds

particularly brother Yahya

congratulation brother you are doing a great job

 

Mushtaq

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am glad you have accepted that your people have thrown bible long back

But you are blaming Christians for this

I am sorry, extreme; it is the bible which is to be blamed

Bible miserably failed the test of time

It fell short to the demands of this modern world long ago, at least from 2nd world war

So .make one thing very clear, bible failed and not the Christians

You cannot held Christians responsible for the short coming of bible

This is quite a shocking statement, what you have told me here is that you place the demands of the world - the demands of men above the word of God.

Since when did the world dictate what was right and wrong? surely there are absolutes when it comes to right and wrong, and those absolutes come from God - not the world.

If you are conforming to the world then you are abhorant to a Holy God - the Apostle Paul pens this nicely when writing "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."

But let's put this to the test, tell me if you have ever stolen or lied or looked at a woman with lust in your eyes, if you haven't then you are a liar, and if you have then you have failed the word of God.

Your statement that the Bible has failed therefore cannot be further from the truth.

 

 

Lol, your bible is a greatest lie ever told

This is not the scripture given to Jesus (pbuh) by GOD

Rather it was a book of compromise made by the scholars¡¦ of different sects

Otherwise ,pl prove me that jesus preached the same book that you are holding as bible

 

The Bible and Koran are 2 completely different books, one is the recordings of eye witness testimonies, and the other is the dictation from a spirit entity.

By your own standards, you'd also have to prove that the Koran wasn't channeled to Mohammed by a demon in order for me to accpet that the Koran is the truth.

As for the Bible being a compramise? would you like to describe Noah and the flood to me using just the Koran, or maybe tell me the story of Job? How about Jonah?...  I think it's pretty obvious which book is a compramise!

 

wow! wow !wow!  ,lol  look here , my dear extreme

Can give one such document of your  bible, lol

 

Oh, well, an excellent example is 2nd Cronicles 33:1-25 where Manasseh turn over to worshiping false Gods, killing his sons by fire, witchcraft etc you'll find that the people of israel paid a very high price for this. What you now need to do is provide an example from the Koran for me, all this mockery you are indulging in, only has value if you can produce some truth, so off you go!

 

 

 Quran actually does every thing

Muslims are royally living in front of your eyes

You are yet another victim of your church

You are programmed in the way you are

Otherwise, Quran gives solution to everything at any time

Islam is the most modern religion not only modern but even it is ahead of this times

 

???

Scientology is a more recent religion than Islam, by your standards that makes it better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone explain what does one mean when one says a manuscript is corrupt in this instance the Bible?

 

Was the original document consider authentic and then became corrupt over time or was the Bible corrupt from the very beginning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The former. *Corrupted*, not corrupt. As in "made inferior by errors or alterations, as a text" (dictionary.com). Some of the biblical texts were *originally* inspired; not so much now.

Edited by Yahya Sulaiman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[at]xtremecheese, you should know full well that Paul wrote the majority of the New Testament and as such it is NOT the result of eyewitness testimonies as he was not there!  The other primary author would be Luke, the disciple of Paul.  Again, not there.  It is what they would call in a legal proceeding heresay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[at]xtremecheese, you should know full well that Paul wrote the majority of the New Testament and as such it is NOT the result of eyewitness testimonies as he was not there!  The other primary author would be Luke, the disciple of Paul.  Again, not there.  It is what they would call in a legal proceeding heresay

 

This is a futile and inept argument that I notice most Muslims resort to at some point or other.

Paul wrote the most books in the New Testament, but he did not write the most in volume - Luke and John both beat him on this.

All of Pauls letters are from a first person perspective and are therefore written from an eyewitness point of view.

Paul met Jesus on the Road to Damascus.

Paul was witnes to the persecution of the early church, the foundations of the early church and planting of the early church.

Paul was introduced to and accepted by all the Apostles.

Mohammed on the other had did not meet Jesus - and you believe his writings?

By your own standards you fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who says that Paul met Jesus? Paul

Who says that the apostles accepted Paul? Paul, or in the case of the book of Act Luke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who says that Paul met Jesus? Paul

Who says that the apostles accepted Paul? Paul, or in the case of the book of Act Luke.

Yes that's right Luke does concur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With respect to the 1st century Biblical evidence concerning
Paul we have Paul’s writings (Romans; 1 & 2 Corinthians; Galatians;
Ephesians; Philippians; Colossians; 1 & 2 Thessalonians; 1 & 2 Timothy;
Titus; and Philemon), the history of the 1st century church known as “Acts” or
“Acts of the Apostles,” and a Christian epistle known as 2 Peter. So, with
respect to 1st century
Biblical writings we have Paul’s epistles as well as two other independent
documents to work with. All of the 1st century Biblical sources that mention
Paul affirm that Paul was a genuine Apostle. None of them question that.   



I have 3 questions:-


1 – Do you consider all the books of the Old Testament and all Books of the  New Testament to be corrupted?


2 – Who wrote the Quran text?


3 – When was the first Quran text written?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[at]COD1981

 

This topic is "Is The Bible Corrupted"  .... if we want to talk about the Qur'an then it might be more appropriate to have it in the correct context so that it does not seem like it is merely oh yea what about yours.

 

Next, truthfully I believe thoroughly in accordance with modern historians that the Old Testament was altered several times throughout the years before Jesus,pbuh, was even born.  In fact, many Jewish Rabbis will actually agree with this as it was a means of culling of sorts as they explain it. 

 

If the Bible is really as thorough as you would have us believe why was the Talmud not included?

 

Finally, did not Jesus (pbuh) say to be leery of those who claim to see him in the desert or out in the wilderness?  Where did Paul claim to see Jesus, pbuh? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[at]COD1981

 

This topic is "Is The Bible Corrupted"  .... if we want to talk about the Qur'an then it might be more appropriate to have it in the correct context so that it does not seem like it is merely oh yea what about yours.

 

Next, truthfully I believe thoroughly in accordance with modern historians that the Old Testament was altered several times throughout the years before Jesus,pbuh, was even born.  In fact, many Jewish Rabbis will actually agree with this as it was a means of culling of sorts as they explain it. 

 

If the Bible is really as thorough as you would have us believe why was the Talmud not included?

 

Finally, did not Jesus (pbuh) say to be leery of those who claim to see him in the desert or out in the wilderness?  Where did Paul claim to see Jesus, pbuh? 

The reason why he included an expose on the Koran is because you are judging the Bible on standards that the Koran does not uphold to, which of course is hypocracy.

The Old Testament was verified via the Dead Sea Scrolls, nothing changed except the occasional spelling error, meanwhile the Talmuld is not accepted as cannon - it is irrelevent that there is any truth in that book as it opposes the Torah (just like the Koran) Sure by all means do what Muhammed did and add as much as you can to your religion to appease as many people you like, but at the end of the day you are still stuck with being a sinner and as a sinner you need a saviour!

Finaly, Jesus was leery to the Devil? you advise against this? You think that the Devil should be entertained? I'm stunned that your religion forces you to believe such idiocy.

Paul's encounter with Jesus was not a dictation of religion, as per Muhammed with the entity that called itself Gabriel. Paul's encounter changed his mind from a persecuter of the church to one that fully understood it, I can only pray that one day this happens to you Muslims to.

Edited by xtremecheese

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“The Old Testament was verified via the Dead Sea Scrolls, nothing changed except the occasional spelling error.”

 

I don’t know who *you’ve* been listening to but here’s what “The Oxford Companion to Archaeology” has to say on the subject:

 

“While some of the Qumran biblical manuscripts are nearly identical to the Masoretic, or traditional, Hebrew text of the Old Testament, some manuscripts of the books of Exodus and Samuel found in Cave Four exhibit dramatic differences in both language and content. In their astonishing range of textual variants [they] have prompted scholars to reconsider the once-accepted theories of the development of the modern biblical text from only three manuscript families: of the Masoretic text, of the Hebrew original of the Septuagint, and of the Samaritan Pentateuch. It is now becoming increasingly clear that the Old Testament scripture was extremely fluid until its canonization around A.D. 100.”

 

“At the end of the day you are still stuck with being a sinner and as a sinner you need a saviour!”

 

Indeed we do. Good thing our Maker is both omnipotent and good. Even a human being doesn’t need to do anything more than say, “I forgive you.” Why should a deity? In all my life I’ve never heard a good answer to this, just circular arguments about “the law” and what not, and the same misinterpretations about animal sacrifices we’ve already been over before (which doesn't answer the question anyway). When your friend says to you, “Look, I’m so sorry I did that to you, I know I deserve to be punched in the face and I wouldn’t blame you if you did it, but could you find it in your heart to have some mercy on me?” you don’t go, “Sure, no problem, man,” and then give *yourself* a good slobberknocker, saying, “Well, *someone* had to get hit!”

Edited by Yahya Sulaiman

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


×