This section is online for reference only. No new content will be added. no deletion either...

Go to Current Forums ...with millions of posts

Why can no one answer my question?

SomaliNet Forum (Archive): Islam (Religion): Archive (Before Sept. 29, 2000): Why can no one answer my question?

Runta	Monday, September 18, 2000 - 06:18 am Hi all, Sacrifices were extremely important to the Jews...in fact Moses is the one who led them in it. All the prophets believed in the sacrifices for atonement of sins... except Muhammed. Why did he stop the importance of sacrifices? What was his precedent? Why? I've tried to ask formerguest and asad who seem to be the most vocal ones, but they really gave me an answer along the lines of "well... it just happened that way" I need something more concrete. Please let me know. I'd like to hear from some new folks too... the ones of the non-violent persuasion when they have discussions. Anyone like to speak up on the subject who hasn't already?
asad	Monday, September 18, 2000 - 10:26 am "Sacrifices were extremely important to the Jews...in fact Moses is the one who led them in it." yes, and the jews and moses never believed that a human being by the name of jesus will die for the sins of people. also, when jesus came, he never told the jews, whom he was sent for, that he is going to die and change the law for them. "All the prophets believed in the sacrifices for atonement of sins... except Muhammed." that is not true. prophet muhammad preached and encouraged muslims to do sacrifices in the hope that they may receive mercy and forgiveness from Allah. every year, we sacrifice animals like the jews used to do. runta, if i may ask, what do you sacrifice in order that your sins my be forgiven?
Runta	Monday, September 18, 2000 - 11:28 am no muhammed didn't encourage the Muslims to sacrifice for the atonement of sins like the other prophets... animal sacrifices became only a sacrificial gesture like giving up money, or land, or crops for God... not atonement... Muhammed just said that Allah will forgive. Why did God stop using sacrifices for atonement (supposedly) and just decided all of a sudden (forget it... I'll just forgive 'em if I feel like it)?? You answer my question and I'll answer yours.
Runta	Monday, September 18, 2000 - 12:07 pm Sacrifices weren't just once a year... so also why did the sacrifices decrease? why was there no priesthood like Moses and Aaron before?
asad	Monday, September 18, 2000 - 01:10 pm "no muhammed didn't encourage the Muslims to sacrifice for the atonement of sins like the other prophets,,,animal sacrifices became only a sacrificial gesture like giving up money, or land, or crops for God... not atonement... " that is not true, but what you do not know is that all the prophet of Allah knew that Allah could and had forgiven people without the sacrifice of animals and without the sacrifice of a human being named jesus; without money, land or crops. "Muhammed just said that Allah will forgive." yes, but muhammad also preached and encouraged the important of sacrifices. "Why did God stop using sacrifices for atonement (supposedly) and just decided all of a sudden (forget it... I'll just forgive 'em if I feel like it)??" Allah can do and does do what He feels like. He just does not forgive people only if they sacrifice animals. Jesus never said his blood was going to be sacrificed for all people. jesus has nothing to do with forgiveness. only Allah forgives people and He does not need any blood be shed. "You answer my question and I'll answer yours." i do not think you want to answer, for some reason. ;-) runta, if i may ask, what do you sacrifice in order that your sins my be forgiven?
foremrguest.	Monday, September 18, 2000 - 05:37 pm One of the DOCTRINE that PAUL mastered to attract the PAGAN ROMANS was to make christianity look like A PAGAN RELIGION. All this pain RUNTA goes through of circulating around SACRIFICES amounts to nothing more than one CONCEPT: Jesus= the sacrifice of god to forgive people. Rediculous and thousand times rediculous for Allah forgives when he wants, how he wants and whom he wants. Runta should also worry about his polytheistic and paganism that lets him worship HUMAN BEINGS and the false teachings of PAUL. Paul's Confession to his Falsehood!!! Please read below what Paul has questioned to the readers of his Epistle, and then you be the Judge of Paul's Confession to Falsehood. Paul interrogates: "But if through my falsehood ("lie" in K.J.V.), God's truthfulness abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned ("judged" in K.J.V.), as a sinner?" Romans 3:7 (N.R.S.V.) Would you knowingly and consciously encourage your own children to resort to "Falsehood" so that they may Glorify the God before others? Does your God seek such "False Glory" from you or your children?? Jesus claimed he was "the Truth" (Jn. 14:6); and he preached "the Truth shall make you free" (Jn. 8:32); and he also declared that the "another Advocate" that was to come after him would be "the Spirit of Truth" (Jn. 14: 16/17), under the circumstances it is most unlikely that he would personally appoint anyone to carry forward his mission that would "through his falsehood" try to Glorify the truthfulness of God. RUNTA and all christian missionaries resort to are lies when they know no one is gonna accept CONFUSION over the simple beleif in ONE GOD. All their faith revolves around is HUMAN WORSHIP BASED ON PAUL'S IDEA AND FALSEHOOD. RUNTA and his folks are the ones whom ALLAH said about them: <2.175. They are the ones who buy Error in place of Guidance and Torment in place of Forgiveness. Ah! what boldness (they show) for the Fire! >.
formerguest.	Monday, September 18, 2000 - 06:07 pm Allah told us in the Quran he forgives again and again: <20:82. "But, without doubt, I am (also) He that forgives again and again, to those who repent, believe, and do right, who,- in fine, are on true guidance." > <39.5 He created the heavens and the earth in true (proportions): He makes the Night overlap the Day, and the Day overlap the Night: He has subjected the sun and the moon (to His law): each one follows a course for a time appointed. Is not He the Exalted in Power - He Who forgives again and again? > ONE OF THE NAMES OF ALLAH IS THE FORGIVER(the one who forgives) And he said taklking to his servants: <39:53. Say: "O my Servants who have transgressed against their souls! Despair not of the Mercy of Allah: for Allah forgives all sins: for He is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Allah tells US what we should do in terms of finding forgiveness and He Almighty says: 54. "Turn you to your Lord (in repentance) and submit to Him, before the chastisement comes on you: after that you shall not be helped. 55. "And follow the best of that which was revealed to you from your Lord, before the Chastisement comes on you - of a sudden while you perceive not!- 56. "Lest the soul should (then) say: 'Ah! Woe is me!- In that I neglected (my duty) towards Allah, and was but among those who mocked!'- 57. "Or (lest) it should say: 'If only Allah had guided me, I should certainly have been among the righteous!'- 58. "Or (lest) it should say when it (actually) sees the Chastisement: 'If only I had another chance, I should certainly be among those who do good!' This is the right advice. One that teaches muslims to be responsible for their own attitude and make sure the results they will recieve are the product of their work. Not THE SIMPLISTIC, POLYTHEISTIC BELEIFS THAT TRINITY DOCTRINE TEACHEAS people; JESUS DIED FOR YOU AND ALL IS TAKEN CARE OFF. Any fool knows that is rediculous. Runta can see how misguided he is, if he carefully looks at what he is promoting. IT IS AGAINST THE COMMON SENSE OF THE HUMAN INTELLECT that one doesn't have to worry about his deeds because someone else has died for him. What a misguidance?.
Runta	Tuesday, September 19, 2000 - 07:27 am asad, God used priests and a temple. In the temple was the holy of holies where the chief priest went in once a year to intercede for the people. (...the paralell Jesus interceding for us... He is better than the high priest because He was sinless unlike the priest, yet because of being in a human body He could sympathize with our weaknesses) sacrifices were constant... the point is that is it possible that Muhammed decided that it wasn't worth the time to do detailed sacrifices like God commanded thru ALL the prophets. The Jews were commanded to practice the Passover where God passed over the Jews in Egypt because they placed blood on the side of the doors and when the angel of death saw the blood he passed over them (parallel in the Bible Jesus is called the passover lamb, through His blood God passover us with death so that we may live) Jesus in several places (man didn't you read those verses quoting Jesus talking about His death I posted before!!!! Read man! I found them myself) Please read these verses... they're the ones that your Islamic books left out. These are really good... plus my occasional comment in between or in the verses ********************************************* On Jesus' Sacrifice John 3 Jesus speaking... 15that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. 18"He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 6 51I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world." 52The Jews therefore quarreled among themselves, saying, "How can this Man give us His flesh to eat?" 53Then Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. Mark 14 24And He said to them, "This is My blood of the new covenant [NO MORE ANIMAL SACRIFICES], which is shed for many. ******************************************** On the Trinity Matthew 28 18And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit [THE TRINITY], 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. Look dude, it's very clear that Jesus from His own mouth spoke of His atoning death and that He spoke with an authority that no prophet before Him or since even had... things like "ALL authority has been given to me in heaven and earth." In Revelation He calls Himself, "the First and the Last, the Almighty" What mere prophet calls himself the Almighty? Jesus talks about Himself dwelling within the disciples after He leaves the earth and the quote "I am with you always..."... mere humans don't do that. The claims of Christ are clear in the Bible. Now you can make an easy way out and say that you don't believe in the Bible, but you can't say that Jesus didn't say some pretty audacious things about Himself. He was either mad, bad, or telling the truth about His divinity. You see asad... Christianity gives a very clear link between Judaism and the new covenant in Christianity. Islam just kind of makes God seem unconcise and there is a very blurred link between Judaism and Islam... which there should be a good one since they believe in the same prophets. There is a link between the high priest and the Holy of Holies... Jesus is our intercessor and God God Himself intercedes for us. There is a clear link between the Passover lamb and now Jesus being called the passover lamb. Jesus highlights His blood being shed... and God said to the Jews "there is no forgiveness without the shedding of blood"... hence the extreme importance of the animal sacrifices that represented the animal taking the punishment for the human being. God is so awesomely just and merciful that for His justice to be satisfied there had to be a price paid (like you pay a fine for breaking the law--- how much more God's Law?) yet in His mercy he offers a way for the fine to be paid. Once a fine has been set... it must be paid, a friend could offer to pay it, but it must be paid. The Law of God taught us the Holiness of God, while the sacrifice of Jesus teaches us the MERCY and love of God. It runs together so well with Judaism. It offers the reason... so Christianity isn't just a random "all of a sudden" sort of thing. While the Qu'ran is more unorganized in its approach.
Runta	Tuesday, September 19, 2000 - 07:43 am Dear formerguest, Can you answer me one question... do you EVER read the surrounding verses that you quote from the Bible? Even the one right before and after, let alone the chapter? I'm serious! Do you? Because if you don't that explains a lot. I'm going to clear this one up with you and then I'm leaving you alone... you can read what I write to asad, ok? The Paul verse... -I will place this in context- Romans 3 3For what if some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect? 4Certainly not! Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. As it is written: "That You may be justified in Your words, And may overcome when You are judged." 5But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unjust who inflicts wrath? (I speak as a man.) 6Certainly not! For then how will God judge the world? 7For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? OK READ THIS ONE REAL HARD 8And why not say, "Let us do evil that good may come"?--as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just. 9Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. The CONTEXT (Come on man CONTEXT!) of the chapter is that every man is a sinner and unrighteous compared to the awesome righteousness of God. For your info Paul was teaching the Romans and he was giving the question and throughtout the chapter he gives the answer. Verse 8 talks about previous discussions of what people have said. In Verse 7 Paul is saying basically, "Some people might feel then... well Paul if you say that we are so bad, why don't we go ahead and do bad things so God's righteousness over us becomes more apparent. I can lie then and shouldn't be judged. " Paul was giving them correction to that errant thought. Alright, there you go... GoodBye.
formerguest.	Tuesday, September 19, 2000 - 02:51 pm Whether RUNTA places the verse in context or not the question was "Can you invite people TO GOD lying to them?". Paul was in disagreement with the rest of the christian teachers at his time over how to propagate and to whom to propagate to. He was a liar a complete fabricator who didn't shy away from telling lies. LET US CHECK IF RUNTA can place into context this coming conflicting stories PAUL gave about the VISION of JESUS in his route to DIMISHIQ: Readers might also know that this guy PAUL was among a jewish sect(pharisees) who were known for their hypocricy and stiff neckedness to a point where our prophet JESUS said about them when He met them : "You are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." John 8:44 Let us see HOW PAUL proved OUR PROFET JESUS right: CHECK HIS TESTIMONIES AND HOW HE LIES IN TWO DIFFERENT OCCASSIONS;(Runta shares the hypocricy and the lies with his master): Narration No. 1: <Acts 22:1ff>. While defending himself before the people of Jerusalem, Paul narrated the first narration in the Hebrew dialect; "Brethren and fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you." <Verses 6ff> "And it came about that as I was on my way, approaching Damascus about noontime, a very bright light suddenly flashed from heaven all around me, and I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?' And I answered, 'Who art Thou, Lord?' And He said to me, 'I am Jesus the Nazarene, whom you are persecuting.' And those who were with me beheld the light, to be sure, but did not understand that voice of the One who was speaking to me. And I said, 'What shall I do, Lord?' And the Lord said to me, 'Arise and go into Damascus; AND THERE YOU WILL BE TOLD OF ALL THAT HAS BEEN APPOINTED FOR YOU TO DO." Note: In this first narration, Paul tells us that Jesus Christ simply directed him to go to the City of Damascus and there he will receive instructions from some one. Paul does not mention having personally received the "instructions" concerning his ministry and/or his mission "directly" from Jesus Christ, which is recorded in the Narration No. 2. A narration very similar to the above is also found in Acts 9:5ff. Narration No. 2: Acts 26:12ff. While defending himself before King Agrippa Paul narrates the incident in first person;............... I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads'. And I said, 'Who are Thou, Lord?' And the Lord said,'I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. But arise, and stand on your feet; FOR THIS PURPOSE I HAVE APPEARED TO YOU, TO APPOINT YOU A MINISTER AND A WITNESS NOT ONLY TO THE THING WHICH YOU HAVE SEEN, BUT ALSO TO THE THINGS IN WHICH I WILL APPEAR TO YOU; delivering you from the Jewish people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am sending you, to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, in order that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me." Note: In this second narration, Paul says; Jesus Christ himself personally gave all the instructions for his future role as a minister. And, Jesus Christ himself personally appointed Paul as his Minister. Paul did not mention in this narration about Jesus telling him to take the instructions from some one else when he goes to the City of Damascus. Similarly, in the earlier narration Paul did not mention he was given any instruction of his Ministry directly by Christ himself during the Vision. WHAT IS THE TRUTH? IF Jesus had already given the needed guidance to Paul and also made him the Minister then why the story of a disciple of Jesus named Ananias breaking the news of appointment to Paul, three or four days later in the city of Damascus, who already knew it? (see Acts 22:14) If this kind of accountability is shown by the man who wrote and propagated the christian fatih and made it look like PAGAN RELIGION for ROMANS to accept, I can understand why RUNTA LIED TO US TOO so many times to just win some hearts.
Formerguest.	Tuesday, September 19, 2000 - 03:17 pm PAUL was out there to misguide people and tell them non of the orders given and taught by JESUS: "[Gal. 5:2] Behold, I Paul, say unto you, that if you be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing." SEE HOW THIS MAN MISGUIDED PEOPLE, I wonder if RUNTA is circumcized?. If not he is in clear contradiction to PAUL. Does he DARE oppose HIS MASTER PAUL since he cancelled CIRCUMCISION which is the way of prophets and all previous nations. May be RUNTA is more educated than THE DISCIPLES OF CHRISTIANITY who opposed PAUL when they declared their discontent WITH HIM: [Acts 21:20] They said to him, "How many thousands of Jews there are which believe, and they are zealous of the law: and they are informed of you, that you teach all the jews which are among the GENTILES to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs." THEREFORE HE WAS COMPLAINING TO TIMOTHY THAT ALL OF THEM DOUBTED HIM AND LEFT HIM SAYING: "1 Timo. 1:15] You know that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me. [2 Timo. 4:16] Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil, the Lord reward him according to his works. Of whom you be ware also, for he has greatly withstood our wards. At my first answer no man stood with me.> MAY BE this is out of context too and IF RUNTA has the GUTTS can comment on them. PS: I am not planning to go anywhere. RUNTA can write his lies and fabrications, I will be here to put them out of place one by one. All that will be left then will be to claim victory for RUNTA and LEAVE THE FORUMS. An unvited guest can leave anytime he wants.
Runta	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 05:56 am Hey asad did you read my response to you?
asad	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 09:40 am "Hey asad did you read my response to you?" runta, you didn't answer my question. "what do you sacrifice in order that your sins my be forgiven?" "Look dude, it's very clear that Jesus from His own mouth spoke of His atoning death and that He spoke with an authority that no prophet before Him or since even had" i told you that jesus did not change the jews law. he himself said he didn't come to change the law. whatever the jews practiced and learned from moses, jesus fulfilled. since the jews practiced animal sacrifices, then jesus didn't change the practice. when you say that muhammad changed the law, then you are also saying that jesus changed the law. i told you that he did not say to jews that he was going to die and change the law for them and everyone else. his mission was to tell them that God is One and that God is the only One who forgives the sins of people. so, who is the liar----jesus or you and the people who wrote about the bible?
Runta	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 10:50 am Did you read those verses?????? It's clearly talked about Him giving Himself for the world you said... "i told you that he did not say to jews that he was going to die and change the law for them and everyone else." so are you saying that those verses don't say that Jesus was going to die for the people Mark 14 24And He said to them, "This is My blood of the new covenant [NO MORE ANIMAL SACRIFICES], which is shed for many. Are you saying that Jesus didn't say anything like that in the Bible or are you saying that Jesus never actually said that and the verses I showed you are fabricated? I'm saying you can't say that it's not in the Bible... because if you read all the verses, you'd see that it is. On Jesus and the Law--- Matthew 5 17 "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I DID NOT COME TO DESTROY BUT TO FULFILL. 18For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. " Jesus said that He came to fulfill the Law. What does fulfill mean? ful·fill also ful·fil (fl-fl). v. tr. ful·filled, ful·fill·ing, ful·fills, also ful·fils. 4. To bring to an end; complete. The key is that He completed the law. The Law's purpose was to teach people about God's Holiness and hatred for sin... Jesus completes it by showing God's grace through His atoning sacrifices NOTE: Jesus said that the law would not pass away UNTIL it was fulfilled... before that He says that He fulfills the Law. His death on the cross created the NEW covenant as Mark 14:24 quoted above says. Jesus is my sacrifice. So what happened to sacrifices as it was practiced in the Law? We have an explanation... Jesus who said that He fulfilled the Law and that His blood shed was for the New Covenant provides a logical step... not a watered down version/importance of sacrifices offered in Islam that offer no real reason of why sacrifices lost the atoning importance that it had in the Law. Why the priesthood was lost (Jesus became our HighPriest in the New Covenant (Testament)) The paralell between Jewish religion and Christianity is much more profound... so Muhammed never had a priesthood as it was practiced for hundreds of years, or one high priest, or a temple, or a tabernacle where sacrifices where authorized to be done... only the priests (who were of the tribe of Levi) could offer sacrifices in the Law, not just any religious guy. There were rules of dress and sanctification... that were to be followed... what happened to all that in Islam. It just died for no reason. The people were required to give 10% of all livestock and crops to the temple priests as a gift unto the LORD. What happened to the mandatory tithe (10%)to the priests of God?? There are too many gaps. Islam is only a rough model of the Law in most places... with huge gaps.
asad	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 11:13 am Did you read those verses?????? yes, i did. and i asked you which one is lying? "It's clearly talked about Him giving Himself for the world you said..."i told you that he did not say to jews that he was going to die and change the law for them and everyone else." so are you saying that those verses don't say that Jesus was going to die for the people" i'm saying that jesus said he came to fulfil the law and not change it. you are saying he changed the law. which one is lying? in the dictionary fulfil means: to obey, act in accordance with, confirm, abide by, submit----------it does not mean "to bring to an end; complete" as you are claiming. so which one is lying-----jesus or you and the ones who wrote the bible?
Runtata	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 12:51 pm No one of the definitions does mean to "complete" Here is Webster Unabridged definition... fulfill \Fulfill", v. t. [imp. & p. p. Fulfilled; p. pr. & vb. n. Fulfilling.] [OE. fulfillen, fulfullen, AS. fulfyllan; ful full + fyllan to fill. See Full, a., and Fill, v. t.] [Written also fulfil.] 1. To fill up; to make full or complete.* [>Obs.] ``Fulfill her week'' --Gen. xxix. 27. 2. To accomplish or carry into effect, as an intention, promise, or prophecy, a desire, prayer, or requirement, etc.; to complete by performance; to answer the requisitions of; to bring to pass, as a purpose or design; to effectuate. As in, He fulfilled his obligation... which could be said He COMPLETED his obligation. But Jesus did say that the Law would pass away once it was fulfilled... think about which definition fills in properly... The law won't pass away until it is "obeyed" or The law won't pass away until it is "complete" Both of those are definitions of Why would something pass away if you obeyed it? As I say sometimes, "A half truth is a WHOLE lie" Ok, asad I think that you need to either call the Bible a lie or the truth. If it's a lie... then why do you quote from it and use it to defend your arguments? One moment you quote the Bible (like the fulfilling the Law verse) as though Jesus really said it... but then you take the verse where Jesus talks about His death and blood being shed for many and you disregard that verse as though He never said it. You can't be both... you would have had to have been there at the time to tell what He said or didn't say. What gives you the power to decide which part you want to believe is true and which part is false?? Jesus and the Bible agree... you are not correct. You have no proof that they don't agree. You never answered my previous post about the startling gaps between the Law of atonement and what Muhammed preached. There is no logical continuation bewteen what Muhammed preached and the Law. It's like he took 15% and ditched 85% of the atonement laws. Atonement which means according to the American Heritage Library 1. Amends or reparation made for an injury or wrong; expiation. So atonement is necessary (hence the big deal of sacrifices in the Law)... what's your atonement? Jesus is mine.
formerguest.	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 03:52 pm RUNTA says; "There is no logical continuation bewteen what Muhammed preached and the Law. " . The Quran confirms The true Message of earlier religions It is a continuation of the same message taught earlier prophets and messengers without Addition, delition, fabrication: ----------------------------------- "10.37 This Qurán is not such as can be produced by other than Allah. on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the Worlds." The Muslim Declaration of his/her beleif in earlier prophets and Religions: ------------------------------- 3.84 Say: "We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, and the Prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islám)." Allah's Information pertaining the Originality of those books Before the Quran: --------------------------------- "5:13. But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard: they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor will you cease to find them - barring a few - ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loves those who are kind. 14. From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so We stirred up enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the Day of Judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done. " Allah's declaration of the disbeleive of those who beleive in trinity;(1+1+1=1): ----------------------------------- "5:17. They disbelieved indeed those that say that Allah is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against Allah, if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and every one that is on the earth? For to Allah belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For Allah hath power over all things." The muslim stance and call to those who take parteners with ALLAH including Jesus: ---------------------------- "3.64 Say: "O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah." If then they turn back, say you: "Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah's Will)." Will RUNTA be saved By jesus Despite RUNTA'S Sins and crimes against Others and himslef: And For RUNTA taking JESUS as a partener TO ALLAH?: -------------------------------- ALLAH speaks of truth and He told US: "5:116. And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Did you say unto men, take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah.?" He will say: "Glory to You! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would indeed have known it. You know what is in my heart, I know not what is in Yours. For You know in full all that is hidden. 117. "Never said I to them aught except what You did command me to say, to wit, 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'; and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when You did take me up You were the Watcher over them, and You are a witness to all things. 118. "If You do punish them, they are Your servant: If You do forgive them, You are the Exalted in power, the Wise." 119. Allah will say: "This is a day on which the truthful will profit from their truth: theirs are Gardens, with rivers flowing beneath,- their eternal Home: Allah well-pleased with them, and they with Allah. That is the great salvation, (the fulfillment of all desires). 120. To Allah do belong the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is therein, and it is He Who has power over all things. It is Injustice on the part of christians to teach such fallacy and uncommon sense to man that no one is accountable and responsible for his/her evil deeds. I guess I can kill, rape, cheat as I like, and at the end of the day take Huge chain cross on my neck like all gangs do and proclaim Jeusu took care of my devilish sins. How is that something someone can understand?. I gues the americans aren't fooled by that, so they built MAXIMUM SECIRITY JAILS TO LET CRIMINALS DO THEIR TIME. WHere the atonement for those christians?. Talk about unfair beleifs here. One which is against the teaching of All prophets and messengers. RUNTA concluded: " what's your atonement? Jesus is mine. ------------------------------ Allah is the forgiver of all our sins. "20.82 "But, without doubt, I am (also) He that forgives again and again, to those who repent, believe, and do right, who,- in fine, are on true guidance." Those who rely on A BEING OTHER THAN allah ARE GIVEN THEIR EXAMPLE AS : --------------------------- "29.41 The parable of those who take protectors other than Allah is that of the spider, who builds (to itself) a house; but truly the flimsiest of houses is the spider's house;- if they but knew. "
formerguest.	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 05:49 pm to see the answer to the belief of the bible errancy the disbute among christians of what books are right or wrong or who is considered to have the right book of the bible among the many books of the bibles read: http://somalinet.com/forums_archives/4669/8488.html Judge for yourself then if is it logical and right for a chrisitian to propagate a religion that they themsleves are in disagreement and can't decide which books are right or wrong.
formerguest.	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 06:58 pm little correction. The muslim stance and call to those who take parteners with ALLAH including Jesus: ---------------------------- should read: The muslim stance and call to those who take parteners with ALLAH(including christians).
asad	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 09:02 pm "Jesus and the Bible agree... you are not correct" what jesus said (that he came to fulfil the law; that he was only sent to the children of israel) agrees with what the Qur'an says. the difinition of fulfil is to obey, act in accordance with, confirm, abide by, submit. THINK NOT THAT I AM COME TO DESTROY THE LAW OR THE PROPHETS: I AM COME NOT TO DESTROY, BUT TO FULFIL (the Law). FOR VERILY I SAY UNTO YOU, TILL HEAVEN AND EARTH PASS AWAY, ONE LOT OR ONE TITLE SHALL IN NO WISE PASS FROM THE LAW, TILL ALL BE FULFILLED. Mathew 5:17-18. the bible is being corrupted. there are many contradictions and corruption in it. you, yourself, admitted it in another place. everything in the bible is not accurate or correct, but whatever it agrees with the Qur'an, then it is correct; whatever the bible says that the Qur'an does not agree with is not correct. so, runta, are you saying that jesus came to destory the law? are you saying jesus never said these words? which one is correct-------these words or your words and the words that the people who wrote the bible say? "You never answered my previous post about the startling gaps between the Law of atonement and what Muhammed preached." well, i told you many times that jesus said the only way to salvation is to obey the commandments. to enter the Kingdom of Heaven one has to keep the Commandments. he didn't say he will die for people's sins.
asad	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 09:05 pm http://wings.buffalo.edu/sa/muslim/library/jesus-say/contents.html
asad	Thursday, September 21, 2000 - 09:12 pm "when Paul came with his new and innovative ideas on how to improve upon the message of Jesus (pbuh), he began by dropping specific commandments. This continued until he decided that his alleged "visions" were sufficient authority to completely discard all of the commandments which both prophet Moses as well as prophet Jesus (pbut) both observed very strictly throughout their lives. The fact that both of these prophets are well known to have spent their lives commanding their followers to uphold these laws and commandments is casually brushed aside by "St. Paul." His "visions," we are told, are higher in authority than the commands of Jesus (pbuh) during his lifetime. Once Paul was finished nullifying the law of God through Moses and Jesus and simplifying the religion for them he began to get many converts. This is because his "Christianity" only required "faith" and no actual work (Romans 3:28). But faith without work was too flimsy a concept to build one's whole way of life around. Paul needed a stupendous and monumental event to have faith IN order for his claims to be accepted by anyone. Thus the original sin and the atonement were born. Paul claimed that God Almighty had created mankind inherently sinful and as inheritors of "the sin of Adam." He claimed that this hereditary burden was so great that the creator of all of the heavens and earth, and yes, the creator of the concepts of sin and forgiveness themselves, could not forgive this sin. This, in Paul's estimation, was beyond God's capabilities. Paul preached that the only way the creator of the heavens and the earth and everything in-between could forgive this sin was to have his sinless "only begotten son" beaten, spat on, stripped, whipped, cut, humiliated, and finally killed in the most gruesome and drawn-out way known to man at the time; by hanging on the cross, and thus becoming a curse upon mankind. "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that hangeth on a tree" Galatians 3:13: Only then would God be able to forgive this sin. However, if we were to read the words of Jesus (pbuh) in Mark 2:9 we would find that Jesus (pbuh) informs us that for him to tell a man that his sins are forgiven is much easier than to cure a paralytic and cause him to walk, and since Jesus (pbuh) had the power to cure paralytics, therefore, he demonstrates to us that forgiving sins is much easier for him. However, we already know that God Almighty the "Father" of all believers "And call no [man] your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven" Matthew 23:9 We further know that God Almighty is greater in power than all humans, inluding Jesus: "..my Father is greater than I", John 14:28 Finally, we know that Jesus (pbuh) gets his power from God: "I can of mine own self do nothing...," John 5:30 "Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:" Acts 2:22 So it stands to reason that what is easy for Jesus (pbuh) is trivial and inconsequential for God Almighty Himself. Thus, if Jesus (pbuh) can forgive sins with the utmost ease simply by uttering the words "your sins are forgiven you," then it is well within the ability of God Almighty Himself to do the same simply by willing it, even without uttering a word. Indeed, we can even read in the Bible: "Who [is] a God like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger for ever, because he delighteth [in] mercy." Micah 7:18 "Nevertheless, He (God), [being] full of compassion, forgave [their] iniquity, and destroyed [them] not: yea, many a time turned He His anger away, and did not stir up all his wrath. For He remembered that they [were but] flesh; a wind that passeth away, and cometh not again." Psalm 78:38-39 "I, [even] I, [am] he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins." Isaiah 43:25 Well, how then does God Almighty forgive our sins? Is He able to simply say "you are forgiven" to those who turn to Him in repentance or must He first sacrifice a sinless individual before He can do this? To get the answer let us read the Bible: "It may be that the house of Judah will hear all the evil which I purpose to do unto them; that they may return every man from his evil way; that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin." Jeremiah 36:3 "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon." Isaiah 55:7 "I acknowledged my sin unto thee, and mine iniquity have I not hid. I said, I will confess my transgressions unto the LORD; and thou forgavest the iniquity of my sin. Selah." Psalm 32:5 "By mercy and truth iniquity is purged..." Proverbs 16:6 "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." 2 Chronicles 7:14 "But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live. Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: [and] not that he should return from his ways, and live? But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, [and] doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked [man] doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die. Yet ye say, The way of the Lord is not equal. Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal? When a righteous [man] turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die. Again, when the wicked [man] turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the Lord is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn [yourselves] from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin." Ezekiel 18:21-30 "To do righteousness and justice [is] more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice." Proverbs 21:3 "For I (God) desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6 "Wherewith shall I come before the LORD, [and] bow myself before the high God? shall I come before him with burnt offerings, with calves of a year old? Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, [or] with ten thousands of rivers of oil? shall I give my firstborn [for] my transgression, the fruit of my body [for] the sin of my soul? He hath shewed thee, O man, what [is] good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?" Micah 6:6-8 "To what purpose [is] the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. When ye come to appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my courts? Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; [it is] iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear [them]. And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood. Wash you, make you clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease to do evil; Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless, plead for the widow. Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool." Isaiah 1:11-18 This is indeed the teachings of Islam. In the Qur'an, we are told that mankind were created to inhabit the earth. When Adam and Eve were first created, they were allowed to abide in the garden. However, soon after they ate from the tree and God sent them down to earth. Once Adam realized his error he was remorseful and repentant, however, he was the first man. He did not know how to repent or how to seek forgiveness. So, God Almighty provided him with a revelation teaching him how to ask for God's forgiveness. Adam did so and God accepted Adam's repentance. God did not mandate gruesome and torturous blood sacrifices of the sinless or anything else. He simply forgave Adam's sin. We can read this story in the Qur'an: "And We said: O Adam! Dwell you and your wife in the Paradise, and eat from it freely with pleasure and delight wherever you will, but do not approach this tree or you both will be of the wrongdoers. But Satan made them slip therefrom (the Paradise), such that he expelled them from that in which they were. And we said: Decend, all, with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be a dwelling place for you and an enjoyment until a time. Then Adam received from his Lord words (of revelation), and He pardoned him. Verily! He is the Forgiving, the Merciful. We said: Decend, all of you, from hence; but whenever there comes to you a guidance from Me, then whosoever follows My guidance, there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve. But they who disbelieve and deny our revelations, such are the dwellers of the Fire. They shall abide therein forever" The noble Qur'an, Al-Baqarah(2):35-39 "Say: O My slaves who have been prodigal to their own hurt (through excessive sin)! Despair not of the mercy of Allah. Verily Allah forgives all sins. Truly, He is the Oft-Forgiving, the Most-Merciful." The noble Qur'an, Al-Zumar(39):53 Anas ibn Malik narrated in Mishkat Al-Masabih the following: "Allah's Messenger (pbuh) stated that Allah said, "O Son of Adam, as long as you supplicate to Me and have hope in me I will pardon you in spite of what you have done, and I do not care. O Son of Adam, if your sins were so numerous as to reach the lofty regions of the sky, then you asked My forgiveness, I would forgive you, and I do not care. O Son of Adam, if you were to meet Me with enough sins to fill the earth, then met Me, not associating anything with Me (in worship), I shall greet you with it's equivalent in forgiveness.'"
Runta	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 05:41 am Asad, No Jesus didn't destroy the Law... He came to complete the law...and He said that it wouldn't pass away UNTIL it was completed (fulfilled)... which He said that He would do... it's like why continue putting paint on the painting once you've added the finishing stroke? Jesus was the finishing stroke to the artwork of the Law... He didn't destroy the artwork... He just finished it with His death on the cross... Ok... asad do you believe that Jesus actually said those things that are in the Bible? Or do you believe some of the words of Jesus in the Bible and disbelieve the others? If so which words of Jesus in the Bible are the correct words and which ones are the fake ones? Let me know how you know. Here are some MORE quotes (I get the feeling you don't really read them, even though I take the time to look them up myself... yet it proves my point.) Here are some more. DID JESUS JUST SAY FOLLOW THE COMMANDMENTS? OR FOLLOW HIM? Matthew 19 20The young man said to Him, "All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?" 21Jesus said to him, "If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and COME, FOLLOW ME." <-------- ^ : : HERE'S A GOOD ONE John 14 4 And where I go you know, and the way you know." 5 Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?" 6 Jesus said to him, "I AM THE WAY, THE TRUTH and THE LIFE. No one comes to the Father except THROUGH ME. So asad did Jesus actually say that? If He didn't what proof do you have to say that He didn't? Here's some more of Christ declaring His divine nature. John 14 8 Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us." 9 Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? HE WHO HAS SEEN ME HAS SEEN THE FATHER; so how can you say, "Show us the Father'? 10 Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works. 11 Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else believe Me for the sake of the works themselves. So, did Jesus say THAT? How do you know that He didn't? This is how you responded to my question "You never answered my previous post about the startling gaps between the Law of atonement and what Muhammed preached" you said.. well, i told you many times that jesus said the only way to salvation is to obey the commandments. to enter the Kingdom of Heaven one has to keep the Commandments. he didn't say he will die for people's sins. What's that got to do with Muhammed???????! Way to have an indirect answer. Just admit you don't know why the sacrificial Laws aren't followed in detail anymore. Instead of answering you just want to "pass the buck" to talking about Christianity.
Runta	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 06:01 am Asad, Jesus did say that He would die in SEVERAL parts all throughout the Bible. Any theologian can show you MULTIPLE parts where Jesus predicts His death. Again you are not reading the verses are you? Honestly? AGAIN I will re-quote it. Mark 14 24And He said to them, "This is My blood of the new covenant [NO MORE ANIMAL SACRIFICES], which is shed for many." John 10 14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. 15 As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd. 17 "Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father." Did JESUS say THAT? Jesus says to believe in Him. John 12 25 Jesus said to her, "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live. 26 And whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die. Do you believe this?" 27 She said to Him, "Yes, Lord, I believe that You are the Christ, the Son of God, who is to come into the world." So did Jesus really say that, asad? Is that a big 'ol typo?
asad	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 06:18 am "He didn't destroy the artwork... He just finished it with His death on the cross..." so since jesus didn't destroy the law-------"To do righteousness and justice [is] more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice." Proverbs 21:3-----then, this law stands all the time that God accepts forgiveness and forgives sins without sacrifice. according to the bible, if God said----------"For I (God) desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings."--------then, it is true. this saying by God in the bible agrees with what the Qur'an says and it contradicts what you are saying and what the other verses of the bible say. "Ok... asad do you believe that Jesus actually said those things that are in the Bible? Or do you believe some of the words of Jesus in the Bible and disbelieve the others? If so which words of Jesus in the Bible are the correct words and which ones are the fake ones? Let me know how you know." i think i told you that the bible is being corrupted. there are many contradictions and corruption in it. you, yourself, admitted it in another place this. everything in the bible is not accurate or correct, but whatever it agrees with the Qur'an, then it is correct; whatever the bible says that the Qur'an does not agree with is not correct. so, runta, which one is correct--------------"To do righteousness and justice [is] more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice." Proverbs 21:3-------------"For I (God) desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." or your words and the some of the words that the people who wrote the bible say?
asad	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 06:34 am "Who can forgive sins? "If Christianity believes that forgiving sins is a sign of divinity then what are we to say about the many millions of people in the Christian clergy who over the last 2000 years have publicly accepted people's "confessions" and "forgiven" their sins? Are they all the offspring of God and part of the Trinity? Do they call God on the telephone and ask His permission to forgive each individual or do they have "the power to forgive sins"?----------"Stories of Jesus curing a paralytic are found in all four narrative gospels, The Johannine version (John 5:1-9) differs substantially...The controversy interrupts the story of the cure- which reads smoothly if one omits vv. 5b-10 (Mark 2)- and it is absent in the parallel of John...Scholars usually conclude, on the basis of this evidence, that Mark has inserted the dispute into what was originally a simple healing story...If the words are to be attributed to Jesus, v. 10 may represent a bold new claim on Jesus' part that gives the authority to forgive sins to all human beings...The early church was in the process of claiming for itself the right to forgive sins and so would have been inclined to claim that it's authorization came directly from Jesus." However, even if we were for a moment to disregard all of the evidence, then we will find that to insist on following Mark 2:1-12 blindly shall result in utter and complete nullification of one of the founding beliefs of Christianity." Who bears the sin? "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." Ezekiel 18:20 Remembering this, let us read:...... Noah curses Canaan: "And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan. These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread. And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." Genesis 9:18-25 If for a moment we are to believe that this was originally inspired by God and not a later insertion of mankind, and we are to believe that Noah (pbuh) would drink till he became falling-down drunk and naked. And we are to somehow assign the blame for this to Ham. Then, why curse Canaan (the son of Ham) why not curse Ham directly? Also, why curse only one of the four sons of Ham and not all of them (see Fig. 2)? "And the sons of Ham; Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan." Genesis 10:6 Further, Ham did not uncover his father. He only happened upon his father by chance. He could not have known that he would find his father naked in the tent. His brothers Shem and Japheth were told by Ham of their father's condition. So they knew without having to actually see. If their roles were reversed, and Shem or Japheth were to have been in Ham's shoes, what would they have done differently? Is this justice? If I burn my own house down, and you call the fire department, shall I then randomly select one of your sons and curse him? Why? What could possibly justify such an action? Fig. 2 The cursing of Canaan One thing that people in Western countries today find hard to comprehend is that in the past, and even today in many Eastern countries, tribalism was a very strong force. A scandal in one tribe or an indiscretion of their ancestors would be powerful ammunition in the hands of their rivals. To have such scandals stated publicly by God himself would only strengthen the validity of that claim (please read section 2.3). If I were a Jewish descendant of Shem or Japhath and my neighbor were a son of Canaan, then I could beat him over the head day and night with the fact that he was a servant of my servants. God Himself said so. "Verily, those who purchase a small gain at the cost of Allah's covenant and their oaths, they shall have no portion in the Hereafter. Neither will Allah speak to them, nor (will He) look upon them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them, and they shall have a painful torment." The noble Qur'an, A'al-Umran(3):77 For a Muslim, many of the claims to be found in the Bible with regard to the prophets of God, and even God himself, are monstrous and preposterous. One is hard pressed to find a single prophet or messenger who was not a drunkard, an idolater, an adulterer, guilty of incest, a liar, and so forth. The Bible practically overflows with such stories from almost every Tom, Dick, and Harry. The messengers of God are even made to be guilty of multiple cases of adultery and worse. Abraham (pbuh) is alleged to be a liar and worse (Genesis 12:13). Noah (pbuh) a drunkard (Genesis 9:21). Lot (pbuh) a drunkard and guilty of incest (Genesis 19:30-38). Solomon (pbuh) a worshipper of idols in his old age (1 Kings 4-9), King David (pbuh) commits adultery with Uriah's wife and then murdered her husband (2 Samuel 11:3-4,15-18), David's son Ammon is guilty of incest and the rape of his half sister (2 Samuel 13:14). Aaron (pbuh) fashions an idol (the golden calf) for the Jews to worship (Exodus 32:1-4), to name but a very few of the many allegations to be found in the current Bible. We have already seen in section 2.3 how such fabrications found their way into the book of God (also see section 6.8) so we will not get into it here. Muslims believe that God protects his messengers from erring in matters of faith. They can only err in matters of livelihood. For instance, a prophet can make a mistake in selecting which season to plant crops but he can not make a mistake in doctrine and worship. Why? Let us take the example of the most benign of these allegations, that of lying. When a prophet is sent by God to a group of people, he can expect the deck to be stacked severely against him. They will justly assume him to be a liar until proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to be otherwise. They will call him a liar even if they have no proof. A prophet's message rests solely on his truthfulness. If he were ever to lie, even to save his life, then this would prove that he is capable of lying and that he has established for himself guidelines under which it is permissible to lie. This would undermine his whole message as no one could then be sure he had not convinced himself that the end justifies the means, and that in order to get them to become decent people he might be willing to fabricate lies against God himself. How much worse to drink oneself into a stupor. Alcohol is the door to all evils. Once a person loses control of his faculties he will be capable of anything. Just look at the allegations presented against Lot* (pbuh). He who is willing to drink in such a fashion must realize that he will be accountable for his subsequent actions. It is not an acceptable excuse to say "I was drunk, I didn't know what I was doing." If your neighbor drinks himself into a stupor and then runs down your mother with his car, will you say "It's not your fault. You were drunk"? Think about the other allegations for a while and you will understand what we mean. Muslims believe that the prophets of God are above such actions. A Muslim believes that when God selects a messenger, He chooses the best of the best. He chooses men who will be an inspiration and a good example for their followers. Why the insistence in the Bible that God has such poor judgment? If my prophets, which God sent to guide and teach me, are sinful people, can I not say "What is good enough for my prophet is good enough for me"? The claim that God wanted to prove the fallibility of humans is quite flimsy. When we elect a congressman, do we look for a man of weak character who we know will use his position to steal and then say: "we did this to prove that thieves are people too," or do we look for the man with the most impeccable character? If this man then steals, do we say "he is only human, don't worry, we might have done the same," or do we say "Kick the son of a gun out of office and throw him in jail!"? When a government sends an ambassador to another country to represent them, do they select a man who they know will bring their country disgrace and dishonor? Since God knows what is in our hearts (Deuteronomy 8:2), does this not make him the supreme judge of character? God's prophets are human, and thus, imperfect. However, they are not this low. Even in this age of indulgence, we can find individuals of sterling character who rise above allowing themselves to become falling-down drunk. There are monks who spend their whole life without a mate much less committing adultery. Incest is such a filthy word that even the most brazen criminal would be disgusted at such a thought. Are our highest examples of humankind less than these men? Let us now look at another allegation against Jesus (pbuh). In John 2:1-10 we read about Jesus' (pbuh) alleged treatment of his mother. In these verses, Jesus (pbuh) is alleged to have said to his mother John 2:4 "Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come." "Woman, what have I to do with thee?" Is this how a good Christian talks to his mother? The same mother who carried him in her womb for nine months and endured the pains of labor and birth for him. The same mother who endured the lies, accusations, and injuries of many with regard to her chastity because of him? The same mother who suckled him and raised him? Is this how the meek lamb of God is alleged to have responded to his mother's question? Can he find no better manner to address her than that which he used to address the adulteress in John 8:10: ".....Woman, where are those thine accusers?"? In the Qur'an we read the story of the miraculous birth of Jesus (pbuh) wherein we find a defense of Jesus (pbuh) against such claims: "Then she (Mary pbuh) brought him (Jesus pbuh) to her own folk carrying him. They said: 'O Mary, you have truly come with a most wicked innovation. O sister of Aaron, your father was not a wicked man nor was your mother a harlot'. Then she pointed to him. They said: 'How can we speak to one who is in the cradle, a young child?'. He spoke: 'Lo! I am the servant of God, He has given me the Scripture and appointed me a prophet. And has made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and has enjoined upon me prayer and charity so long as I live. And (has made me) dutiful toward my mother and not overbearing or miserable. So peace upon me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive(the hereafter)"
asad	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 06:57 am "Paul has made salvation a very easy commodity to come by in Christianity. They only have to "believe." No actual work is required. No one has to work for their salvation (Romans 3:28, etc.). Paul has brought for them the "sure thing" and the short cut to salvation. The commandments of Jesus (pbuh) which he himself observed faithfully and fully up until the crucifixion, are all discarded by Paul as old, decaying, and ready to vanish away (Hebrews 8:13, etc.). The fact that Jesus (pbuh) himself told his followers that observing the commandments and selling their belongings shall make them "perfect" is forgotten (Matthew 19:16-21). The fact that Jesus (pbuh) himself commanded his followers to keep the commandments until the end of time is also forgotten (Matthew 5:17-19). All they need is "faith."
Runta	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 11:32 am Asad, You said "i think i told you that the bible is being corrupted. there are many contradictions and corruption in it. you, yourself, admitted it in another place this. " WHAT?!?!?!?!?!? I NEVER HAVE SAID THAT! I want this cleared up... please find that quote and show it to me. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT THE BIBLE IS CORRUPTED. Just to make things clear, if there were any doubt. To prove other wise please direct quote me.
formerguest.	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 02:17 pm Don't expect this hypocrite to address the issues Asad. It is their weakness to run from their own beleifs.
asad	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 04:10 pm "I want this cleared up... please find that quote and show it to me." i believe you said that the bible went through abuses. you said and i quote: "Yet, the Bible is still the international best seller of all time no matter what the Muslims say. After all the abuse that's a miracle in itself... the Qu'ran doesn't come close. God is protecting His true Word." http://somalinet.com/forums_archives/4669/7926.html?#POST93901 then, asked you this: "are you saying God is protecting corruption, contradictions and abuse that is found in the bible?. if God would have protected the bible, there would not be corruption, contradictions and abuse in the bible."
formerguest.	Friday, September 22, 2000 - 04:44 pm ISAAC NEWTON ON THE TRINITY SUPERSTITION: Newton on I John 5:7 Newton states that this verse appeared for the first time in the third edition of Erasmus's New Testament. "When they got the Trinity; into his edition they threw by their manuscript, if they had one, as an almanac out of date. And can such shuffling dealings satisfy considering men?....It is rather a danger in religion than an advantage to make it now lean on a broken reed. "In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, this text of the "three in heaven" was never once thought of. It is now in everybody�s mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books. "Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part, I can make none. If it be said that we are not to determine what is Scripture what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious art of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honour for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best." Newton on I Timothy 3:16 "In all the times of the hot and lasting Arian controversy it never came into play . . . they that read "God manifested in the flesh" think it one of the most obvious and pertinent texts for the business." "The word Deity imports exercise of dominion over subordinate beings and the word God most frequently signifies Lord. Every lord is not God. The exercise of dominion in a spiritual being constitutes a God. If that dominion be real that being is the real God; if it be fictitious, a false God; if it be supreme, a supreme God." Newton also wrote a discussion on two other texts that Athanasius had attempted to corrupt. This work has not been preserved. He believed that not all the books of the Scriptures have the same authority. Reference A. Wallace, �Anti-Trinitarian Biographies,� Vol. III, 1850.
Runta	Monday, September 25, 2000 - 06:20 am asad, Thank you for direct quoting me. The CONTEXT in which I used "abuse" is all of the assaults made by Muslims, atheists, and liberal "Christian" scholars to discredit the Bible. Yet, through all of THEIR abuse of the Bible the Bible continues to be the international best seller... NOT the Qu'ran... I guess the Qu'ran can't compete. I in NO WAY meant that the Bible is corrupted. I'm straight telling you this now. I feel that I had to clear that up or else everything I answer using the Bible you might think ("Oh, Runta doesn't believe in the purity of the Bible anyway") but I do. #1 Also side note... the verse talking about the children shall not bear the sins of the father and the father for the children... meant an involuntary imputing of sins upon the other person. Jesus VOLUNTARILY took upon Himself those sins and being that He was God and completely pure He could do that. Remember the "flesh body" of Jesus was not "God"... the Spirit that dwelt within Jesus was God... for God is a Spirit. So God never "died"... the body His Spirit dwelt in died. #2 Asad Jesus didn't tell the disciples to keep the commandments until the "end of time" but until it was fulfilled and before that He said that HE fulfilled the law. I wish you could see that. He said that He was the fulfillment of that law. #3 priests cannot forgive sins only God can, that is an errant belief #4 Why is it that whenever I ask you guys a question about Islam... all I get is an attack on Christianity. It's like you guys can't answer quetsions so they easy way out is to attack. Ok so you guys try to say "Jesus never changed the commandments"... yet it should be obvious that Muhammed DID change the commandments. Why can't you explain the OBVIOUSLY divergence from the Law originally given to the Jews? #5 I personally believe that the Qu'ran was plagiarized from multiple Sabean, Christian, heretical Christian, Jewish, Jewish legend, etc. sources plus his personal feelings from the subject. Being on a trade route, he came in contact with many different religions... how easy it would be to put their traditions all together (all the stuff he liked) into one book. That's why there isn't any reference to sacrifices as done in the Law. That's why that story I quoted in the discusion "THAT's in the Qu'ran" was in a Jewish book of legends was also in the Qu'ran almost identically. It was plagiarized. The Qu'ran isn't new it's a "hodge podge" of different stuff. Your sins have to be atoned for and you have no sacrifice in your place... Muhammed got rid of the constant atonement that had to be continually done... I mean it made sense for him to get rid of it... only Levites could offer up sacrifices. He was an Arab. I'm sure he wasn't exactly thrilled over becoming a Jew. He didn't have a temple. Animals are valuable who wants to keep on sacrifices them?... maybe an animal once in a while... but not all the time. Plus he'd have to give a 10% of all his increase crops, animals, gold, etc. for the support of the priests. What a headache! Now me saying those things I realize are quite offensive. Since we are talking about the inability for my question to be answered I decided to input the answer to why it couldn't be answered. I have been very patient with the constant attacks upon Christianity and the Bible. I have looked at Muslim websites that have attacked the Bible. However, I don't feel that Muslims have the same sort of patience. If I know something is true, why become so irate when it is challenged? Here's a website that talks about the Qu'ran's apparent plagiarism of the Talmud and Jewish myth. Of course the Qu'ran plagiarized, not the Jews because the Jewish myths were there long before Muhammed's Qu'ran. http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/debate/part2.htm I doubt you will actually go to and look at it, but the copying is pretty obvious. Why believe in a book of copied myths? It also challenge's the Qu'ran supposed scientific superiority and the supposed beauty of the Qu'ran (C'mon guys... there isn't even any chronological order... He could be talking about calming down an argument between his wives and the next verse could talk about not eating pork... no coherence.) So there you have it... if you do look at the sight. Tell me what you think, asad.
asad	Monday, September 25, 2000 - 11:53 am "The CONTEXT in which I used "abuse" is all of the assaults made by Muslims, atheists, and liberal "Christian" scholars to discredit the Bible. Yet, through all of THEIR abuse of the Bible the Bible continues to be the international best seller " so if you beleive that the bible went through abuses (corruption) by people, including by the "christians", this does not mean that it can not be international best seller. many people in the world buy the lies and the hype put by people. "I guess the Qu'ran can't compete." the Qur'an does not have to. It has no corruption and it did not go through abuse. it is being protected. "I in NO WAY meant that the Bible is corrupted. I'm straight telling you this now. I feel that I had to clear that up or else everything I answer using the Bible you might think ("Oh, Runta doesn't believe in the purity of the Bible anyway") but I do." again, if God would have protected the bible, there would not be corruption, contradictions and abuse in the bible. again, runta, can you answer this question. "are you saying God is protecting corruption, contradictions and abuse that is found in the bible? "Jesus VOLUNTARILY took upon Himself those sins and being that He was God and completely pure He could do that." jesus is NOT GOD. Why Would Jesus Have to Die on the Cross? -------"According to the Christian doctrine, Jesus died on the cross as a sacrifice for our sins. The idea here is that every human is born with sins, or that all humans will sin, and therefore it was necessary that someone as pure as Jesus would be the crucified to nullify these sins. The question is; why does anyone have to die for our sins when God, the All-Merciful, could as easily give us forgiveness if we ask for it? Isn't God the one who makes the rules? Why does He have to make someone suffer for our sins or for someone else's sins? Isn't that unjust of Him? According to the Bible the way to redemption could be obtained without the need for sacrifice. The Bible says: Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezekiel 18:21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. Clearly the soul that sins shall die. Clearly that no one shall bear the iniquity (sins) of others. So Jesus cannot bear the sins of others either. If one is righteous then it shall be upon him, and if one commits a sin then it shall be upon him, and not on Jesus. Finally, the way to repentance and forgiveness is by turning from all sins, doing what is right, and keeping the commandments. Also we see the same message given by Solomon. He says in the book of Ecclesiastes 12:13 "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man." This is the whole message, and this is the conclusion of messages. It is that one should fear God, and keep the commandments, and nothing else. Again in 2 Chronicles 7:14 "If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land." This clearly states that to seek forgiveness from God we have to humble ourselves, pray and seek God, and turn away from wickedness. Finally the Bible says in Samuel 15:22 "And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." This clearly states that obeying God is better that sacrifice whether this sacrifice is of objects, animals, or humans, or any other type. What God likes is for us to heed and obey Him, and if that is what God likes then it is not of Him to come later and change his mind, and change his ways. God says in the Holy Quran, "Verily God is All-Knowing, All-Wise" (Ch 9: Vr 28). Now that we have seen this, Christians say that Jesus has changed some of these laws. Let's look at what Jesus says. In Matthew 5:17 "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." Jesus clearly states that he was not sent to abolish the law, the law of which had already existed. So what is mentioned above cannot be discounted. Then Jesus continues to say, in Matthew 5:18 and 19 "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Jesus here states that not even as much as a dot (tittle) shall not pass from the law. Every thing is kept the way it was. That is why the previous laws cannot be removed or discarded, and those who willfully change these laws "he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." "Remember the "flesh body" of Jesus was not "God". he never said he was God or part of God. let's see about jesus and God in the bible------"One of the fundamental beliefs of Christianity is that Jesus had died and allowed for the shedding of his blood for the sake of granting forgiveness to people. In other words Jesus had died on the cross as a sacrifice for our sins. Let us investigate this topic from the Bible, and find out whether Jesus was sent to be crucified or that he was crucified: 1. Willingness of Jesus Christ to Die for Our Sins: Peter and the two sons of Zebedee were with Jesus Christ before the elders of the people and the chief priests came to take him to crucify him. Jesus at this point talked to Peter and the two sons of Zebedee as in Matthew 26:38 "Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me." Then Jesus went a little further way from them and prayed to God as in Matthew 26:39 "And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." It is very clear from the above verse in Matthew 26:39 that Jesus had no intention of dying. In this verse it is shown that Jesus was praying strongly (Matthew mentions that Jesus repeated these prayer three time) to have this death removed from him. Had Jesus Christ been sent to be crucified he would not have hesitated to be killed at all. When I relate this to my Christian brothers, they tell me that this hesitation comes from the flesh side of him (in other words he was tempted), and that his soul which is godly does not have this hesitation at all. When we look at Matthew 26:38 we see that Jesus is contradicting this idea by saying, "My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death." (Matthew 26:38). He himself says that it really his soul that is hesitating and not his body. These are Jesus' own words. 2. God Answered the prayers of Jesus Christ: After Jesus made the above mentioned prayer he was answered by God according to Hebrews 5:7 "Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared." These words clearly show that when Jesus was praying strongly to God, God would grant him his request. The word "heard in that he feared" (Hebrews 5:7) mean that God granted him what he requested. So the above verse shows that when Jesus asked of God to "let this cup pass from" (Matthew 26:39) him, God respond to his prayer and saved him from death or crucifixion. 3. The Post Crucifixion Prophesied Events never happened: When the people were asking Jesus Christ if he was going to show them a sign, He replied by saying that the only sign that they should expect is the sign of Jonas. Jesus also made sure to specify what exactly this sign was. The details are shown in the following verses: Matthew 12:38 Then certain of the scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from thee. Matthew 12:39 But he answered and said unto them, An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: Matthew 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. Jesus here emphasized what will happen to him by specifically saying that he will be like Jonas in terms of the number of days and nights he will be in the heart of the earth, " For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." (Matthew 12:40). Now let us see if this prophecy came to pass. Jesus was crucified on Friday, this is certainly known among all Christians, and that is the reason for calling that Friday by "Good Friday". Jesus was buried on Friday night. Now let us start counting: Friday night Jesus was buried. This is night number 1. Saturday day Jesus was still in the grave. This is day number 1. Saturday night Jesus was still in the grave. This is night number 2. Mary Magdalene, very early in the morning before sun rise and after the Sabbath (Saturday), went to the see Jesus, and he was not there. The following verses relate this event: Mark 16:1 And when the Sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. Mark 16:3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? Mark 16:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great. Mark 16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted. Mark 16:6 And he saith unto them, Be not affrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. The number of days and nights that Jesus had spent in the heart of the earth is 1 day and 2 nights. This clearly challenges what Jesus had prophesied. When I tell this to my Christian brothers, some of them responded by saying that what Jesus wanted to really say was that he will be gone for a while, and not that he will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. This is clearly not the case. Had Jesus meant that, he would have said it, but it is clear that he wanted the people to know that this was a sign (miracle) and that it will be like Joans' sign, and that he will be in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights. These were his own words." "the Spirit that dwelt within Jesus was God." if the sprint within jesus makes jesus God, what about the spirit in adam-----does that make adam God too? ;-) "Asad Jesus didn't tell the disciples to keep the commandments until the "end of time" but until it was fulfilled and before that He said that HE fulfilled the law. I wish you could see that. He said that He was the fulfillment of that law." jesus was reported to have said he came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it. again, "Paul has made salvation a very easy commodity to come by in Christianity. They only have to "believe." No actual work is required. No one has to work for their salvation (Romans 3:28, etc.). Paul has brought for them the "sure thing" and the short cut to salvation. The commandments of Jesus (pbuh) which he himself observed faithfully and fully up until the crucifixion, are all discarded by Paul as old, decaying, and ready to vanish away (Hebrews 8:13, etc.). The fact that Jesus (pbuh) himself told his followers that observing the commandments and selling their belongings shall make them "perfect" is forgotten (Matthew 19:16-21). The fact that Jesus (pbuh) himself commanded his followers to keep the commandments until the end of time is also forgotten (Matthew 5:17-19)" "Ok so you guys try to say "Jesus never changed the commandments"... yet it should be obvious that Muhammed DID change the commandments. Why can't you explain the OBVIOUSLY divergence from the Law originally given to the Jews?" there is no different between what jesus preached and what moses and muhammad preached. you are the one who is saying jesus changed the law of moses.! "I personally believe that the Qu'ran was plagiarized from multiple Sabean, Christian, heretical Christian, Jewish, Jewish legend, etc. sources plus his personal feelings from the subject" that happens to be your personal believe, but it is just that--your personal believe which happens to be a lie. "Muhammed got rid of the constant atonement that had to be continually done" maybe the people who abused the bible didn't get rid of this verse: "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." Ezekiel 18:20 http://home.swipnet.se/~w-20479/Christ.htm At the end of the debate - "Christianity and Islam" - which appeared on the SABC-TV program "Cross Questions" on Sunday 5th June 1983, the Chairman, Mr. Bill Chalmers commented: "I think it can be said from this discussion that there is, at present, somewhat more accommodation on the Islamic side for the founder of Christianity than there is on the Christian side for the founder of Islam. What the significance of that is, we leave it to you, the viewer, to determine, but I do think you will agree that it is a good thing that we are talking together." "Bill" as he is popularly addressed, without any formalities, on all his programs, by all his panelists, is extremely charming and stupendous in his humility. He is a picture of what the Holy Quran portrays of a good Christian: "...And nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say: 'We are Christians': because among these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world. And they are not arrogant." (The Holy Quran 5:82) Jesus - His Status Were the Muslims on the panel trying to placate the viewers out policy, deceit or diplomacy? Nothing of the kind! They were only articulating what God Almighty had commanded them to say in the Holy Quran. As Muslims, they had no choice. They had said in so many words: "We Muslims believe, that Jesus was one of the mightiest messengers of God that he was the Christ, that he was born miraculously without any male intervention (which many modern-day Christians do not believe today), that he gave life to the dead by God's permission and that he healed those born blind and the lepers by god's permission. In fact, no Muslim is a Muslim if he or she does not believe in Jesus!" Pleasant Surprise Over 90% of the people who witnessed this debate must have been pleasantly, but skeptically, surprised. They might have not believed their ears. They must have surmised that the Muslims were playing to the gallery - that they were trying to curry favor with their fellow Christian countrymen; that if the Muslims would say a few good words about Jesus, then in reciprocation the Christians might say a few good words about Muhammed (may the peace and the blessings of God be upon all His righteous servants, Moses, Jesus, Muhammed...etc.); that I scratch your back and you scratch my back - which would be a sham or hypocrisy. Hate Cultivated We cannot blame the Christians for their skepticism. They have been so learned for centuries. They were trained to think the worst of the man Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, and his religion. How aptly did Thomas Carlyle say about his Christian brethren over a hundred and fifty years ago: "The lies which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammed) are disgraceful to ourselves only." We Muslims are partly responsible for this. We have not done anything substantial to remove the cobwebs. Ocean of Christianity South Africa is an ocean of Christianity. If Libya boasts the highest percentage of Muslims on the continent of Africa, then the Republic of South Africa would also be entitled to boast the highest percentage of Christians. In this ocean of Christianity the R.S.A. - the Muslims are barely 2% of the total population. We are a voteless minority - numerically, we count for nothing; politically, we count for nothing; and economically, one white man, as Oppenheimer, could buy out the whole lot of us, lock, stock and barrel. So if we had feigned to appease, we might be excused. But no! We must proclaim our Master's Will; we must declare the Truth, whether we liked it or not. In the words of Jesus: "Seek ye the truth, and the truth shall set you free" (John 8:32). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter Two : Jesus in the Quran -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Christians Unaware The Christian does not know that the true spirit of charity which the Muslim displays, always, towards Jesus and his mother Mary spring from the fountainhead of his faith - the Holy Quran. He does not know that the Muslim does not take the holy name of Jesus, in his own language, without saying Eesa, alaihi assalam ("Jesus, peace be upon him") The Christian does not know that in the Holy Quran Jesus is mentioned twenty five times. For example: "We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear signs and strengthened him with the Holy Spirit" (The Holy Quran 2:87) "O Mary! God giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary..." (3:45) "...Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of god..." (4:171) "...And in their foot steps we sent Jesus the son of Mary..." (5:46) "And Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous." (6:85) Jesus - His Titles Though Jesus is mentioned by name in twenty-five places in the Holy Quran, he is also addressed with respect as: Ibn Maryam, meaning "The son of Mary"; and as the Maseeh (in Hebrew it is the Messiah), which is translated as "Christ". He is also known as Abdullah, "The servant of Allah"; and as Rasul u Allah, the messenger of Allah. He is spoken of as "The Word of God", as "The Spirit of God", as a "Sign of God", and numerous other epithets of honor spread over fifteen different chapters. The Holy Quran honors this mighty messenger of God, and the Muslims have not fallen short over the past fourteen hundred years in doing the same. There is not a single disparaging remark in the entire Quran to which even the most jaundiced among the Christians can take exception. Eesa Latinised to "Jesus" The Holy Quran refers to Jesus as Eesa, and this name is used more times than any other title, because this was his "Christian" name. Actually, his proper name was Eesa (Arabic), or Esau (Hebrew); classical Yeheshua, which the Christian nations of the West latinised as Jesus. Neither the "J" nor the second "s" in the name Jesus is to be found in the original tongue - they are not found in the Semitic languages. The word is very simply "E S A U" a very common Jewish name, used more than sixty times in the very first booklet alone of the Bible, in the part called "Genesis". There was at least one "Jesus" sitting on the "bench" at the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin. Josephus the Jewish historian mentions some twenty five Jesus' in his "Book of Antiquities". The New Testament speaks of "Bar-Jesus" a magician and a sorcerer, a false prophet (Acts 13:6); and also "Jesus-Justus" a Christian missionary, a contemporary of Paul (Colossians 4:11). These are distinct from Jesus the son of Mary. Transforming "Esau" to (J)esu(s) - Jesus - makes it unique. This unique (?) name has gone out of currency among the Jews and the Christians from the 2nd century after Christ. Among the Jews, because it came to be a name of ill - repute, the name of one who blasphemed in Jewry; and among the Christians because it came to be the proper name of their God. The Muslim will not hesitate to name his son Eesa because it is an honored name, the name of a righteous servant of the Lord. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter Three : Mother And Son -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mary Honored The birth of Jesus Christ is described in two places of the Quran - chapter 3 and chapter 19. Reading from the beginning of his birth, we come across the story of Mary, and the esteemed position which she occupies in the House of Islam, before the actual annunciation of the birth of Jesus is given: "'Behold'! the angels said: 'O Mary! God hath chosen thee and purified thee, and chosen thee above the women of all nations" (3:42) "Chosen thee above the women of all nations." Such an honor is not to be found given to Mary even in the Christian Bible! The verse continues: "O Mary! Worship thy Lord devoutly: prostrate thyself, and bow down (in prayer) with those who bow down." (3:43) Divine Revelation What is the source of this beautiful and sublime recitation which, in its original Arabic, moves men to ecstasy and tears? verse 44 below explains: "This is part of the tidings, of the things unseen, which We reveal unto thee (O Muhammad!) by inspiration: Thou wast not with them when they cast lots with arrows, as to which of them should be charged with the care of Mary: nor wast thou with them when they disputed (the point)." (3:44) Mary's Birth The story is that the maternal grandmother of Jesus, Hannah, had hitherto been barren. She poured out her heart to God: If only God will grant her a child, she would surely dedicate such a child for the service of God in the temple. God granted her prayer and Mary was born. Hannah was disappointed. She was yearning for a son, but instead she delivered a daughter; and in no way is the female like the male, for what she had in mind. What was she to do? She had made a vow to God. She waited for Mary to be big enough to fend for herself. When the time came, Hannah took her darling daughter to the temple, to hand over for temple services. Every priest wanted to be the god-father of this child. They cast lots with arrows for her - like the tossing of the coin - head or tail? eventually she fell to the lot of Zakariya, but not without a dispute. The Source of His Message This was the story. But where did Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, get this knowledge from? He was an Ummi, Arabic for "unlettered". He did not low how to read or write. He is made by God Almighty to answer this very question in the verse above, by saying that it was all by divine inspiration. "No!", says the controversialist. "This is Muhammed's own concoction. He copied his revelations from the Jews and Christians. He plagiarized it. He forged it." Knowing full-well, and believing as we do, that the whole Quran is the veritable Word of God, we will nevertheless agree, for the sake of argument, with the enemies of Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, for a moment, that he wrote it. We can now expect some cooperation from the unbelievers. Ask him: "Have you any qualms in agreeing that Muhammed was an Arab?" Only an ignorant will hesitate to agree. In that case there is no sense in pursuing any discussion. Cut short the talk. Close the book! With the man of reason, we proceed. "That this Arab, in the first instance, was addressing other Arabs. He was not talking to Indian Muslims, Chinese Muslims, or Nigerian Muslims. He was addressing his own people, the Arabs. Whether they agreed with him or not, he told them in the most sublime form, words that were seared into the hearts and minds of his listeners that Mary the mother of Jesus, a Jewess, was chosen above the women of all nations. Not his own mother, nor his wife nor his daughter, nor any other Arab woman, but a Jewess! Can one explain this? Because to everyone his own mother or wife, or daughters would come before other women. Why would the prophet of Islam honor a woman from his opposition! and a Jewess at that! belonging to a race which had been looking down upon his people for three thousand years? Just as they still look down upon their Arab brethren today." Sarah and Hagar The Jews learn, from the Bible, that their father, Abraham, had two wives Sarah and Hagar. They say that they are the children of Abraham through Sarah his legitimate wife; that their Arab brethren have descended through Hagar, a "bondwoman", and that as such, the Arabs are an inferior breed. Will anyone please explain the anomaly as to why Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, if he is the author, chose this Jewess for such high honor? The answer is simple, he had no choice he had no right to speak of his own desire. "It is no less than an inspiration sent down to him." (53:4) The Chapter of Maryam There is a Chapter in the Holy Quran, named Surat u Maryam "Chapter Mary", named in honor of Mary the mother of Jesus Christ, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him; again, such an honor is not to be found given to Mary in the Christian Bible. Out of the 66 books of the Protestants and 73 of the Roman Catholics, not one is named after Mary or her son. You will find books named after Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Peter, Paul and two score more obscure names, but not a single one is that of Mary! If Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, was the author of the Holy Quran, then he would not have failed to include in it with Mary, the mother of Jesus, his own mother Aamina, his dear wife Khadija, or his beloved daughter Fatima. But No! No! This can never be. The Quran is not his handiwork!. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter Four : The Good News -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- " 'Behold!' the angels said: 'O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him: his name will be Jesus, the son of Mary; held in honor in this world and the hereafter; and (of the company of) those nearest to Allah." (3:45) "Nearest to God," not physically nor geographically, but spiritually. Compare this with "And (Jesus) sat on the right hand of God." (Mark 16:19). The bulk of Christendom has misunderstood this verse as well as many others in the Bible. They imagine the Father (God) sitting on a throne, a glorified chair, and His Son, Jesus, sitting on His right hand side. Can you conjure up the picture? If you do, you have strayed from the true knowledge of God. He is no old Father Christmas. He is beyond the imagination of the mind of man. He exists. He is real, but He is not like anything we can think of, or imagine. In eastern languages "right hand" meant a place of honor, which the Holy Quran more fittingly describes as "In the company of those nearest to Allah." The above verse confirms that Jesus is the Christ. and that he is the Word which God bestowed upon Mary. Again, the Christian reads into these words, a meaning which they do not carry. They equate the word "Christ" with the idea of a god-incarnate; and the "Word" of God to be God. "Christ" Not a Name The word "Christ" is derived from the Hebrew word Messiah, Arabic Maseeh. Root word masaha, meaning "to rub", "to massage", "to anoint". Priests and kings were anointed when being consecrated to their offices. But in its translated Grecian form, "Christ" seems unique: befitting Jesus only. Christians like to translate names into their own language; like Cephas to "Peter" , Messiah to "Christ". How do they do that? Very easily. Messiah in Hebrew means "Anointed". The Greek word for anointed is Christos. Just lop off the 'os' from Christos, and you are left with "Christ"; a unique name! Christos means "Anointed", and anointed means appointed in its religious connotation. Jesus, peace and blessing be upon him, was appointed (anointed) at his baptism by John the Baptist, as God's Messenger. Every prophet of God is so anointed or appointed. The Holy Bible is replete with the "anointed" ones. In the original Hebrew, he was made a Messiah. Let us keep to the English translation "anointed." Not only were prophets and priests and kings anointed (Christos-ed), but horns, and cherubs and lamp-posts also. "I am the God of Bethel, where you anointed a pillar ..." (Genesis 31:13) "If the priest that is anointed do sin ..." (Leviticus 4:3) "And Moses... anointed the tabernacle and all things that was therein..." (Leviticus 8:100) "..the Lord shall...exalt the horn of his anointed" (I Samuel 2:10) "Thus saith the Lord to his anointed to Cyrus..." (Isaiah 45:1) "Thou art the anointed cherub..." (Ezekiel 28:14) There are an hundred more such references in the Holy Bible. Every time you come across the word "anointed" in your Bible, you can take it that that word would be christos in the Greek translations, and if you take the same liberty with the word that the Christians have done, you will have Christ Cherub, Christ Cyrus, Christ Priest and Christ Pillar, ...etc. Some Titles Exclusive Although, every prophet of God is an anointed one of God, a Messiah, the title Maseeh or Messiah, or its translation "Christ" is exclusively reserved for Jesus, the son of Mary, in both Islam and in Christianity. This is not unusual in religion. There are certain other honorific titles which may be applied to more than one prophet, yet being made exclusive to one by usage: like "Rasulullah", meaning "Messenger of God", which title is applied to both Moses (19:51) and Jesus (61:6) in the Holy Quran. Yet "Rasullullah" has become synonymous only with Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, among Muslims. Every prophet is indeed a "Friend of God", but its Arabic equivalent "Khalillullah" is exclusively associated with Father Abraham. This does not mean that the others are not God's friends. "Kaleemullah", meaning "One who spoke with Allah" is never used for anyone other than Moses, yet we believe that God spoke with many of His messengers, including Jesus and Muhammed, may the peace and blessings of God be upon all His servants. Associating certain titles with certain personages only, does not make them exclusive or unique in any way. We honor all in varying terms. Whilst the good news was being announced (verse 45 above) Mary was told that her unborn child will be called Jesus, that he would be the Christ, a "Word" from God, and that... "He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous." (3:46) "At length she brought the (babe) to her people carrying him. They said: 'O Mary! truly a strange thing has thou brought!'. 'O sister of Aaron!, thy father was not a man of evil, nor thy mother a woman unchaste!' " (The Holy Quran 19:27-28) Jews Amazed There is no Joseph the carpenter here. The circumstances being peculiar, Mary the mother of Jesus had retired herself to some remote place in the East (19:16). After the birth of the child she returns. A. Yusuf Ali, comments in his popular English translation of the Quran: "The amazement of the people knew no bounds. In any case they were prepared to think the worst of her, as she had disappeared from her kin for some time. But now she comes, shamelessly parading a babe in her arms! How she had disgraced house of Aaron, the fountain of priesthood! "Sister of Aaron": Mary is reminded of her high lineage and the unexceptionable morals of her father and mother. How, they said, she had fallen, and disgraced the name of her progenitors! What could Mary do? How could she explain? Would they, in their censorious mood accept her explanation? All she could do was to point to the child, who, she knew, was no ordinary child. And the child came to her rescue. By a miracle he spoke, defended his mother, and preached to an unbelieving audience." Allah azza wa jall says in the Quran: "But she pointed to the babe. They said: 'How can we talk one who is a child in the cradle?' He (Jesus) said: 'I am indeed a servant of Allah (God) : He hath given me revelation and made me a prophet: 'and He hath made me blessed wheresoever I be, and hath enjoined on me prayer and charity as long as I live. '(He hath made me) kind to my mother, and not overbearing or unblest; 'So Peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life again)'!" (19:29-33) His First Miracle(s) Thus Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, defended his mother from the grave calumny and innuendoes of her enemies. This is the very first miracle attributed to Jesus in the Holy Quran that, he spoke as an infant from his mother's arms. Contrast this with his first miracle in the Christian Bible which occurred when he was over thirty years of age: "And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, they have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, 'Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.' His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. And there were set there six water pots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. Jesus saith unto them, Fill the water pots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, And saith unto him, Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but thou hast kept the good wine until now." (John 2:110) Since this miracle, wine has flowed like water in Christendom. Many reason that what was good for the Master is good enough for them. Jesus was no "kill-joy" they say. Didn't he make good potent wine, that even those "well drunk", those whose senses had been dulled could make out the difference ? "That the best was kept for the last.". This was no pure grape juice. It was the same wine that, according to the Christian Bible, enabled the daughters of Lot to seduce their father (Genesis 19:32-33).It was the same wine which the Christian is advised to eschew in Ephesians 5:18 - "And be not drunk with wine..." It is that innocent (?) 1% potency that eventually leads millions down into the gutter. America has 10 million drunkards in the midst of 70 million "born-again" Christians! The Americans call their drunkards "Problem Drinkers". In South Africa, they are called "Alcoholics"; drunkard is too strong a word for people to stomach. But the Prime Minister of Zambia, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda, does not hesitate to call a spade a spade. He says, "I am not prepared to lead nation of drunkards", referring to his own people who drink intoxicants. Whether the water "blushed" or not "seeing" Jesus, we cannot blame him or his disciples for the drinking habits of his contemporaries. For he had truly opined, "have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now" (John 16:12). Mankind had not reached the stage of receiving the whole Truth of Islam. Did he not also say "You cannot put new wine into old bottles"? (Matthew 9:17). "Mother" or "Woman"? According to St. John, in the fourth verse above, describing the marriage feast at Cana, we are told that Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, behaved insolently towards his mother. He calls her "woman," and to rub more salt into the wound he is made to say "what have I to do with thee?" What connection is there between you and me, or what have I got to do with you? Could he have forgotten that this very "woman" had carried him for nine months, and perhaps suckled him for 2 years, and had borne endless insults and injuries on account of him? Is she not his mother? Is there no word in his language for "mother"? Strange as it may seem, that while the missionaries boast about their master's humility, meekness and long-suffering, they call him the "Prince of Peace" and they sing that "he was led to the slaughter like a lamb, and like a sheep who before his shearer is dumb, he opened not his mouth", yet they proudly record in the same breath, that he was ever ready with invectives for the elders of his race, and was always itching for a showdown i.e. if their records are true: "Ye hypocrites!" "Ye wicked and adulterous generation!" "Ye whited sephulcres!" "Ye generation of vipers!" and now to his mother: "Woman..." Jesus Defended Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, the Messenger of God, is made to absolve Jesus from the false charges and calumnies of his enemies. "And He (God Almighty) hath made me (Jesus) kind to my mother, and not overbearing or unblest" (19:31). On receiving the good news of the birth of a righteous son Mary responds: "She said: 'O My Lord! how shall I have a son, when no man hath touched me?" The angel says in reply: "He said: 'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a matter He but sayth o it 'Be,' and it is! And Allah (God) will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Torah (Law) and the Gospel," (3:47-48). -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter Five : Quranic and Biblical Versions -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Meeting the Reverend I was visiting the "Bible House" in Johannesburg. Whilst browsing through the stacks of Bibles and religious books, I picked up an Indonesian Bible and had just taken in hand a Greek - English New Testament, a large, expensive volume. I had not realized that I was being observed by the supervisor of the Bible House. Casually, he walked up to me. Perhaps my beard and my Muslim headgear were an attraction and a challenge? He inquired about my interest in that costly volume. I explained that as a student of comparative religion, I had need for such a book. He invited me to have tea with him in his office. It was very kind of him and I accepted. Over the cup of tea, I explained to him the Muslim belief in Jesus, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. I explained to him the high position that Jesus occupied in the House of Islam. He seemed skeptical about what I said. I was amazed at his seeming ignorance, because only retired Reverend gentlemen can become Supervisors of Bible Houses in South Africa. I began reciting from verse 42 of chapters 3 of the Holy Quran: "'Behold!' The angels said: 'O Mary, Allah hath chosen thee...'" I wanted the Reverend to listen, not only to the meaning of the Quran, but also to the music of its cadences when the original Arabic was recited. Rev. Dunkers (for that was his name) sat back and listened with rapt attention to "Allah's Words". When I reached the end of verse 49, the Reverend commented that the Quranic message was like that of his own Bible. He said, he saw no difference between what he behaved as a Christian, and what I had read to him. I said: "that was true". If he had come across these verses in the English language alone without their Arabic equivalent, side by side, he would not have been able to guess in a hundred years that he was reading the Holy Quran. If he were a Protestant, he would have thought that he was reading the Roman Catholic Version, if he had not seen one, or the Jehovah's Witness Version or the Greek Orthodox Version, or the hundred and one other versions that he might not have seen; but he would never have guessed that he was reading the Quranic version. The Christian would be reading here, in the Quran, everything he wanted to hear about Jesus, but in a most noble, elevated and sublime language. He could not help being moved by it. In these eight terse verses from 42 to 49 we are told: (a) That Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a virtuous woman, and honored above the women of all nations. (b) That all that was being said was God's own Revelation to mankind. (c) That Jesus was the "Word" of God. (d) That he was the Christ that the Jews were waiting for. (e) That God will empower this Jesus to perform miracles even in infancy. (f) That Jesus was born miraculously, without any male intervention. (g) That God will vouchsafe him Revelation. (h) That he will give life to the dead by God's permission, and that he will heal those born blind and the lepers by God's permission, ... etc. "Chalk and Cheese" The most fervent Christian cannot take exception to a single statement or word here. But the difference between the Biblical and the Quranic narratives is that between "chalk and cheese". "To me they are identical, what is the difference?" the Reverend asked. I know that in their essentials both the stories agree in their details, but when we scrutinize them closely we will discover that the difference between them is staggering. Now compare the miraculous conception as announced in verse 47 of the Holy Quran with what the Holy Bible says: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was in this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, (as husband and wife) she was found with child of the holy ghost."(Matthew 1:18) Master Dramatizer The eminent Billy Graham from the United States of America dramatized this verse in front of 40,000 people in King Park, Durban, with his index finger sticking out and swinging his outstretched arm from right to left, he said: "And the Holy Ghost came and impregnated Mary!" On the other hand St. Luke tells us the very same thing but less crudely. He says, that when the annunciation was made, Mary was perturbed. Her natural reaction was : "How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?" (Luke 1:34) meaning sexually. The Quranic narrative is: "She said: O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" (3:47) meaning sexually. In essence there is no difference between these two statements "seeing I know not a man" and "when no man hath touched me". Both the quotations have an identical meaning. It is simply a choice of different words meaning the same thing. But the respective replies to Mary's plea in the two Books (the Quran and the Bible) are revealing. The Biblical Version Says the Bible: "And the angle answered and said into her : 'The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee" (Luke 1:35) Can't you see that you are giving the atheist, the skeptic, the agnostic a stick to beat you with? They may well ask "How did the Holy Ghost come upon Mary?" "How did the Highest overshadow her?" We know that literally it does not mean that: that it was an immaculate conception, but the language used here, is distasteful. Now contrast this with the language of the Quran: The Quranic Version "He said (the angel says in reply): 'Even so: Allah (God) createth what He willeth: when He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!' " (3:47) This is the Muslim concept of the birth of Jesus. For God to create a Jesus, without a human father, He merely has to will it. If He wants to create a million Jesus' without fathers or mothers, He merely wills them into existence. He does not have to take seeds and transfer them, like men or animals by contact or artificial insemination . He wills everything into being by His word of command "Be" and "It is". There is nothing new in what I am telling you, I reminded the Reverend. It is in the very first Book of your Holy Bible, Genesis 1:3 "And God said..." What did He say? He said "Be" and "It was". He did not have to articulate the words. This is our way of understanding the word "Be", that He willed everything into being. Choice for His Daughter "Between these two versions of the birth of Jesus, the Quranic version and the Biblical version, which would you prefer to give your daughter ?" I asked the supervisor of the Bible House. He bowed his head down in humility and admitted "The Quranic Version." How can "a forgery" or "an imitation", as it is alleged of the Quran, be better than the genuine, the original, as it is claimed for the Bible? It can never be, unless this Revelation to Muhammed is what it, itself, claims to be viz. The pure and holy Word of God! There are a hundred different tests that the unprejudiced seeker after truth can apply to the Holy Quran and it will qualify with flying colors to being a Message from on High. Like Adam Does the miraculous birth of Jesus make him a God or a "begotten" son of God? No! says the Holy Quran: "The similitude of Jesus before Allah (God) is that of Adam; He created him from dust then said to him: 'Be', and he was." (3:59) Yusuf Ali, comments in his notes in the Quran translation: "After a description of the high position which Jesus occupies as a prophet in the preceding verses we have a repudiation of the dogma that he was God, or the son of God, or any thing more than man. If it is said that he was born without a human father, Adam was also so born. Indeed Adam was born without either a human father or mother. As far as our physical bodies are concerned they are mere dust. In God's sight Jesus was as dust just as Adam was or humanity is. The greatness of Jesus arose from the divine command 'Be': for after that he was more than dust a great spiritual leader and teacher" The logic of it is that, if being born without a male parent entitles Jesus to being equated with God, then, Adam would have a greater right to such honor, and this no Christian would readily concede. Thus, the Muslim is made to repudiate the Christian blasphemy. Further, if the Christian splits hairs by arguing that Adam was "created" from the dust of the ground, whereas Jesus was immaculately "begotten" in the womb of Mary, then let us remind him that, even according to his own false standards, there is yet another person greater than Jesus, in his own Bible . Who is this superman? Paul's Innovation "For this Melchisedec, king of Salem, priest of the most high God... Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life..." (Hebrews 7:1,3) Here is a candidate for Divinity itself, for only God Almighty could possess these qualities. Adam had a beginning (in the garden), Jesus had a beginning (in the stable); Adam had an end and, claim the Christians, so had Jesus "and he gave up the ghost". But where is Melchisedec? Perhaps he is hibernating somewhere like Rip Van Winkel (a fairy tale character who slept for many ages.) And what is this "Hebrews"? It is the name of one of the Books of the Holy Bible, authored by the gallant St. Paul, the self appointed thirteenth apostle of Christ. Jesus had twelve apostles, but one of them (Judas) had the Devil in him. So the vacancy had to be filled, because of the "twelve" thrones in heaven which had to be occupied by his disciples to judge the children of Israel (Luke 22:30). Saul was a renegade Jew, and the Christians changed his name to "Paul", probably because "Saul" sounds Jewish. This St. Paul made such a fine mess of the teachings of Jesus, peace blessings be upon him, that he earned for himself the second most coveted position of "The Most Influential Men of History" in the monumental work of Michael H. Hart: The 100 or The Top Hundred or the Greatest Hundred in History. Paul outclasses even Jesus because, according to Michael Hart, Paul was the real founder of present day Christianity. The honor of creating Christianity had to be shared between Paul and Jesus, and Paul won because he wrote more Books of the Bible than any other single author, whereas Jesus did not write a single word. Paul needed no inspiration to write his hyperboles here and in the rest of his Epistles. Did not Hitler's Minister of Propaganda Goebbels say: "The bigger the lie the more likely it is to be believed'? But the amazing thing about this exaggeration is that no Christian seems to have read it. Every learned man to whom I have shown this verse to, seemed to be seeing it for the first time. They appear dumbfounded, as described by the fitting words of Jesus: "...seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand." (Matthew 13:13) The Holy Quran also contains a verse which fittingly describes this well cultivated sickness: "Deaf, dumb and blind, will they not return (to the path)." (2:18) The Sons of God The Muslim takes strong exception to the Christian dogma that "Jesus is the only begotten son, begotten not made". This is what the Christian is made to repeat from childhood in his catechism. I have asked learned Christians, again and again as to what they are really trying to emphasize, when they say: "Begotten not made". They know that according to their own God given (?) records, God has sons by the tons: "...Adam, which was the son of God."(Luke 3:38) "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair... And when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them..." (Genesis 6: 2,4) "...Israel is My son, even My firstborn:" (Exodus 4:22) "...for I (God) am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn." (Jeremiah 31:9) "...the Lord hath said unto me (David): 'Thou art My son: this day have I begotten thee." (Psalms 2:7) "For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God." (Romans 18:14) Can't you see that in the language of the Jew, every righteous person, every Tom, Dick and Harry who followed the Will and Plan of God, was a "Son of God". It was a metaphorical descriptive term commonly used among the Jews. The Christian agrees with this reasoning, but goes on to say: "but Jesus was not like that". Adam was made by God. Every living thing was made by God, He is the Lord, Cherisher and Sustainer of all. Metaphorically speaking therefore God is the Father of all. But Jesus was the "begotten" son of God, not a created son of God ? Begotten Means "Sired"! In my forty years of practical experience in talking to learned Christians, not a single one has opened his mouth to hazard an explanation of the phrase "begotten not made". It had to be an American who dared to explain. He said : "It means, sired by God." "What!?" I exploded : "Sired by God?" "No, no!" he said, "I am only trying to explain the meaning, I do not believe that God really sired a son." The sensible Christian says that the words do not literally mean what they say. Then why do you say it? Why are you creating unnecessary conflict between the 1,200,000,000 Christians and a thousand million Muslims of the world in making senseless statements? Reason for Objection The Muslim takes exception to the word "begotten", because begetting is an animal act, belonging to the lower animal functions of sex. How can we attribute such a lowly capacity to God? Metaphorically we are all the children of God, the good and the bad, and Jesus would be closer to being the son of God than any one of us, because he would be more faithful to God then any one of us can ever be. From that point of view he is preeminently the son of God. Although this pernicious word "begotten" has now unceremoniously been thrown out of the "Most Accurate" version of the Bible, the Revised Standard Version (R.S.V.), its ghost still lingers on in the Christian mind, both black and white. Through its insidious brainwashing the white man is made to feel superior to his black Christian brother of the same Church and Denomination. And in turn, the black man is given a permanent inferiority complex through this dogma. Brain-washed Inferiority The human mind can't help reasoning that since the "begotten son" of an African will look like an African, and that of a Chinaman as a Chinese, and that of an Indian like an Indian: so the begotten son of God aught naturally to look like God. Billions of beautiful pictures and replicas of this "only begotten son of God" are put in peoples hands. He looks like a European with blonde hair, blue eyes and handsome features like e one I saw in the "King of Kings" or "The Day of Triumph" or "Jesus of Nazareth". Remember Jeffrey Hunter? The "Savior" of the Christian is more like a German than a Jew with his polly nose. So naturally, if the son is a white man, the father would also be a white man (God?). Hence the darker skinned races of the earth subconsciously have the feeling of inferiory ingrained in their souls as God's "step children". No amount of face creams, skin lighteners and hair straighteners will erase the inferiority. God is neither black nor white. He is beyond the imagination of the mind of man. Break the mental shackles of a Caucasian (white) man-god, and you have broken the shackles of a permanent inferiority. But intellectual bondages are harder to shatter: the slave himself fights to retain them. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter Six : Answer to Christian Dilemmas -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Christ in Islam" is really Christ in the Quran: and the Holy Quran has something definite to say about every aberration of Christianity. The Quran absolves Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, from all the false charges of his enemies as well as the misplaced infatuation of his followers. His enemies allege that he blasphemed against God by claiming Divinity. His misguided followers claim that he did avow Divinity, but that was not blasphemy because he was God. What does the Quran say ? Addressing both the Jews and the Christians, Allah says: "O People of the Book! commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah (God) aught but the truth. Christ Jesus son of Mary was (no more than) a messenger of Allah (God), and His Word, which he bestowed on Mary, and a Spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah (God) and His messengers..." (4:171) Going to Extremes "O People of the Book" is a very respectful title with which the Jews and the Christians are addressed in the Holy Quran. In other words, Allah is saying "O Learned People!", "O People with a Scripture!" According to their own boast, the Jews and the Christians prided themselves over the Arabs, who had no Scripture before the Quran. As a learned people, Allah pulls up both the contending religionists for going to either extremes as regards the personality of Christ. The Jews made certain insinuations about the legitimacy of Jesus and charged him of blasphemy by twisting his words. The Christians read other meanings into his words; wrench words out of their context to make him God. The modern day Christian, the hot - gospeller, the Bible thumper, uses harsher words and cruder approaches to win over a convert to his blasphemies. He says: (a) "Either Jesus is God or a liar" (b) "Either Jesus is God or a lunatic" (c) "Either Jesus is God or an impostor" These are his words, words culled from Christian literature. Since no man of charity, Muslim or otherwise, can condemn Christ so harshly as the Christian challenges him to do, perforce he must keep non-committal. He thinks he must make a choice between one or the other of these silly extremes. It does not occur to him that there is an alternative to this Christian conundrum. Sensible Alternative Is it not possible that Jesus is simply what he claimed to be, a prophet, like so many other prophets that passed away before him? Even that he is one of the greatest of them, a mighty miracle worker, a great spiritual teacher and guide - the Messiah!. Why only God or Lunatic? Is "lunacy" the opposite of "Divinity" in Christianity? What is the antonym of God? Will some clever Christian answer? The Quran lays bare the true position of Christ in a single verse, followed by a note by Yusuf Ali's: "That he was the son of a woman, Mary, and therefore a man;" "But a messenger, a man with a mission from Allah (God), and therefore entitled to honor." "A Word bestowed on Mary, for he was created by Allah's word 'Be', and he was;"(3:59). A spirit proceeding from Allah (God), but not Allah: his life and mission were more limited than in the case of some other messengers, though we must pay equal honor to him as a prophet of Allah. The doctrines of Trinity, equality with God, and sons, are repudiated as blasphemies. Allah (God) is independent of all needs and has no need of a son to manage His affairs. The Gospel of John (whoever wrote it) has put a great deal of Alexandrian Gnostic mysticism round the doctrine of the Word (Greek, Logos), but it is simply explained here." Jesus Questioned Reproduced below are verses 119 to 121 from the Chapter of Maeda (chapter 5 of the Quran) depicting the scene of Judgment Day, when Allah will question Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, regarding the misdirected zeal of his supposed followers in worshipping him and his mother: and his response, "And behold! Allah will say: 'O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, take me and my mother for two gods beside Allah?' He will say: 'Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, Thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden. 'Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit, 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'; and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou didst take me up Thou wast the Watcher over them, and Thou art a witness to all things. 'If Thou dost punish them, they are Thy servant: If Thou dost forgive them, Thou art the Exalted in power, the Wise.'" (5:116-118) Claimed No Divinity If this is the statement of truth from the All-Knowing, that "Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit, 'Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'", then how do the Christians justify worshipping Jesus? There is not a single unequivocal statement throughout the Bible, in all its 66 volumes of the Protestant versions, or in the 73 volumes of the Roman Catholic versions, where Jesus claims to be God or where he says "worship me". Nowhere does he say that he and God Almighty "are one" and "the same person." The last phrase above "one and the same person" tickles many a "hot-gospeller" and "Bible-thumper," not excluding the Doctor of Divinity and the Professor of Theology. Even the new converts to Christianity have memorized these verses. They are programmed to rattle off verses out of context, upon which they can hang their faith. The words "are one" activates the mind by association of memories. "Yes", say the Trinitarians, the worshippers of three gods in one God, and one God in three gods, "Jesus did claim to be God!" Where? Reverend at the Table I had taken Rev. Morris D.D. and his wife, to lunch at the "Golden Peacock." While at the table, during the course of our mutual sharing of knowledge, the opportunity arose to ask, "Where?" And without a murmur he quoted, "I and my father are one" to imply that God and Jesus were one and the same person. That Jesus here claims to be God. The verse quoted was well known to me, but it was being quoted out of context. It did not carry the meaning that the Doctor was imagining, so I asked him, "What is the context?" Choked on "Context" The Reverend stopped eating and began staring at me. I said, "Why? Don't you know the context?", "You see, what you have quoted is the text, I want to know the context, the text that goes with it, before or after." Here was an Englishman (Canadian), a paid servant of the Presbyterian Church, a Doctor of Divinity, and it appeared that I was trying to teach him English. Of course he knew what "context" meant. But like the rest of his compatriots, he had not studied the sense in which Jesus had uttered the words. In my forty years of experience, this text had been thrown at me hundreds of times, but not a single learned Christian had ever attempted to hazard a guess as to its real meaning. They always start fumbling for their Bibles. The Doctor did not have one with him. When they do start going for their Bibles, I stop them in their stride: "Surely, you know what you are quoting?", "Surely, you know your Bible?" After reading this, I hope some "born-again" Christians will rectify this deficiency. But I doubt that my Muslim readers will ever come across one in their lifetime who could give them the context. What is the Context? It is unfair on the part of the Reverend, having failed to provide the context, then to ask me, "Do you know the context?" "Of course," I said. "Then, what is it?" asked my learned friend. I said, "That which you have quoted is the text of John chapter 10, verse 30. To get at the context, we have to begin from verse 23 which reads: 23. "and Jesus was in the temple area walking in Solomon's Colonnade." (John 10:23). John, or whoever he was, who wrote this story, does not tell us the reason for Jesus tempting the Devil by walking alone in the lion's den. For we do not expect the Jews to miss a golden opportunity to get even with Jesus. Perhaps, he was emboldened by the manner in which he had literally whipped the Jews single-handed in the Temple, and upset the tables of the money changers at the beginning of his ministry (John 2:15). 24. "The Jews gathered around him, saying, "How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly." (John 10:24). They surrounded him. Brandishing their fingers in his face, they began accusing him and provoking him; saying that he had not put forth his claim plainly enough, clearly enough. That he was talking ambiguously. They were trying to work themselves into a frenzy to assault him. In fact, their real complaint was that they did not like his method of preaching, his invectives, the manner in which he condemned them for their formalism, their ceremonialism, their going for the letter of the law and forgetting the spirit. But Jesus could not afford to provoke them any further there were too many and they were itching for a fight. Discretion is the better part of valor. In a conciliatory spirit, befitting the occasion: 25. "Jesus answered, I did tell you, but you do not believe. The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me," 26. "but you do not believe because you are not my sheep." (John 10:25-26). Jesus rebuts the false charge of his enemies that he was ambiguous in his claims to being the Messiah that they were waiting for. He says that he did tell them clearly enough, yet they would not listen to him, but: 27. "My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me." 28. "I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand." 29. "My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.." (John 10:29). How can anyone be so blind as not to see the exactness of the ending of the last two verses. But spiritual blinkers are more impervious than physical defects. He is telling the Jews and recording for posterity, the real unity or relationship between the Father and the son. The most crucial verse: 30. "I and the Father are one." (John 10:30). One in what? In their Omniscience? In their Nature? In their Omnipotence? No! One in purpose! That once a believer has accepted faith, the Messenger sees to it that he remains in faith, and God Almighty also sees to it that he remains in faith. This is the purpose of the "Father" and the "son" and the "Holy Ghost" and of every man and every woman of faith. Let the same John explain his Gnostic mystic verbiage. "That they all may be one as thou. Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us..." "I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one..."(John 17:20-22) If Jesus is "one" with God, and if that "oneness" makes him God, then the traitor Judas, and the doubting Thomas, and the satanic Peter, plus the other nine who deserted him when he was most in need are God(s), because the same "oneness" which he claimed with God in John 10:30, now he claims for all "who forsook him and fled" (Mark 14:50). All "ye of little faith" (Matthew 8:26). All "O faithless and perverse generation" (Luke 9:41). Where and when will the Christian blasphemy end? The expression "I and my Father are one," was very innocent, meaning nothing more than a common purpose with God. But the Jews were looking for trouble and any excuse will not do, therefore, 31. "Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him," 32. "but Jesus said to them, I have shown you many great miracles from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?" 33. "The Jews answered him, saying : 'For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself a God.'" (John 10:31-33). In verse 24 above the Jews falsely alleged that Jesus was talking ambiguously. When that charge was ably refuted, they then accused him of blasphemy which is like treason in the spiritual realm. So they say that Jesus is claiming to be God "I and the Father are one". The Christians agree with the Jews in this that Jesus did make such a claim; but differ in that it was not blasphemy because the Christians say that he was God and was entitled to own up to his Divinity. The Christians and the Jews are both agreed that the utterance is serious. To one as an excuse for good "redemption", and to the other as an excuse for good "riddance". Between the two, let the poor Jesus die. But Jesus refuses to co-operate in this game, so: 34. "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your Law, `I have said you are gods'?" 35. "If he called them `gods,' to whom the word of God came --and the Scripture cannot be broken--," 36. "what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, `I am God's Son'?" (John 10:34-36). Why "Your Law"? He is a bit sarcastic in verse 34, but in any event, why does he say: "Your Law"? Is it not also his Law? Didn't he say: "Think not that I am come to destroy the Law of the prophets: I am come not to destroy, but to fulfill (the Law). For verily I say unto you, till heaven and earth pass away, one Jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:1718). "You are Gods" "You are gods:" He is obviously quoting from the 82nd Psalm , verse 6, "I have said, ye are gods: and all of you are the children of the most High." Jesus, continues: "If he (i.e. God Almighty) called them gods, unto whom the word of God came (meaning that the prophets of God were called 'gods') and the scripture cannot be broken..." (John 10:35), in other words he is saying: "you can't contradict me!" Jesus knows his Scripture; he speaks with authority; and he reasons with his enemies that: "If good men, holy men, prophets of God are being addressed as 'gods' in our Books of Authority, with which you find no fault, then why do you take exception to me? When the only claim I make for myself is far inferior in our language, viz. 'A son of God' as against others being called 'gods' by God Himself. Even if I (Jesus) described myself as 'god' in our language, according to Hebrew usage, you could find no fault with me." This is the plain reading of Christian Scripture. I am giving no interpretations of my own or some esoteric meaning to words! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter Seven : "In The Beginning" -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Where does Jesus say: 'I am God,' or 'I am equal to God,' or 'Worship me'?" I asked the Rev. Morris again. He took a deep breath and took another try. He quoted the most oft-repeated verse of the Christian Bible - John 1:1. "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Please note, these are not the words of Jesus. They are the words of John (or whoever wrote them). Acknowledged by every erudite Christian scholar of the Bible as being the words of another Jew, Philo of Alexandria, who had written them even before John and Jesus were born. And Philo claimed no divine inspiration for them. No matter what mystical meaning that Philo had woven around these words (which our John has plagiarized), we will accept them for what they are worth. Greek not Hebrew Since the manuscripts of the 27 Books of the New Testament are in Greek, a Christian sect has produced its own version and has even changed the name of this selection of 27 Books to Christian Greek Scriptures ! I asked the Reverend whether he knew Greek? "Yes," he said, He had studied Greek for 5 years before qualification. I asked him what was the Greek word for "God" the first time it occurs in the quotation "and the Word was With God"? He kept staring, but didn't answer. So I said, the word was Hotheos, which literally means "The God". Since the European (including the North American) has evolved a system of using capital letters to start a proper noun and small letters for common nouns, we would accept his giving a capital "G" for God; in other words Hotheos is rendered "the god" which in turn is rendered "God". "Now tell me, what is the Greek word for "God" in the second occurrence in your quotation - "and the Word was God"? The Reverend still kept silent. Not that he did not know Greek, or that he had lied, but he knew more than that; the game was up. I said : "the word was Tontheos, which means "a god". According to your own system of translating you aught to have spelt this word 'God' a second time with a small 'g' i.e. 'god', and not 'God' with a capital 'G'; in other words Tontheos is rendered "a god". Both of these, "god" or "a god" are correct. I told the Reverend: "But in 2 Corinthians 4:4 you have dishonestly reversed your system by using a small 'g' when spelling 'God' "(and the devil is) the god of this world." The Greek word for "the god" is Hotheos the same as in John 1:1. "Why have you not been consistent in your translations ?" "If Paul was inspired to write hotheos the God for the Devil, why don't you use that capital 'G'?" And in the Old Testament, the Lord said unto Moses: "See, I have made thee a god to Pharoah" (Exodus 7:1). "Why do you use a small 'g' for 'God' when referring to Moses instead of a capital 'G' as you do for a mere word 'Word' - "and the Word was God."? "Why do you do this? Why do you play fast and loose with the Word of God?" I asked the reverend. He said, "I didn't do it." I said, "I know, but I am talking about the vested interests of Christianity, who are hell-bent to deify Christ, by using capital letters here and small letters there, to deceive the unwary masses who think that every letter, every comma and full stop and the capital and small letters were dictated by God (Capital 'G' here!)." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chapter Eight : What is Left -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Three Topics It can hardly be expected in a small publication of this nature that one can deal with all the references about Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, interspersed throughout the fifteen different chapters of the Holy Quran. What we can do is to give a quick glance to the index page reproduced from the Quran earlier in this letter. Here we find three significant topics, not dealt with yet in our discussion: Not crucified, (4:157). Message and miracles,(5:113, 19:30-33). Prophesied Ahmed, (61:6). Regarding the first topic, "not crucified", I had written a booklet under the heading "Was Christ Crucified?" some twenty years ago. The book is presently out of print, and further, it needs updating, for much water has passed under the bridge since it first saw the light of day. As regards the third topic mentioned above, "Prophesied Ahmed", I propose to write a booklet under the title "Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, the Natural Successor to Christ" after I have completed "Was Christ Crucified?", I hope to complete both these projects soon, Insha Allah! (Arabic: "By the will of Allah"). The Way to Salvation We are now left with Topic No. 2, "Message and miracles". The message of Jesus was as simple and straight forward as that of all his predecessors as well as that of his successor Muhammed, salla Allah u alihi wa sallam, namely "Believe in God and keep His Commandments". For the God who inspired His Messengers, is an unvarying God and He is consistent: He is not the "author of confusion" (1 Corinthian14:33). A law abiding Jew comes to Jesus seeking eternal life or salvation. In the words of Matthew: "And behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." (Matthew 19:16-17) You will agree, that if you or I were that Jew, we would infer from these words that, according to Jesus, peace and blessings be upon him, salvation was guaranteed, provided we kept the commandments without the shedding of any innocent blood. Unless, of course Jesus was speaking with tongue in cheek; knowing full well that his own "forthcoming redemptive sacrifice", his "vicarious atonement" (?) for the sins of mankind, was not many days hence. Why would Jesus give him the impossible solution of keeping the Law (as the Christian alleges) when an easier way was in the offing? Or did he not know what was going to happen, that he was to be crucified ? Was there not a contract between Father and Son, before the worlds began, for his redeeming blood to be shed? Had he lost his memory? No! There was no such fairy tale agreement as far as Jesus was concerned. He knew that there is only one way to God, and that is, as Jesus said, "keep the Commandments"! Miracles, What They Prove Regarding his miracles: the Holy Quran does not go into any detail about blind Bartimus or about Lazarus or any other miracle, except that he (Jesus) defended his mother as an infant in his mother's arms. The Muslim has no hesitation about accepting the most wondrous of his miracles - even that of reviving the dead. But that does not make Jesus a "God" or the begotten "Son of God" as understood by the Christian. Miracles do not prove even prophethood, or whether a man is true or false. Jesus himself said: "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."(Matthew 24:24) If false prophets and false Christs can perform miraculous feats, then these wonders or miracles do not prove even the geniuses or otherwise, of a prophet. John the Baptist, according to Jesus, was the greatest of the Israelite prophets. Greater than Moses, David, Solomon, Isaiah and all, not excluding himself: in his own words: "Verily I say unto you, among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist..." (Matthew 11:11) Not excluding Jesus: because, was he not born of a woman - Mary? The Baptist, greater than "all", yet he performed not a single miracle! Miracles are no standards of judging truth and falsehood. But in his childishness, the might Christian insists that Jesus is God because he gave life back to the dead. Will reviving the dead make others God too? This perplexes him, because he has mentally blocked himself from the miracles of others who outshine Jesus in his own Bible. For example, according to his false standard: Moses is greater than Jesus because he put life back into a dead stick and transmuted it from the plant kingdom to the animal kingdom by making it into a serpent (Exodus 7:10). Elisha is greater than Jesus because the bones of Elisha brought a man back to life merely by coming into contact with the corpse (2 Kings 13:21). Need I illustrate to you a catalogue of miracles? But the sickness persists - "it was God working miracles through His prophets but Jesus performed them of his own power." Where did Jesus get all his power from? Ask Jesus, and he will tell us: Power not His Own "...All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." (Matthew 28:18) "...I cast out devils by the Spirit of God then the kingdom of God is come unto you." (Matthew 12:28) "I can of mine own self do nothing " (John 5:30) "I with the finger of God cast out devils" (Luke 1 1:20) Borrowed Power The "power" as he says is not his, "it is given unto me". Given by whom? By God, of course! Every action, every word he attributes to God. Lazarus But since so much is made of Jesus' mightiest miracle of reviving Lazarus from the dead, we will analyze the episode as recorded in John's Gospel. It is astonishing that none of the other Gospel writers mention Lazarus in any context. However, the story is that Lazarus was very sick, his sisters Mary and Martha had made frantic calls for Jesus to come and cure his sickness but he arrived too late, actually four days after his demise. He Groaned Mary wails to Jesus that had he arrived in time, perhaps her brother would not have died; meaning that if he could heal other peoples' sicknesses, why would he not have healed her brother, a dear friend of his. Jesus says that "even now if ye have faith, ye shall see the glory of god." The condition was that they should have faith. Didn't he say that faith could move mountains? He asks to be taken to the tomb. On the way, "he groaned in the spirit". He was not mumbling; he was pouring out his heart and praying to God. But while he sobbed so bitterly his words were not audible enough for people around him to understand. Hence the words "he groaned". On reaching the grave, Jesus "groaned" again; perhaps, even more earnestly and God heard his groaning (his prayer), and Jesus received the assurance that God will fulfill his request. Now, Jesus could rest assured and command that the stone which was barring the tomb, be removed so that Lazarus could come back from the dead. Without that assurance from God, Jesus would have made a fool of himself. Avoiding Misunderstanding Mary thinks of the stink because her brother had been dead for four days! But Jesus was confident and the stone was removed. Then he looked up towards heaven and said: "Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me." (John 11:41-42) What is all this, play - acting? Why all the drama? Because he know that these superstitious and credulous people will misunderstand the source of the miracle. They might take him for "God". Giving life to the dead is the prerogative of God alone. To make doubly sure, that his people do not misunderstand, he speaks out loudly that the "groaning" was actually his crying to God Almighty for help. The prayer was incoherent as far as the bystanders could discern, but the Father in heaven had accepted his prayer, viz. "thou hast heard me". Furthermore, he says, "thou hearest me always"; in other words, every miracle wrought by him was an answer by God Almighty to his prayer. The Jews of his day understood the position well, and they "glorified God", as Matthew tells us of another occasion when the Jews exclaimed "for giving such power unto men" (Matt. 9:8). In fact, Jesus gives his reason for speaking loudly. He says, "that they may believe that thou has sent me." One who is sent is a messenger, and if he be sent by God, then he is a Messenger of God i.e. Rasulullah. Jesus is referred to in the Quran asRasulullah ("Messenger of Allah"). Alas, this attempt by Jesus to prevent any misunderstanding, as to who really performed the miracle, and that he was in fact only a messenger of God, failed. Christians will not even accept the unambiguous disavowal of Jesus, nor the testimony of Peter, the "Rock" upon which Jesus was supposed to build his Church. Peter truly testified: "Ye men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, A man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know. " (Acts 2:22) Case Not Hopeless This very same message is repeated by God Almighty in the Holy Quran, following the annunciation. In verse 49 of chapter 3, Allah makes it clear that every sign or wonder that Jesus performed was "By Allah's leave," by God's permission. Jesus says so, Peter says so and God says so; but the stubborn controversialist will not listen: prejudice, superstition and credulity die hard. Our duty is simply to deliver the Message, loud and clear, the rest we leave to God. The case is not altogether hopeless for Allah tells us in His Holy Book: "And among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors." (3:110) "Among them", meaning among the Jews and the Christians, there are two types of people; the one group described as people of faith to whom this book is addressed, and the other as rebellious transgressors. We must also find ways and means of getting at them. Our literature is eminently suited to cater for all. Pass them on to your non - Muslim friends after reading. Open the Holy Quran and make your Christian friends and acquaintances to read the verses discussed in this book. Then we can truly conclude: "Such (was) Jesus the son of Mary: (it is) a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute. "It is not befitting to (the majesty of) Allah (God) that He should beget a son. Glory be to Him! when He determines a matter, He only says to it, 'Be', and it is. "Verily Allah is my Lord and your Lord: Him therefore serve ye: this is a Way that is straight." (19:34-36)
Runta	Monday, September 25, 2000 - 12:44 pm What I mean by "abuse" is the CRITICIZING of the Bible. You put the word "corruption" in my mouth because you believe that. People (Muslims and atheists in particular) try to criticize the Bible. They write internet articles, books, have meetings, just to criticize the Bible... but it doesn't work. People are much more interested in the Bible despite all of the critical attitudes and publishings of unbelievers. They are abusive in their words against the Bible but the Bible still stands. #2 There are two types of presence of God... omnipresence (He's everywhere in a general sense) and manifest presence... He is in one place in particular. God blew life into Adam and placed a spirit within him, but God's own Spirit, His own identity was within Jesus. You can't disprove otherwise. Jesus did say "I and My Father are One" and "He who has seen Me has seen the Father." All you have to disprove it is the Qu'ran... which has little credibility anyway. All you have to "disprove" is "because the Qu'ran said so". You are putting a lot into a book that has clearly plagiarized Jewish mythology. Please see "The Qu'ran has THAT in it." discussion. 1st posting. #3 I didn't get any answer on the Qu'ran. Did you read the site or at least skim it? I at least skim your huge postings every once in a while. Are you afraid of reading criticism of the Qu'ran? Christians hear you guys criticizing us with every breath with a vengeance and most folks still stay Christian and keep on believeing in the Bible. It's like gnats flying around a giant. It's just annoying more than anything. Notice that it's not the Muslim calendar the world goes by, but Jesus is the one who split time. Maybe the Qu'ran isn't true maybe. Hm? The Qu'ran was not protected... what about Uthman who burned all other copies of the Qu'ran when people in the surrounding provinces protested because they thaught that his compilation was not complete. Plus Muslims can't stand criticism of the Qu'ran. Non-Muslims have a hard time gaining access to old Qu'ranic texts... Why? They don't want anyone who don't totally believe it to be analyzing the Qu'ran. While biblical texts are very open to scrutiny. You CANNOT say that the Qu'ran has been scrutinized NEAR the amount the Bible has... no book has. It's because the devil knows that the Bible is the truth and he doesn't care about discrediting the Qu'ran, or the Vedas, or Buddhist manuscripts... only the Bible. The Muslim scholars are only open to little very supervised study of the old Qu'ranic scripts. What are they hiding? What do you have to say about the plagiarism of the Qu'ran? About why Muhammed would not have had sacrifices? Why didn't you answer? Again why do you answer my questions with attacks on the Bible instead of just answering the question straight? I don't answer by attacking Islam... I give an answer. If you don't think my answer is clear... I clarify my answer. Please be direct and give up the "Bible attacks" until you can answer my question. Then you can start that up again when the conversation is started on the Bible instead of the Qu'ran.
asad	Monday, September 25, 2000 - 12:53 pm "So there you have it... if you do look at the sight. Tell me what you think, asad." "Methodological Fallacy Of The Theory Of Religious Borrowing-----The 'Charge' & Its Implications. And they say: 'Tales of the ancients which he has caused to be written...' 'And they say: 'Tales of the ancients which he has caused to be written' This charge of borrowing ancient materials and composing it as the Qur'ân is, contrary to popular view among the Christians, not new. It is as old as its time of revelation. In fact the above quotation is from the Qur'ân itself! (Surah 25, verse 5). Since the Qur'ân, in the time of its revelation, talks about the people before them, as well as which was known to them from before, it was one of the excuses of unbelievers rejection of the Qur'ân. Missionary Christians are now faithfully echoing this tradition of the excuse-makers. So What Is The Implication Of This Charge? It is that the Qur'ân is not a divine revelation since most of it is found narrated in ancient texts and traditions, some of which are known to be myths, legends and fables, while other parts just plagiarized from the Judeo-Christian scriptures. Therefore, by implication again form this is that Muhammad(P) is an imposter who is seen to be fabricating, plagiarizing and claiming to have received divine inspiration and thus deceived the people, i.e., Muhammad(P) is an imposter and the Qur'ân is a deception. The Theory Of Religious Borrowing The main theme of the theory of borrowing is as follows: If a later text shows similarities to an older (i.e.earler) text(s) or tradition(s) or is similar to what is known (or thought to be known) before, then the later text has borrowed/plagiarized/copied/utilized the 'previously known'. Ever since Abraham Geiger's Was hat Mohammed aus dem Judenthume aufgenommen? in 1833 which gave an over- exaggerated view of the Jewish 'contribution' in the Qur'ân, - the Jews, Christian and the Orientalists have gone at pains to show parallels in the Qur'ân from pre-Qur'ânic sources, thus to their satisfaction demonstrating Prophet Muhammad(P)'s spiritual debt to the Judeo-Christian heritage. The use of these 'scholarly' materials has become a missionary heritage in our present time. Some of which is seen at: Material for the Evaluation of the Sources of the Qur'ân (Show a similarity and call it a borrowed material) The Sources Of Islam (Basically a neat carbon copy of Tisdall's material) Islam Unvieled But before we go into that what needs clarification is whether similarities always imply borrowing. Does Similarities Imply Borrowing? Let's start with an example. Prophet Noah(P) was given certain commandments. So was Prophet Moses(P) after him. If we were to see that the followers of Prophet Noah(P) accusing of the followers of Prophet Moses(P), how do we expect the followers of Prophet Moses(P) to respond? We might hear a response like this: The Law has come from the same source (from the one and only God), Of course we would expect similar teachings and not such as God is a twin or has a daughter from eternity etc., Any differences from absolute similarities would mean correction of the message that got corrupted, Any other differences would mean additional Law with the newer revelation, The new revelation from the same source comes with its own proof and evidences, otherwise anyone can attempt to invent 'revelation' (while not coming from that same source - God) and mislead many thereby. If there were no proofs or evidences then how can someone verify its truthfulness and authenticity, believe in it and accept it? We will thus see that the emphasis shifts to verifying the inherent proofs or evidences of the fresh revelation when older (or traces of the older) revelation still exists. Therefore, similarity between two revelations can even imply that the later revelation is from God. The Dilemma & The Double Standard Since it is the claim of the Christian missionaries that similarities imply borrowing then one can simply show the same in the Bible concerning the notion of God as depicted in the Old Testament as an aged diety, his dwelling place and heavenly court being borrowed from Ugaritic sources. The Flood narrative in Genesis and the Mesopotamian parallels are some of the most interesting parallels in the history. There are many more examples that can be shown. Now the key question is: Are the Christian missionaries now ready to accept the conclusions of the orientalists with regards to biblical data being borrowed from ancient texts? Surely it seems unlikely. They will readily say that biblical data is derived from the same source from which earlier data was generated albeit now corrupted, and biblical data is providing true narratives that ought to be. This is what we Muslims have been saying all along! That is, the Qur'ân corrects the previous texts, testifies to their truthfulness and falsifies their falsities. But this alternative theory puts them into a dilemma. Hence they are seen resorting to a double standard. They would accept the 'one source' theory when it comes to comparing biblical data with ancient literature or traditions; but resorts back to the borrowing theory when it comes to comparing Qur'ân with earlier literature or traditions. However, as we shall see, the problem lies elsewhere. The Theory Of Innovation It is not just the similarities between the Qur'ân and earlier texts but the differences also has given another problem to the missionaries. Suppose the Qur'ân was totally devoid of similarities, would they then accept it? Very unlikely. Rather they have come up with another theory: The theory of innovation. Why? Because it is not to be found in earlier revelation (which to them is the Bible). Because some of the concepts in the Qur'ân are not similar to earlier revelations, then they must have been invented. But this brings us back to square one. Parallels imply borrowing, so can't accept. Differences imply innovation, so can't accept. This is the millenium bug of missionary evangelism: the tautological war you can't win either way, any way bug. Missionary Tautology & Its Implication This methodology is used not to prove why they don't believe in the Qur'ân; rather to deceive the uninformed Muslims to have doubts about the Qur'ân and to make them accept the Bible, as well as to prevent others from considering Islam. The Jews and the Christians will never be satisfied until you changed to their religion..... They wish that Qur'ân never had existed. The problem lies elsewhere! Now suppose Qur'ân had similarities which totally agreed in doctrines to that of the Bible, would they accept it then? We don't think so. It all comes down to Belief in the Bible being the only and last revelation of god with Jesus(P) being the revelation in person. Belief in the man-god idea, i.e., God became man. Belief in the unity of three gods (i.e., tri-unity or trinity of: 1. god the father, 2. god the son, 3. god the holy ghost) and ad nauseam. Let's give an example: Suppose the whole of the Qur'ân was just a single chapter consisting of 3-4 verses e.g., Surah Ikhlas 104, which when interpreted means: Say or Proclaim: Allah is Ahad (one, unique, only). Allah is as-Samad (Absolute, independent, eternal, on whom every one and every thing depends). He is not begotten, and does not beget And there is none co-equal unto him (in whatever manner). Would the missionary Christians accept this? If not, then it's not the concept of borrowing which is the problem in accepting the Qur'ân but it is what the Qur'ân has to say. To make it clear: Not the alleged source(s) of the Qur'ân but the contents of it. Important Questions To Ask Furthermore, the assertion of Judeo-Christian borrowing raises a number of questions. Jamal Badawi puts forward the following six questions: Why is it in spite of the abundance of historical material on Muhammad(P)'s life, and in spite of the extensive research on his life for centuries by his severe critics, that it was not possible to discover the mysterious teacher(s) through whom Muhammad(P) might have learned all that? It is known that Muhammad(P) was opposed, ridiculed and persecuted for nearly 13 years by his own contemporaries. With this magnitude of severe enemies, was it not possible for them to prove to the masses that Muhammad(P)'s claim of revelation was sheer fabrication? Was it not possible for them to reveal and name the person whom they alleged to be the human source or sources of his teachings? Even some of his adversaries who had made this assertion, changed their minds later on and accused him, instead, of magic or being possessed by evil... etc. Muhammad(P) was raised among his people and every aspect of his life was exposed to them, especially by the openness that characterises tribal life in the desert. How could the multitudes of his contemporaries, including many of his close relatives who knew him so well, how could they believe in his truthfulness if they had any doubt that he was claiming credit for ideas taught to him by some other teachers without bothering to give them credit ? What kind of teacher might have taught Muhammad(P) a coherent and complete religion that changed the face of history? Why didn't he or they (if any) speak against the alleged student who continued learning from them, while ignoring them and claiming some other divine source for his teachings? How could many Jews and Christians amongst his contemporaries become Muslims and believe in his truthfulness if they knew he was copying from their scriptures or learning from their priests or rabbis? It is known that some of the Qur'ânic revelations to Muhammad(P) in the presence of people. The Qur'ân was revealed over the span of 23 years, where then that was mysterious, perhaps invisible teacher of Muhammad(P)? How could he have hidden himself for so long? Or how could Muhammad(P) who was constantly surrounded by companions, how was he able to make frequent secret visits to that mysterious teacher or teachers for 23 years without even being caught once? The answer to all these questions are never given. But the Christian missionaries' logic is that still Muhammad(P) borrowed from the Judeo-Christian sources even though there is no evidence to show. What you do not know, you do not have to show; just say it and it becomes so. Since the Christian missionaries are confused about their own ideology let us now refute some of the 'contents' which they think are borrowed by the Qur'ân. http://salam.muslimsonline.com/~islamawe/Quran/Science/ http://kuc01.kuniv.edu.kw/~stevens/ia/green02.htm http://www.muslim-answers.org/proofs10.htm Bible Contradictions PAUL SAID, "God is not the author of confusion," (I Corinthians 14:33), yet never has a book produced more confusion than the bible! There are hundreds of denominations and sects, all using the "inspired Scriptures" to prove their conflicting doctrines. Why do trained theologians differ? Why do educated translators disagree over Greek and Hebrew meanings? Why all the confusion? Shouldn't a document that was "divinely inspired" by an omniscient and omnipotent deity be as clear as possible? "If the trumpet give an uncertain sound," Paul wrote in I Corinthians 14:8, "who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air." Exactly! Paul should have practiced what he preached. For almost two millennia, the bible has been producing a most "uncertain sound." The problem is not with human limitations, as some claim. The problem is the bible itself. People who are free of theological bias notice that the bible contains hundreds of discrepancies. Should it surprise us when such a literary and moral mish-mash, taken seriously, causes so much discord? Here is a brief sampling of biblical contradictions. Should we kill? Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill." Leviticus 24:17 "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death." vs. Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor." I Samuel 6:19 " . . . and the people lamented because the Lord had smitten many of the people with a great slaughter." I Samuel 15:2,3,7,8 "Thus saith the Lord . . . Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. . . . And Saul smote the Amalekites . . . and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword." Numbers 15:36 "And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." Hosea 13:16 "they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with children shall be ripped up." For a discussion of the defense that the Commandments prohibit only murder, see "Murder, He Wrote", chapter 27 (Losing Faith In Faith: From Preacher To Atheist). Should we tell lies? Exodus 20:16 "Thou shalt not bear false witness." Proverbs 12:22 "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord." vs. I Kings 22:23 "The Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee." II Thessalonians 2:11 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie." Also, compare Joshua 2:4-6 with James 2:25. Should we steal? Exodus 20:15 "Thou shalt not steal." Leviticus 19:13 "Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbor, neither rob him." vs. Exodus 3:22 "And ye shall spoil the Egyptians." Exodus 12:35-36 "And they spoiled [plundered, NRSV] the Egyptians." Luke 19:29-34 "[Jesus] sent two of his disciples, Saying, Go ye into the village . . . ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet never man sat: loose him, and bring him hither. And if any man ask you, Why do ye loose him? thus shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him. . . . And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof said unto them, Why loose ye the colt? And they said, The Lord hath need of him." I was taught as a child that when you take something without asking for it, that is stealing. Shall we keep the sabbath? Exodus 20:8 "Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy." Exodus 31:15 "Whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death." Numbers 15:32,36 "And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day. . . . And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the Lord commanded Moses." vs. Isaiah 1:13 "The new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity." John 5:16 "And therefore did the Jews persecute Jesus and sought to slay him, because he had done these things on the sabbath day." Colossians 2:16 "Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holy-day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days." Shall we make graven images? Exodus 20:4 "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven . . . earth . . . water." Leviticus 26:1 "Ye shall make ye no idols nor graven image, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone." Deuteronomy 27:15 "Cursed be the man that maketh any graven or molten image." vs. Exodus 25:18 "And thou shalt make two cherubims of gold, of beaten work shalt thou make them." I Kings 7:15,16,23,25 "For he [Solomon] cast two pillars of brass . . . and two chapiters of molten brass . . . And he made a molten sea . . . it stood upon twelve oxen . . . [and so on]" Are we saved through works? Ephesians 2:8,9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith . . . not of works." Romans 3:20,28 "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight." Galatians 2:16 "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ." vs. James 2:24 "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." Matthew 19:16-21 "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And he [Jesus] said unto him . . . keep the commandments. . . . The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven." The common defense here is that "we are saved by faith and works." But Paul said "not of works." Should good works be seen? Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works." I Peter 2:12 "Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that . . . they may by your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation." vs. Matthew 6:1-4 "Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them . . . that thine alms may be in secret." Matthew 23:3,5 "Do not ye after their [Pharisees'] works. . . . all their works they do for to be seen of men." Should we own slaves? Leviticus 25:45-46 "Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, . . . and they shall be your possession . . . they shall be your bondmen forever." Genesis 9:25 "And he [Noah] said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." Exodus 21:2,7 "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. . . . And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the manservants do." Joel 3:8 "And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the hand of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off: for the Lord hath spoken it." Luke 12:47,48 [Jesus speaking] "And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes." Colossians 3:22 "Servants, obey in all things your masters." vs. Isaiah 58:6 "Undo the heavy burdens . . . let the oppressed go free, . . . break every yoke." Matthew 23:10 "Neither be ye called Masters: for one is your Master, even Christ." Pro-slavery bible verses were cited by many churches in the South during the Civil War, and were used by some theologians in the Dutch Reformed Church to justify apartheid in South Africa. There are more pro-slavery verses than cited here. Does God change his mind? Malachi 3:6 "For I am the Lord; I change not." Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent." Ezekiel 24:14 "I the Lord have spoken it: it shall come to pass, and I will do it; I will not go back, neither will I spare, neither will I repent." James 1:17 " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." vs. Exodus 32:14 "And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people." Genesis 6:6,7 "And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth . . . And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth . . . for it repenteth me that I have made him." Jonah 3:10 ". . . and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not." See also II Kings 20:1-7, Numbers 16:20-35, Numbers 16:44-50. See Genesis 18:23-33, where Abraham gets God to change his mind about the minimum number of righteous people in Sodom required to avoid destruction, bargaining down from fifty to ten. (An omniscient God must have known that he was playing with Abraham's hopes for mercy--he destroyed the city anyway.) Are we punished for our parents' sins? Exodus 20:5 "For I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation." (Repeated in Deuteronomy 5:9) Exodus 34:6-7 " . . . The Lord God, merciful and gracious, . . . that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation." I Corinthians 15:22 "For as in Adam all die, . . ." vs. Ezekiel 18:20 "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father." Deuteronomy 24:16 "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin." Is God good or evil? Psalm 145:9 "The Lord is good to all." Deuteronomy 32:4 "a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he." vs. Isaiah 45:7 "I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things." See "Out of Context" for more on Isaiah 45:7. Lamentations 3:38 "Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil and good?" Jeremiah 18:11 "Thus saith the Lord; Behold, I frame evil against you, and devise a device against you." Ezekiel 20:25,26 "I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments whereby they should not live. And I polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the Lord." Does God tempt people? James 1:13 "Let no man say . . . I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." vs. Genesis 22:1 "And it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham." Is God peaceable? Romans 15:33 "The God of peace." Isaiah 2:4 ". . . and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more." vs. Exodus 15:3 "The Lord is a man of war." Joel 3:9-10 "Prepare war, wake up the mighty men, let all the men of war draw near; let them come up: Beat your plowshares into swords, and your pruninghooks into spears: let the weak say, I am strong." Was Jesus peaceable? John 14:27 "Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you." Acts 10:36 "The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ." Luke 2:14 " . . . on earth peace, good will toward men." vs. Matthew 10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household." Luke 22:36 "Then said he unto them, . . . he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." Was Jesus trustworthy? John 8:14 "Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true." vs. John 5:31 "If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true." "Record" and "witness" in the above verses are the same Greek word (martyria). Shall we call people names? Matthew 5:22 "Whosoever shall say Thou fool, shall be in danger of hellfire." [Jesus speaking] vs. Matthew 23:17 "Ye fools and blind." [Jesus speaking] Psalm 14:1 "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." Has anyone seen God? John 1:18 "No man hath seen God at any time." Exodus 33:20 "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live." John 6:46 "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God [Jesus], he hath seen the Father." I John 4:12 "No man hath seen God at any time." vs. Genesis 32:30 "For I have seen God face to face." Exodus 33:11 "And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend." Isaiah 6:1 "In the year that king Uzziah died I saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple." Job 42:5 "I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: but now mine eye seeth thee." How many Gods are there? Deuteronomy 6:4 "The Lord our God is one Lord." vs. Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image." Genesis 3:22 "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil." I John 5:7 "And there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." It does no good to claim that "Let us" is the magisterial "we." Such usage implies inclusivity of all authorities under a king's leadership. Invoking the Trinity solves nothing because such an idea is more contradictory than the problem it attempts to solve. Are we all sinners? Romans 3:23 "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Romans 3:10 "As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one." Psalm 14:3 "There is none that doeth good, no, not one." vs. Job 1:1 "There was a man . . . who name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright." Genesis 7:1 "And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation." Luke 1:6 "And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless." How old was Ahaziah? II Kings 8:26 "Two and twenty years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign." vs. II Chronicles 22:2 "Forty and two years old was Ahaziah when he began to reign." Should we swear an oath? Numbers 30:2 "If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath . . . he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth." Genesis 21:22-24,31 " . . . swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me . . . And Abraham said, I will swear. . . . Wherefore he called that place Beersheba ["well of the oath"]; because there they sware both of them." Hebrews 6:13-17 "For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself . . . for men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath." See also Genesis 22:15-19, Genesis 31:53, and Judges 11:30-39. vs. Matthew 5:34-37 "But I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by heaven . . . nor by the earth . . . . Neither shalt thou swear by thy head . . . . But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." James 5:12 ". . . swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation." When was Jesus crucified? Mark 15:25 "And it was the third hour, and they crucified him." vs. John 19:14-15 "And about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out . . . crucify him." It is an ad hoc defense to claim that there are two methods of reckoning time here. It has never been shown that this is the case. Shall we obey the law? I Peter 2:13 "Submit yourself to every ordinance of man . . . to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors." Matthew 22:21 "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's." See also Romans 13:1,7 and Titus 3:1. vs. Acts 5:29 "We ought to obey God rather then men." How many animals on the ark? Genesis 6:19 "And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark." Genesis 7:8-9 "Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah." Genesis 7:15 "And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life." vs. Genesis 7:2 "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female." Were women and men created equal? Genesis 1:27 "So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." vs. Genesis 2:18,23 "And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. . . . And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." Were trees created before humans? Genesis 1:12-31 "And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: . . . And the evening and the morning were the third day. . . . And God said, Let us make man in our image . . . And the evening and the morning were the sixth day." vs. Genesis 2:5-9 "And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. .Ê.ÊAnd the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground . . . And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food." Did Michal have children? II Samuel 6:23 "Therefore Michal the daughter of Saul had no child unto the day of her death." vs. II Samuel 21:8 "But the king took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul." How many stalls did Solomon have? I Kings 4:26 "And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen." vs. II Chronicles 9:25 "And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen." Did Paul's men hear a voice? Acts 9:7 "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." vs. Acts 22:9 "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me." (For more detail on this contradiction, with a linguistic analysis of the Greek words, see "Did Paul's Men Hear A Voice?" by Dan Barker, published in the The Skeptical Review, 1994 #1) Is God omnipotent? Jeremiah 32:27 "Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh: is there anything too hard for me? Matthew 19:26 "But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible." vs. Judges 1:19 "And the Lord was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron." Does God live in light? I Timothy 6:15-16 " . . . the King of kings, and Lord of lords; Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach . . ." James 1:17 " . . . the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." John 12:35 "Then Jesus saith unto them, . . . he that walketh in darkness knoweth not wither he goeth." Job 18:18 "He [the wicked] shall be driven from light into darkness, and chased out of the world." Daniel 2:22 "He [God] knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him." See also Psalm 143:3, II Corinthians 6:14, and Hebrews 12:18-22. vs. I Kings 8:12 "Then spake Solomon, The Lord said that he would dwell in the thick darkness." (Repeated in II Chronicles 6:1) II Samuel 22:12 "And he made darkness pavilions round about him, dark waters, and thick clouds of the skies." Psalm 18:11 "He made darkness his secret place; his pavilion round about him were dark waters and thick clouds of the skies." Psalm 97:1-2 "The Lord reigneth; let the earth rejoice . . . clouds and darkness are round about him." Does God accept human sacrifice? Deuteronomy 12:31 "Thou shalt not do so unto the Lord thy God: for every abomination to the Lord, which he hateth, have they done unto their gods; for even their sons and their daughters they have burnt in the fire to their gods." vs. Genesis 22:2 "And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of." Exodus 22:29 "For thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors; the firstborn of thy sons shalt thou give unto me." Judges 11:30-39 "And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hand, Then it shall be, that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me, when I return in peace from the children of Ammon, shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burnt offering. So Jephthah passed over unto the children of Ammon . . . and the Lord delivered them into his hands. . . . And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and, behold, his daughter came out to meet him with timbrels and with dances: . . . And it came to pass at the end of two months, that she returned unto her father, who did with her according to his vow which he had vowed." II Samuel 21:8-14 "But the king [David] took the two sons of Rizpah . . . and the five sons of Michal . . . and he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the Lord: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest . . . And after that God was intreated for the land." Hebrews 10:10-12 " . . . we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ . . . But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God." I Corinthians 5:7 " . . . For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us." Who was Joseph's father? Matthew 1:16 "And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus." vs. Luke 3:23 "And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This chapter was first printed as a "nontract," a freethinkers' version of a (non-proselytizing) tract. Since it was first published, I have received numerous replies from Christians who think that these contradictions are either trivial or easily explained. Yet not a single "explanation" has been convincing. Most of them do little homework, inventing off-the-cuff defenses of what the bible "could have meant," or devising creative explanations that actually make the problem worse. For example, one Christian, agreeing with Eusebius, explained that "Thou shalt not bear false witness" does not prohibit lies, and that God actually wants us to tell falsehoods if it will further the kingdom of heaven. Many of the defensive attempts are arguments from silence. Some apologists assert that since the writer of John does not say that there were not more women who visited the tomb with Mary, then it is wrong to accuse him of contradicting the other evangelists who say it was a group of women. But this is a non-argument. With this kind of thinking, I could claim that the people who accompanied Mary to the tomb included Mother Teresa, Elvis Presley, and Paul Bunyan. Since the writer of John does not specifically exclude these people, then there is no way to prove that this is not true--if such fragile logic is valid. All of the above contradictions have been carefully studied, and when necessary the original languages have been consulted. Although it is always scholarly to consider the original languages, why should that be necessary with the "word of God?" An omnipotent, omniscient deity should have made his all-important message unmistakably clear to everyone, everywhere, at all times. No one should have to learn an extinct language to get God's message, especially an ancient language about which there is much scholarly disagreement. If the English translation is flawed or imprecise, then God failed to get his point across to English speakers. A true fundamentalist should consider the English version of the bible to be just as inerrant as the original because if we admit that human error was possible in the translation, then it was equally possible in the original writing. (Some fundamentalists do assert that the King James Version is perfect. One preacher reportedly said, "If the King James Version was good enough for the Apostle Paul, then it's good enough for me.") If a contradiction exists in English, then the bible is contradictory. The above list of thirty-three contradictions is a very small portion of the thousands of biblical discrepancies that have been catalogued by scholars. See "Leave No Stone Unturned" for seventeen additional contradictions specific to the resurrection of Jesus. One monthly publication, "Biblical Errancy," is devoted entirely to this topic (published by Dennis McKinsey, 3158 Sherwood Park Drive, Springfield OH, 45505.) Even if a defender of the bible were to eliminate all of the above (and no one has come close), we are still only scratching the surface. The bible is a flawed book. These lists are meant to identify possible problems in the Bible, especially problems which are inherent in a literalist or fundamentalist interpretation. Some of the selections may be resolvable on certain interpretations--after all, almost any problem can be eliminated with suitable rationalizations--but it is the reader's obligation to test this possibility and to decide whether it really makes appropriate sense to do this. To help readers in this task, these lists are aimed at presenting examples where problems may exist given certain allowable (but not always obligatory) assumptions. GE 1:3-5 On the first day, God created light, then separated light and darkness. GE 1:14-19 The sun (which separates night and day) wasn't created until the fourth day. GE 1:11-12, 26-27 Trees were created before man was created. GE 2:4-9 Man was created before trees were created. GE 1:20-21, 26-27 Birds were created before man was created. GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before birds were created. GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created. GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created. GE 1:26-27 Man and woman were created at the same time. GE 2:7, 21-22 Man was created first, woman sometime later. GE 1:28 God encourages reproduction. LE 12:1-8 God requires purification rites following childbirth which, in effect, makes childbirth a sin. (Note: The period for purification following the birth of a daughter is twice that for a son.) GE 1:31 God was pleased with his creation. GE 6:5-6 God was not pleased with his creation. (Note: That God should be displeased is inconsistent with the concept of omniscience.) GE 2:4, 4:26, 12:8, 22:14-16, 26:25 God was already known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) much earlier than the time of Moses. EX 6:2-3 God was first known as "the Lord" (Jahveh or Jehovah) at the time of the Egyptian Bondage, during the life of Moses. GE 2:17 Adam was to die the very day that he ate the forbidden fruit. GE 5:5 Adam lived 930 years. GE 2:15-17, 3:4-6 It is wrong to want to be able to tell good from evil. HE 5:13-14 It is immature to be unable to tell good from evil. GE 4:4-5 God prefers Abel's offering and has no regard for Cain's. 2CH 19:7, AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike. GE 4:9 God asks Cain where his brother Able is. PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view. GE 4:15, DT 32:4, IS 34:8 God is a vengeful god. EX 15:3, IS 42:13, HE 12:29 God is a warrior. God is a consuming fire. EX 20:5, 34:14, DT 4:24, 5:9, 6:15, 29:20, 32:21 God is a jealous god. LE 26:7-8, NU 31:17-18, DT 20:16-17, JS 10:40, JG 14:19, EZ 9:5-7 The Spirit of God is (sometimes) murder and killing. NU 25:3-4, DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21, PS 7:11, 78:49, JE 4:8, 17:4, 32:30-31, ZP 2:2 God is angry. His anger is sometimes fierce. 2SA 22:7-8 (KJV) "I called to the Lord; ... he heard my voice; ... The earth trembled and quaked, ... because he was angry. Smoke came from his nostrils. Consuming fire came from his mouth, burning coals blazed out of it." EZ 6:12, NA 1:2, 6 God is jealous and furious. He reserves wrath for, and takes revenge on, his enemies. "... who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? His fury is poured out like fire, and rocks are thrown down by him." 2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is love. GA 5:22-23 The fruit of the Spirit of God is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. GE 4:16 Cain went away (or out) from the presence of the Lord. JE 23:23-24 A man cannot hide from God. God fills heaven and earth. GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood. GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood. NU 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood. GE 6:6. EX 32:14, NU 14:20, 1SA 15:35, 2SA 24:16 God does change his mind. NU 23:19-20, IS 15:29, JA 1:17 God does not change his mind. GE 6:19-22, 7:8-9, 7:14-16 Two of each kind are to be taken, and are taken, aboard Noah's Ark. GE 7:2-5 Seven pairs of some kinds are to be taken (and are taken) aboard the Ark. GE 7:1 Noah was righteous. JB 1:1,8, JB 2:3 Job was righteous. LK 1:6 Zechariah and Elizabeth were righteous. JA 5:16 Some men are righteous, (which makes their prayers effective). 1JN 3:6-9 Christians become righteous (or else they are not really Christians). RO 3:10, 3:23, 1JN 1:8-10 No one was or is righteous. GE 7:7 Noah and his clan enter the Ark. GE 7:13 They enter the Ark (again?). GE 11:7-9 God sows discord. PR 6:16-19 God hates anyone who sows discord. GE 11:9 At Babel, the Lord confused the language of the whole world. 1CO 14:33 Paul says that God is not the author of confusion. GE 11:12 Arpachshad [Arphaxad] was the father of Shelah. LK 3:35-36 Cainan was the father of Shelah. Arpachshad was the grandfather of Shelah. GE 11:16 Terah was 70 years old when his son Abram was born. GE 11:32 Terah was 205 years old when he died (making Abram 135 at the time). GE 12:4, AC 7:4 Abram was 75 when he left Haran. This was after Terah died. Thus, Terah could have been no more than 145 when he died; or Abram was only 75 years old after he had lived 135 years. GE 12:7, 17:1, 18:1, 26:2, 32:30, EX 3:16, 6:2-3, 24:9-11, 33:11, NU 12:7-8, 14:14, JB 42:5, AM 7:7-8, 9:1 God is seen. EX 33:20, JN 1:18, 1JN 4:12 God is not seen. No one can see God's face and live. No one has ever seen him. GE 10:5, 20, 31 There were many languages before the Tower of Babel. GE 11:1 There was only one language before the Tower of Babel. GE 15:9, EX 20:24, 29:10-42, LE 1:1-7, 38, NU 28:1-29, 40 God details sacrificial offerings. JE 7:21-22 God says he did no such thing. GE 16:15, 21:1-3, GA 4:22 Abraham had two sons, Ishmael and Isaac. HE 11:17 Abraham had only one son. GE 17:1, 35:11, 1CH 29:11-12, LK 1:37 God is omnipotent. Nothing is impossible with (or for) God. JG 1:19 Although God was with Judah, together they could not defeat the plainsmen because the latter had iron chariots. GE 17:7, 10-11 The covenant of circumcision is to be everlasting. GA 6:15 It is of no consequence. GE 17:8 God promises Abraham the land of Canaan as an "everlasting possession." GE 25:8, AC 7:2-5, HE 11:13 Abraham died with the promise unfulfilled. GE 17:15-16, 20:11-12, 22:17 Abraham and his half sister, Sarai, are married and receive God's blessings. LE 20:17, DT 27:20-23 Incest is wrong. GE 18:20-21 God decides to "go down" to see what is going on. PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from his view. GE 19:30-38 While he is drunk, Lot's two daughters "lie with him," become pregnant, and give birth to his offspring. 2PE 2:7 Lot was "just" and "righteous." GE 22:1-12, DT 8:2 God tempts (tests) Abraham and Moses. JG 2:22 God himself says that he does test (tempt). 1CO 10:13 Paul says that God controls the extent of our temptations. JA 1:13 God tests (tempts) no one. GE 27:28 "May God give you ... an abundance of grain and new wine." DT 7:13 If they follow his commandments, God will bless the fruit of their wine. PS 104:5 God gives us wine to gladden the heart. JE 13:12 "... every bottle shall be filled with wine." JN 2:1-11 According to the author of John, Jesus' first miracle was turning water to wine. RO 14:21 It is good to refrain from drinking wine. GE 35:10 God says Jacob is to be called Jacob no longer; henceforth his name is Israel. GE 46:2 At a later time, God himself uses the name Jacob. GE 36:11 The sons of Eliphaz were Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam, and Kenaz. GE 36:15-16 Teman, Omar, Zepho, Kenaz. 1CH 1:35-36 Teman, Omar, Zephi, Gatam, Kenaz, Timna, and Amalek. GE 49:2-28 The fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel are: Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, Zebulun, Issachar, Dan, Gad, Asher, Naphtali, Joseph, and Benjamin. RE 7:4-8 (Leaves out the tribe of Dan, but adds Manasseh.) GE 50:13 Jacob was buried in a cave at Machpelah bought from Ephron the Hittite. AC 7:15-16 He was buried in the sepulchre at Shechem, bought from the sons of Hamor. EX 3:1 Jethro was the father-in-law of Moses. NU 10:29, JG 4:11 (KJV) Hobab was the father-in-law of Moses. EX 3:20-22, DT 20:13-17 God instructs the Israelites to despoil the Egyptians, to plunder their enemies. EX 20:15, 17, LE 19:13 God prohibits stealing, defrauding, or robbing a neighbor. EX 4:11 God decides who will be dumb, deaf, blind, etc. 2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is a god of love. EX 9:3-6 God destroys all the cattle (including horses) belonging to the Egyptians. EX 9:9-11 The people and the cattle are afflicted with boils. EX 12:12, 29 All the first-born of the cattle of the Egyptians are destroyed. EX 14:9 After having all their cattle destroyed, then afflicted with boils, and then their first-born cattle destroyed, the Egyptians pursue Moses on horseback. EX 12:13 The Israelites have to mark their houses with blood in order for God to see which houses they occupy and "pass over" them. PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees everything. Nothing is hidden from God. EX 12:37, NU 1:45-46 The number of men of military age who take part in the Exodus is given as more than 600,000. Allowing for women, children, and older men would probably mean that a total of about 2,000,000 Israelites left Egypt. 1KI 20:15 All the Israelites, including children, number only 7000 at a later time. EX 15:3, 17:16, NU 25:4, 32:14, IS 42:13 God is a man of war--he is fierce and angry. RO 15:33, 2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is a god of love and peace. EX 20:1-17 God gave the law directly to Moses (without using an intermediary). GA 3:19 The law was ordained through angels by a mediator (an intermediary). EX 20:4 God prohibits the making of any graven images whatsoever. EX 25:18 God enjoins the making of two graven images. EX 20:5, 34:7, NU 14:18, DT 5:9, IS 14:21-22 Children are to suffer for their parent's sins. DT 24:16, EZ 18:19-20 Children are not to suffer for their parent's sins. EX 20:8-11, 31:15-17, 35:1-3 No work is to be done on the Sabbath, not even lighting a fire. The commandment is permanent, and death is required for infractions. MK 2:27-28 Jesus says that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath (after his disciples were criticized for breaking the Sabbath). RO 14:5, CN 2:14-16 Paul says the Sabbath commandment was temporary, and to decide for yourself regarding its observance. EX 20:12, DT 5:16, MT 15:4, 19:19, MK 7:10, 10:19, LK 18:20 Honor your father and your mother is one of the ten commandments. It is reinforced by Jesus. MT 10:35-37, LK 12:51-53, 14:26 Jesus says that he has come to divide families; that a man's foes will be those of his own household; that you must hate your father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, and even your own life to be a disciple. MT 23:9 Jesus says to call no man on earth your father. EX 20:13, DT 5:17, MK 10:19, LK 18:20, RO 13:9, JA 2:11 God prohibits killing. GE 34:1-35:5 God condones trickery and killing. EX 32:27, DT 7:2, 13:15, 20:1-18 God orders killing. 2KI 19:35 An angel of the Lord slaughters 185,000 men. (Note: See Atrocities section for many more examples.) EX 20:14 God prohibits adultery. HO 1:2 God instructs Hosea to "take a wife of harlotry." EX 21:23-25, LE 24:20, DT 19:21 A life for a life, an eye for an eye, etc. MT 5:38-44, LK 6:27-29 Turn the other cheek. Love your enemies. EX 23:7 God prohibits the killing of the innocent. NU 31:17-18, DT 7:2, JS 6:21-27, 7:19-26, 8:22-25, 10:20, 40, 11:8-15, 20, 30-39, JG 11:30-39, 21:10-12, 1SA 15:3 God orders or approves the complete extermination of groups of people which include innocent women and/or children. (Note: See Atrocities section for many other examples of the killing of innocents.) EX 34:6, DT 7:9-10, TS 1:2 God is faithful and truthful. He does not lie. NU 14:30 God breaks his promise. EX 34:6, DT 7:9-10, TS 1:2 God is faithful and truthful. He does not lie. 1KI 22:21-23 God condones a spirit of deception. EX 34:6, DT 7:9-10, TS 1:2 God is faithful and truthful. He does not lie. 2TH 2:11-12 God deludes people, making them believe what is false, so as to be able to condemn them. (Note: some versions use the word persuade here. The context makes clear, however, that deception is involved.) EX 34:6-7, JS 24:19, 1CH 16:34 God is faithful, holy and good. IS 45:6-7, LA 3:8, AM 3:6 God is responsible for evil. EX 34:6-7, HE 9:27 God remembers sin, even when it has been forgiven. JE 31:34 God does not remember sin when it has been forgiven. LE 3:17 God himself prohibits forever the eating of blood and fat. MT 15:11, CN 2:20-22 Jesus and Paul say that such rules don't matter--they are only human injunctions. LE 19:18, MT 22:39 Love your neighbor [as much as] yourself. 1CO 10:24 Put your neighbor ahead of yourself. LE 21:10 The chief priest is not to rend his clothes. MT 26:65, MK 14:63 He does so during the trial of Jesus. LE 25:37, PS 15:1, 5 It is wrong to lend money at interest. MT 25:27, LK 19:23-27 It is wrong to lend money without interest. NU 11:33 God inflicts sickness. JB 2:7 Satan inflicts sickness. NU 15:24-28 Sacrifices can, in at least some case, take away sin. HE 10:11 They never take away sin. NU 25:9 24,000 died in the plague. 1CO 10:8 23,000 died in the plague. NU 30:2 God enjoins the making of vows (oaths). MT 5:33-37 Jesus forbids doing so, saying that they arise from evil (or the Devil). NU 33:38 Aaron died on Mt. Hor. DT 10:6 Aaron died in Mosera. NU 33:41-42 After Aaron's death, the Israelites journeyed from Mt. Hor, to Zalmonah, to Punon, etc. DT 10:6-7 It was from Mosera, to Gudgodah, to Jotbath. DT 6:15, 9:7-8, 29:20, 32:21 God is sometimes angry. MT 5:22 Anger is a sin. DT 7:9-10 God destroys his enemies. MT 5:39-44 Do not resist your enemies. Love them. DT 18:20-22 A false prophet is one whose words do not come true. Death is required. EZ 14:9 A prophet who is deceived, is deceived by God himself. Death is still required. DT 23:1 A castrate may not enter the assembly of the Lord. IS 56:4-5 Some castrates will receive special rewards. DT 23:1 A castrate may not enter the assembly of the Lord. MT 19:12 Men are encouraged to consider making themselves castrates for the sake of the Kingdom of God. DT 24:1-5 A man can divorce his wife simply because she displeases him and both he and his wife can remarry. MK 10:2-12 Divorce is wrong, and to remarry is to commit adultery. DT 24:16, 2KI 14:6, 2CH 25:4, EZ 18:20 Children are not to suffer for their parent's sins. RO 5:12, 19, 1CO 15:22 Death is passed to all men by the sin of Adam. DT 30:11-20 It is possible to keep the law. RO 3:20-23 It is not possible to keep the law. JS 11:20 God shows no mercy to some. LK 6:36, JA 5:11 God is merciful. JG 4:21 Sisera was sleeping when Jael killed him. JG 5:25-27 Sisera was standing. JS 10:38-40 Joshua himself captured Debir. JG 1:11-15 It was Othniel, who thereby obtained the hand of Caleb's daughter, Achsah. 1SA 8:2-22 Samuel informs God as to what he has heard from others. PR 15:3, JE 16:17, 23:24-25, HE 4:13 God is everywhere. He sees and hears everything. 1SA 9:15-17 The Lord tells Samuel that Saul has been chosen to lead the Israelites and will save them from the Philistines. 1SA 15:35 The Lord is sorry that he has chosen Saul. 1SA 31:4-7 Saul commits suicide and the Israelites are overrun by the Philistines. 1SA 15:7-8, 20 The Amalekites are utterly destroyed. 1SA 27:8-9 They are utterly destroyed (again?). 1SA 30:1, 17-18 They raid Ziklag and David smites them (again?). 1SA 16:10-11, 17:12 Jesse had seven sons plus David, or eight total. 1CH 2:13-15 He had seven total. 1SA 16:19-23 Saul knew David well before the latter's encounter with Goliath. 1SA 17:55-58 Saul did not know David at the time of his encounter with Goliath and had to ask about David's identity. 1SA 17:50 David killed Goliath with a slingshot. 1SA 17:51 David killed Goliath (again?) with a sword. 1SA 17:50 David killed Goliath. 2SA 21:19 Elhanan killed Goliath. (Note: Some translations insert the words "the brother of" before Elhanan. These are an addition to the earliest manuscripts in an apparent attempt to rectify this inconsistency.) 1SA 21:1-6 Ahimalech was high priest when David ate the bread. MK 2:26 Abiathar was high priest at the time. 1SA 28:6 Saul inquired of the Lord, but received no answer. 1CH 10:13-14 Saul died for not inquiring of the Lord. 1SA 31:4-6 Saul killed himself by falling on his sword. 2SA 2:2-10 Saul, at his own request, was slain by an Amalekite. 2SA 21:12 Saul was killed by the Philistines on Gilboa. 1CH 10:13-14 Saul was slain by God. 2SA 6:23 Michal was childless. 2SA 21:8 (KJV) She had five sons. 2SA 24:1 The Lord inspired David to take the census. 1CH 21:1 Satan inspired the census. 2SA 24:9 The census count was: Israel 800,000 and Judah 500,000. 1CH 21:5 The census count was: Israel 1,100,000 and Judah 470,000. 2SA 24:10-17 David sinned in taking the census. 1KI 15:5 David's only sin (ever) was in regard to another matter. 2SA 24:24 David paid 50 shekels of silver for the purchase of a property. 1CH 21:22-25 He paid 600 shekels of gold. 1KI 3:12 God made Solomon the wisest man that ever lived, yet .... 1KI 11:1-13 Solomon loved many foreign women (against God's explicit prohibition) who turned him to other gods (for which he deserved death). 1KI 3:12, 4:29, 10:23-24, 2CH 9:22-23 God made Solomon the wisest king and the wisest man that ever lived. There never has been nor will be another like him. MT 12:42, LK 11:31 Jesus says: "... now one greater than Solomon is here." 1KI 4:26 Solomon had 40,000 horses (or stalls for horses). 2CH 9:25 He had 4,000 horses (or stalls for horses). 1KI 5:16 Solomon had 3,300 supervisors. 2CH 2:2 He had 3,600 supervisors. 1KI 7:15-22 The two pillars were 18 cubits high. 2CH 3:15-17 They were 35 cubits high. 1KI 7:26 Solomon's "molten sea" held 2000 "baths" (1 bath = about 8 gallons). 2CH 4:5 It held 3000 "baths." 1KI 8:12, 2CH 6:1, PS 18:11 God dwells in thick darkness. 1TI 6:16 God dwells in unapproachable light. 1KI 8:13, AC 7:47 Solomon, whom God made the wisest man ever, built his temple as an abode for God. AC 7:48-49 God does not dwell in temples built by men. 1KI 9:28 420 talents of gold were brought back from Ophir. 2CH 8:18 450 talents of gold were brought back from Ophir. 1KI 15:14 Asa did not remove the high places. 2CH 14:2-3 He did remove them. 1KI 16:6-8 Baasha died in the 26th year of King Asa's reign. 2CH 16:1 Baasha built a city in the 36th year of King Asa's reign. 1KI 16:23 Omri became king in the thirty-first year of Asa's reign and he reigned for a total of twelve years. 1KI 16:28-29 Omri died, and his son Ahab became king in the thirty- eighth year of Asa's reign. (Note: Thirty-one through thirty-eight equals a reign of seven or eight years.) 1KI 22:23, 2CH 18:22, 2TH 2:11 God himself causes a lying spirit. PR 12:22 God abhors lying lips and delights in honesty. 1KI 22:42-43 Jehoshaphat did not remove the high places. 2CH 17:5-6 He did remove them. 2KI 2:11 Elijah went up to heaven. JN 3:13 Only the Son of Man (Jesus) has ever ascended to heaven. 2CO 12:2-4 An unnamed man, known to Paul, went up to heaven and came back. HE 11:5 Enoch was translated to heaven. 2KI 4:32-37 A dead child is raised (well before the time of Jesus). MT 9:18-25, JN 11:38-44 Two dead persons are raised (by Jesus himself). AC 26:23 Jesus was the first to rise from the dead. 2KI 8:25-26 Ahaziah was 22 years old when he began his reign. 2CH 22:1 He was 42 when he began his reign. 2KI 9:27 Jehu shot Ahaziah near Ibleam. Ahaziah fled to Meggido and died there. 2CH 22:9 Ahaziah was found hiding in Samaria, brought to Jehu, and put to death. 2KI 16:5 The King of Syria and the son of the King of Israel did not conquer Ahaz. 2CH 28:5-6 They did conquer Ahaz. 2KI 24:8 Jehoiachin (Jehoiakim) was eighteen years old when he began to reign. 2CH 36:9 He was eight. (Note: This discrepancy has been "corrected" in some versions.) 2KI 24:8 Jehoiachin (Jehoiakim) reigned three months. 2CH 36:9 He reigned three months and ten days. 2KI 24:17 Jehoiachin (Jehoaikim) was succeeded by his uncle. 2CH 36:10 He was succeeded by his brother. 2CH 3:11-13 The lineage is: Joram, Ahaziah, Joash, Amaziah, Azariah, Jotham. MT 1:8-9 It is: Joram, Uzziah, Jotham, etc. 2CH 3:19 Pedaiah was the father of Zerubbabel. ER 3:2 Shealtiel was the father of Zerubbabel. 2CH 19:7, AC 10:34, RO 2:11 There is no injustice or partiality with the Lord. RO 9:15-18 God has mercy on (and hardens the hearts of) whom he pleases. ER 2:3-64 (Gives the whole congregation as 42,360 while the actual sum of the numbers is about 30,000.) JB 2:3-6, 21:7-13, 2TI 3:12 The godly are persecuted and chastised but the wicked grow old, wealthy, and powerful, unchastised by God. PS 55:23, 92:12-14, PR 10:2-3, 27-31, 12:2, 21 The lives of the wicked are cut short. The righteous flourish and obtain favor from the Lord. PS 10:1 God cannot be found in time of need. He is "far off." PS 145:18 God is near to all who call upon him in truth. PS 22:1-2 God sometimes forsakes his children. He does not answer. PS 46:1 God is a refuge, a strength, a very present help. PS 30:5, JE 3:12, MI 7:18 God's anger does not last forever. JE 17:4, MT 25:46 It does last forever. (He has provided for eternal punishment.) PS 58:10-11 The righteous shall rejoice when he sees vengeance. PR 24:16-18 Do not rejoice when your enemy falls or stumbles. PS 78:69, EC 1:4, 3:14 The earth was established forever. PS 102:25-26, MT 24:35, MK 13:31, LK 21:33, HE 1:10-11, 2PE 3:10 The earth will someday perish. PR 3:13, 4:7, 19:8, JA 1:5 Happy is the man who finds wisdom. Get wisdom. LK 2:40, 52 Jesus was filled with wisdom and found favor with God. 1CO 1:19-25, 3:18-20 Wisdom is foolishness. PR 12:2, RO 8:28 A good man obtains favor from the Lord. TI 3:12, HE 12:6 The godly will be persecuted. PR 14:8 The wisdom of a prudent man is to discern his way. MT 6:25-34 Take no thought for tomorrow. God will take care of you. PR 14:15-18 The simple believe everything and acquire folly; the prudent look where they are going and are crowned with knowledge. MT 18:3, LK 18:17 You must believe as little children do. 1CO 1:20, 27 God has made the wisdom of the world foolish so as to shame the wise. PR 16:4 God made the wicked for the "day of evil." MT 11:25, MK 4:11-12 God and Jesus hide some things from some people. JN 6:65 No one can come to Jesus unless it is granted by God. RO 8:28-30 Some are predestined to be called to God, believe in Jesus, and be justified. RO 9:15-18 God has mercy on, and hardens the hearts of, whom he pleases. 2TH 2:11-12 God deceives the wicked so as to be able to condemn them. 1TI 2:3-4, 2PE 3:9 [Yet] God wants all to be saved. PR 8:13, 16:6 It is the fear of God that keeps men from evil. 1JN 4:18 There is no fear in love. Perfect love drives out fear. 1JN 5:2, 2JN 1:6 Those who love God keep his commandments. PR 26:4 Do not answer a fool. To do so makes you foolish too. PR 26:5 Answer a fool. If you don't, he will think himself wise. PR 30:5 Every word of God proves true. JE 8:8 The scribes falsify the word of God. JE 20:7, EZ 14:9, 2TH 2:11-12 God himself deceives people. (Note: Some versions translate deceive as "persuade." The context makes clear, however, that deception is involved.) IS 3:13 God stands to judge. JL 3:12 He sits to judge. IS 44:24 God created heaven and earth alone. JN 1:1-3 Jesus took part in creation. IS 53:9 Usually taken to be a prophecy re: Jesus, mentions burial with others. MT 27:58-60, MK 15:45-46, LK 23:52-53, JN 19:38-42 Jesus was buried by himself. JE 12:13 Some sow wheat but reap thorns. MI 6:15 Some sow but won't reap anything. MT 25:26, LK 19:22 Some reap without sowing. 2CO 9:6, GA 6:7 A man reaps what he sows. JE 32:18 God shows love to thousands, but brings punishment for the sins of their fathers to many children. 2CO 13:11, 14, 1JN 4:8, 16 God is a god of love. JE 34:4-5 Zedekiah was to die in peace. JE 52:10-11 Instead, Zedekaih's sons are slain before his eyes, his eyes are then put out, he is bound in fetters, taken to Babylon and left in prison to die. EZ 20:25-26 The law was not good. The sacrifice of children was for the purpose of horrifying the people so that they would know that God is Lord. RO 7:12, 1TI 1:8 The law is good. EZ 26:15-21 God says that Tyre will be destroyed and will never be found again. (Nebudchanezzar failed to capture or destroy Tyre. It is still inhabited.) DN 5:1 (Gives the title of "king" to Belshazzar although Belshazzar was actually the "viceroy.") DN 5:2 (Says that Nebuchadnezzar was the father of Belshazzar, but actually, Nebonidus was the father of Belshazzar.) (Note: Some versions attempt to correct this error by making the verse say that Nebuchadnezzar was the grandfather of Belshazzar.) ZE 11:12-13 Mentions "thirty pieces" and could possibly be thought to be connected with the Potter's Field prophesy referred to in Matthew. MT 27:9 Jeremiah is given as the source of the prophesy regarding the purchase of the Potter's Field. (Note: There is no such prophesy in Jeremiah.) MT 1:6-7 The lineage of Jesus is traced through David's son, Solomon. LK 3:23-31 It is traced through David's son, Nathan. (Note: Some apologists assert that Luke traces the lineage through Mary. That this is untrue is obvious from the context since Luke and Matthew both clearly state that Joseph was Jesus' father.) MT 1:16 Jacob was Joseph's father. LK 3:23 Heli was Joseph's father. MT 1:17 There were twenty-eight generations from David to Jesus. LK 3:23-38 There were forty-three. MT 1:18-21 The Annunciation occurred after Mary had conceived Jesus. LK 1:26-31 It occurred before conception. MT 1:20 The angel spoke to Joseph. LK 1:28 The angel spoke to Mary. MT 1:20-23, LK 1:26-33 An angel announces to Joseph and/or Mary that the child (Jesus) will be "great," the "son of the Most High," etc., and .... MT 3:13-17, MK 1:9-11 The baptism of Jesus is accompanied by the most extraordinary happenings, yet .... MK 3:21 Jesus' own relatives (or friends) attempt to constrain him, thinking that he might be out of his mind, and .... MK 6:4-6 Jesus says that a prophet is without honor in his own house (which certainly should not have been the case considering the Annunciation and the Baptism). MT 1:23 He will be called Emmanuel (or Immanuel). MT 1:25 Instead, he was called Jesus. MT 2:13-16 Following the birth of Jesus, Joseph and Mary flee to Egypt, (where they stay until after Herod's death) in order to avoid the murder of their firstborn by Herod. Herod slaughters all male infants two years old and under. (Note: John the Baptist, Jesus' cousin, though under two is somehow spared without fleeing to Egypt.) LK 2:22-40 Following the birth of Jesus, Joseph and Mary remain in the area of Jerusalem for the Presentation (about forty days) and then return to Nazareth without ever going to Egypt. There is no slaughter of the infants. MT 2:23 "And he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets: He will be called a Nazarene.'" (This prophecy is not found in the OT and while Jesus is often referred to as "Jesus of Nazareth", he is seldom referred to as "Jesus the Nazarene.") MT 3:11-14, JN 1:31-34 John realized the true identity of Jesus (as the Messiah) either prior to the actual Baptism, or from the Baptism onward. The very purpose of John's baptism was to reveal Jesus to Israel. MT 11:2-3 After the Baptism, John sends his disciples to ask if Jesus is the Messiah. MT 3:12, 13:42 Hell is a furnace of fire (and must therefore be light). MT 8:12, 22:13, 25:30 Hell is an "outer darkness" (and therefore dark). MT 3:16, MK 1:10 It was Jesus who saw the Spirit descending. JN 1:32 It was John who saw the Spirit descending. MT 3:17 The heavenly voice addressed the crowd: "This is my beloved Son." MK 1:11, LK 3:22 The voice addressed Jesus: "You are my beloved Son...." MT 4:1-11, MK 1:12-13 Immediately following his Baptism, Jesus spent forty days in the wilderness resisting temptation by the Devil. JN 2:1-11 Three days after the Baptism, Jesus was at the wedding in Cana. MT 4:5-8 The Devil took Jesus to the pinnacle of the temple, then to the mountain top. LK 4:5-9 First to the mountain top, then to the pinnacle of the temple. MT 4:18-20, MK 1:16-18 (One story about choosing Peter as a disciple.) LK 5:2-11 (A different story.) JN 1:35-42 (Still another story.) MT 5:1 - 7:29 Jesus delivers his most noteworthy sermon while on the mount. LK 6:17-49 Jesus delivers his most noteworthy sermon while on the plain. (Note: No such sermons are mentioned in either MK or JN and Paul seems totally unfamiliar with either the sermon on the mount or the sermon on the plain.) MT 5:16 Good works should be seen. MT 6:1-4 They should be kept secret. MT 5:17-19, LK 16:17 Jesus underscores the permanence of the law. LE 10:8 - 11:47, DT 14:3-21 The law distinguishes between clean and unclean foods. MK 7:14-15, MK 7:18-19 Jesus says that there is no such distinction. TI 4:1-4 All foods are clean according to Paul. MT 5:17-19, LK 16:17 Jesus did not come to abolish the law. EP 2:13-15, HE 7:18-19 Jesus did abolish the law. MT 5:22 Anyone who calls another a fool is liable to Hell. MT 7:26 Jesus says that anyone who hears his words and does not do them is a fool. (Note: The translation now prevalent, "like a foolish man," in MT 7:26 is a dishonest attempt to alleviate the obvious inconsistency here in that the oldest Greek manuscripts use the same Greek word translated "fool" in MT 5:22 and "like a foolish man" in MT 7:26.) MT 23:17-19 Jesus twice calls the Pharisees blind fools. MT 25:2, 3, 8 Jesus likens the maidens who took no oil to fools. (Note: Again, this is the same Greek word translated "fool" in MT 5:22 and MT 23:17-19.) 1CO 1:23, 3:18, 4:10 Paul uses fool with regard to Christians becoming fools for Christ. (Note: Again, this is the same Greek word translated "fool" in MT 5:22 and MT 23:17-19.) MT 5:22 Anger by itself is a sin. EP 4:26 Anger is not necessarily a sin. MT 5:22 Anger by itself is a sin. MT 11:22-24, LK 10:13-15 Jesus curses the inhabitants of several cities who are not sufficiently impressed with his mighty works. MT 21:19, MK 11:12-14 Jesus curses a fig tree when it fails to bear fruit out of season. MK 3:5 Jesus looks around "angrily." MT 5:32 Divorce, except on the grounds of unchastity, is wrong. MK 10:11-12 Divorce on any grounds is wrong. MT 5:39, MT 5:44 Jesus says: "Do not resist evil. Love your enemies." MT 6:15, 12:34, 16:3, 22:18, 23:13-15, 17, 19, 27, 29, 33, MK 7:6, LK 11:40, 44, 12:56 Jesus repeatedly hurls epithets at his opponents. MT 5:39, MT 5:44 Do not resist evil. Love your enemies. LK 19:27 God is likened to one who destroys his enemies. MT 5:39, MT 5:44 Do not resist evil. Love your enemies. JN 1:9-11 Shun anyone who does not hold the proper doctrine. MT 5:43-44, MT 22:39 Love your enemies. Love your neighbor as yourself. MT 10:5 Go nowhere among the Gentiles nor enter a Samaritan town. MT 5:45, 7:21 God resides in heaven. MK 13:32 The angels reside in heaven AC 7:55, HE 12:2 Jesus is at the right hand of God, in heaven. 1PE 1:3-4 Believers will inherit eternal life in heaven. MT 24:35, MK 13:31, LK 21:33 Heaven will pass away. MT 6:13 God might lead us into temptation and it is better avoided. JA 1:2-3 Temptation is joy. MT 6:13 Jesus' prayer implies that God might lead us into temptation. JA 1:13 God tempts no one. MT 6:25-34, LK 12:22-31 Take no thought for tomorrow. God will take care of you. TI 5:8 A man who does not provide for his family is worse than an infidel. (Note: Providing for a family certainly involves taking "thought for tomorrow.") MT 7:1-2 Do not judge. MT 7:15-20 Instructions for judging a false prophet. MT 7:7-8, LK 11:9-10 Ask and it will be given. Seek and you will find. LK 13:24 Many will try to enter the Kingdom but will be unable. MT 7:21 Not everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. AC 2:21, RO 10:13 Whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved. AC 2:39 Those God calls to himself will be saved. MT 7:21, LK 10:36-37, RO 2:6, 13, JA 2:24 We are justified by works, not by faith. JN 3:16, RO 3:20-26, EP 2:8-9, GA 2:16 We are justified by faith, not by works. MT 8:5-12 The centurion himself approaches Jesus to ask to heal his servant. LK 7:2-10 The centurion sends elders to do the asking. MT 8:16, LK 4:40 Jesus healed all that were sick. MK 1:32-34 Jesus healed many (but not all). MT 8:28-33 Two demoniacs are healed in the Gadarene swine incident. MK 5:2-16, LK 8:26-36 One demoniac is healed in this incident. MT 9:18 The ruler's daughter was already dead when Jesus raised her. LK 8:42 She was dying, but not dead. MT 10:1-8 Jesus gives his disciples the power to exorcise and heal... MT 17:14-16 (Yet) the disciples are unable to do so. MT 10:2, MK 3:16-19 The twelve apostles (disciples) were: Simon (Peter), Andrew his brother, James the son of Zebedee, John his brother, Philip, Bartholemew, Thomas, Matthew the tax collector, James the son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus (Labbaeus), Simon, and Judas Iscariot. LK 6:13-16 The above except that Thaddaeus (Labbaeus) is excluded, and Judas the son of James is added (and Judas Iscariot remains). AC 1:13, 26 Same as MT and MK except that, like LK Thaddaeus (Labbaeus) is excluded, Judas the son of James is included, and Mathias is chosen by the others to replace Judas Iscariot. MT 10:2, 5-6 Peter was to be an apostle to the Jews and not go near the Gentiles. AC 15:7 He was an apostle to the Gentiles. MT 10:10 Do not take sandals (shoes) or staves. MK 6:8-9 Take sandals (shoes) and staves. MT 10:34, LK 12:49-53 Jesus has come to bring a sword, fire, and division--not peace. JN 16:33 Jesus says: "In me you have peace." MT 10:22, 24:13, MK 13:13 He that endures to the end will be saved. MK 16:16 He that believes and is baptized will be saved. JN 3:5 Only he that is born of water and Spirit will be saved. AC 16:31 He that believes on the Lord Jesus will be saved. AC 2:21 He that calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved. RO 10:9 He who confesses with his mouth "Jesus is Lord" and believes in his heart that God raised him from the dead will be saved. 1JN 4:7 He who loves is born of God (and presumably will be saved.) MT 10:28, LK 12:4 Jesus says not to fear men. (Fear God only.) MT 12:15-16, JN 7:1-10, 8:59, 10:39, 11:53-54 Jesus hid, escaped, went secretly, etc. MT 11:7-15, 17:12-13 Jesus says that John the Baptist was a prophet, and more. JN 1:21 John himself says that he is not a prophet, nor is he Elijah. MT 11:25, MK 4:11-12 Jesus thanks God for hiding some things from the wise while revealing them to "babes." He says that he uses parables so that the meaning of some of his teachings will remain hidden to at least some persons, and specifically so that they will not turn and be forgiven. MK 4:22 Jesus says that all things should be made known. MT 11:29 Jesus says that he is gentle (meek) and humble (lowly). JN 2:15 Jesus makes a whip of cords, drives the money changers from the Temple, overturns their tables, and pours out their coins. (Note: The presence of the money changers in the outer court of the Temple had been authorized by the Temple authorities and was, in fact, a necessity since the Jews would not accept Roman coin for the purchase of sacrifices.) MT 12:5 Jesus says that the law (OT) states that the priests profane the Sabbath but are blameless. (No such statement is found in the OT. MT 12:30 Jesus says that those who are not with him are against him. MK 9:40 Jesus says that those who are not against him are for him. (Note: This puts those who are indifferent or undecided in the "for him" category in the first instance and in the "against him" category in the second instance.) MT 12:39, MK 8:12, LK 11:29 Jesus says that he will give no "sign." JN 3:2, 20:30, AC 2:22 Jesus proceeds to give many such "signs." MT 13:34, MK 4:34 Jesus addresses the crowds only in parables, so that they would not fully understand. He explains the meaning only to his disciples. JN 1:1 - 21:25 (Throughout the book of John, unlike the other Gospels, Jesus addresses the crowds in a very straightforward manner. He does not employ parables.) MT 13:58, MK 6:5 In spite of his faith, Jesus is not able to perform mighty miracles. MT 17:20, 19:26, MK 9:23, 10:27, LK 17:6, 18:27 Jesus says that anything is possible to him who believes if he has the faith of a grain of mustard seed. All things are possible with God. A mountain can be commanded to move and it will move. MT 5:37, 15:19, MK 7:22, JN 8:14, 44, 14:6, 18:37 Jesus says that you should answer a plain "yes" or "no," that his purpose is to bear witness to the truth, and that his testimony is true. He equates lying with evil. JN 7:2-10 Jesus tells his brothers that he is not going to Jerusalem for the Feast of the Tabernacles, then later goes secretly by himself. (Note: The words "not yet" were added to some versions at JN 7:8 in order to alleviate this problem. The context at JN 7:10 makes the deception clear, however.) MT 16:6, 11 Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. MK 8:15 Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Herod. MT 16:18 Jesus founds his church on Peter and will give him the keys of the kingdom. MT 16:23 Jesus calls Peter [a] "Satan" and "a hindrance," and accuses him of being on the side of men rather than that of God. MT 16:18 Jesus founds his church on Peter and will give him the keys of the kingdom. AC 15:1-21 James presides over the first Council of Jerusalem and formulates the decree regarding the accepting of Gentiles which is sent to the other churches. (Note: Tradition has it that James was appointed as the first Bishop or Pope, not Peter.) MT 17:1-2 The Transfiguration occurs six days after Jesus foretells his suffering. LK 9:28-29 It takes place about eight days afterwards. MT 20:20-21 The mother of James and John asks Jesus a favor for her sons. MK 10:35-37 They ask for themselves. MT 20:23, MK 10:40 Jesus responds that it is not his to give. MT 28:18, JN 3:35 All authority has been given to Jesus. MT 20:29-34 Jesus heals two blind men on the way to Jericho. MK 10:46-52 He heals one blind man. MT 21:1-17 The sequence was: triumphal entry, cleansing of the temple, Bethany. MK 11:1-19 Triumphal entry, cleansing of the temple. LK 19:28-48 Triumphal entry, cleansing of the temple, daily teaching in the temple. JN 12:1-18 Cleansing of the temple (early in his career), Supper with Lazarus, triumphal entry, no cleansing of the temple following the triumphal entry. MT 21:2-6, MK 11:2-7, LK 19:30-35 The disciples follow Jesus instructions and bring him the animal (or animals, in the case of MT). JN 12:14 Jesus finds the animal himself. MT 21:7 Jesus rides two animals during his triumphal entry. MK 11:7, LK 19:35, JN 12:14 Only one animal is involved. MT 21:12-13 The cleansing of the temple occurs at the end of Jesus' career. JN 2:13-16 It occurs near the beginning of his career. MT 21:19-20 The fig tree withers immediately after being cursed by Jesus. The disciples notice and are amazed. MK 11:13-14, 20-21 The disciples first notice that the tree has withered the day following. MT 23:35 Jesus says that Zacharias (Zechariah) was the son of Barachias (Barachiah). 2CH 24:20 Zacharias was actually the son of Jehoida, the priest. (Note: The name Barachias, or Barachiah, does not appear in the O.T.) MT 24:29-33, MK 13:24-29 The coming of the kingdom will be accompanied by signs and miracles. LK 17:20-21 It will not be accompanied by signs and miracles. It is already within. MT 25:34 Heaven was prepared before the Ascension of Jesus. JN 14:2-3 It was prepared after the Ascension of Jesus. MT 26:6-13, MK 14:3 The anointing of Jeus takes place in Bethany at the house of Simon the leper. LK 7:36-38 It takes place at the house of a Pharisee in Galilee. MT 26:7, MK 14:3 The oil is poured on Jesus' head. LK 7:38, JN 12:3 On his feet. MT 26:7, MK 14:3, LK 7:37 An unnamed woman does the anointing. JN 12:3 It is Mary. MT 28:6-8 The women ran from the tomb "with great joy." JN 20:1-2 Mary told Peter and the other disciple that the body had been stolen. (Would she feel "great joy" if she thought the body had been stolen?) MT 26:8 The disciples reproach her. MK 14:4 "Some" reproach her. JN 12:4-5 Judas Iscariot reproaches her. MT 26:14-25, MK 14:10-11, LK 22:3-23 Judas made his bargain with the chief priests before the meal. JN 13:21-30 After the meal. MT 26:20-29, MK 14:17-28, JN 13:21-30 Jesus forecasts his betrayal prior to the communion portion of the supper. LK 22:14-23 After the communion portion. MT 26:26-29, MK 14:22-25 The order of the communion was: bread, then wine. LK 22:17-20 It was: wine, then bread. MT 26:34, LK 22:34, JN 13:38 Peter was to deny Jesus before the cock crowed. MK 14:30 Before the cock crowed twice. MK 14:66-72 The cock crows after both the first and second denials. (Note: These discrepancies have been "translated out" in some Bible versions.) MT 26:40-45, MK 14:37-41 The disciples fall asleep three times. LK 22:45 One time. MT 26:49-50, MK 14:44-46 Jesus is betrayed by Judas with a kiss, then seized. LK 22:47-48 Jesus anticipates Judas' kiss. No actual kiss is mentioned. JN 18:2-9 Jesus voluntarily steps forward to identify himself making it completely unnecessary for Judas to point him out. No kiss is mentioned. MT 26:51, MK 14:47, JN 18:10 The ear of a slave is cut off and left that way. LK 22:50-51 The severed ear is miraculously healed by Jesus. MT 26:52 Dispose of swords. All who take the sword will perish by it. LK 22:36-38 Buy swords. MT 26:57, MK 14:53, LK 22:54 After his arrest Jesus is first taken to Caiphas, the high priest. JN 18:13-24 First to Annas, the son-in-law of Caiphas, then to Caiphas. MT 26:18-20, 57-68, 27:1-2, MK 14:16-18, 53-72, 15:1 Jesus' initial hearing was at night on Passover. In the morning he was taken to Pilate. LK 22:13-15, 54-66 The initial hearing took place in the morning on Passover. JN 18:28, 19:14 It took place the day before Passover, on the Day of Preparation. MT 26:59-66, MK 14:55-64 Jesus was tried by the entire Sanhedrin (the chief priests and the whole council). LK 22:66-71 There was no trial but merely an inquiry held by the Sanhedrin. JN 18:13-24 There was no appearance before the Sanhedrin, only the private hearings before Annas and then Caiphas. MT 26:63, LK 22:70 The high priest asks Jesus if he is the Son of God. MK 14:61 He asks Jesus if he is the Son of the Blessed. MT 26:64, LK 22:70 Jesus answers: "You have said so," or words to this effect. MK 14:62 He answers directly: "I am." MT 26:69-70 Peter makes his first denial to a maid and "them all." MK 14:66-68, LK 22:56-57, JN 18:17 It was to one maid only. MT 26:71-72 Peter's second denial is to still another maid. MK 14:69-70 (Apparently) to the same maid. LK 22:58 To a man, not a maid. JN 18:25 To more than one, "they." MT 26:73-74, MK 14:70-71 Peter's third denial is to bystanders (two or more). LK 22:59-60 To "another" (one). JN 18:26-27 To one of the servants. MT 26:74 The cock crowed once. MK 14:72 The cock crowed twice. MT 27:3-7 The chief priests bought the field. AC 1:16-19 Judas bought the field. MT 27:5 Judas threw down the pieces of silver, then departed. AC 1:18 He used the coins to buy the field. MT 27:5 Judas hanged himself. AC 1:18 He fell headlong, burst open, and his bowels gushed out. MT 27:11, MK 15:2, LK 23:3 When asked if he is King of the Jews, Jesus answers: "You have said so," (or "Thou sayest"). JN 18:33-34 He answers: "Do you say this of your own accord?" MT 27:11-14 Jesus answers not a single charge at his hearing before Pilate. JN 18:33-37 Jesus answers all charges at his hearing before Pilate. MT 27:20 The chief priests and elders are responsible for persuading the people to ask for the release of Barabbas. MK 15:11 Only the chief priests are responsible. LK 23:18-23 The people ask, apparently having decided for themselves. MT 27:28 Jesus is given a scarlet robe (a sign of infamy). MK 15:17, JN 19:2 A purple robe (a sign of royalty). MT 27:32, MK 15:21, LK 23:26 Simon of Cyrene carries Jesus' cross. JN 19:17 Jesus carries his own cross with no help from anyone. MT 27:37 The inscription on the cross read: "This is Jesus the King of the Jews." MK 15:26 "The King of the Jews." LK 23:38 "This is the King of the Jews." JN 19:19 "Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews." MT 27:44 Both of those who are crucified with Jesus taunt him. LK 23:39-42 Only one taunts Jesus, and he is rebuked by the other for doing so. MT 27:46 Jesus asks God, the Father, why he has been forsaken. JN 10:30 Jesus says that he and the Father are one. MT 27:46-50, MK 15:34-37 Jesus' last recorded words are: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" LK 23:46 "Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit." JN 19:30 "It is finished." (Note: Even though both MT and MK represent direct quotes and are translated similarly, the actual Greek words used for God are different. MT uses "Eli" and MK uses "Eloi.") MT 27:48, LK 23:36, JN 19:29 Jesus was offered vinegar to drink. MK 15:23 It was wine and myrrh, and he did not drink it. JN 19:29-30 Whatever it was, he did drink it. MT 27:54 The centurion says: "Truly this was the son of God." MK 15:39 He says: "Truly this man was the son of God!" LK 23:47 He says: "Truly this man was innocent" (or "righteous"). MT 27:55, MK 15:40, LK 23:49 The women looked on from afar. JN 19:25-26 They were near enough that Jesus could speak to his mother. MT 27:62-66 A guard was placed at the tomb (the day following the burial). MK 15:42- 16:8, LK 23:50-56, JN 19:38-42 (No guard is mentioned. This is important since rumor had it that Jesus' body was stolen and the Resurrection feigned.) MK 16:1-3, LK 24:1 (There could not have been a guard, as far as the women were concerned, since they were planning to enter the tomb with spices. Though the women were aware of the stone, they were obviously unaware of a guard.) MT 24:9 Even some of the disciples of Jesus will be killed. JN 8:51 If anyone keeps Jesus' words, he will never see death. HE 9:27 [All] men die once, then judgement follows. MT 28:1 The first visitors to the tomb were Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (two). MK 16:1 Both of the above plus Salome (three). LK 23:55 - 24:1, 24:10 Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and "other women" (at least five). JN 20:1 Mary Magdalene only (one). MT 28:1 It was toward dawn when they arrived. MK 16:2 It was after sunrise. LK 24:1 It was at early dawn. JN 20:1 It was still dark. MT 28:1-2 The stone was still in place when they arrived. It was rolled away later. MK 16:4, LK 24:2, JN 20:1 The stone had already been rolled (or taken) away. MT 28:2 An angel arrived during an earthquake, rolled back the stone, then sat on it (outside the tomb). MK 16:5 No earthquake, only one young man sitting inside the tomb. LK 24:2-4 No earthquake. Two men suddenly appear standing inside the tomb. JN 20:12 No earthquake. Two angels are sitting inside the tomb. MT 28:8 The visitors ran to tell the disciples. MK 16:8 They said nothing to anyone. LK 24:9 They told the eleven and all the rest. JN 20:10-11 The disciples returned home. Mary remained outside, weeping. MT 28:8-9 Jesus' first Resurrection appearance was fairly near the tomb. LK 24:13-15 It was in the vicinity of Emmaus (seven miles from Jerusalem). JN 20:13-14 It was right at the tomb. MT 28:9 On his first appearance to them, Jesus lets Mary Magdalene and the other Mary hold him by his feet. JN 20:17 On his first appearance to Mary, Jesus forbids her to touch him since he has not yet ascended to the Father. JN 20:27 A week later, although he has not yet ascended to the Father, Jesus tells Thomas to touch him. MT 28:7-10, MT 28:16 Although some doubted, the initial reaction of those that heard the story was one of belief since they followed the revealed instructions. MK 16:11, LK 24:11 The initial reaction was one of disbelief. All doubted. MT 28:1-18 The order of Resurrection appearances was: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, then the eleven. MK 16:9-14 It was Mary Magdalene, then two others, then the eleven. LK 24:15-36 It was two, then Simon (Peter?), then the eleven. JN 20:14 - 21:1 It was Mary Magdalene, then the disciples without Thomas, then the disciples with Thomas, then the eleven disciples again. 1CO 15:5-8 It was Cephas (Peter?), then the "twelve" (which twelve, Judas was dead?), then 500+ brethren (although AC 1:15 says there were only about 120), then James, then all the Apostles, then Paul. MT 28:19 Jesus instructs his disciples to baptize. 1CO 1:17 Although he considers himself a disciple of Jesus, Paul says that he has not been sent to baptize. MK 1:2 Jesus quotes a statement that he says appears in Isaiah. (No such statement appears in Isaiah.) MK 1:14 Jesus began his ministry after the arrest of John the Baptist. JN 3:22-24 Before the arrest of John the Baptist. MK 1:23-24 A demon cries out that Jesus is the Holy One of God. JN 4:1-2 Everyone who confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God. (Note: This would mean that the demon is of God.) MK 3:29 Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is an unforgivable sin. AC 13:39, CN 2:13, 1JN 1:9 All sins are forgivable. MK 4:11-12, 11:25 Jesus says that he uses parables so that the meaning of some of his teachings will remain secret to at least some persons. He explains the meanings of the parables only to his disciples. He thanks God for hiding some things from the wise while revealing them to "babes." JN 18:20 Jesus says that he always taught openly, never secretly. MK 6:16 Herod was the source of the belief that John had been raised from the dead. LK 9:7 Others were the source. Herod was perplexed by the belief. MK 6:52 The people were so unimpressed with "the Feeding of the Multitude" that they did not even understand the event. JN 6:14-15 They were so impressed that they tried to force Jesus to be their king. MK 6:53 After the feeding of the 5000, Jesus and the disciples went to Gennesaret. JN 6:17-25 They went to Capernaum. MK 10:19 Jesus lists "defraud not" as one of the commandments. EX 20:3-17 There is no such commandment in the Ten Commandments or elsewhere in the OT) MK 15:25 It was the third hour when Jesus was crucified. JN 19:14-15 It was after the sixth hour since Jesus was still before Pilate and had not yet been sentenced at that time. MK 16:1-2 The women came to the tomb to anoint the body. JN 19:39-40 The body had already been anointed and wrapped in linen cloth. MK 16:5, LK 24:3 The women actually entered the tomb. JN 20:1-2, 11 They did not. MK 16:14-19 The Ascension took place (presumably from a room) while the disciples were together seated at a table, probably in or near Jerusalem. LK 24:50-51 It took place outdoors, after supper, at Bethany (near Jerusalem). AC 1:9-12 It took place outdoors, after 40+ days, at Mt. Olivet. MT 28:16-20 No mention is made of an ascension, but if it took place at all, it must have been from a mountain in Galilee since MT ends there.) LK 1:15 John the Baptist had the Holy Spirit from before his birth or the birth of Jesus. LK 1:41 Elizabeth had it long before Jesus went away. LK 1:67 So did Zechariah. LK 2:25 So did Simeon. LK 11:13 It is obtained by prayer (presumably at any time). JN 7:39, JN 16:7, AC 1:3-5 The Holy Spirit cannot come into the world until after Jesus has departed. LK 8:12 The Devil causes unbelief. MK 4:11-12 Jesus is responsible for unbelief in at least some cases. 2TH 2:11-12 God is ultimately responsible for unbelief in at least some cases. LK 14:26 No one can be a disciple of Jesus unless he hates his parents, wife, children, brothers and sisters. JN 3:15 Whoever hates his brother is a murderer. JN 4:20 If anyone claims to love God but hates his brother, he is a liar. LK 18:9-14 Do not boast of your virtue. RO 11:20, 1PE 5:5 Do not be proud. RO 15:17, 2CO 1:12, HE 3:6, 2CO 2:14, 5:12, 11:17 Paul boasts of his faith and says that one should be proud of it. LK 22:3-23 Satan entered Judas before the supper. JN 13:27 It was during the supper. LK 23:43 Jesus promises one of those crucified with him that they will be together, that very day, in Paradise. JN 20:17, AC 1:3 Jesus was not raised until the third day and did not ascend until at least forty days later. LK 23:55-56 The women followed Joseph to the tomb, saw how the body had been laid, then went to prepare spices with which to annoint the body. JN 19:39-40 Joseph brought spices with him (75 or a 100 lbs.) and annointed the body (as the women should have noticed). JN 1:1, 10:30 Jesus and God are one. JN 14:28 God is greater than Jesus. JN 1:1 Jesus was God incarnate. AC 2:22 Jesus was a man approved by God. JN 3:17, 8:15, 12:47 Jesus does not judge. JN 5:22, 5:27-30, 9:39, AC 10:42, 2CO 5:10 Jesus does judge. JN 5:22 God does not judge. RO 2:2-5, 3:19, 2TH 1:5, 1PE 1:17 God does judge. JN 5:24 Believers do not come into judgement. MT 12:36, 2CO 5:10, HE 9:27, 1PE 1:17, JU 1:14-15, RE 20:12-13 All persons (including believers) come into judgement. JN 5:31 Jesus says that if he bears witness to himself, his testimony is not true. JN 8:14 Jesus says that even if he bears witness to himself, his testimony is true. JN 5:38-47 Men have a choice as to whether or not to receive Jesus. JN 6:44 No one can come to Jesus unless he is drawn by the Father. JN 7:38 Jesus quotes a statement that he says appears in scripture (i.e., the OT). (No such statement is found in the OT.) JN 10:27-29 None of Jesus' followers will be lost. TI 4:1 Some of them will be lost. JN 10:30 Jesus and the Father are one, (i.e., equal). JN 14:28 The Father is greater than Jesus. JN 12:31 The Devil is the ruler (or "prince") of this world. 1CO 10:26, RE 1:5 Jesus is the ruler of kings--the earth is his. JN 12:32 Jesus implies that all persons will be saved. TI 2:3-4, 2PE 3:9 God wants all to be saved. JN 12:40, AC 2:21, 2:39, RO 9:27, 10:13 Some will not be saved. RE 14:1-4 Heaven will be inhabited by 144,000 virgin men (only?). JN 13:36 Peter asks Jesus where he is going. JN 14:5 Thomas does the same. JN 16:5 Jesus says that none of them have asked him where he is going. JN 17:12 Jesus has lost none of his disciples other than Judas. JN 18:9 Jesus has lost none, period. JN 17:12 Mentions a "son of perdition" as appearing in scripture (meaning the OT). (Note: There is no "son of perdition" mentioned in the OT.) JN 18:37 Jesus came into the world to bear witness to the truth. RO 1:18-20 The truth has always been evident. JN 20:9 Jesus quotes a statement that he says appears in scripture (meaning the OT). (No such statement is found in the OT.) JN 20:22 In his first resurrection appearance before the assembled disciples, Jesus gives them the Holy Spirit. AC 1:3-5, AC 2:1-4 The Holy Spirit was received much later (on Pentecost.) JN 21:25 The world probably could not contain the books if all that Jesus did were to be recorded. AC 1:1 The author of Acts has already written about all that Jesus began to do. AC 5:19, 12:6-11 The disciples take part in a jailbreak made possible by an angel. AC 5:40-42 The disciples disobey the Council and continue to teach and preach Jesus. RO 13:1-4, 1PE 2:13-15 Obey the laws of men (i.e., government). It is the will of God. AC 5:29 Obey God, not men. RO 13:1-4, 1PE 2:13-15 Obey the laws of men (i.e., government). It is the will of God. AC 9:7 Those present at Paul's conversion heard the voice but saw no one. AC 22:9 They saw a light but did not hear a voice. AC 9:7 Those present at Paul's conversion stood. AC 26:14 They fell to the ground. AC 9:19-28 Shortly after his conversion, Paul went to Damascus, then Jerusalem where he was introduced to the Apostles by Barnabas, and there spent some time with them (going in and out among them). GA 1:15-20 He made the trip three years later, then saw only Peter and James. AC 9:23 The governor attempted to seize Paul. 2CO 11:32 It was the Jews who tried to seize Paul. AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike. RO 9:11-13 God hated Esau and loved Jacob even before their birth. AC 10:34, RO 2:11 God shows no partiality. He treats all alike. RO 9:18 God has mercy on whoever he chooses, etc. AC 16:6 The Holy Spirit forbids preaching in Asia. AC 19:8-10 Paul preaches in Asia anyway. AC 20:35 Quotes Jesus as having said: "It is more blessed to give than to receive." (No such statement of Jesus is found elsewhere in the Bible.) RO 2:12 All who have sinned without the law will perish without the law. RO 4:15 Where there is no law there is no transgression (sin). RO 2:13 Doers of the law will be justified. RO 3:20, GA 3:11 They will not be justified. RO 2:15 The law is written on the heart. Conscience teaches right from wrong. 1JN 2:27 Anointing by Jesus teaches right from wrong. RO 4:9 Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness. JA 2:21 Abraham was justified by works (which made his faith perfect). RO 10:11 (An alleged OT quote; no such statement in the OT.) RO 14:21 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything that might cause your brother to stumble or be offended. CN 2:16 Let no one pass judgement on you in matters of food and drink. 1CO 7:8-9 Widows should not marry (although it is better to marry than burn). TI 5:14 Young widows should marry, bear children, rule the household, etc.. 1CO 8:4 There is only one God. 2CO 4:4 Satan is God of this world (therefore there are at least two gods). 1CO 10:33 Paul says that he tries to please men (so they might be saved). GA 1:10 Paul says he would not be a servant of Christ if he tried to please men. 2CO 12:16 Paul says that he does use trickery. 1TH 2:3 Paul says that he does not use trickery. GA 6:2 Bear one anothers burdens. GA 6:5 Bear your own burden. 1TH 2:2 God gave Paul the courage to continue his work. 1TH 2:17-18 Satan hindered Paul. (Note: Who is stronger, Satan or God?) TI 1:15 Paul says that he is the foremost of sinners. JN 3:8-10 He who commits sin is of the Devil. Children of God do not sin. TI 6:20, 2TI 2:14-16, 3:1-7 Do not argue with an unbeliever. 2JN 1:10-11 Anyone who even greets an unbeliever shares his wicked work. 1PE 3:15 Always be ready to answer any man concerning your faith. JA 4:5 (Quotes an alleged scripture (OT) verse; not found in the OT.) RE 8:7 All of the grass on earth is burned up, and then ... REV 9:4 An army of locusts, which is about to be turned loose on the earth, is instructed not to harm the grass. Leave No Stone Unturned An Easter Challenge For Christians I HAVE AN EASTER challenge for Christians. My challenge is simply this: tell me what happened on Easter. I am not asking for proof. My straightforward request is merely that Christians tell me exactly what happened on the day that their most important doctrine was born. Believers should eagerly take up this challenge, since without the resurrection, there is no Christianity. Paul wrote, "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not." (I Corinthians 15:14-15) The conditions of the challenge are simple and reasonable. In each of the four Gospels, begin at Easter morning and read to the end of the book: Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, and John 20-21. Also read Acts 1:3-12 and Paul's tiny version of the story in I Corinthians 15:3-8. These 165 verses can be read in a few moments. Then, without omitting a single detail from these separate accounts, write a simple, chronological narrative of the events between the resurrection and the ascension: what happened first, second, and so on; who said what, when; and where these things happened. Since the gospels do not always give precise times of day, it is permissible to make educated guesses. The narrative does not have to pretend to present a perfect picture--it only needs to give at least one plausible account of all of the facts. Additional explanation of the narrative may be set apart in parentheses. The important condition to the challenge, however, is that not one single biblical detail be omitted. Fair enough? I have tried this challenge myself. I failed. An Assembly of God minister whom I was debating a couple of years ago on a Florida radio show loudly proclaimed over the air that he would send me the narrative in a few days. I am still waiting. After my debate at the University of Wisconsin, "Jesus of Nazareth: Messiah or Myth," a Lutheran graduate student told me he accepted the challenge and would be contacting me in about a week. I have never heard from him. Both of these people, and others, agreed that the request was reasonable and crucial. Maybe they are slow readers. Many bible stories are given only once or twice, and are therefore hard to confirm. The author of Matthew, for example, was the only one to mention that at the crucifixion dead people emerged from the graves of Jerusalem, walking around showing themselves to everyone--an amazing event that could hardly escape the notice of the other Gospel writers, or any other historians of the period. But though the silence of others might weaken the likelihood of a story, it does not disprove it. Disconfirmation comes with contradictions. Thomas Paine tackled this matter two hundred years ago in The Age of Reason, stumbling across dozens of New Testament discrepancies: "I lay it down as a position which cannot be controverted," he wrote, "first, that the agreement of all the parts of a story does not prove that story to be true, because the parts may agree and the whole may be false; secondly, that the disagreement of the parts of a story proves the whole cannot be true." Since Easter is told by five different writers, it gives one of the best chances to confirm or disconfirm the account. Christians should welcome the opportunity. One of the first problems I found is in Matthew 28:2, after two women arrived at the tomb: "And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it." (Let's ignore the fact that no other writer mentioned this "great earthquake.") This story says that the stone was rolled away after the women arrived, in their presence. Yet Mark's Gospel says it happened before the women arrived: "And they said among themselves, Who shall roll away the stone from the door of the sepulchre? And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great." Luke writes: "And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre." John agrees. No earthquake, no rolling stone. It is a three-to-one vote: Matthew loses. (Or else the other three are wrong.) The event cannot have happened both before and after they arrived. Some bible defenders assert that Matthew 28:2 was intended to be understood in the past perfect, showing what had happened before the women arrived. But the entire passage is in the aorist (past) tense, and it reads, in context, like a simple chronological account. Matthew 28:2 begins, "And, behold," not "For, behold." If this verse can be so easily shuffled around, then what is to keep us from putting the flood before the ark, or the crucifixion before the nativity? Another glaring problem is the fact that in Matthew the first post-resurrection appearance of Jesus to the disciples happened on a mountain in Galilee (not in Jerusalem, as most Christians believe), as predicted by the angel sitting on the newly moved rock: "And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead; and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him." This must have been of supreme importance, since this was the message of God via the angel(s) at the tomb. Jesus had even predicted this himself sixty hours earlier, during the Last Supper (Matthew 26:32). After receiving this angelic message, "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted." (Matthew 28:16-17) Reading this at face value, and in context, it is clear that Matthew intends this to have been the first appearance. Otherwise, if Jesus had been seen before this time, why did some doubt? Mark agrees with Matthew's account of the angel's Galilee message, but gives a different story about the first appearance. Luke and John give different angel messages and then radically contradict Matthew. Luke shows the first appearance on the road to Emmaus and then in a room in Jerusalem. John says it happened later than evening in a room, minus Thomas. These angel messages, locations, and travels during the day are impossible to reconcile. Believers sometimes use the analogy of the five blind men examining an elephant, all coming away with a different definition: tree trunk (leg), rope (tail), hose (trunk), wall (side), and fabric (ear). People who use this argument forget that each of the blind men was wrong: an elephant is not a rope or a tree. You can put the five parts together to arrive at a noncontradictory aggregate of the entire animal. This hasn't been done with the resurrection. Another analogy sometimes used by apologists is comparing the resurrection contradictions to differing accounts given by witnesses of an auto accident. If one witness said the vehicle was green and the other said it was blue, that could be accounted for by different angles, lighting, perception, or definitions of words. The important thing, they claim, is that they do agree on the basic story--there was an accident, there was a resurrection. I am not a fundamentalist inerrantist. I'm not demanding that the evangelists must have been expert, infallible witnesses. (None of them claims to have been at the tomb itself, anyway.) But what if one person said the auto accident happened in Chicago and the other said it happened in Milwaukee? At least one of these witnesses has serious problems with the truth. Luke says the post-resurrection appearance happened in Jerusalem, but Matthew says it happened in Galilee, sixty to one hundred miles away! Could they all have traveled 150 miles that day, by foot, trudging up to Galilee for the first appearance, then back to Jerusalem for the evening meal? There is no mention of any horses, but twelve well-conditioned thoroughbreds racing at breakneck speed, as the crow flies, would need about five hours for the trip, without a rest. And during this madcap scenario, could Jesus have found time for a leisurely stroll to Emmaus, accepting, "toward evening," an invitation to dinner? Something is very wrong here. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Of course, none of these contradictions prove that the resurrection did not happen, but they do throw considerable doubt on the reliability of the supposed witnesses. Some of them were wrong. Maybe they were all wrong. This challenge could be harder. I could ask why reports of supernatural beings, vanishing and materializing out of thin air, long-dead corpses coming back to life, and people levitating should be given serious consideration at all. Thomas Paine was one of the first to point out that outrageous claims require outrageous proof. Protestants and Catholics seem to have no trouble applying healthy skepticism to the miracles of Islam, or to the "historical" visit between Joseph Smith and the angel Moroni. Why should Christians treat their own outrageous claims any differently? Why should someone who was not there be any more eager to believe than doubting Thomas, who lived during that time, or the other disciples who said that the women's news from the tomb "seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not" (Luke 24:11)? Paine also points out that everything in the bible is hearsay. For example, the message at the tomb (if it happened at all) took this path, at minimum, before it got to our eyes: God, angel(s), Mary, disciples, Gospel writers, copyists, translators. (The Gospels are all anonymous and we have no original versions.) But first things first: Christians, either tell me exactly what happened on Easter Sunday, or let's leave the Jesus myth buried next to Eastre (Ishtar, Astarte), the pagan Goddess of Spring after whom your holiday was named. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Here are some of the discrepancies among the resurrection accounts: What time did the women visit the tomb? Matthew: "as it began to dawn" (28:1) Mark: "very early in the morning . . . at the rising of the sun" (16:2, KJV); "when the sun had risen" (NRSV); "just after sunrise" (NIV) Luke: "very early in the morning" (24:1, KJV) "at early dawn" (NRSV) John: "when it was yet dark" (20:1) Who were the women? Matthew: Mary Magdalene and the other Mary (28:1) Mark: Mary Magdalene, the mother of James, and Salome (16:1) Luke: Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James, and other women (24:10) John: Mary Magdalene (20:1) What was their purpose? Matthew: to see the tomb (28:1) Mark: had already seen the tomb (15:47), brought spices (16:1) Luke: had already seen the tomb (23:55), brought spices (24:1) John: the body had already been spiced before they arrived (19:39,40) Was the tomb open when they arrived? Matthew: No (28:2) Mark: Yes (16:4) Luke: Yes (24:2) John: Yes (20:1) Who was at the tomb when they arrived? Matthew: One angel (28:2-7) Mark: One young man (16:5) Luke: Two men (24:4) John: Two angels (20:12) Where were these messengers situated? Matthew: Angel sitting on the stone (28:2) Mark: Young man sitting inside, on the right (16:5) Luke: Two men standing inside (24:4) John: Two angels sitting on each end of the bed (20:12) What did the messenger(s) say? Matthew: "Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay. And go quickly, and tell his disciples that he is risen from the dead: and, behold, he goeth before you into Galilee; there shall ye see him: lo, I have told you." (28:5-7) Mark: "Be not afrighted: Ye seek Jesus of Nazareth, which was crucified: he is risen; he is not here: behold the place where they laid him. But go your way, tell his disciples and Peter that he goeth before you into Galilee: there shall ye see him, as he said unto you." (16:6-7) Luke: "Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again." (24:5-7) John: "Woman, why weepest thou?" (20:13) Did the women tell what happened? Matthew: Yes (28:8) Mark: No. "Neither said they any thing to any man." (16:8) Luke: Yes. "And they returned from the tomb and told all these things to the eleven, and to all the rest." (24:9, 22-24) John: Yes (20:18) When Mary returned from the tomb, did she know Jesus had been resurrected? Matthew: Yes (28:7-8) Mark: Yes (16:10,11) Luke: Yes (24:6-9,23) John: No (20:2) When did Mary first see Jesus? Matthew: Before she returned to the disciples (28:9) Mark: Before she returned to the disciples (16:9,10) John: After she returned to the disciples (20:2,14) Could Jesus be touched after the resurrection? Matthew: Yes (28:9) John: No (20:17), Yes (20:27) After the women, to whom did Jesus first appear? Matthew: Eleven disciples (28:16) Mark: Two disciples in the country, later to eleven (16:12,14) Luke: Two disciples in Emmaus, later to eleven (24:13,36) John: Ten disciples (Judas and Thomas were absent) (20:19, 24) Paul: First to Cephas (Peter), then to the twelve. (Twelve? Judas was dead). (I Corinthians 15:5) Where did Jesus first appear to the disciples? Matthew: On a mountain in Galilee (60-100 miles away) (28:16-17) Mark: To two in the country, to eleven "as they sat at meat" (16:12,14) Luke: In Emmaus (about seven miles away) at evening, to the rest in a room in Jerusalem later that night. (24:31, 36) John: In a room, at evening (20:19) Did the disciples believe the two men? Mark: No (16:13) Luke: Yes (24:34--it is the group speaking here, not the two) What happened at the appearance? Matthew: Disciples worshipped, some doubted, "Go preach." (28:17-20) Mark: Jesus reprimanded them, said "Go preach" (16:14-19) Luke: Christ incognito, vanishing act, materialized out of thin air, reprimand, supper (24:13-51) John: Passed through solid door, disciples happy, Jesus blesses them, no reprimand (21:19-23) Did Jesus stay on earth for a while? Mark: No (16:19) Compare 16:14 with John 20:19 to show that this was all done on Sunday Luke: No (24:50-52) It all happened on Sunday John: Yes, at least eight days (20:26, 21:1-22) Acts: Yes, at least forty days (1:3) Where did the ascension take place? Matthew: No ascension. Book ends on mountain in Galilee Mark: In or near Jerusalem, after supper (16:19) Luke: In Bethany, very close to Jerusalem, after supper (24:50-51) John: No ascension Paul: No ascension Acts: Ascended from Mount of Olives (1:9-12) http://www.muslim-answers.org/proofs-t.htm http://salam.muslimsonline.com/~islamawe/Quran/Sources/Bibindex.html
asad	Monday, September 25, 2000 - 01:29 pm "What I mean by "abuse" is the CRITICIZING of the Bible." what about the contradictions and inconsistences in the bible. are these not abuses(corruptions) done by people? :-) runta, you did not answer my question: !! are you saying God is protecting corruption, contradictions and abuse that is found in the bible?. if God would have protected the bible, there would not be corruption, contradictions and abuse in the bible, right? "What do you have to say about the plagiarism of the Qu'ran? i thought i answered. check up there and read it. "About why Muhammed would not have had sacrifices? Why didn't you answer?" i thought i told you that we muslims do sacrifice, but we do not believe the sacrifice of human blood like you and the christians. "It also challenge's the Qu'ran supposed scientific superiority and the supposed beauty of the Qu'ran (C'mon guys... there isn't even any chronological order... He could be talking about calming down an argument between his wives and the next verse could talk about not eating pork... no coherence.)" What About Scientific Foreknowledge in the Bible? "Any challenge to the Bible inerrancy doctrine will sooner or later encounter the scientific-foreknowledge argument. "If the Bible is not the inspired word of God," the inerrancy spokesmen ask, "then how do you explain the many examples of scientific foreknowledge in it?" The claim implied in this question is that men writing in an age of relative ignorance indicated in various passages of the Bible that they understood scientific truths that were completely unknown at the time. The response the question seeks is that these scientific facts could not have been known to Bible writers without God's having revealed them during the verbal inspiration process. They see this as a compelling argument for the inerrancy doctrine. A basic problem with this argument is the same as the one found in the familiar harmonious-content, unity-of-theme, and fulfillment-of-prophecy arguments so often presented in the Bible's defense. It is based more on speculation, imaginative interpretations, and wishful thinking than on verifiable facts. As I write this, I am engaged in a written debate with a Church-of-Christ preacher who, in trying to use this argument, threw a volley of speculatively conceived questions at me in his second affirmative manuscript. How did Moses know of woman's seed being involved in the conception of children, (Gen. 3:15)? How did Isaiah know in his day that the earth is round, (Isa. 40:22)? How did Job know that the earth rests on no material foundation, (Job 26:7)? How did Moses know that life is in the blood (Gen. 9:4), when medical science didn't know it until a late date? How did David know of the moon's bearing witness (Ps. 89:37) to the sunlight on the other side of the earth? How did David know that there are paths in the seas (Ps. 8:8) long before oceanography and Matthew Maury's work found it so? These are the questions exactly as he fired them at me. Not once did he take the time to explicate scripture references to show reasonable proof that the writers meant what he was interpreting them to mean. He just tacked the references onto his questions as if this alone were enough to establish that the writers had intended the meanings he was attributing to them. Any verbal communication, however, whether oral or written, must be interpreted before it can be understood, and this is doubly true of written statements. Participants in oral communication enjoy the advantage of voice inflections and body gestures to help them establish or determine meaning, but this advantage is lost in written communication. Written statements, then, often require careful explication to determine meaning. Without it, the risk of misinterpretation increases. But in the volley of questions listed above, not even a hint of explication was in evidence. What explication, for example, is involved in asking, How did Moses know of woman's seed being involved in the conception of children, (Gen. 3:15)"? There is none. The intended impact of the question depends on two assumptions (aside from the assumption that Moses wrote the book of Genesis): (1) the word seed in this passage refers to the ovum that the female contributes to procreation and (2) the existence of the ovum was unknown when Genesis 3:15 was written. To assess the plausibility of the first of these assumptions, we must examine the passage that the question alludes to. After their disobedience to Yahweh's command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, Yahweh pronounced curses upon all parties involved in the act. To the serpent, he said, "Because you have done this, cursed are you above all cattle and above all wild animals; upon your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the woman and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel," (Gen. 3:14-15, RSV). To assert that the word seed in this passage refers to the ova of the woman is almost too ridiculous to warrant serious comment. For one thing, an ovum is only a female germ cell that cannot develop into a person unless it is first fertilized by the male counterpart, so if ova were the intended meaning of the word, how could the "seed" of the woman ever bruise the head of the serpent? The Hebrew word translated "seed" in this passage is zera, which could mean both seed, in the sense of plant ovules, or posterity (offspring or descendants). It is the same word that was used several times in Genesis 1:11-12 in reference to the creation of vegetation that yielded seed after "its kind." The meaning of the word here seems rather obvious; it was a reference to the seed produced by plants like corn, alfalfa, and turnips. The seed of a plant, however, is something radically different from the ovum of a woman. A plant seed is actually an embryo (formed from the union of the male and female germ cells) encased in a shell with an endosperm that will provide the germinating embryo with food until it is mature enough to survive on its own. A seed, in other words, is the offspring of a plant. It is to the plant what an embryo in the womb is to a woman, so certainly a woman's ovum alone cannot be considered biologically parallel to a plant seed, because it is only half of what a seed is. The one is just a female germ cell; the other an embryo formed from the union of both the female and male germ cells. If we are to understand Genesis 3:15, then, we must think of zera as a Hebrew word that most often meant offspring. In many places in the book of Genesis alone, it was clearly used in this sense. Yahweh said to Abram in Genesis 12:7, "Unto thy seed [zera] will I give this land." In Genesis 13:16, Yahweh promised Abram, "I will make thy seed [zera] as the dust of the earth." After showing a willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac at Jehovah-jireh, an angel of Yahweh told Abraham, "I will multiply thy seed [zera] as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is upon the seashore; and thy seed [zera] shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy seed [zera] shall all the nations of the earth be blessed," (Gen. 22:17-18). In these and other passages too numerous to cite, the Hebrew word zera was obviously used to indicate offspring or descendants. Since this meaning also fits appropriately into the context of Genesis 3:15, only someone desperate to find support for an indefensible position would ever feel a need to interpret it as a lesson in modern biology by a primitive writer. Most English translations, in fact, use offspring or descendants in all of these passages as well as many others in which the King James and American Standard Versions translated zera as seed. If these facts leave any doubt about what the Genesis writer meant in referring to Eve's "seed," Genesis 16:10 should remove it. In her flight from the wrath of Sarah, Hagar, Abraham's concubine, was visited by an angel of Yahweh, who promised her, "I will greatly multiply thy seed [zera], that it shall not be numbered for multitude." In the translations referred to above, the word descendants is used where seed appears in the KJV and ASV. Yet if zera meant ova in reference to Eve's "seed" in Genesis 3:15, consistency would require the proponents of this argument to believe that it also meant ova when referring to Hagar's seed. Hence, we would have an angel of Yahweh promising Hagar that she would produce so many ova that she wouldn't be able to count them. Such is the predicament that inerrancy proponents get themselves into when they try to manufacture evidence out of nothing. Isaiah 40:22 speaks of God who "sitteth above the circle of the earth," but there are many explicative problems that must be resolved before one can present this as proof that Isaiah knew the shape of the earth in a time when no one else did. For one thing, how can we be sure that Isaiah was speaking literally in the passage? He also spoke of "the four corners of the earth" (11:12), but if I should cite this verse as an example of scientific inaccuracy on the part of a Bible writer who thought the earth was square, inerrancy advocates would demand proof that Isaiah had intended literal meaning. By the same token, then, they should be prepared to prove that Isaiah's reference to the "circle of the earth" was meant literally. Even if they could successfully do this, they would then have to prove that Isaiah meant circle in the sense of sphere. Plates and disks are circular in shape as well as spheres, and, as practically any general encyclopedia will confirm, some ancient cultures before and during Isaiah's time thought that the earth was a flat disk. To find evidence of scientific foreknowledge in Isaiah 40:22, then, the inerrancy advocates would have to prove that the passage referred to a spherical rather than a discoid circle. I seriously doubt that they can ever do that, but until they do, they have no argument. The main weakness of this argument, however, is the fact that the shape of the earth was known in Isaiah's time. In discussing the spherical era of Earth's history, the Encyclopedia Britannica (Vol. 6, 1978, pp. 1-3) explains that ancient astronomers determined that the earth was round by observing its circular shadow move across the moon during lunar eclipses. The Egyptians and Greeks as far back as 2550 B.C. (more than a thousand years before Moses) knew not only the earth's spherical shape but also its approximate size. The Grecian philosopher Pythagoras, who was born in 532 B.C., defended the spherical theory on the basis of observations he had made of the shape of the sun and moon. If this information was generally known by educated Greeks and Egyptians before and during biblical times, how can anyone say with certitude that Isaiah couldn't have known about it? If space allowed, I would explicate the other scriptures mentioned earlier that are often cited as evidence of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible, but these are enough to demonstrate the problems that the inerrancy proponents must solve before rational-thinking people can take their argument seriously. If Pythagoras could observe the sun and the moon and thereby reason that the earth was also spherical in shape, why couldn't Job have looked at the moon or the sun and concluded that the earth, like them, was suspended in space on nothing? Why couldn't Moses, if he was indeed the author of Genesis, have observed that when blood is drained from the body, life flowed out with it so that in some sense life was "in the blood"? Just why does this have to mean that Moses knew that blood carries oxygen to cells throughout the body and thereby sustains life? Why does "paths of the seas" in Psalm 8:8 have to be a reference to ocean currents like the Gulf Stream and the North Atlantic Current? Why couldn't it just as easily have been a reference to ocean trade routes that the ships of that time traveled? The Hebrew word orach translated paths in this passage in fact meant "customary road." And even if it was a reference to currents in the oceans, how can anyone determine today that knowledge of those currents was completely unknown at that time? Simply because it isn't now known that it was known doesn't prove that it wasn't known. So inerrancy proponents aren't the only ones who can ask questions. Those of us who reject the inerrancy doctrine have a lot of questions to ask too, especially on this matter of alleged scientific foreknowledge in the Bible. Like so much of the other "evidence" that Bible fundamentalists offer as proof of the inerrancy doctrine, they see scientific foreknowledge in the Bible only because they so desperately want to see something that can form a rational basis for their faith. In the same way, they see prophecies and their fulfillments in passages so obscurely written that no one can really determine what the writers originally intended in the statements. In the face of unequivocal inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible text, they see unity of theme because they so desperately want to see unity of theme. This approach to Bible interpretation has at times caused them major embarrassment. In 1939, for example, George DeHoff wrote a biblical apology entitled Why We Believe the Bible. An entire chapter was devoted to the scientific-foreknowledge argument in which he cited Job 26:7 as supporting evidence, (p. 50): Astronomers have discovered that there is a great empty space in the North. It contains no moving planets and shining stars. By turning their telescopes to the South, the East and the West, men may behold countless millions of stars invisible to the naked eye but when the telescope is set exactly to the North there is a great empty space. For this, astronomers have been unable to account. They did not know until recently that there was such an empty space, yet Job declared, "He stretcheth out the North over the empty places [sic] and hangeth the earth upon nothing," (Job 26:7). DeHoff's conclusion was that "Job could not have written by guess. It must be that he wrote by inspiration of God." For years, this scripture was cited from Church-of-Christ pulpits as compelling evidence that the Bible was divinely inspired, but there was just one thing wrong with it. The premise on which it was based wasn't true. There is no "empty place" in our northern space. Everywhere astronomers look, they find space filled with galaxies and stars. That includes our northern space too. So wherever DeHoff got this argument, he didn't get it from science, and he will find no support for it in scientific circles. Inerrancy advocates in the Churches of Christ are now admitting that they erred in using Job 26:7 as an example of scientific foreknowledge in the Bible. In the September 1989 issue of Reason & Revelation, Dr. Bert Thompson summarized the traditional DeHoffian interpretation of Job 26:7 and then said this, (p. 35): This writer has so used the verse himself in the past, but does so no longer, because of problems associated with such interpretations. For example, if we attempt to convince people that this verse is to be taken literally, how do we then consistently deal with statements in the chapter which are obviously figurative (such as verse 11: "The pillars of heaven tremble, and are astonished at his reproof")? Further, there seems to be no empty space in the north. Instead, "billions of stars and galaxies extend outward in all directions," (Donald B. DeYoung, Astronomy and the Bible). We congratulate Dr. Thompson for finally recognizing an obvious flaw in a popular inerrancy argument. It gives us hope that he might someday see the flaws in other inerrancy arguments too. Something that has long perplexed me is the way that inerrancy proponents can so easily find "scientific foreknowledge" in obscurely worded Bible passages but seem completely unable to see scientific error in statements that were rather plainly written. There are too many to discuss, but Leviticus 11:5-6 can serve as an example. Here "Moses," after having identified clean animals as those that "chew the cud and part the hoof," said, "And the coney, because he cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, he is unclean unto you. And the hare, because she cheweth the cud but parteth not the hoof, she is unclean unto you." Deuteronomy 14:7 also described the hare and the cony as cud-chewers, but in reality they are not. They do not have compartmentalized stomachs that ruminants must have in order to be cud-chewers. Inerrancy champions have stumbled over these passages with various attempts to explain them. Gleason Archer justifies the classification of hares and conies as cud-chewers on the grounds that they "give the appearance of chewing their cud in the same way ruminants do," (Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, p. 126). Yet after all has been said on the matter, the fact remains that hares and conies are not cud-chewers. But "Moses" said that they were. One would think that if God were going to arm his inspired writers with scientific foreknowledge about complex matters like the "seed of woman" and the shape of the earth, he could have easily programmed them to know the simple fact that hares and conies aren't cud-chewers. That he didn't reveal this to them, as well as other things, certainly doesn't help the scientific-foreknowledge argument."
Runta	Tuesday, September 26, 2000 - 05:48 am The Bible has no corruption. God has protected the Bible from corruption. The only abuse of the Bible has been people quoting it out of context and criticizing it. That's the abuse. No, asad just because a later story contradicts an earlier story that doesn't mean that the later story has "additional and new insights". Usually the earlier account is given more credibility. If I gave a story about my mountain trip and wrote it down and 50 years later someone I had retold the story who was not there tries to recount the story. If he has contradictions to what the my story said... HE is considered wrong, not my story. My written story was first. If I write a paper on physics and someone basically has what I said plus or minus a few points... if you were a teacher you would fail the student for plagiarism. Sure he might have added a few insights... but the majority of the paper was plagiarized. If I write an American fairy tale and 200 years later a foreigner tells the story as though it were true, but all the Americans know that the story is just a fairy tale... the foreigner would be the foolish one... trying to tell a story that is consider a myth in another culture as though it was true... what about that asad? It is error to think that newer revelation given by a self-proclaimed "prophet" supercedes previous revelation automatically. It takes more than a revelation being new to make it true. Have you ever seen the Qu'ran contradict itself? Or display historically inaccurate information? Answer me. Do you believe that Muhammed institued sacrifices the same way that was in the Law? (As in the strictness of administering it and the reasoning behind it, etc.) If so how could he administer it or any Arab since they were not Levites? What happened to the temple asad? What happened to the Levitcal priesthood asad? Last big question which you have not once answered... this is my fourth time at least asking it... why do you respond with attacks on the Bible when the original discussion was not talking about the Bible? I am talking about Islam and the Qu'ran... it's like you can't stand but to copy these huge postings (have you even read them?) Why do you always have to answer with an attack on the Bible NO MATTER WHAT I ASK???? What does that have to do with my question? It's kind of annoying. How would you like it if when you asked me about the Bible and all I gave you was a two sentence response and then a 20 page attack on the Qu'ran?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! It's irrelevant to the issue at hand. I don't even see the reason to talking to you... I ask you all these questions and you give these short sentence responses that don't answer anything. I wish to have dialogue with a person not with his internet links. Once in a while would be fine... but you're doing this every posting now. That's ridiculous. I want to talk to you. Asad can you think of your own detailed responses? If you can't let me know and I'll try to find someone on this site who can.
asad	Tuesday, September 26, 2000 - 06:59 am "The Bible has no corruption. God has protected the Bible from corruption. The only abuse of the Bible has been people quoting it out of context and criticizing it. That's the abuse." saying it does not have corruption does not make it so. let's see what christian scholars say about the contradictions in the bible: "Let us start from the beginning. No Biblical scholar on this earth will claim that the Bible was written by Jesus himself. They all agree that the Bible was written after the departure of Jesus peace be upon him by his followers. Dr. W Graham Scroggie of the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, a prestigious Christian evangelical mission, says: "..Yes, the Bible is human, although some out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men and bear in their style the characteristics of men...." "It is Human, Yet Divine," W Graham Scroggie, p. 17 Another Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, says: "...Not so the New testament...There is condensation and editing; there is choice reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come through the mind of the church behind the authors. They represent experience and history..." "The Call of the Minaret," Kenneth Cragg, p 277 "It is well known that the primitive Christian Gospel was initially transmitted by word of mouth and that this oral tradition resulted in variant reporting of word and deed. It is equally true that when the Christian record was committed to writing it continued to be the subject of verbal variation. Involuntary and intentional, at the hands of scribes and editors" Peake's Commentary on the Bible, p. 633 "Yet, as a matter of fact, every book of the New Testament with the exception of the four great Epistles of St. Paul is at present more or less the subject of controversy, and interpolations are asserted even in these." Encyclopaedia Brittanica, 12th Ed. Vol. 3, p. 643 Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf, one of the most adamant conservative Christian defenders of the Trinity was himself driven to admit that: "[the New Testament had] in many passages undergone such serious modification of meaning as to leave us in painful uncertainty as to what the Apostles had actually written" Secrets of Mount Sinai, James Bentley, p. 117. After listing many examples of contradictory statements in the Bible, Dr. Frederic Kenyon says: "Besides the larger discrepancies, such as these, there is scarcely a verse in which there is not some variation of phrase in some copies [of the ancient manuscripts from which the Bible has been collected]. No one can say that these additions or omissions or alterations are matters of mere indifference". Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, Dr. Frederic Kenyon, Eyre and Spottiswoode, p. 3. Throughout this book you will find countless other similar quotations from some of Christendom's leading scholars. Let us suffice with these for now. Christians are, in general, good and decent people, and the stronger their convictions the more decent they are. This is attested to in the noble Qur'an: "...and nearest among them (men) in love to the believers will you find those who say 'we are Christians': because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant. And when they listen to the revelation received by the messenger (Muhammad), you will see their eyes overflowing with tears for they recognize the truth: They pray: 'Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses'." The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):82-83. All biblical "versions" of the Bible prior to the revised version of 1881 were dependent upon the "Ancient Copies" (those dating between five to six hundred years after Jesus). The revisers of the Revised Standard Version (RSV) 1952 were the first biblical scholars to have access to the "MOST ancient copies" which date fully three to four hundred years after Christ. It is only logical for us to concur that the closer a document is to the source the more authentic it is. Let us see what is the opinion of Christendom with regard to the most revised version of the Bible (revised in 1952 and then again in 1971): "The finest version which has been produced in the present century" - (Church of England newspaper) "A completely fresh translation by scholars of the highest eminence" - (Times literary supplement) "The well loved characteristics of the authorized version combined with a new accuracy of translation" - (Life and Work)"The most accurate and close rendering of the original" - (The Times). The publishers themselves (Collins) mention on page 10 of their notes: "This Bible (RSV) is the product of thirty two scholars assisted by an advisory committee representing fifty cooperating denominations" Let us see what these thirty two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations have to say about the Authorized Version (AV), or as it is better known, the King James Version (KJV). In the preface of the RSV 1971 we find the following: "...Yet the King James Version has GRAVE DEFECTS.." They go on to caution us that: "...That these defects are SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS as to call for revision" The Jehovah's Witnesses in their "AWAKE" Magazine dated 8th September 1957 published the following headline: "50,000 Errors in the Bible" wherein they say "..there are probably 50,000 errors in the Bible...errors which have crept into the Bible text...50,000 such serious errors..." After all of this, however, they go on to say: "...as a whole the Bible is accurate." Let us have a look at only a very few of these errors. In John 3:16 - AV(KJV) we read: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.." But as seen in section 1.2.3.10, this fabrication "begotten" has now been unceremoniously excised by these most eminent of Bible revisers. However, humanity did not have to wait 2000 years for this revelation. In Maryam(19):88-98 of the noble Qur'an we read: "And they say 'Allah Most Compassionate has begotten a son!'. Indeed you have put forth a thing most monstrous! The skies are ready to burst (at such a claim), and the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin. That they should ascribe a son to the Most Compassionate. But it is not befitting [the majesty of] the Most Compassionate that He should beget a son. Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to the Most Compassionate as a servant. He has taken account of all of them and has numbered them all exactly. And every one of them will come to him singly on the day of judgment. On those who believe and work deeds of righteousness, will Allah most gracious bestow love. Verily, We have made this [Qur'an] easy in your tongue [O Muhammad] that you might deliver glad tidings to those who seek refuge [in Allah] and warn with it a people who are contentious. And how many a generation before them have we destroyed! Can you find a single one of them or hear from them so much as a whisper?" In 1st Epistle of John 5:7 (King James Version) we find: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one." As we have already seen in section 1.2.2.5, this verse is the closest approximation to what the Church calls the holy Trinity. However, as seen in that section, this cornerstone of the Christian faith has also been scrapped from the RSV by the same thirty two Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations, once again all according to the "most ancient manuscripts." And once again, we find that the noble Qur'an revealed this truth over fourteen hundred years ago: "O people of the book! commit no excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah, and his Word, which he bestowed upon Mary, and a spirit preceding from him so believe in Allah and his messengers. Say not "Three" desist It will be better for you for Allah is one God Glory be to him Far exalted is he above having a son. To him belong all things in the heavens and the earth. And enough is Allah as a disposer of affairs." The noble Qur'an, Al-Nissa(4):171 Prior to 1952 all versions of the Bible made mention of one of the most miraculous events associated with the prophet Jesus peace be upon him, that of his ascension into heaven: "So then the lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God" Mark 16:19 and once again in Luke: "While he blessed them, he parted from them, and was carried up into heaven. And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy." Luke 24:51-52. In the 1952 RSV Mark 16 ends at verse 8 and the rest is relegated in small print to a footnote (more on this later). Similarly, in the commentary on the verses of Luke 24, we are told in the footnotes of the NRSV Bible "Other ancient authorities lack "and was carried up into heaven'" and "Other ancient authorities lack 'and worshipped him'". Thus, we see that the verse of Luke in it's original form only said: "While he blessed them, he parted from them. And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy." It took centuries of "inspired correction" to give us Luke 24:51-52 in their current form. As another example, in Luke 24:1-7 we read: "Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulcher. And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again." Once again, in reference to verse 5, the footnotes say: "Other ancient authorities lack 'He is not here but has risen'" Also, please read entries 16 and 17 in the table in section 2.2. The examples are far too numerous to list here, however, you are encouraged to obtain a copy of the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible for yourself and scan through the four gospels. You shall be hard pressed to find even two consecutive pages that do not contain the words "Other ancient authorities lack..." or "Other ancient authorities add..." etc. in the footnotes.. Let us now talk about the alleged authors of the New Testament. We will note that every Gospel begins with the introduction "According to....." such as "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," "The Gospel according to Saint Luke," "The Gospel according to Saint Mark," "The Gospel according to Saint John." The obvious conclusion for the average man on the street is that these people are known to be the authors of the books attributed to them. This, however is not the case. Why? Because not one of the vaunted four thousand copies existent carries it's author's signature. It has just been assumed that they were the authors. Recent discoveries, however, refute this belief. Even the internal evidence proves that, for instance, Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to him: "...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus)." Matthew 9:9 It does not take a rocket scientist to see that neither Jesus nor Matthew wrote this verse of "Matthew." Such evidence can be found in many places throughout the New Testament. Although many people have hypothesized that it is possible that an author sometimes may write in the third person, still, in light of the rest of the evidence that we shall see throughout this book, there is simply too much evidence against this hypothesis. This observation is by no means limited to the New Testament. There is even proof that at least parts of Deuteronomy were neither written by God nor by Moses. This can be seen in Deuteronomy 34:5-10 where we read "So Moses....DIED... and he (God Almighty) BURIED HIM (Moses)... He was 120 years old WHEN HE DIED... and there arose not a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses...." Did Moses write his own obituary? Joshua also speaks in detail about his own death in Joshua 24:29-33. The evidence overwhelmingly supports the current recognition that most of the books of the Bible were not written by their supposed authors. The authors of the RSV by Collins say that the author of "Kings" is "Unknown." If they knew it to be the word of God they would have undoubtedly attributed it to him. Rather, they have chosen to honestly say "Author....Unknown." But if the author is unknown then why attribute it to God? How can it then be claimed to have been "inspired"? Continuing, we read that the book of Isaiah is "Mainly credited to Isaiah. Parts may have been written by others." Ecclesiastics: "Author. Doubtful, but commonly assigned to Solomon." Ruth: "Author. Not definitely known, perhaps Samuel." and on and on. Let us have a slightly more detailed look at only one book of the New Testament: "The author of the Book of Hebrews is unknown. Martin Luther suggested that Apollos was the author...Tertullian said that Hebrews was a letter of Barnabas...Adolf Harnack and J. Rendel Harris speculated that it was written by Priscilla (or Prisca). William Ramsey suggested that it was done by Philip. However, the traditional position is that the Apostle Paul wrote Hebrews...Eusebius believed that Paul wrote it, but Origen was not positive of Pauline authorship." From the introduction to the King James Bible, New revised and updated sixth edition, the Hebrew/Greek Key Study, Red Letter Edition Is this how we define "inspired by God"? As seen in chapter one, St. Paul and his church after him, were responsible of making wholesale changes to the religion of Jesus (pbuh) after his departure and were further responsible for mounting a massive campaign of death and torture of all Christians who refused to renounce the teachings of the apostles in favor of the Pauline doctrines. All but the Gospels acceptable to the Pauline faith were then systematically destroyed or re-written. Rev. Charles Anderson Scott has the following to say: "It is highly probable that not one of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) was in existence in the form which we have it, prior to the death of Paul. And were the documents to be taken in strict order of chronology, the Pauline Epistles would come before the synoptic Gospels." History of Christianity in the Light of Modern Knowledge, Rev. Charles Anderson Scott, p.338 This statement is further confirmed by Prof. Brandon: "The earliest Christian writings that have been preserved for us are the letters of the apostle Paul" "Religions in Ancient History," S.G.F. Brandon, p. 228. In the latter part of the second century, Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth says: "As the brethren desired me to write epistles(letters), I did so, and these the apostles of the devil have filled with tares (undesirable elements), exchanging some things and adding others, for whom there is a woe reserved. It is not therefore, a matter of wonder if some have also attempted to adulterate the sacred writings of the Lord, since they have attempted the same in other works that are not to be compared with these." The Qur'an confirms this with the words: "Then woe to those who write the book (of Allah/God) with their own hands and then say: 'This is from Allah', to traffic with it for a miserable price. Woe to them for what their hands do write and for the gain they make thereby" The noble Qur'an Al-Bakarah(2):79 Victor Tununensis, a sixth century African Bishop related in his Chronicle (566 AD) that when Messala was consul at Costantinople (506 AD), he "censored and corrected" the Gentile Gospels written by persons considered illiterate by the Emperor Anastasius. The implication was that they were altered to conform to sixth century Christianity which differed from the Christianity of previous centuries (The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Gospel of Barnabas, and the New Testament, by M. A. Yusseff, p. 81) These "corrections" were by no means confined to the first centuries after Christ. Sir Higgins says: "It is impossible to deny that the Bendictine Monks of St. Maur, as far as Latin and Greek language went, were very learned and talented, as well as numerous body of men. In Cleland's 'Life of Lanfranc, Archbishop of Canterbury', is the following passage: 'Lanfranc, a Benedictine Monk, Archbishop of Canterbury, having found the Scriptures much corrupted by copyists, applied himself to correct them, as also the writings of the fathers, agreeably to the orthodox faith, secundum fidem orthodoxam." History of Christianity in the light of Modern knowledge, Higgins p.318 In other words, the Christian scriptures were re-written in order to conform to the doctrines of the eleventh and twelfth centuries and even the writings of the early church fathers were "corrected" so that the changes would not be discovered. Sir Higgins goes on to say: "The same Protestant divine has this remarkable passage: 'Impartiality exacts from me the confession, that the orthodox have in some places altered the Gospels." The author then goes on to demonstrate how a massive effort was undertaken in Costantinople, Rome, Canterbury, and the Christian world in general in order to "correct" the Gospels and destroy all manuscripts before this period. Theodore Zahan, illustrated the bitter conflicts within the established churches in Articles of the Apostolic Creed. He points out that the Roman Catholics accuse the Greek Orthodox Church of remodeling the text of the holy scriptures by additions and omissions with both good as well as evil intentions. The Greek Orthodox, on the other hand, accuse the Roman Catholics of straying in many places very far away from the original text. In spite of their differences, they both join forces to condemn the non-conformist Christians of deviating from "the true way" and condemn them as heretics. The heretics in turn condemn the Catholics for having "recoined the truth like forgers." The author concludes "Do not facts support these accusations?" "And from those who said: "We are Christians," We took their Covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message which was sent to them. Therefore We have stirred up enmity and hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, and Allah will inform them of what they used to do. O people of the Scripture! Now has Our messenger (Muhammad) come to you, explaining to you much of that which you used to hide in the Scripture, and forgiving much. Indeed, there has come to you a light from Allah and a plain Scripture. Wherewith Allah guides him who seeks His good pleasure unto paths of peace. He brings them out of darkness by His will into light, and guides them to a straight path. They indeed have disbelieved who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. Say: Who then has the least power against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and his mother and everyone on earth? And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He creates what He will. And Allah is Able to do all things. The Jews and Christians say: We are sons of Allah and His loved ones. Say; Why then does He punish you for your sins? No, you are but mortals of His creating. He forgives whom He will, and punishes whom He will. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and unto Him is the return (of all). O people of the Scripture! Now has Our messenger (Muhammad) come unto you to make things plain after a break in (the series of) the messengers, lest you should say: There came not unto us a messenger of cheer nor any Warner. Now has a messenger of cheer and a Warner come unto you. And Allah is Able to do all things." The noble Qur'an, Al-Maidah(5):14-19 St. Augustine himself, a man acknowledged and looked up to by both Protestants and Catholics alike, professed that there were secret doctrines in the Christian religion and that "there were many things true in the Christian religion which it was not convenient for the vulgar to know, and that some things were false, but convenient for the vulgar to believe in them." Sir Higgins admits: "It is not unfair to suppose that in these withheld truths we have part of the modern Christian mysteries, and I think it will hardly be denied that the church, whose highest authorities held such doctrines, would not scruple to retouch the sacred writings" (The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Gospel of Barnabas, and the New Testament, M. A. Yusseff, p.83) Even the epistles attributed to Paul were not written by him. After years of research, Catholics and Protestants alike agree that of the thirteen epistles attributed to Paul only seven are genuinely his. They are: Romans, 1, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philipians, Philemon, and 1 Thessalonians. Christian sect are not even agreed on the definition of what exactly is an "inspired" book of God. The Protestants are taught that there are 66 truly "inspired" books in the Bible, while the Catholics have been taught that there are 73 truly "inspired" books, not to mention the many other sects and their "newer" books, such as the Mormons, etc. As we shall see shortly, the very first Christians, for many generations, did not follow either the 66 books of the Protestants, nor the 73 books of the Catholics. Quite the opposite, they believed in books that were, many generations later, "recognized" to be fabrications and apocrypha by a more enlightened age than that of the apostles. Well, where do all of these Bibles come from and why the difficulty in defining what is a truly "inspired" word of God? They come from the "ancient manuscripts" (also known as MSS). The Christian world today boasts of an excess of 24,000 "ancient manuscripts" of the Bible dating all the way back to the fourth century after Christ (But not back to Christ or the apostles themselves). In other words, we have with us gospels which date back to the century when the Trinitarians took over the Christian Church. All manuscripts from before this period have strangely perished. All Bibles in existence today are compiled from these "ancient manuscripts." Any scholar of the Bible will tell us that no two ancient manuscripts are exactly identical. People today generally believe that there is only ONE Bible, and ONE version of any given verse of the Bible. This is far from true. All Bibles in our possession today (Such as the KJV, the NRSV, the NAB, NIV,...etc.) are the result of extensive cutting and pasting from these various manuscripts with no single one being the definitive reference. There are countless cases where a paragraph shows up in one "ancient manuscript" but is totally missing from many others. For instance, Mark 16:8-20 (twelve whole verses) is completely missing from the most ancient manuscripts available today (such as the Sinaitic Manuscript, the Vatican #1209 and the Armenian version) but shows up in more recent "ancient manuscripts." There are also many documented cases where even geographical locations are completely different from one ancient manuscript to the next. For instance, in the "Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript," Deuteronomy 27:4 speaks of "mount Gerizim," while in the "Hebrew manuscript" the exact same verse speaks of "mount Ebal." From Deuteronomy 27:12-13 we can see that these are two distinctly different locations. Similarly, Luke 4:44 in some "ancient manuscripts" mentions "Synagogues of Judea," others mention "Synagogues of Galilee." This is only a sampling, a comprehensive listing would require a book of it's own. There are countless examples in the Bible where verses of a questionable nature are included in the text without any disclaimer telling the reader that many scholars and translators have serious reservations as to their authenticity. The King James Version of the Bible (Also known as the "Authorized Version", the one in the hands of the majority of Christendom today, is one of the most notorious in this regard. It gives the reader absolutely no clue as to the questionable nature of such verses. However, more recent translations of the Bible are now beginning to be a little more honest and forthcoming in this regard. For example, the New Revised Standard Version of the Bible, by Oxford Press, has adopted an extremely subtle system of bracketing the most glaring examples of such questionable verses with double square brackets ([[ ]]). It is highly unlikely that the casual reader will realize the true function these brackets serve. They are there to tell the informed reader that the enclosed verses are of a highly questionable nature. Examples of this are the story of the "woman taken in adultery" in John 8:1-11, as well as Mark 16:9-20 (Jesus' resurrection and return), and Luke 23:34 (which, interestingly enough, is there to confirm the prophesy of Isaiah 53:12).....and so forth. For example, with regard to John 8:1-11, the commentators of this Bible say in very small print at the bottom of the page: "The most ancient authorities lack 7.53-8.11; other authorities add the passage here or after 7.36 or after 21.25 or after Luke 21.38 with variations of text; some mark the text as doubtful." (emphasis added). With regard to Mark 16:9-20, we are, strangely enough, given a choice of how we would like the Gospel of Mark to end. The commentators have supplied both a "short ending" and a "long ending." Thus, we are given a choice of what we would prefer to be the "inspired word of God". Once again, at the end of this Gospel in very small text, the commentators say: "Some of the most ancient authorities bring the book to a close at the end of verse 8. One authority concludes the book with the shorter ending; others include the shorter ending and then continue with verses 9-20. In most authorities, verses 9-20 follow immediately after verse 8, though in some of these authorities the passage is marked as being doubtful." Peake's Commentary on the Bible records; "It is now generally agreed that 9-20 are not an original part of Mk. They are not found in the oldest MSS, and indeed were apparently not in the copies used by Mt. and Lk. A 10th-cent. Armenian MS ascribes the passage to Aristion, the presbyter mentioned by Papias (ap.Eus.HE III, xxxix, 15)." "Indeed an Armenian translation of St. Mark has quite recently been discovered, in which the last twelve verses of St. Mark are ascribed to Ariston, who is otherwise known as one of the earliest of the Christian Fathers; and it is quite possible that this tradition is correct" Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, F. Kenyon, Eyre and Spottiswoode, pp. 7-8 Even at that, these verses are noted as having been narrated differently in different "authorities." For example, verse 14 is claimed by the commentators to have the following words added on to them in some "ancient authorities": "and they excused themselves saying 'This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits. Therefore, reveal your righteousness now' - thus they spoke to Christ and Christ replied to them 'The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, that they may inherit the spiritual and imperishable glory of the righteousness that is in heaven'.". Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf was one of the most eminent conservative biblical scholars of the nineteenth century. He was also one of the staunchest most adamant defenders of the "Trinity" history has known. One of his greatest lifelong achievements was the discovery of the oldest known Biblical manuscript know to mankind, the "Codex Sinaiticus," from Saint Catherine's Monastery in Mount Sinai. One of the most devastating discoveries made from the study of this fourth century manuscript was that the gospel of Mark originally ended at verses 16:8 and not at verse 16:20 as it does today. In other words, the last 12 verses (Mark 16:9 through Mark 16:20) were "injected" by the church into the Bible sometime after the 4th century. Clement of Alexandria and Origen never quoted these verses. Later on, it was also discovered that the said 12 verses, wherein lies the account of "the resurrection of Jesus," do not appear in codices Syriacus, Vaticanus and Bobiensis. Originally, the "Gospel of Mark" contained no mention of the "resurrection of Jesus" (Mark 16:9-20). At least four hundred years (if not more) after the departure of Jesus, the Church received divine "inspiration" to add the story of the resurrection to the end of this Gospel. The author of "Codex Sinaiticus" had no doubt that the Gospel of Mark came to an end at Mark 16:8, to emphasize this point we find that immediately following this verse he brings the text to a close with a fine artistic squiggle and the words "The Gospel according to Mark." Tischendorf was a staunch conservative Christian and as such he managed to casually brush this discrepancy aside since in his estimation the fact that Mark was not an apostle nor an eye witness to the ministry of Jesus made his account secondary to those of the apostles such as Matthew and John. However, as seen elsewhere in this book, the majority of Christian scholars today recognize the writings of Paul to be the oldest of the writings of the Bible. These are closely followed by the "Gospel of Mark" and the "Gospels of Matthew and Luke" are almost universally recognized to have been based upon the "Gospel of Mark." This discovery was the result of centuries of detailed and painstaking studies by these Christian scholars and the details can not be repeated here. Suffice it to say that most reputable Christian scholars today recognize this as a basic indisputable fact. Today, the translators and publishers of our modern Bibles are beginning to be a little more forthright and honest with their readers. Although they may not simply openly admit that these twelve verses were forgeries of the Church and not the word of God, still, at least they are beginning to draw the reader's attention to the fact that there are two "versions" of the "Gospel of Mark" and then leave the reader to decide what to make of these two "versions." Now the question becomes "if the Church has tampered with the Gospel of Mark, then did they stop there or is there more to this story?. As it happens, Tischendorf also discovered that the "Gospel of John" has been heavily reworked by the Church over the ages. For example, It was found that the verses starting from John 7:53 to 8:11 (the story of the woman taken in adultery) are not to be found in the most ancient copies of the Bible available to Christianity today, specifically, codices Sinaiticus or Vaticanus. It was also found that John 21:25 was a later insertion, and that a verse from the gospel of Luke (24:12) that speaks of Peter discovering an empty tomb of Jesus is not to be found in the ancient manuscripts. (For more on this topic please read 'Secrets of Mount Sinai' by James Bentley, Doubleday, NY, 1985). Much of the discoveries of Dr. Tischendorf regarding the continuous and unrelenting tampering with the text of the Bible over the ages has been verified by twentieth century science. For example, a study of the Codex Sinaiticus under ultraviolet light has revealed that the "Gospel of John" originally ended at verse 21:24 and was followed by a small tail piece and then the words "The Gospel according to John." However, some time later, a completely different "inspired" individual took pen in hand, erased the text following verse 24, and then added in the "inspired" text of John 21:25 which we find in our Bibles today. The evidence of tampering goes on and on. For example, in the Codex Sinaiticus the "lord's prayer" of Luke 11:2-4 differs substantially from the version which has reached us through the agency of centuries of "inspired" correction. Luke 11:2-4 in this most ancient of all Christian manuscripts reads: "Father, Hallowed by thy name, Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so upon earth. Give us day by day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins, as we ourselves also forgive everyone that is indebted to us. And bring us not into temptation." Further, the "Codex Vaticanus," is another ancient manuscript held by the scholars of Christianity in the same reverent standing as the Codex Sinaiticus. These two fourth century codices are together considered the most ancient copies of the Bible available today. In the codex Vaticanus we can find a version of Luke 11:2-4 even shorter than that of Codex Sinaiticus. In this version even the words "Thy will be done, as in heaven, so upon earth." are not to be found. Well, what has been the official Church position regarding these "discrepancies"? How did the Church decide to handle this situation? Did they call upon all of the foremost scholars of Christian literature to come together in a mass conference in order to jointly study the most ancient Christian manuscripts available to the Church and come to a common agreement as to what was the true original word of God? No! Well then, did they immediately expend every effort to make mass copies of the original manuscripts and send them out to the Christian world so that they could make their own decisions as to what truly was the original unchanged word of God? Once again, No! So what did they do? Let us ask Rev. Dr. George L. Robertson. In his book "Where did we get our Bible? he writes: "Of the MSS. of Holy Scripture in Greek still existing there are said to be several thousand of varying worth ... Three or four in particular of these old, faded out, and unattractive documents constitute the most ancient and the most precious treasures of the Christian Church, and are therefore of special interest." First in Rev. Richardson's list is the "Codex Vaticanus" of which he says: "This is probably the most ancient of all Greek MSS. now known to exist. It is designated as Codex 'B.' In 1448, Pope Nicholas V brought it to Rome where it has lain practically ever since, being guarded assiduously by papal officials in the Vatican Library. It's history is brief: Erasmus in 1533 knew of its existence, but neither he nor any of his successors were permitted to study it... becoming quite inaccessible to scholars, till Tischendorf in 1843, after months of delay, was finally allowed to see it for six hours. Another specialist, named de Muralt in 1844 was likewise given an aggravating glimpse of it for nine hours. The story of how Dr. Tregelles in 1845 was allowed by the authorities (all unconscious to themselves) to secure it page by page through memorizing the text, is a fascinating one. Dr. Tregelles did it. He was permitted to study the MS. continuously for a long time, but not to touch it or to take notes. Indeed, every day as he entered the room where the precious document was guarded, his pockets were searched and pen, paper and ink were taken from him, if he carried such accessories with him. The permission to enter, however, was repeated, until he finally had carried away with him and annotated in his room most of the principle variant readings of this most ancient text. Often, however, in the process, if the papal authorities observed he was becoming too much absorbed in any one section, they would snatch the MS. away from him and direct his attention to another leaf. Eventually they discovered that Tregelles had practically stolen the text, and that the Biblical world knew the secrets of their historic MS. Accordingly, Pope Pius IX ordered that it should be photographed and published; and it was, in five volumes which appeared in 1857. But the work was very unsatisfactorily done. About that time Tischendorf made a third attempt to gain access to and examine it. He succeeded, and later issued the text of the first twenty pages. Finally in 1889-90, with papal permission, the entire text was photographed and issued in facsimile, and published so that a copy of the expensive quartos was obtainable by, and is now in the possession of all the principle libraries in the biblical world." "Where did we get our Bible?", Rev. Dr. George L. Robertson. Harper and Brothers Publishers, pp.110-112 What were all of the Popes afraid of? What was the Vatican as a whole afraid of? Why was the concept of releasing the text of their most ancient copy of the Bible to the general public so terrifying to them? Why did they feel it necessary to bury the most ancient copies of the inspired word of God in a dark corner of the Vatican never to be seen by outside eyes? Why? What about all of the thousands upon thousands of other manuscripts which to this day remain buried in the darkest depths of the Vatican vaults never to be seen or studied by the general masses of Christendom? "[And remember] When God took a Covenant from those who were given the Scripture: You shall make it known and clear to mankind, and you shall not to hide it; but they flung it behind their backs, and purchased with it a miserable gain! How evil was that which they purchased!" The noble Qur'an, A'al-Umran(3):187 "Say: 'O people of the Book! exceed not in your religion the bounds [of what is proper], trespassing beyond the truth, nor follow the vain desires of people who went astray in times gone by, who misled many, and strayed [themselves] from the straight path.'" The noble Qur'an, Al-Maida(5):77 Returning to our study of some of the "discrepancies" to be found between our modern Bibles and between the most ancient copies of the Bible available to the chosen few, we find that the verse of Luke 24:51 contains Luke's alleged account of the final parting of Jesus (pbuh) and how he was "raised up into heaven." However, as seen in previous pages, in the Codex Sinaiticus and other ancient manuscripts the words "and was carried up into heaven" are completely missing. The verse only says: "And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them." C.S.C. Williams observed, if this omission were correct, "there is no reference at all to the Ascension in the original text of the Gospel." Some other "inspired" modification of the Church to Codex Sinaiticus and our modern Bibles: Matthew 17:21 is missing in Codex Sinaiticus. In our modern Bibles, Mark 1:1 reads "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;" however, in this most ancient of all Christian manuscripts, this verse only reads "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ" Strangely, the very words which are most grating to the Muslim's Qur'an, "the Son of God," are completely missing. Isn't that interesting? The words of Jesus in Luke 9:55-56 are missing. The original text of Matthew 8:2 as found in Codex Sinaiticus tells us that a leper asked Jesus to heal him and Jesus "angrily put forth [his] hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean." In our modern Bibles, the word "angrily" is strangely absent. Luke 22:44 in Codex Sinaiticus and our modern Bibles claim that an angel appeared before Jesus, strengthening him. In Codex Vaticanus, this angel is strangely absent. If Jesus was the "Son of God" then obviously it would be highly inappropriate for him to need an angel to strengthen him. This verse, then, must have been a scribal mistake. Right? The alleged words of Jesus on the cross "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34) were originally present in the Codex Sinaiticus but was later erased from the text by another editor. Bearing in mind how the Church regarded and treated the Jews in the middle ages, can we think of any reason why this verse might have stood in the way of official Church policy and their "inquisitions"? John 5:4 is missing from Codex Sinaiticus. In Mark chapter 9, the words "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." are again missing. In Matt. 5:22, the words "without cause" are missing in both the codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus. Matt. 21:7 in our modern Bibles reads "And [the disciples] brought the ass, and the colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set [Jesus] thereon." In the original manuscripts, this verse read "and they set [Jesus] upon them," However, the picture of Jesus being placed upon two animals at the same time and being asked to ride them at once was objectionable to some, so this verse was changed to "and they set [Jesus] upon him" (which "him"?). Soon after, the English translation completely avoided this problem by translating it as "thereon." In Mark 6:11, our modern Bibles contain the words "Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." However, these words are not to be found in either of these two most ancient of Christian Biblical manuscripts, having been introduced into the text centuries later. The words of Matthew 6:13 "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever." Are not to be found in these two most ancient manuscripts as well as many others. The parallel passages in Luke are also defective. Matthew 27:35 in our modern Bibles contains the words "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots." This passage, once again, is not found according to Rev. Merrill in any Biblical uncial manuscript dating before the ninth century. 1 Timothy 3:16 originally read "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: which was manifest in the flesh.." This was then later (as seen previously), ever so subtly changed to "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh�." Thus, the doctrine of the "incarnation" was born."
asad	Tuesday, September 26, 2000 - 07:41 am "No, asad just because a later story contradicts an earlier story that doesn't mean that the later story has "additional and new insights". Usually the earlier account is given more credibility." if the later story (pauls story) contradicts an earlier story about jesus, then the earlier account is given more credibility. in fact, the later story about paul which contradicts what jesus said needs no place in God's book, right? "If I gave a story about my mountain trip and wrote it down and 50 years later someone I had retold the story who was not there tries to recount the story. If he has contradictions to what the my story said... HE is considered wrong, not my story. My written story was first." yes, paul's story about jesus is considered wrong. "If I write a paper on physics and someone basically has what I said plus or minus a few points... if you were a teacher you would fail the student for plagiarism. Sure he might have added a few insights... but the majority of the paper was plagiarized." but what paul changed was not only few points about jesus's teachings, but he changed the central theme of jesus's teachings which is tawxiid---the Oneness of Allah. "If I write an American fairy tale and 200 years later a foreigner tells the story as though it were true, but all the Americans know that the story is just a fairy tale... the foreigner would be the foolish one... trying to tell a story that is consider a myth in another culture as though it was true... what about that asad?" yes, since what the christians claim about jesus is fairy tale (children are born with the sin of adam and ave), then whoever accepts from any culture is the foolish one. "It is error to think that newer revelation given by a self-proclaimed "prophet" supercedes previous revelation automatically. It takes more than a revelation being new to make it true." are you talking about pual's teachings that supercedes jesus's teachings? "Have you ever seen the Qu'ran contradict itself? Or display historically inaccurate information?" no, i have not. have you? if you have, i would like to see it? "Answer me. Do you believe that Muhammed institued sacrifices the same way that was in the Law? (As in the strictness of administering it and the reasoning behind it, etc.)" i told you that what jesus practiced and instituted--the sacrifice is no different than what moses and muhammad practiced and instituted, but you and the christians claim jesus changed the law of moses when jesus said he didn't come to destroy the law.!! "If so how could he administer it or any Arab since they were not Levites? What happened to the temple asad? What happened to the Levitcal priesthood asad?" what temple, runta? "Last big question which you have not once answered... this is my fourth time at least asking it... why do you respond with attacks on the Bible when the original discussion was not talking about the Bible? I am talking about Islam and the Qu'ran..." i'm not attacking anything. i'm just comparing between islam and christianity; between the bible and the Qur'an. "it's like you can't stand but to copy these huge postings (have you even read them?) Why do you always have to answer with an attack on the Bible NO MATTER WHAT I ASK???? What does that have to do with my question? " well, the fact is that, it is you who is afraid to see what the bible has. i'm asking you to bring anything you have against the Qur'an. let's do comparison between the two. "It's kind of annoying." don't be annoyed, runta. "How would you like it if when you asked me about the Bible and all I gave you was a two sentence response and then a 20 page attack on the Qu'ran?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?! It's irrelevant to the issue at hand." please bring anything that you have against the Qur'an, but don't ask me not to talk about what you beleive. let's talk about the two reliogions. "I don't even see the reason to talking to you..." don't run away from me. let's do comparision, that is all. i'm comfortable about you talking about the Qur'an. why are you uncomfortable talking about the bible? "Asad can you think of your own detailed responses? If you can't let me know and I'll try to find someone on this site who can." well, i'm going to be here and i'm going to respond to you, like it or not. ;-)
Runta	Tuesday, September 26, 2000 - 01:01 pm Ok asad... here's a big 'ol list of contradictions gotten from www.answering-islam.org it's a big post, oh well... you do it all the time. Qu'ranic CONTRADICTIONS 4.Six or eight days of creation? Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 clearly state that God created "the heavens and the earth" in six days. But in 41:9-12 the detailed description of the creation procedure adds up to eight days. 1.And it just doesn't add up: Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 state the Qur'anic inheritance law. When a man dies, and is leaving behind three daughters, his two parents and his wife, they will receive the respective shares of 2/3 for the 3 daughters together, 1/3 for the parents together [both according to verse 4:11] and 1/8 for the wife [4:12] which adds up to more than the available estate. A second example: A man leaves only his mother, his wife and two sisters, then they receive 1/3 [mother, 4:11], 1/4 [wife, 4:12] and 2/3 [the two sisters, 4:176], which again adds up to 15/12 of the available property. ********** 2.How many angels were talking to Mary? When the Qur'an speaks about the announciation of the birth of Jesus to the virgin Mary, Sura 3:42,45 speaks about (several) angels while it is only one in Sura 19:17-21. ******** 6.Heavens or Earth? Which was created first? First earth and then heaven [2:29], heaven and after that earth [79:27-30]. ******** 33.What is the punishment for adultery? Flogging with a 100 stripes (men and women) [24:2], "confine them to houses until death do claim them (lifelong house arrest - for the women) [4:15]. For men: "If they repent and amend, leave them alone" [4:16]. 24:2 contradicts both the procedure for women and men in Sura 4. And why is the punishment for women and men equal in Sura 24 but different in Sura 4? ********** 22.Three contradictions in 2:97 and 16:101-103 Who brings the revelation from Allah to Muhammad? The ANGEL Gabriel [297], or the Holy Spirit [16:102]? The new revelation confirms the old [2:97] or substitutes it [16:101]? The Qur'an is PURE Arabic [16:103] but there are numerous foreign, non-Arabic words in it. *********** 34.Will Christians enter Paradise or go to Hell? Sura 2:62 and 5:69 say "Yes", Sura 5:72 (just 3 verses later) and 3:85 say "No". ************ How should you see us? (9:29) "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth ....." or (45:14) "Tell those who believe, to forgive those who do not hope for the Days of Allah; It is for Him to recompense (for good or evil) each people according to what they have earned" ************** 40.Will all Muslims go to Hell? According to Sura 19:71 every Muslim will go to Hell (for at least some time), while another passage states that those who die in Jihad will go to Paradise immediately. NOT A CONTRADICTION, BUT SILLY Does God know what the Jews believe? In Surah at-Taubah, 9:30, we find the astonishing statement: And the Jews say, "Ezra is the Son of God;" and the Christians say, "The Messiah is the Son of God." ... While the statement about the Christian doctrine is correct, the claim that "Ezra is the Son of God" is wrong and such a belief has never been a tenet of the Jewish faith. There you have it.
asad	Tuesday, September 26, 2000 - 02:06 pm runta, i hope you read the response. don't claim that it is too long. ;-) Refutation Of The So-Called Internal Contradictions In The Qur'ân Here, insha'allah, we deal with the following claimed internal contradictions in the Qur'ân. But before that we would like to deal with the correct methodology for the understanding as well as exegesis of the Qur'ân. The below article deals with the methodology which is based on the dictum that the best exegesis of the Qur'ân is Qur'ân itself. This involves context and internal relationships. On Claims, Contradictions, Context & Internal Relationships Many Muslims such as al-Kadhi and Randy Desmond have refuted the internal contradictions but without any proper treatment involving the methodology, although they have used the above mentioned methodology. We wish to fill that gap with the above mentioned article. And it just doesn't add up: Sura 4:11-12 and 4:176 state the Qur'anic inheritance law. When a man dies, and is leaving behind three daughters, his two parents and his wife, they will receive the respective shares of 2/3 for the 3 daughters together, 1/3 for the parents together [both according to verse 4:11] and 1/8 for the wife [4:12] which adds up to more than the available estate. A second example: A man leaves only his mother, his wife and two sisters, then they receive 1/3 [mother, 4:11], 1/4 [wife, 4:12] and 2/3 [the two sisters, 4:176], which again adds up to 15/12 of the available property. How many angels were talking to Mary? When the Qur'an speaks about the announciation of the birth of Jesus to the virgin Mary, Sura 3:42,45 speaks about (several) angels while it is only one in Sura 19:17-21. Further numerical discrepancies Does Allah's day equal to 1,000 human years (Sura 22:47, 32:5) or 50,000 human years (Sura 70:4)? --- How many gardens are there in paradise? ONE [as stated in 39:73, 41:30, 57:21, 79:41] or MANY [18:31, 22:23, 35:33, 78:32]? --- According to Sura 56:7 there will be THREE distinct groups of people at the Last Judgement, but 90:18-19, 99:6-8, etc. mention only TWO groups. --- There are conflicting views on who takes the souls at death: THE Angel of Death [32:11], THE angels (plural) [47:27] but also "It is Allah that takes the souls (of men) at death." [39:42] Angels have 2, 3, or 4 pairs of wings [35:1]. But Gabriel had 600 wings. [Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 455] Six or eight days of creation? Sura 7:54, 10:3, 11:7, and 25:59 clearly state that God created "the heavens and the earth" in six days. But in 41:9-12 the detailed description of the creation procedure adds up to eight days. Quick or Slow Creation? Allah creates the heavens and the earth in six days [7:54] and many Muslims want to be modern and scientific, and make that six eons, but then again, He creates instantaneously [2:117], "Be! And it is". Heavens or Earth? Which was created first? First earth and then heaven [2:29], heaven and after that earth [79:27-30]. Calling together or ripping apart? In the process of creation heaven and earth were first apart and are called to come together [41:11], while 21:30 states that they were originally one piece and then ripped apart. What was man created from? A blood clot [96:1-2], water [21:30, 24:45, 25:54], "sounding" (i.e. burned) clay [15:26], dust [3:59, 30:20, 35:11], nothing [19:67] and this is then denied in 52:35, earth [11:61], a drop of thickened fluid [16:4, 75:37] Where is Allah and his throne? Allah is nearer than the jugular vein [50:16], but he is also on the throne [57:4] which is upon the water [11:7], and at the same time so far away, that it takes between 1,000 and 50,000 years to reach reach him [32:5, 70:4]. The origin of calamity? Is the evil in our life from Satan [38:41], Ourselves [4:79], or Allah [4:78]? How merciful is Allah's mercy? He has prescribed mercy for himself [6:12], yet he does not guide some, even though he could [6:35, 14:4]. Will there be inquiry in Paradise? "neither will they question one another" [23:101] but nevertheless they will be "engaging in mutual inquiry" [52:25], "and they will ... question one another" [37:27]. Are angels protectors? "NO protector besides Allah" [2:107, 29:22]. But in Sura 41:31 the angels themselves say: "We are your protectors in this life and the Hereafter." And also in other suras is their role described as guarding [13:11, 50:17-18] and protecting [82:10]. Is everything devoutly obedient to Allah? That is the claim in 30:26, but dozens of verses speak of the proud disobedience of Satan [7:11, 15:28-31, 17:61, 20:116, 38:71-74, 18:50] as well of many different human beings who reject His commands and His revelations. Does Allah forgive shirk? Shirk is considered the worst of all sins, but the author of the Qur'an seems seems unable to decide if Allah will ever forgive it or not. No [4:48, 116], Yes [4:153, 25:68-71]. Abraham committed this sin of polytheism as he takes moon, sun, stars to be his Lord [6:76-78], yet Muslims believe that all prophets are without any sin. The event of worship of the golden calf: The Israelites repented about worshipping the golden calf BEFORE Moses returned from the mountain [7:149], yet they refused to repent but rather continued to worship the calf until Moses came back [20:91]. Does Aaron share in their guilt? No [20:85-90], yes [20:92, 7:151]. Was Jonah cast on the desert shore or was he not? "Then We cast him on a desert shore while he was sick" [37:145] "Had not Grace from his Lord reached him, he would indeed have been cast off on the naked shore while he was reprobate." [68:49] Moses and the Injil? Jesus is born more than 1,000 years after Moses, but in 7:157 Allah speaks to Moses about what is written in the Injil [the book given to Jesus]. Can slander of chaste women be forgiven? Yes [24:5], No [24:23]. How do we receive the record on Judgment Day? On Judgement day the lost people are given the Record (of their bad deeds): Behind their back [84:10], or in their left hand [69:25]. Can angels disobey? No angel is arrogant, they all obey Allah [16:49-50], but: "And behold, we said to the ANGELS: 'Bow down to Adam'. And THEY bowed down, EXCEPT Iblis. He refused and was haughty." [2:34]. Three contradictions in 2:97 and 16:101-103 Who brings the revelation from Allah to Muhammad? The ANGEL Gabriel [297], or the Holy Spirit [16:102]? The new revelation confirms the old [2:97] or substitutes it [16:101]? The Qur'an is PURE Arabic [16:103] but there are numerous foreign, non-Arabic words in it. The infinite loop problem Sura 26:192,195,196: "It (the Qur'an) is indeed a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds, ... in clear Arabic speech and indeed IT (the Qur'an) is in the writings of the earlier (prophets)." Now, the 'earlier writings' are the Torah and the Injil for example, written in Hebrew and Greek. HOW can an ARABIC Qur'an be contained in books of other languages? Furthermore, it would have to contain this very passage of the Qur'an since the Qur'an is properly contained in them. Hence these earlier writings have to be contained in yet other earlier writings and we are in an infinite loop, which is absurd. "An old woman" and God's character About the story of Lot: "So we delivered him and his family, - all exept an old woman who lingered behind." [Sura 26:170-171] And again: "But we saved him and his family, exept his wife: she was of those who lagged behind. [Sura 7:83]. Either this is a contradiction or if indeed Lot's wife is derogatorily called "an old woman" then this does not show much respect for her as a wife of a prophet. More problems with the story of Lot "And his people gave NO answer but this: They said, "Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" [Sura 7:82 & 27:56]. Yet: "But his people gave NO answer but this: They said: "Bring us the Wrath of Allah if thou tellest the truth." [Sura 29:29]. Obviously these answers are different. The "pleasure" of Allah? Is God's action of punishment or mercy and guidance or misguidance arbitrary? Did Abraham smash the idols? The accounts of Abraham, Suras 19:41-49, 6:74-83 differ quite a bit from Sura 21:51-59. While in Sura 21 Abraham confronts his people strongly, and even destroys the idols, in Sura 19 Abraham shuts up after his father threatens him to stone him for speaking out against the idols. And he seems not only to become silent, but even to leave the area ("turning away from them all". What about Noah's son? According to Sura 21:76, Noah and his family is saved from the flood, and Sura 37:77 confirms that his seed survived. But Sura 11:42-43 reports that Noah's son drowns. Was Noah driven out? "Before them the people of Noah rejected (their messenger): They rejected Our servant and said, 'Here is One possessed!' And he was driven out." [Sura 54:9] Now, if he is driven out [expelled from their country] how come they can scoff at him while he is buiding the ark since we read "Forthwith he (starts) constructing the Ark: Every time that the Chiefs of his people passed by him, they threw ridicule on him." [Sura 11:38] He cannot be both: Driven out and near enough that they can regularly pass by. Pharaoh's repentance in the face of death? According to Sura 10:90-92, Pharaoh repented "in the sight of death" and was saved. But Sura 4:18 says that such a thing can't happen. Abrogation? "The words of the Lord are perfect in truth and justice; there is NONE who can change His words." [Sura 6:115] Also see 6:34 and 10:65. But then Allah (Muhammad?) sees the need to exchange some of them for "better ones" [Sura 2:106, 16:101]. And it is not for ignorant people to question Allah because of such practices! Guiding to truth? "Say: 'God - He guides to the truth; and which is worthier to be followed ...?" [Sura 10:35] But how much is left over of this worthiness when we also read: "Allah leads astray whom he pleases, and he guides whom He pleases, ..." [Sura 14:4]. And how do we know in which of Allah's categories of pleasure we fall? How sure can a Muslim be that he is one of those guided right and not one of those led astray? What is the punishment for adultery? Flogging with a 100 stripes (men and women) [24:2], "confine them to houses until death do claim them (lifelong house arrest - for the women) [4:15]. For men: "If they repent and amend, leave them alone" [4:16]. 24:2 contradicts both the procedure for women and men in Sura 4. And why is the punishment for women and men equal in Sura 24 but different in Sura 4? Will Christians enter Paradise or go to Hell? Sura 2:62 and 5:69 say "Yes", Sura 5:72 (just 3 verses later) and 3:85 say "No". God alone or also men? Clear or incomprehensible? The Qur'an is "clear Arabic speech." [16:103] Yet "NONE knows its interpretation, save only Allah." [3:7]. Actually, "men of understanding do grasp it." [3:7] Was Pharaoh Drowned or Saved when chasing Moses and the Israelites? Saved [10:92], drowned [28:40, 17:103, 43:55]. When Commanded Pharaoh the Killing of the Sons? When Moses was a Prophet and spoke God's truth to Pharaoh [40:23-25] or when he was still an infant [20:38-39]? When/how are the fates determined? "The night of power is better than a thousand months. The angels and spirit descend therein, by the permission of their Lord, with all decrees." [97:3,4] "Lo! We revealed it on a blessed night." [44:3] To Muslims, the "Night of Power" is a blessed night on which fates are settled and on which everything relating to life, death, etc., which occurs throughout the year is decreed. It is said to be the night on which Allah's decrees for the year are brought down to the earthly plane. In other words, matters of creation are decreed a year at a time. Contradicting this, Sura 57:22 says, "No affliction befalls in the earth or in your selves, but it is in a Book before we create it." This means it is written in the Preserved Tablet, being totally fixed in Allah's knowledge before anyone was created. All of the above is contradicted by "And every man's fate We have fastened to his own neck." This says that man alone is responsible for what he does and what happens to him. [17:13] Wine: Good or bad? Strong drink and ... are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork. [5:90, also 2:219]. Yet on the other hand in Paradise are rivers of wine [47:15, also 83:22,25]. How does Satan's handiwork get into Paradise? Will all Muslims go to Hell? According to Sura 19:71 every Muslim will go to Hell (for at least some time), while another passage states that those who die in Jihad will go to Paradise immediately. Will Jesus burn in Hell? Jesus is raised to Allah, [Sura 4:158], near stationed with him [Sura 3:45], worshiped by millions of Christians, yet Sura Sura 21:98 says, that all that are worshiped by men besides Allah will burn in Hell together with those who worship them. Jinns and men created for worship or for Hell? Created only to serve God [Sura 51:56], many of them made for Hell [Sura 7:179]. Who is the father of Jesus? A more involved argument that is difficult to summarize in one sentence. Begetting and Self-sufficiency. A self-contradiction on account of confused terminology. Could Allah have a son? Sura 39:4 affirms and Sura 6:101 denies this possibility. Did Jesus Die already? Surah 3:144 states that all messengers died before Muhammad. But 4:158 claims that Jesus was raised to God (alive?). One Creator or many? The Qur'an uses twice the phrase that Allah is "the best of creators" [23:14, 37:125]. What other creators are in mind? On the other hand, many verses make clear that Allah alone is "the creator of all things" [e.g. 39:62]. There is nothing left for others to be a creator of. From among all nations or from Abraham's seed? Surah 29:27 states that all prophets came Abraham's seed. But 16:36 claims that Allah raised messengers from among every people. Marrying the wives of adopted sons? It is important that Muslims can marry the divorced wives of adopted sons [Sura 33:37], yet it is forbidden to adopt sons [Sura 33:4-5]. Basically, the Christian missionaries' argument is circular. According to them, the Bible says such-and-such and the Qur'ân says such-and-such; therefore it follows that it is a contradiction in the Qur'ân. Since the Bible says so, it must be true. Proof is not necessary, Belief is sufficient. No attempt is made by the Christian missionaries to show that the Biblical account is historical and the Qur'ânic one a legend. http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/quranerr.htm http://salam.muslimsonline.com/~islamawe/Quran/Contrad/External/
asad	Tuesday, September 26, 2000 - 02:08 pm http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/quranerr.htm
asad	Tuesday, September 26, 2000 - 02:25 pm runta, here is more comparative religion for you: Answering Trinity. Jesus is not the Creator of this universe. http://www.answering-christianity.com/at.htm Ask me any question. See my responds. http://www.answering-christianity.com/islamic_qa.htm Women are far much better treated in "real" Islam than in "real" Christianity. http://www.answering-christianity.com/woman.htm Science in the Noble Quran. GOD's detailed explanation of His creation. http://www.answering-christianity.com/sci_quran.htm Human equality and freedom in Islam V.S. Christianity. http://www.answering-christianity.com/expose_lies.htm Rebuttals and exposing the cheap lies of the "Answering Islam" team. Human equality and freedom in Islam V.S. Christianity. http://www.answering-christianity.com/human.htm http://www.answering-christianity.com/jews.htm The Jewish offensive views in their Holy Scriptures toward Jesus and Mary and women. Rebuttals and exposing the cheap lies of the "Answering Islam" team. http://www.answering-christianity.com/expose_lies.htm
Runta	Wednesday, September 27, 2000 - 05:46 am Uh, asad... I'm waiting for an answer. I failed to see one.... what is YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR (just so you understand what I want) response. Hm?
asad	Wednesday, September 27, 2000 - 07:09 am "Uh, asad... I'm waiting for an answer. I failed to see one." i told you that "i hope you read the response" the list of contradictions which you have gotten from www.answering-islam.org and their reponse (links) were given to you, but you failed to see one!!! to make it easy for you, let me copy for you the links again. http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/quranerr.htm let me know if you failed to read this, okay? after you read the responses, please visit this site too. you will enjoy it: ;-) http://www.answering-christianity.com/islamic_qa.htm

Feel like posting? Pleaase click here for the list of current forums.

site-wide search

SomaliNet Forums: Archives

This section is online for reference only. No new content will be added. no deletion either...

Go to Current Forums ...with millions of posts

About SomaliNet

Site Sections

Share this page

Site Status