navedz.com a muslim's Quest for the truth
All Praise is for Allah alone. He is the Rabb of all that exists. Surely, we send the highest Salah and Salaam upon the Final Prophet, the leader of the pious and upon his family, companions and those who follow their example with Ih’san till the Day of Reckoning.
One of the greatest hurdles confronting Muslims today is a lack of knowledge about certain essential beliefs that we as Muslims must unwaveringly adhere to. Of the most pertinent issues facing Muslims living in localities that are heavily influenced by western culture is how we view ‘Isa bin Maryam – Jesus the Son of Mary – alaihis salaam (AS).
On a cyclical basis we are confronted with different “religious” occasions that are marked by our Christian neighbours, coworkers and acquaintances. It is paramount that we as Muslims have a firm understanding of what he – ‘Isa (AS) represents to us as Muslims. Whether it is Easter Monday or Christmas day, we as Muslims should know what Islam says about the issues that are presented to us on a regular basis.
The Muslim Nation is more Worthy of ‘Isa than all the other nations.
The one who claims that ‘Isa (AS) is God, or that ‘Isa (AS) is the Son of God, or that God is a Trinity that includes ‘Isa is in fact the most distant from the teachings of ‘Isa (AS) even if he calls himself a devout Christian. Claiming love for someone implies that you adhere to what that individual stood for and called to. ‘Isa (AS) was never one who claimed any one of the previous three statements for himself. In fact neither did his true followers.
For this to become clear we will analyze four main points:
- The Prophets of Allah are all Related.
- The Only accepted Deen (Religious Way of Life) is Islam.
- ‘Isa was but a humble Messenger and Prophet of Allah.
- ‘Isa distances himself from the slander and unjustified claims of Christians.
The Prophets of Allah are all related
Rasool Allah (SAW) said:
“I am the most worthy of ‘Isa bin Maryam in this life and in the hereafter.” They (Sahabah) asked: “Why is that O Messenger of Allah (SAW)?” He (SAW) replied: “The Prophets are paternal (bloodline) brethren (from fathers side). Their mothers may be different (races, peoples, bloodlines) yet their Deen is always one (Islam).” (Reported by Bukhari and Muslim.)
Therefore this necessitates that he who disputes the validity of one of the true Prophets and Messengers has in fact reviled and disputed all of them. One cannot believe in Muhammad (SAW) and not believe in ‘Isa (AS). Equally, one cannot truly believe in ‘Isa and not believe in Muhammad (SAW). To truly accept one Prophet or Messenger necessitates the acceptance of all those who came before him and all who will come after him, ending with Muhammad (SAW).
This concept is clearly portrayed in the Quran. Allah (SWT) mentions the first Messenger to humanity Nuh or Noah (AS) in the Quran. What is very interesting is that Allah (SWT) states in Surah Al Shu’ara’ (26:105) that “The people of Nuh (Noah) rejected the messengers.” The point of relevance is that a plural (Messengers) is used in this ayah, yet we know that there were no Messengers sent to his people or humanity as a matter of fact. Allah only sent Nuh (AS) to his people and none other before him. This same concept is further emphasized in the same Surah. Allah (SWT) says:
“The ‘Ad (people) rejected the messengers.“ [Surah Al Shu’ara’ 26:123]
“The Thamud (people) rejected the messengers.” [Surah Al Shu’ara’ 26:141]
“The people of Lut (Lot) rejected the messengers.” [Surah Al Shu’ara’ 26:160]
We know that to each of these people only one Messenger was sent to them.
Disbelieving in one Prophet or Messenger is disbelief in all the Prophets and Messengers.
Allah (SWT) says:
“The Apostle (Muhammad) believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believeth in Allah, His angels, His books, and His apostles (Messengers). “We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His apostles.”…” [Surah Al Baqarah 2:285]
Therefore all the Prophets and Messengers are a fraternity of brethren through the lineage of their fathers. Even ‘Isa (AS), who was born without a fathers’ input into the equation of procreation is from the family of Bani Israel the descendant of Ishaq (Isaac) son of Yaqub or Jacob (AS).
Even more important is to know that all the Prophets called to one and the same thing – Islam. This brings us to the second point of our analysis:
The Only accepted Deen (Religious Way of Life) is Islam
Allah (SWT) says: “The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will):…” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:19]
All of the Prophets and Messengers came calling to the one true faith. They all were sent with one mission. They were selected to call people to singling out only Allah in worship and to disavow all other gods or deities while establishing Allah (SWT) alone as the One deserving all worship. All the Prophets and Messengers called their respective peoples to Islam.
Nuh (AS) called to Islam:
Allah (SWT) says: “(Nuh said) “But if ye turn back, (consider): no reward have I asked of you: my reward is only due from Allah, and I have been commanded to be of those who submit to Allah’s will (in Islam).”” [Surah Yunus 10:72]
Ibrahim and Yaqub or Abraham and Jacob (AS) called to Islam: Allah (SWT) says:
“And who turns away from the religion of Ibraham but such as debase their souls with folly? Him We chose and rendered pure in this world: And he will be in the Hereafter in the ranks of the Righteous.
Behold! His Lord said to him: “Bow (thy will to Me):” He said: “I bow (my will) to the Lord and Cherisher of the Universe.”
And this was the legacy that Ibraham left to his sons, and so did Yaqub (Jacob); “Oh my sons! Allah hath chosen the Faith for you; then die not except in the State of Submission (to Allah).
Were ye witnesses when Death appeared before Yaqub? Behold, he said to his sons: “What will ye worship after me?” They said: “We shall worship Thy God and the God of thy fathers- of Ibraham, Isma’il and Ishaaq (Isaac),- the one (True) God: To Him we bow (in Islam).”” [Surah Al Baqarah 2:130-133]
Musa or Moses (AS) came with nothing other than Islam. Allah (SWT) says:
“And Musa said: “O my people! If ye do (really) believe in Allah, then in Him put your trust if ye submit (your will to His).”” [Surah Yunus 10:84]
Yusuf or Joseph (AS) came calling his people to Islam. Allah (SWT) says:
“(Yusuf supplicated) My Lord! You have indeed bestowed on me of the sovereignty, and taught me something of the interpretation of dreams – the (Only) Creator of the heavens and the earth! You (O Allah) are my Wali (Protector, Helper, Supporter, Guardian) in this world and in the Hereafter. Cause me to die as a Muslim (submitting to You alone) and join me with the righteous.” [Surah Yusuf 12:101]
In turn, ‘Isa bin Maryam (AS) came calling his people only to Islam. Allah (SWT) says:
“Then when ‘Isa came to know of their disbelief, he said: ‘Who will be my helpers in Allah’s Cause?’ The disciples said: ‘We are the helpers of Allah; we believe in Allah, and bear witness that we are Muslims.’” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:52]
And the finality of Prophethood, the Imam of the Messengers and the Leader of the Righteous, Muhammad (SAW) was sent calling all of humanity not just a single people to Islam. Allah (SWT) says:
“This day I have perfected your religion for you (all humanity), completed My Favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.” [Surah Al Ma’idah 5:3]
The religion of all those truly sent by Allah as Messengers was Islam.
‘Isa was but a humble Messenger and Prophet of Allah.
What is quite amusing to see is that there are those who accept the concept of Monotheism (Jews and Christians) yet reject it at the same time. The Jews reject known Prophets and Messengers of Allah. They at times went as far as executing them. This was planned for ‘Isa as will be explained. Allah (SWT) describes this vividly in the Quran:
“Is it that whenever there came to you a Messenger with what you yourselves desired not, you grew arrogant? Some you disbelieved and some you killed.” [Surah Al Baqarah 2:87]
On the other hand, those who claimed Christianity went too far in the veneration of their Prophet and Messenger ‘Isa. They corrupted his teachings by claiming for him things that he never stated for himself. They elevated ‘Isa after his departing them to a paganistic status that nullified whatever Monotheistic faith they had in their hearts.
Allah (SWT) says:
“And they say: ‘The Most Gracious (Allah) has begotten a son (or offspring or children).’ Indeed you have brought forth (said) a most terrible, evil thing. Whereby the heavens are almost torn, and the earth is split asunder, and the mountains fall in ruins, that they ascribe a son (or offspring) to the Most Gracious.
But it is not befitting (the Majesty) of the Most Gracious (Allah) that He should beget a son (or offspring).
There is none in the heavens and the earth but comes unto the Most Gracious as a slave.” [Surah Maryam 19:88-93]
Shaykhul Islam Ibn al-Qayyim has a beautiful poem dispelling the falsities and irrational of Christians past and present. He poetically states:
To the worshippers of the Messiah (‘Isa) we put forth a question.
We seek an answer from those who have comprehension.
If a god was to be put to death by a people
Can he be truly godly?
Stranger than a god being interned in a grave,
Is being confined in a womb
Remaining for nine months
In darkness; nourished from his mothers blood
Finally exiting the birth canal a small weak child
With open mouth seeking a breast to suckle
Suckling thus necessitating urination and defecation
Is this the God that you claim?!
Quite simply he is but a man who was chosen by Allah (SWT) as a caller to guidance and righteousness. Allah (SWT) says:
“The Messiah (‘Isa) bin Maryam, was no more than a Messenger, many who were Messengers have passed away before him. His mother (Mary) was a Sidiqah (believed in Words of Allah). Both of them used to eat food (as all other human beings). Look how We make the Ayat (proofs, evidences, lessons, examples) clear to them; yet look how they are deluded away (from the truth).” [Surah Al Ma’idah 5:75]
Some will ask, how can someone be born to a virgin mother and not be divine?
Allah (SWT) answers:
“Verily, the likeness of ‘Isa before Allah is the likeness of Adam. He created him (Adam) from dust, then (He) said to him: ‘Be!’ – and he was.” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:59]
Surely the creation of a complete physical man from dust is greater than the creation of ‘Isa. If Adam (AS) is not thought of as being divine, then why has the same claim been made for ‘Isa (AS)?
‘Isa distances himself from the slander and unjustified claims of Christians.
Allah (SWT) gives us a glimpse of what will be spoken by ‘Isa on the Day of Judgment in defense of himself and proclaiming his innocence and freedom from the unjustified claims of those who ascribed to him abominable lies.
Allah (SWT) mentions this to us in the concluding verses of Surah Al Ma’idah:
“And (remember) when Allah will say (on the Day of Ressurection):
‘O ‘Isa, son of Maryam! Did you say unto men: ‘Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?’’
He (‘Isa) will say: ‘Glory is to You (Alone)! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You surely, have known it. You know what is in my inner-self though I do not know what is in Yours; truly You, only You, are the All-Knower of all that is hidden and (unseen).’
‘Never did I say to them except what You (Allah) commanded me to say: ‘Worship Allah, My Lord and Your Lord.’ And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them; and You are a Witness to all things.’
‘If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if You forgive them, verily, You, only You, are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.’
Allah will say: ‘This is a Day on which the truthful will profit from their truth: Theirs are Gardens under which rivers flow (in Paradise) – they shall abide therein forever.’ Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him. That is the great success (Paradise).
To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is therein, and He is Able to do all things.” [Surah Al Ma’idah 5:116-120]
These are the words of truth that are undeniable by the one who possesses insight, rational and a clear understanding of Allah.
Who was Maryam? And the Truth about the Immaculate Conception and the Birth of ‘Isa (AS).
It has been aptly stated that behind every successful man there is a woman. In most cases, ones’ mother is by far the single most profound shaping force behind a young man or woman. From the moment of conception the mother to be undergoes emotional, physical and psychological changes that ready her for the responsibility of shaping the life a new human being. The mother is an institution of higher learning. She is a bastion of blind love for her child. She is a proprietor of undying devotion. The mother is a source of physical nutrition and safety, emotional attachment, psychological comfort and spiritual guidance to her growing child.
Therefore, we are compelled as Muslims to honour, elevate, adore, protect, esteem, respect, revere, strengthen, recognize, be dutiful to, give comfort to, show loyalty and allegiance to, pay homage to and supplicate for ones mother.
The mother-son relationship is one of great importance and value in Islam. As such, we have been given many great examples in the Quran and the Sunnah to model ourselves after. One can see examples in the Quran of all of the different forms of family structure. To see the relationship of a foster mother with her adopted son look to the example of Musa or Moses (AS) and his foster mother Asiya (AS). To see the relationship of a single mother raising her son alone look to the example of Ismail or Ishmael (AS) and his mother Hajar (AS). To see the relationship of an unrighteous mother with her children look to the example of the daughters of Lot or Lut (AS) and their unrighteous mother.
Of the most poignant and telling mother-son relationships in the Quran is that of ‘Isa bin Maryam (AS). For the first and last time in history a Prophet would not be addressed by his father’s name. Rather, he is referred to as Jesus the son of Mary.
To assess and grasp the true virtue of ‘Isa (AS) it is necessary to learn about his mother Maryam ibnata ‘Imran (AS).
Who is Maryam (AS)?
Maryam (AS) simply is of the most complete women of all humanity, past, present and future.
Rasool Allah (SAW) said: “Many men have reached completion (in their relationship with Allah such as the many thousands of Prophets; Ibn Hajr). (Yet,) only four woman have reached (this same level of) completion. Maryam bint (daughter of) ‘Imran, Asiya the wife of Pharaoh, Khadijah bint Khuwaylid (wife of Rasool Allah) and Fatimah bint Muhammad (reached completion). The excellence and superiority of ‘Aisha (wife of Rasool Allah) in relation to the rest of women is the equal of that of Thareed (Meat filled dish) in relation to other dishes.” [Agreed upon its authenticity by both Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim.]
Maryam is the daughter of one of the most well known and respected men from the Jewish nation. She is from the house of ‘Imran. Her mother is Hinah bin Faqoud (Ibn Kathir’s Bidayah).
Hinah bint Faqoud was unable to bear a child for a number of years. She turned in sincere supplication to Allah (SWT) beseeching Him (SWT) to bless her with a child whom she vowed to dedicate to the service of Allah. Allah (SWT) says:
“Allah chose Adam, Nuh (Noah), and the family of Ibrahim and the family of ‘Imran above the ‘Alameen (all creation during their respective times). Offspring, one of the other and Allah is the All-Hearer, All-Knowing.
(Remember) when the wife of ‘Imran said: ‘O my Lord! I have vowed to You what (the child that) is in my womb to be dedicated for your services (free from all worldly work and obligations; solely for your worship) so accept this from me. Verily you are the All-Hearer (You hear my Du‘a) and the All-Knowing (and you know my sincere intention in fulfilling this vow).’
Then when she gave birth to her (Maryam), she said ‘O my Lord! I have given birth to a female child (Ibn Abbas states that the Jews only accepted males into dedicated service).’ – And Allah knew better what she brought forth (He is the Creator), – ‘And the male is not like the female, and I have named her Maryam (literally = pure maidservant of Allah), and I see refuge with You (Allah) for her and her offspring from the Shaytan (Satan), the outcast.’
So her Lord (Allah) accepted her with goodly acceptance. He made her grow in a good manner and put her under the care of Zakariya (Prophet Zachary).” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:33-37]
Rasool Allah (SAW) mentions:
“No new born escapes the prick (touch) of the Shaytan at the time of their birth. (The touch is what) causes them to begin to scream. Only Maryam and her son (escaped being molested by the Shaytan).” [Reported through authentic narrations in the Musnad of al-Imam Ahmed and the Sahih of al-Imam Muslim.]
Allah (SWT) thus answered the supplication by Hinah for Maryam and her future offspring.
Maryam was taken under the tutelage of the great Prophet of Allah Zakariya (AS). In fact Allah chose Zakariya (AS) for the great task of spiritually rearing Maryam (AS). Allah (SWT) describes this in the Quran:
“This is part of the news of the Ghaib (unseen, news of past nations of which you have no knowledge prior to this) which We reveal to you (O Muhammad). You were not with them when they cast lots with their pens as to which of them should be charged with the care of Maryam; nor were you with them when they disputed.” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:44]
The pious leaders of Bani Israel gathered in dispute as to whom would be given charge of Maryam. They decided to throw their pens in the river (Jordan). The owner of the pen that flowed against the current would be given charge of Maryam (Ibn Kathir al-Bidayah).
To truly appreciate the virtue of Maryam we remember the words of Allah:
“And (remember) when the angels said: ‘O Maryam! Verily, Allah has chosen you, purified you (from Shirk and disbelief and sin), and chosen you above the woman of the ‘Alameen (all creation during her time). O Maryam! Submit yourself with obedience to your Lord and prostrate yourself, and bow down along with those who bow down (to Him).’” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:42-43]
The angels would openly address her and bring her what she desired in forms of sustenance. Allah (SWT) says:
“So her Lord (Allah) accepted her with goodly acceptance. He made her grow in a good manner and put her under the care of Zakariya (Prophet Zachary). Every time he entered the praying place to (visit) her, he found her supplied with sustenance. He said, ‘O Maryam! From where have you received this?’ She said, ‘This is from Allah.’ Verily Allah provides sustenance to whom He Wills, without limit.” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:37]
This honoured woman was therefore chosen by Allah for a unique mission that would test her faith and resolve.
The Immaculate Conception
Owing the delicate and confusing nature of this great occurrence, Allah (SWT) records this happening in the Quran with precision and point by point detail. In a Surah titled Maryam (Chapter 19), Allah (SWT) describes to us the Immaculate Conception and the birth of ‘Isa (AS). To gain full benefit and strengthen our grasp of this great happening we will at times insert explanatory words and arguments (derived from the Tafsir of the Rabbani Scholars).
Allah (SWT) says in Surah Maryam (19:16-21):
“And mention in the Book (the Quran, O Muhammad the story of) Maryam, when she withdrew in seclusion from her family to a place facing the east.
She placed a screen (to screen herself) from them. We then sent unto her our Ruh (Jibreel or Archangel Gabriel), and he appeared before her in the form of a man in all respects (physically). In the midst of her screen and secluded state a strange man confronted her in her private quarters. Feeling threatened she turned to Allah.
She said: ‘Verily, I seek refuge with the Most Gracious (Allah) from you, if you do fear Allah.’ [Instead of saying I seek refuge with the Most Mighty she mentioned Allah with His attribute of Rahman (Most Gracious) to remind the seemingly threateningly stranger of Mercy and Grace rather than Anger and Wrath. Her immediate impulse was to turn to Allah the Protector rather than to seek what may be the futile aid of others on the onset of the happening.]
(The angel) said: ‘I am only a messenger from your Lord, (to announce) to you the gift of a righteous son.’
She said: ‘How can I have a son, when no man has touched me, nor was I unchaste?’
He said: “So (it will be), your Lord has said, ‘That is easy for Me (Allah)! And (We wish) to appoint him as a sign to mankind and a mercy from Us (Allah), and it is a matter already decreed.’”
By whose Power and Might were the heavens created and raised above one another without supports?
By whose Power and Might was the earth created as a sphere yet made flat for those who tread upon its surface?
By whose Power and Might was Ibrahim (AS) saved from the fire?
By whose Power and Might was Musa (AS) Saved from Pharaoh?
By whose Power and Might was Yunus or Jones (AS) saved from the whale?
By Whose Power and Might was ‘Isa (AS) eventually going to be saved from the plots of the Jews and Romans?
The answer is found in Surah Al Hashr (59:22-24):
“He is Allah, beside Whom none has the right to be worshipped but He. (Allah is) the All-Knower of the unseen and the seen. He is the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
He is Allah beside Whom none has the right to be worshipped but He. (Allah is) the King, the Holy, the One Free from all defects, the Giver of Security, the Watcher over His creatures, the All-Mighty, the Compeller, The Supreme. Glory is to Allah! (High is He) above all that they associate as partners with Him.
He is Allah, the Creator, the Inventor of all things, the Bestower of forms. To Him belong the Best Names. All that is in the Heavens and the earth glorify Him. And He is the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.” [Surah Al Hashr 59:22-24]
He said: “So (it will be), your Lord has said, ‘That is easy for Me (Allah)! And (We wish) to appoint him as a sign to mankind and a mercy from Us (Allah), and it is a matter already decreed.’” A sign of Tawheed during his stay with Bani Israel and a sign of the nearness of the Day of Judgment after his descent from the heavens to say the one eyed liar or the Dajjal.
So she conceived him, and she withdrew with him to a far place (Bethlehem about 4-6 miles from Jerusalem). She remained in Jerusalem until the signs of her pregnancy began to manifest themselves. When the signs began to show themselves she moved to Bethlehem for privacy. After the conception she went to visit her sister, the mother of Yahya (AS) bin Zakariya (AS) and told her of what had transpired.
Imam Malik (RA) states: “It has reached me that Yahya bin Zakariya and ‘Isa bin Maryam are cousins from the side of the mother, and that their conception was in the same day.” [Reported by Ibn Kathir in Bidayah.]
And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a date palm. It should not be misunderstood that after conception Maryam immediately and simultaneously gave birth to a child. This should not be misconstrued due to the nature of the wording or in misunderstanding the placement of the Faa (Faa ut-Ta‘qeeb). The previous verse is preceded with the verse of Conception. The verse of conception does begin with a Faa, as does this one. This usually means that the two acts are linked in a specific time constraint, and in sequence. The important point is that the time constraint and sequence is relative to the action in question. The Faa is also used in Surah Al-Mu’minoon verse number 14. Allah says: “Then we made the Nutfah (semen and ovum) into a clot, then We made the clot into a little lump of flesh, then We made out of that little lump of flesh bones….” The Faa (translated to the word Then in this example) is used in the same manner of linking the respective phases. Yet there is no claim that these phases are done simultaneously, rather it implies that they are consecutive in nature. As well, we will soon see that the people accused Maryam of immorality because she came carrying a newborn. This implies that the time frame caused them to uniformly suspect that the child was hers. Ibn Kathir states that the majority of the scholars (Ibn Jareer, Ibn al-Qayim, Al-Qurtubi and Ibn Taymiyyah) contend that she carried ‘Isa (AS) for full term (9 months).
“So she conceived him, and she retired with him to a remote place.
And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree: She cried (in her anguish): “Ah! would that I had died before this! would that I had been a thing forgotten and out of sight!”
But (a voice) cried to her from beneath the (palm-tree): “Grieve not! for thy Lord hath provided a rivulet beneath thee;
“And shake towards thyself the trunk of the palm-tree: It will let fall fresh ripe dates upon thee.
“So eat and drink and cool (thine) eye. And if thou dost see any man, say, ‘I have vowed a fast to (God) Most Gracious, and this day will I enter into not talk with any human being'”” [Surah Maryam 19:22-26]
A spring sprout from beneath her and food was made available for nourishment. Taking a vow of silence was the preferred from of fasting during those times. It is deemed Haraam (prohibited) in Islam.
The conception was Divinely Ordained. This is the undeniable, verified truth of what truly transpired more than 2000 years ago. It has been eternally recorded for humanity in the Quran so that there is to be no discrepancy or disillusion.
By – Yahya Adel Ibrahim
That is a staggeringly well-documented post. You’re quite a scholar!
JazakAllah Khair brother. Please keep me in your prayers.
Also, this post is an extract from another article I had come across a couple of months back. Unfortunately, i do not have the source handy. 🙁
This is a great post. Mashallah.
My friends, I came across this blog after the purveyor of it commented on mine and after reading some, I wanted to comment on this post which I found very interesting. I would like to respond to this post by first saying that what I wish to say I do so with respect to your beliefs, not to criticize or to even object to them but simply to share further insight into this topic your discussing.
I am a Christian, a follower of Jesus Christ and I would like to share with you why I am with the following insight into what Jesus said:
Mark says it at the outset of his gospel (Mark 1:1).
The angel told Mary her child would be the Son of God (Luke 1:35).
John the Baptist said the same thing (John 1:34).
Nathanael said it (John 1:49).
Martha believed it (John 11:27).
The centurion said so (Matthew 27:54).
Jesus claimed that He said so (John 10:36).
Jesus clearly implies it in John 11:4.
The demons called Jesus the Son of God (Matthew 8:29; Luke 4:41; Mark 3:11).
The charge against Jesus was that He claimed to be the Son of God (Matthew 27:43; John 19:7), a claim He never denied, and virtually admitted (Luke 22:70).
The Gospel of John was written to convince the reader that Jesus was the Son of God (John 20:31).
Why, you might ask, does Jesus not say so plainly. I think the answer is found in Matthew 16:15-17:
15 He said to them, “And who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus answered him, “You are blessed, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father in heaven!” (Matthew 16:15-17).
Jesus did not want Peter and His disciples to believe He was the Son of God just because He said so. He wanted God to bring them to this conclusion, based upon the overwhelming evidence of Scripture and our Lord’s life and teaching.
Furthermore please read this passage out of John Chapter 10:
22 Then came the Festival of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23 and Jesus was in the temple courts walking in Solomon’s Colonnade. 24 The Jews who were there gathered around him, saying, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.”
25 Jesus answered, “I did tell you, but you do not believe. The works I do in my Father’s name testify about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not my sheep. 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 will 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. 30 I and the Father are one.”
31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”
33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”
Thank you for your time.
@jeremiahstrong
I believe being a purveyor holds true for you. You quoted the from the Bible and i am sure you follow the christian version of the Bible.
.
Bible was not revealed in English – It is Old Testament in Hebrew, New Testament in Greek. Though Jesus Christ peace be upon him, spoke Hebrew – But the original Manuscript that you have – it is in Greek. The Old Testament, the original Hebrew is not available – do you know that? The Hebrew translation of the Old Testament is from the Greek – So even the original Old Testament, which is in Hebrew, is not present in Hebrew. So you have a double problem – No wonder you have scribal errors, etc. But the Quran – Alhamdulillah, the original Arabic is maintained. It has been… Alhamdulillah scientifically – you can prove it is the same.
Jesus (pbuh) conveyed orally to the people the Bible which God originally revealed to him. His disciples, too, propagated it among the people by the spoken word in such a manner that they presented an admixture of their Prophet’s life-story and the revealed verses of the Bible. None of this material was put into writing during the lifetime of Jesus (pbuh) or even in the period following him. It fell to the lot of the Christians whose vernacular was Greek to transform these oral traditions into writing. It must be borne in mind that Christ’s native tongue was Syriac or Aramaic and his disciples spoke the same language as well.
Most Greek-speaking authors heard these traditions in the Aramaic vernacular and committed them to writing in Greek. None of these writings is dated prior to the year 70AD; there is not a single instance in these works where the author has cited an authority for an event or maxim attributed to Hadrat Isa (pbuh) in order that we might construct a chain of transmission. Furthermore, even these works have not survived. Thousands of Greek manuscripts of the new Testament were collected, but none of them is older than the fourth century AD; the origin of most of them does not go beyond the period spanning the 11th to the 14th centuries.
Some scattered papyrus fragments found in Egypt can lay claim to no greater antiquity than the third century. We cannot say when the Bible was translated from Greek into Latin. Nor do we know the writer’s name.
In the fourth century AD, the Pope commissioned a review of the Latin translation. In the sixteenth century, this version was discarded and a fresh translation from Greek into Latin was prepared. The Four Bibles were most probably rendered into the Syriac language from Greek in 200 AD, but the oldest Syriac manuscript extant was written in the 4th century. A handwritten copy dated back to the 5th century AD contains, in frequent parts, a different version.
Among the Arabic translations made from the Syriac none is known to have been prepared before the 8th century AD. It is curious that some seventy different versions of the Bible were prepared, four of which were approved by the leaders of the Christian religion, while the rest was rejected. We have no information concerning the grounds for their approval or rejection. But can this material be credited to any extent with authenticity as regards the character and message (gospel ) of Jesus (peace be upon him)?
The Quran says in Surah Al-Rad, Chapter. 13, Verse 38, that Allah has sent down several Revelations. By name only 4 are mentioned – The Torah, the Zaboor, the Injeel and the Quran. The Torah is the Wahi, which was given to Moses, peace be upon him. The Zaboor is the Revelation, the Wahi which was given to David, peace be upon him. Injeel is the Revelation, Wahi which was given to Jesus, peace be upon him. And Quran is the last and final Revelation which was given to the last and final Messenger, Prophet Mohammed, may peace be upon him.
But the present Bible is not the Injeel, which we believe in, which, was revealed to Jesus Christ peace be upon him. This Bible according to us, it may contain the words of God – But it also contains words of Prophets, words of historians, it contains absurdities, obscenity, as well as innumerable scientific errors. If there are scientific points mentioned in the Bible – there are possibilities – why not? It may be part of the word of God, in the Bible. But what about the scientific errors? – What about the unscientific portions? – Can you attribute this to God?
As Jesus Christ, peace be upon him said… ‘Search ye the truth, and the truth shall free you.’ We have the Old Testament, we have the New Testament – Now you should follow the Last and Final Testament, which is the Glorious Quran.
We have many a number of versions of the Bible and it does not exist anymore in the original form either in memory or text anywhere on the earth, nor has it existed as such for at least 1,500 or more years. Infact none of the religious scripture exist in its original form… they have been revised by human as per their whims and needs. The Quran on the other hand, is exactly preserved and memorized as it was during the lifetime of the holy prophet, peace be upon him. The teachings of Islam from the Quran and the hadeeth of Muhammad, peace be upon him, are very clear and available in the original texts in Arabic for whomsoever would like to read them. Allah has said that he would preserve His deen till eternity.
Thank you for your thoughtful response Navedz, you obviously are well read and thorough in your representation and I appreciate learning more about your beliefs, however, I do disagree on several points.
You state that the Christian scriptures as revealed by Jesus may contain the words of God but that it also contains absurdities, obscenity and error without example given. I would be interested to see what would qualify as obscene to you because the predominate message of the gospel of Jesus as well as the new testament as a whole is a message of love. Love not to just other Christians, or to the Jews, but love to all the nations, to all people. As far as scientific errors go, I’m a pre-med undergrad (lots of science courses) and there are many “facts” of science that you and I both will disagree with, such as evolution. Just speaking of the new testament, much of what might be viewed as scientifically erroneous initially is actually not because what you are reading may be metaphor or simile. Lastly, I think that you and I would agree that faith in God prevails over faith in man’s own understanding; Proverbs 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding.
Regarding authenticity, the old testament’s oldest manuscripts prior to 1947 dated back to around the ninth century, when the dead sea scrolls were found (copies > 1000 years older) and checked against the modern preservation they were found to be identical ~95% with the other roughly 5% variance being vernacular differences. The old testament of the Bible not only survived over 2000 years but even retained its integrity over the centuries of translation and dissemination. Regarding the new testament, there are over 5,000 partial and complete manuscripts of the new testament in the original Greek dating back to the 2nd and 4th centuries and if you count all the other translations the number rises to over 24,000. When those were cross referenced by scholars for consistency the same level of validity was found as well even with all of the translation and dissemination across the globe.
Jesus said: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. (Matthew 5:17)
There were seven councils formed to adopt a singular compilation of the various books of the new and old testaments, part of the reason for this is obvious but it was also to allow for easier reading. The “Bible” or biblos was the first “book” so to speak, it was the first manuscript that we would recognize today with the common binding and turning of pages. This was done so that the various gospels could be read side by side instead of having rolls of papyrus or some other textual format which made it difficult to cross reference. in the 16th century the council of Trent adopted what we see today as the agreed upon compilation of the Bible. So, we can see that the actual texts of the old and new testament have been preserved for this long reliably… is it truth though?
Jesus did indeed say the truth will set you free, the entire quote in context is as follows: “To the Jews who had believed him, Jesus said, “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:31-32). I would encourage you to read the entire chapter of John 8 so as to see it in full context as well.
Furthermore, the authors of the Gospel tell us plainly that:
For we did not follow cleverly devised stories when we told you about the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ in power, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. (2 Peter 1:16)
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. (1 John 1:1)
The author’s of the gospel did not claim to be telling a story, they proclaimed boldly that they were eyewitness accounts to what was revealed to them. As is true for my favorite passages from Luke 24:37-44 when Jesus appeared to his disciples after his death and resurrection:
While they were still talking about this, Jesus himself stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”
They were startled and frightened, thinking they saw a ghost. He said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do doubts rise in your minds? Look at my hands and my feet. It is I myself! Touch me and see; a ghost does not have flesh and bones, as you see I have.”
When he had said this, he showed them his hands and feet. And while they still did not believe it because of joy and amazement, he asked them, “Do you have anything here to eat?” They gave him a piece of broiled fish, and he took it and ate it in their presence.
He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”
Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.”
As I said, I truly appreciate your thorough response because I value the insight into your understanding. I wanted to share my responses with you so that maybe you could learn from me as I have learned from you. Jesus said in John chapter 3: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” And in John chapter 14 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him.”
@jeremiahstrong
We muslims believe that Jesus (peace be upon him) was one of the Mightiest Messengers of God. 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. Infact, no muslim is a muslim if he does not believe in Jesus (pbuh).
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. Christian does not know that the Muslim does not take the holy name of Jesus, in his own language, without saying Hazrat Eesa (meaning revered Jesus) or Eesa alai-hiss-salaam (Jesus, peace be upon him). Every time the Muslim mentions the name Jesus (pbuh) without these words of respect, he would be considered disrespectful, uncouth or barbaric. The Christian does not know that in the Holy Quran Jesus (pbuh) is mentioned by name five times more than the number of times the prophet of Islam is mentioned in the Book of God. To be exact – twenty five times as against five.
We Muslims have no hesitation in acknowledging that in the Bible, there three different kinds of witnessing recognizable without any need of specialized training. These are:
1. You will be able to recognize in the Bible what may be described as “The Word of God.”
2. You also be able to discern what can be described as the “Words of a Prophet of God.”
3. And you will most readily observe that the bulk of the Bible is the records of eye witnesses or ear witnesses, or people writing from hearsay. As such they are the “Words of a Historian.”
As for the your other questions, I would recommend you read the transcript of Late Ahmed Deedat’s debate with Dr. W. Graham Scroggie of the MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE, Chicago.
http://ia600306.us.archive.org/13/items/Shk_Ahmed_Deedats_Books/Is_The_Bible_Gods_Word.pdf
Hope this helps in understanding each other. May God show me and you the Right path. Ameen!
When will my post be visible?
Navedz, I’ve known for some time the Islamic belief of Jesus and the customary rhetoric observed in respect of him and that is all fine and good. Christians don’t practice such things because the word of God tells us:
“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. ” (Ephesians 2:8-9) NIV
The way to the Lord is not by works, customs, ritual or any other ‘good deed’. Jesus died on the cross as fulfillment of the prophesies and fulfillment of the law as the final sacrifice for ALL of mankind. There are denominations and sects of distorted Christian teaching such as the Catholic church, Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses who hold the same belief in Jesus Christ however they created their own theological-add-ons and customs not backed by the word of God.
Every other faith, including the Muslim faith holds salvation strongly to how many good deeds you do in life to favor God. Those who acknowledge the son of God know that by GRACE anyone can be saved. Grace meaning we don’t deserve it and there is nothing that we could do on our own to ‘buy’ or ‘earn’ our salvation short of accepting the free gift of love provided to all mankind.
______
I hope Navedz that you could research a little beyond Islamic sources of information regarding the gospel of Jesus. I glanced through the PDF you linked and can confirm to you that it gives a very distorted and false representation of the word of God. This was not any surprise because it was written from an Islamic perspective and is not objective, it’s thesis was to disprove the word of God from the beginning. I have enjoyed our conversation with each other, I hope that we can continue to discuss these ideas and share perspectives with each other more.
One last question I have for you is if Muslim’s believe that the birth of Jesus was divine (which all Christian’s believe, you can’t be a true Christian without believe that Jesus was the Son of God) and that he indeed did the things said in the New Testament, how can you then deny that he said: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” (John 14:6) NIV ?
If your answer is human contamination and interjection of lies into the New Testament I implore you to seek sources outside of Islam for an unbiased source that you can then compare to your knowledge of Islam
May mercy of God be upon me that HE leads me to guidance.
And may mercy of Allah (swt) be upon you sister Jeremiah that HE leads you to guidance.
Sister Jeremiah, I appreciate that you respect our beliefs and don’t criticize or object them and your point is that we understand the truth what you have understood.
Sister, Allah (swt) is my witness that my purpose is the same that you understand the truth what I have understood. It is a mandate on every Muslim to call people to truth. Like Christianity is truth for you, likewise Islam is truth for me.
Now if we analyse this situation, one of the way to seek truth is to find out which is the word of God.
For you Bible is the word of God and for me Qur’an is the word of God.
Before I proceed sister, I want to declare that my intention is not to hurt your sentiments. So if I say anything which hurts you, please forgive me for that.
Few points I have got from the above discussion are that you believe
1. Jesus is the son of God.
Your statement
Mark says it at the outset of his gospel (Mark 1:1).
The angel told Mary her child would be the Son of God (Luke 1:35)
John the Baptist said the same thing (John 1:34), etc
2. Your agreement that the statements in Bible can be a Metaphor or Smilie.
Your Statement
Just speaking of the new testament, much of what might be viewed as scientifically erroneous initially is actually not because what you are reading may be metaphor or simile.
3. We are looking things from the Islamic perspective only.
Your statement
I glanced through the PDF you linked and can confirm to you that it gives a very distorted and false representation of the word of God. This was not any surprise because it was written from an Islamic perspective and is not objective, it’s thesis was to disprove the word of God from the beginning
4. Islamic sources are biased
Your statement
If your answer is human contamination and interjection of lies into the New Testament I implore you to seek sources outside of Islam for an unbiased source that you can then compare to your knowledge of Islam.
My question to you is
1. Have you done a comparative religion study?
Someone can be born into a muslim family and follows Islam. Someone can be born into a Christian family and follows Christianity. Someone can be born into a Hindu family and follows Hinduism. And each one of them can believe his/her religion is the true religion. But what does logic hints towards? Does the intellect not say that comparing each one can only help you find which one is the true religion.
2. Is is not possible that the PDF, Audio, Video, Lectures, Symposium, Mass etc you witness are from the Christianity perspective ? If Yes – what do you suggest will be the correct method to find the truth.
3, Is is not possible that the Christian sources are biased ? If Yes – same as above.
4. Why do you believe that (Mark 1:1), (Luke 1:35), (John 1:34), etc are not amongst the METAPHOR / SMILIE which bible uses at other places. Where there are much evidence for me to believe so –
(GENESIS 6:2-4):
2.The sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
3 Then the LORD said, “My Spirit will not contend with humans forever, for they are mortal; their days will be a hundred and twenty years.”
4 The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of humans and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown.
(EXODUS 4:22),
22. Then say to Pharaoh, ‘This is what the LORD says: Israel is my firstborn son,
JEREMIAH 31:9
9. They will come with weeping; they will pray as I bring them back. I will lead them beside streams of water on a level path where they will not stumble, because I am Israel’s father, and Ephraim is my firstborn son.
ROMANS 8:14
14. For those who are led by the Spirit of God are the children of God.
Why does these statements not appeal to you that it has been stated metaphorically that Jesus pbuh is a godly person and mentioned as son of God, but is not meant as a physical son of God.
You have also touched on points upon the resurrection. Time does not permit me to put in all, but Insha Allah, If you are desirous to find out more, I will definately help you with the same.
I agree that your statement holds good, that the lectures / debates / books I will recommend will be from the Islamic perspective and there are possibilities of it being biased, but if what you believe is truth, It will stand out the test of critics. And biased approach neither have solid foundation nor strong refutation. But if the refutations are not biased and gives you a reason to ponder and find out the truth, then Insha Allah it can be your journey towards Islam provided you don’t overlook your instinct and refuse to accept what is coming evident towards you.
@ Ab’d, I appreciate the response, but what makes you think I’m a sister?
To answer your question, yes I have taken a comparative course on religion as well as read the Qur’an and Hadith as primary sources for my inquiries.
It is true that children raised in various religious households inevitably are more likely to accept the religion of their family even more so when it is deeply engrained into the culture they live in. Logic dictates that there is absolutism in the universe; a beginning and an end (modern quantum science even agrees), light vs. darkness, good vs. evil and the absolute fact of gravity – which is clearly demonstrated at any time I choose to drop a rock from my hand. Because we live in a world of absolutes there is also truth and non-truth and when it comes to religion there cannot be multiple truths. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Scientology and Atheism cannot all be correct, and I think that we would agree that there are not “multiple paths” to God as in my country popular culture embraces.
That being said, and again I think we would be in agreement on those points, can we trust the Gospel of Jesus to be accurate or are the important verses of Jesus being the Son of God and being resurrected just metaphor? Lets take a look.
Lets look at 1 Peter 1:24-25 (NIV)
For, “All people are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall,
but the word of the Lord endures forever.” And this is the word that was preached to you.
And lets also see Isaiah 40:6-8 (NIV)
A voice says, “Cry out.” And I said, “What shall I cry?” “All people are like grass, and all their faithfulness is like the flowers of the field. The grass withers and the flowers fall, because the breath of the LORD blows on them.
Surely the people are grass.The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God endures forever.”
Are these too passages literal? or are they metaphor? I think most people would agree intuitively that they are both metaphor, metaphor for the certainty and eternal nature of God’s promises compared to the feckless nature of mankind. Just as God’s promise was the law given to Moses in the old testament, the law was fulfilled in Jesus Christ as promised as an eternal salvation to all mankind. But don’t take my word for it, look for yourself.
It can sometimes be obscure whether or not certain passages are literal or not, here I chose two which are pretty straight forward and easily understood. How are we to interpret the story of Jonah and the whale or even Jesus’ resurrection on the third day? The answer is uniform and simple: You interpret scripture with scripture, period. If we relied solely on our own understanding we would intimately be lost so we must rely on God’s word for help in understanding the text. When looking at the many passages in the Gospel which state Jesus is the Son of God, was crucified or rose on the third day we could take each one literally or we could see if they are justified by the scriptures.
[Lets just look at a few of many examples:]
Micah 5:2 (ASV)
But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.
&
John 8:58 (ASV)
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was born, I am.
[Metaphor or literal? Clearly Jesus is saying what he means and meaning what he says and it is supported by Old Testament prophesy of the messiah to come. Now lets look at two more:]
Psalm 2:7 (NIV)
I will proclaim the LORD’s decree: He said to me, “You are my son; today I have become your father.
Proverbs 30:4 (NIV)
Who has gone up to heaven and come down? Whose hands have gathered up the wind? Who has wrapped up the waters in a cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and what is the name of his son?
Surely you know!
&
Luke 1:32 (NIV)
He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David,
Matthew 3:17 (NIV)
And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.”
[Here again the New Testament verses are justified by the Old, as a fulfillment of the prophesies, Jesus is the Son of God. Lets look at one more example:]
Isaiah 9:6 (NIV)
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
&
Phillipians 2:9-11 (ESV)
Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Jesus is the son of God, Jesus fulfilled the prophesies of the Old Testament and Jesus is the only path to the Father. For a more detailed analysis of other prophesies fulfilled by Jesus please see http://www.bprc.org/studies/deity.html
__________
Remember that the test of truth lies not in critics, family, friends, pastors or our leaders. The test of truth is to interpret scripture with scripture, to pray and to have an open heart so that God may reveal the truth to you.
The word Christian means to be a “Christ-Follower” and Jesus is not reserved for one set of people, and there is no people more or less worthy of calling on his name like this blog post’s title states. Jesus died for the sins of all man, Arabs, Persians, Europeans, Asians and all others. The language of God is not a language reserved for a single geographic region or culture. Anyone can be a Christ-Follower.
Jesus said: Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? Matthew 7:14-16 (NAS)
@jeremiahstrong
Sorry for late response… has been tough finding time lately.
First and foremost, let me be perfectly clear on the position of Muslims regarding the authenticity of the Holy Bible. It is a condition of faith for believers to believe in all of God’s Books and scripture as stipulated by the Quran, the Last and Final Testament from Almighty God to mankind, that the previous scriptures, including of course the Old Testament (Arabic = Torah), the Psalms (Arabic = Zabur) and the New Testament (Arabic = Injeel) were all from Almighty God (Arabic = Allah) in their original form. The beginning verses of the Quran clearly spell out the position of the ‘Believer’ with regard to these scriptures. As the translation from Arabic may be rendered regarding the conditions of believers:
“And they (believers) believe in what is being sent down to you (Muhammad, peace be upon him) and they believe in what has been sent down before (previous Holy scriptures to Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, and of course Jesus, peace be upon them all).” [Quran 2:2,3]
Therefore, it must be established that Muslims do accept that Almighty Allah did send down many Holy Books and he did allow the people to alter, change, delete and make additions to these Books, and as such, they can not longer be considered as the “Word of God” in their present condition. This is something immediately agreed upon by all qualified Biblical scholars.
Incidentally, there is sufficient evidence in the Quran to prove the remainder of the Bible still contains many of the original teachings and sayings of the prophets to whom the various scriptures were revealed.
Bible scholars themselves know that nothing of the original words, letters or even original copies of the Old or the New Testament exist anymore. Nothing in the original form either in memory or written text exists anywhere on the earth, nor has it existed as such for at least 1,500 or more years.
Interesting enough, the Quran does claim the original Bible was from the exact same source (Almighty God) and it (The Quran) is merely bringing back to us the original message that came with all the prophets from Adam to Jesus (peace be upon them all) – the message of “No God beside God” (Arabic: Laa elaha illalah).
The teachings of Islam from the Quran and the hadeeth of Muhammad, peace be upon him, are very clear and available in the original texts in Arabic for whomsoever would like to read them.
For the comparison to the Bible… There are no “hidden” books (called ‘apocrapha’ by the Catholics) or ‘alternate readings’ of older, ‘more authentic’ manuscripts (see: Revised Standard Version of Bible, introduction). This is in the very beginning of my own Bible:
=============
=============
“The King James Version has with good reason been termed ‘the noblest monument of English prose.’ Its revisers in 1881 expressed admiration of ‘its simplicity, its dignity, its power, its happy turns of express… the music of its cadences, and the felicities of its rhythm.’ It entered, as no other book has, into the making of the personal character and the public institutions of the English-speaking peoples. We owe to it an incalculable debt.”
“Yet the King James Version has grave defects. By the middle of the nineteenth century, the development of Biblical studies and the discovery of many manuscripts more ancient than those upon which the King James Version was based, made it manifest that these defects are so many and so serious as to call for a revision of the English translation. The task was undertaken, by authority of the Church of England, in 1870. The English Revised Version of the Bibles was published in 1881-1885; and the American Standard Version, its variant embodying the preferences of the American scholars associated in the work, was published in 1901.”
“Because of the unhappy experience with unauthorized publications in the two decades between 1881 and 1901, which tampered with the text of the English Revised Version in the supposed interest of the American public, the American Standard Version was copyrighted, to protect the text from unauthorized changes. In 1928 this copyright was acquired by the International Council of Religious Education, and thus passed into the ownership of the churches of the United States and Canada which were associated in this Council through their boards of education and publication.”
“…. decision was reached that there is need for a thorough revision of the version of 1901..””In 1937 the revision was authorized by vote of the Council.”
“Thirty-two scholars have served as members of the Committee charged with making the revision, and they have secured the review and counsel of an Advisory Board of fifty representatives of the co-operating denominations.”
“Each section has submitted its work to the scrutiny of the members of the charter of the Committee requires that all changes be agreed upon by a two-thirds vote of the total membership of the Committee.”
“The problem of establishing the correct Hebrew and Aramaic text of the Old testament is very different from the corresponding problem in the New Testament.”
“For the New Testament we have a large number of Greek manuscripts, preserving many variant forms of the text. Some of them were made only two or three centuries later than the original composition of the books.”
“For the Old Testament only late manuscripts survive, all (with the exception of the Dead Sea Texts of Isaiah and Habakkuk and some fragments of other books) based on a standardized form of the text established many centuries after the books were written.”
“The present revision is based on the consonantal Hebrew and Aramaic text as fixed early in the Christian era and revised by Jewish scholars (the ‘Masoretes’) of the sixth to ninth centuries. The vowel signs, which were added by the Masoretes, are accepted also in the main, but where a more probable and convincing reading can be obtained by assuming different vowels, this has been done.”
“… vowel points are less ancient and [less] reliable than the consonants.”
“Departures from the consonantal text of the best manuscripts have been made only where it seems clear that errors in copying had been made before the text was standardized.”
“Most of the corrections adopted are based on the ancient versions [translations into Greek Aramaic, Syriac, and Latin], which were made before the time of the Masoretic revision and therefore reflect earlier forms of the text.”
“Sometimes it is evident that the text has suffered in transmission, but none of the versions provides a satisfactory restoration. Here we can only follow the best judgment of competent scholars as to the most probable reconstruction of the original text.”
“Many difficulties and obscurities, of course, remain.”
“Where the choice between two meanings is particularly difficult or doubtful, we have given an alternative rendering in a footnote.”
“If in the judgment of the Committee the meaning of a passage is quite uncertain or obscure, either because of corruption in the text or because of the inadequacy of our present knowledge of the language, that fact is indicated by a note.”
“It should not be assumed, however, that the Committee was entirely sure or unanimous concerning every rendering not so indicated.”
“To record all minority views was obviously out of the question.”
“The King James Version of the New Testament was based upon a Greek text that was marred by mistakes, containing the accumulated errors of fourteen centuries of manuscript copying.”
“It was essentially the Greek text of the New Testament as edited by Beza, 1589, who closely followed that published by Erasmus, 1516-1535, which was based upon a few medieval manuscripts.”
“The earliest and best of the eight manuscripts which Erasmus consulted was from the tenth century, and [yet] he made the least use of it because it differed most from the commonly received text; Beza had access to two manuscripts of great value, dating from the fifth and sixth centuries, but he made very little use of them because they differed from the text published by Erasmus.”
“We now possess many more ancient manuscripts of the new Testament, and are far better equipped to seek to recover the original wording of the Greek text. The evidence for the text of the books of the New Testament is better that for any other ancient book, both in the number of extant manuscripts and in the nearness of the date of some of these manuscripts to the date when the book was originally written.”
=============
The words are in plain English. The second paragraph says it all, “Yet, the King James Version has grave defects.”
Therefore, we must conclude the “King James Version” is NOT the Actual Bible sent by God to mankind.
=============
=============
Here is another interesting fact about the “King James Authorized” translation of the Bible in 1611 A.D. – It was not really “authorized” by the King and he didn’t even know it was done until afterwards. The proof is in the dedication to him – called the “Dedicatory”
THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY.
And now at last, by the mercy of god, and the continuance of our labors,
it being brought unto such a conclusion, as that we have great hopes that
the Church of England shall reap good fruit thereby; we hold our duty to offer it
to your Majesty, not only as to our King and Sovereign, but as to the principal
Mover and Author of the work: humbly craving of Your most Sacred Majesty,
that since things of this quality have ever been subject to the censures of ill-
meaning and discontented person, it may receive approbation and patronage
from so learned and judicious a Prince as Your Highness is, whose allowance
and acceptance of our labors shall more honor and encourage us, than all the
calumniations and hard interpretations of other men shall dismay us. So
that if, on the one side, we shall be traduced by Popish Persons at home or
abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make
God’s holy Truth to be yet more and more known unto the people, whom they
desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness; or if, on the other side, we shall
be maligned by self conceited Brethren, who run their own ways, and give liking
unto nothing, but what is framed by themselves, and hammered on their anvil;
we may rest secure, supported within by the truth and innocency of a good
conscience, having walked the ways of simplicity and integrity, as before the
Lord; and sustained without by the powerful protection of Your Majesty’s grace
and favor, which will ever give countenance to honest and christian endeavors
against bitter censures and uncharitable imputations.
The Lord of Heaven and earth bless Your Majesty with many and happy days,
that, as his heavenly hand hath enriched Your Highness with many singular
and extraordinary graces, so You may be the wonder of the world in this
latter age for happiness and true felicity, to the honour of that great God,
An examination of the Bible is necessary today because of the many questions being raised by religious people of all circles, including Jews and Christians, as to its inconsistency with contemporary church teachings as well as its inconsistency within itself.
=============
=============
Today, there are thousands of different versions of the Bible in circulation and the transcript has been freely translated from one language to another numerous times. According to Bible scholars themselves, the original scripture is no longer extant. It is nowhere to be found. We have no idea if what we are reading and implementing into our lives and belief system is, indeed, God’s teaching.
Muslims believe in the same Omnipotent, All-powerful, Unseen God that the Jews have believed in since Adam. However, unlike the Jews, Muslims join in with the Christians by also believing in Jesus as the “Christ”; “Messiah”; “Logos”; and “Miraculous Conception”; as well as all the previous Biblical prophets and their original scriptures that they brought. Muslims also believe that God is merciful and just to His creatures. So, they deny the concept of the ‘Original Sin’ [all children are born into the sins of their parents] and the ‘Sacrificial Lamb’ concept which requires the blood of Jesus, peace be upon him, to atone for the sins of the sinners. This being the case, how can Muslims say that God is just and that His revelation, the Bible, is corrupted? Where is it in God’s great plan that His revelation loses all credibility? These are all very excellent questions.
It is a known fact that Jesus was regarded by his followers as a prophet and that what he preached was written down into physical form by his disciples. However, God placed the responsibility on humans to preserve the integrity of this message over time. When the people failed in their duty, it was made necessary for the Holy Quran to come into existence in order to correct the teachings that were changed. By God’s mercy He revealed His will once again to Muhammad over 600 years later, and his companions similarly wrote it down and compiled it into what became known as The Holy Qur’an. By God’s justice He promised that He would preserve it therefore making it the last revelation to humanity. Today an actual seventh century Qur’an, complete and intact, is on display in a museum in Istanbul, Turkey.
The Quran is memorized today by over ten million (10,000,000) living human beings, in the original text and in the original language.
There are more than a billion distributed around the world in written form – and each is exactly like the other.
There no versions of Quran.
Ever single Muslim has memorized at least some portion of the Quran in the original Arabic language.
Come let us compare these statements to any other religious book – or any book at all for that matter and tell us what you find.
We are waiting.
Unless and until a person cleans their heart from biases and prejudices, they will never be guided by Allah. This is not about your relationship with them. It is about their relationship with Allah.
If they want truth – they need to pray directly to Allah and ask for it. But if they want misguidance – then let them pray to whatever they want – and they will be misguided.
You should offer to share what we have and listen to what they have (in a sincere effort to understand their perspective). Then pray for them and for us to be guided by Allah.
Thats all there is to it.
Reblogged this on JSN and commented:
At the bottom of this article is an informative discussion of Islam and Christianity, worth checking out.
Navedz, I too find it difficult to allot the necessary time to adequately respond. I think Blaise Pascal said it best, “I have made this letter longer than usual, only because I have not had the time to make it shorter.”
I’ll attempt to keep my response short and to the direct point because a lengthy response is no longer needed.
The bottom line is you contend that the Old and New Testaments, including the gospel of Jesus was God ordained (I mentioned previously that Christians understand that the Bible is “God Breathed”, meaning the literal word of God written through his appointed saints) however you state it has been corrupted by man since then and because of that, God revealed the Qur’an to Mohammed to bring mankind back to the original Bible.
-All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness (2TIM 3:16)
I previously wrote though, that indeed there are over 20,000 partial copies and fragments of original manuscripts from the New Testament alone exist today. And when compared to the “modern Bible” was congruent some 97% with the remainder being vernacular differences which is understandable given the translation between 2000 years of language. This same agreement between the old and new texts was verified when the dead sea scrolls were discovered. How about the Qur’an?
What can you say about the fact that Mohammed never compiled the Qur’an in his lifetime?
Or that when it was compiled it had seven versions according to the Hadith. Which also agrees with the history that Mohammad memorized the contents of the Qur’an over the course of 23 years?
Or when it was finally compile into a “book” during the 3rd Caliphate of Uthmam, the six varying versions were burned and destroyed so that there was only one version?
Why burn all of the six other versions if the variance was in dialect alone? This stands to reason that there were glaring differences between all of these early Qur’an’s, necessitating the destruction.
Why was the Qur’an mandated to be in Arabic during this 3rd Caliphate, the exclusive language of Arabs, excluding the rest of the world from the word which supposedly is from the God of ALL people to ALL people?
The claim the the “original” Qur’an is on display in Turkey is true… but it is from the 3rd Caliphate. But even if it was written by Mohammed himself, does that make it the word of God? No.
___
Jesus warned us to be aware of false prophets, that they would come and deceive many. Mohammed was born, brought the world a book which is contradictory in so many ways to the Old and New Testaments, and his religion has amassed a tremendously large following. I’m not saying this to offend or belittle or attack you or other Muslims but Mohammed is a false profit, one in which Jesus warned not to be deceived by.
The name of your blog is Words of love, Words for love and you clearly represent Islam as a love infused religion. I have even glanced a post you’ve written about respecting women. Why then is nearly every Muslim country in the world attacking Christians, Jews and Women in civil (law) as well as physically (terror, beatings, violence)?
How do you explain Sharia Law?
All over the world Islamist factions, sometimes individually, through terror proxy and even entire nations and Islamic headship condone the oppression of these groups? It’s not make believe, it happens every day! Here is just the most recent example that I read several days ago:
Abdulaziz ibn Abdullah Al al-Sheikh, the grand mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, declares that it is “necessary to destroy all the churches in the Arabian Peninsula,” [ http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/294112/destroy-all-churches-clifford-d-may ]
How do you explain verses of the Qur’an and Hadith that seem to very plainly support the oppression, violence and murder I’ve mentioned? The Quran tells you that I am your enemy… I’m a kuffar, an infidel according to the Qur’an.
See the following verses (Sura _:_)
Qur’an teaches non-violence… and violence:
8:15-16
8:12
8:14
2:194
2:191-93
2:216
17:16
…And there’s so many more I don’t even have the time nor the desire to keep reading all these verses. Some of these can be viewed as defensive rather than offensive and I know that most Muslims don’t read these and other verses literally or with hate but many Muslims do and act on it (I don’t need to give examples).
I don’t even have time to discuss the interesting connection between Islamic and Christian eschatology, maybe another response is warranted. Did you know that the two are like polar opposites?
___
Jesus preached love to all people, to the unbeliever, the pagans, Jews, Arabs – everyone. The Qur’an has dozens and dozens of verses of superiority, condescension and hate towards unbelievers along with the contradictory verses of compassion and sympathy. Historians cite that when Mohammad was universally being rejected in Mecca and Medina is when the verses of “compassion/sympathy” where “memorized” and as his power and influence grew so did the violent rhetoric but that’s just conjecture and I have nothing to provide as evidence of that.
Navedz, I’m not trying to win an online debate, I don’t have anything to gain from all my time spent responding to you and sharing what I believe. I’m doing this for the same reason I believe you are, to “enlighten” each other with the truth. I’ve continued to share what I know with you because your polite and enjoyable to converse with and I know that you can see the truth of Jesus as well if you can escape the Islamic falsehood you’ve cited for your references.
I have and will continue to pray that the truth will be revealed to you.
@ Jeremiah
Sorry for the delay. A detailed reply is on its way. Bear with me for some more time.
Part : 1
********
@ Jeremiah
All Praises be to Allah.
I apologize brother. May be your flow of writing, eloquence, etc made me assume Jeremiah to be a feminine name.
And I’m sorry, very sorry for this late a reply. But it seems everybody was busy here. And I’ve topped all else in busyness. Lol.
*************
It took me longer to finalize where to start from, for the discussion has already gone long enough and there are so many things I wanted to refute. Brother Naved already did part of the job, but you don’t seem to be satisfied with the explanation.
Let’s have it straight from the horse’s mouth.
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/pope-reaffirms-ban-women-priests-assails-disobedience-015356798.html
Reverend Helmut Schueller told Reuters on Thursday he remained hopeful for reform despite the pope’s views.
“We believe Church teaching can change. It has changed time and again over the centuries. It is our hope that that can happen again in future,” he said.
All the ancient Christian writers and a great number of modern writers are unanimous on the point that the Gospel of Matthew was originally in the Hebrew language and has been completely obscured due to distortions and alterations made by the Christians. The present Gospel is merely a translation and is not supported by any argument or authority.
EVEN THE NAME OF ITS TRANSLATOR IS NOT DEFINATELY KNOWN.
There are only conjectures that possibly this of that person might have translated it. This kind of argument cannot be acceptable to a non-Christian reader. The book cannot be attributed to its author only on the basis of uncertain calculations.
In addition to this huge disruption in the chain of transmission of their books, which lasted for two centuries, these books did not remain in the languages in which they were originally written, rather they were translated, more than once, by people whose level of knowledge and honesty is unknown. The contradictions in these books and their shortcomings are among the strongest evidence that they have been distorted and that they are not the Gospel (Injeel) that Allaah revealed to His slave and Messenger ‘Eesa (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).
Allaah indeed spoke the truth when He said (interpretation of the meaning):
“Had it been from other than Allaah, they would surely, have found therein many a contradiction” (Al-Nisa 4:82).
To you the Qur’an is not the word of God, but the bible is. Fine we don’t have to prove whether the Qur’an is the word of God or not. We just need to prove that the present day Bible is not the word of God. The Qur’an can speak for itself, as its says…
*************
The topic has revolved much around the divinity of Jesus, he being God, He is the son of God, He was resurrected, He died for the sins of mankind, etc
The resurrection of Jesus is a fundamental and essential doctrine of Christianity. The resurrection of Jesus is so important that without it Christianity is false. Paul said in I-Cor 15:14, “and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.”
The entire Christendom is lured by their dogma of sin inheritance and believe in crucifiction for their redemption. Why be fooled for God or son of God when you have something greater than or equal to God and can be called upon for salvation ?
The question is – Is there a man greater than or equal to God?
Is it not that God is infinite – He has no beginning and no end? Because, if God is merely the first, then somebody must have created Him and that somebody must be the One and only true God. How come Melchizedek according to Paul had such qualities?
“Listen to, me O Jacob and Israel, My called: I am He, I am the First, I am also the last.” (Isaiah 48:12)
The Bible characterises Melchizedek as greater than God for it says that “he has no beginning of days nor end of life”; Whereas, God is merely the “First”.
“For this Melchizedek, king of Salem….meaning, “king of peace”. Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither of days nor end of life, but made like the Son of God, remains a priest continually.” (Hebrews 7:1-3)
*************
Bible as considered to be the book of God contains innumerable errors which is easy for thumpers to attribute it to the 3% of the vernacular differences being understandable.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses in their “AWAKE!” Magazine dated 8 September, 1957, carried this startling headline — “50000 ERRORS IN THE BIBLE?”
The Christian so called SAINTS have surreptitiously inserted the incestuous progenies of the Old Testament upon their Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ, in the New Testament. For a man who had no genealogy, they have manufactured one for him. And what a genealogy! Six adulterers and offsprings of incest are imposed upon this holy man of God. Men and women deserving to be stoned to death according to God’s own law, as revealed through Moses, and further to be ostracised and debarred from the House of God for generations.
“The bastard shall not enter the congregation of the Lord even unto the tenth generation.” (Deut. 23:2 – AV).
Of the four Gospel writers only two were inspired by God to pen down the genealogy of his son. Matthew was inspired to record only 26 ancestors where as Luke was inspired to gather upto 41 ancestors. Surprisingly the only common name on those two list is that of Joseph the carpenter.
Matthew 1:6 says that Jesus was the son of David through Solomon, but Luke 3:31 says that he (Jesus) was the son of David through Nathan. One need not be a gynecologist to tell that by no stretch of the imagination could the seed of David reach the mother of Jesus both through Solomon and Nathan at the same time! Both the authors are confounded liars, because Jesus was conceived miraculously, without any male intervention.
II CHRONICLES 36
9. Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign…
II KINGS 24
8. Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign…
Can we attribute the above discrepancy to the God ?
Compare II-SAMUEL 10 and I-CHRONICLES 19
God doesn’t know the difference between Cavalry and Infantry.
Compare I-KINGS 7 & II-CHRONICLES 4
A 33.33 % discount or 50% extravagance in the word of God. Take your pick.
The Gospel of John has reported Christ as saying:
“If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true.” (John 5:31)
And the same Gospel has reported Christ as contradicting this:
“Though I bear record of myself, yet my record is true.” (John 8:14)
At one place the Bible says that all Scripture is inspired (II-Timothy 3:16), but Paul says in his writing: And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord… But to the rest I speak, not the Lord, Now concerning virgins I have no command of the Lord, yet I give my judgement (I Corinthians 7:10,12,25).
Is this what you call Divinely inspired?
All the four Gospels give a description of Peter denying Jesus after his arrest. But each description is different from the other in eight respects.
Did John the Baptist recognise Jesus BEFORE his baptism? Matthew 3:13-14 confirms, whereas John 1:32-33 rejects.
Did John the Baptist recognize Jesus AFTER his baptism? Surprisingly Matthew 11:2 rejects this time whereas John 1:32-33 confirms.
Did Jesus bear his own cross? John 19:17 says a YES while Matthew 27:31-32 says a NO!!!
Is the law of Moses useful? (a) Yes. “All scripture is . . . profitable . . .” (2 Timothy 3:16). (b) No. “. . . A former commandment is set aside because of its weakness and uselessness . . . ” (Hebrews 7:18)
In II-Chronicles 6:36, it states that “there is NO ONE who does not sin” while I-John 3:9 says “Whosoever is born of God DOTH NOT commit sin.
II SAMUEL 24
AND again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.
I CHRONICLES 21
AND SATAN stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.
No religion conceives Satan as synonymous to God.
I-Kings 22:21-23
Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the LORD and said, ‘I will entice him’. “By what means?” the LORD asked. “I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,he said”. “You will succeed in enticing him, said the LORD. ‘Go and do it.’
23 “So now the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The LORD has decreed disaster for you.”
GOD Almighty gave the spirit the green light to go and cause lying. And yet they tell us: “thou shalt not lie”?
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour. (From the KJV Bible, Exodus 20:16)
Paul permitted lying in Romans 3:1-8 & Philippians 1:15-18
Paul here is admitting that he lied or that he might resort to lying for the sake of spreading GOD Almighty’s Truth. This is demonstrated in the following verses from Paul:-
Philippians 1:15-18
15 It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill.
16 The latter do so in love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel.
17 The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains.
18 But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice
Paul: On his own admittance being cunning, used deceit “But be it so, I did not burden you nevertheless, being crafty, I CAUGHT YOU WITH GUILE.” 2 CORINTHIANS 12:16 (GUILE: means ruse, sharp practice, treachery, trickery and wiliness.)
Does God change his mind? (a) Yes. The word of the Lord came to Samuel: “I repent that I have made Saul King . . .” (1 Samuel 15:10 to 11). (b) No. God “will not lie or repent; for he is not a man, that he should repent” (1 Samuel 15:29). (c) Yes. “And the Lord repented that he had made Saul King over Israel” (1 Samuel 15:35).
Notice that the above three quotes are all from the same chapter of the same book!
*************
It speaks of absurdities where people will reach a state To eat SHIT and drink their own PISS. 2 KINGS 18:27 and ISAIAH 36:12
In Judges 15, if you read the whole passage you will find Samson killed a thousand men with jawbone of a donkey. And one thousand men against one could do nothing. Is it reasonable ?
The Christian dogma that sin is inherited is against all ethics, morality and common sense. It is against the explicit pronouncement of God. “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son (the progeny of Adam) shall not bear the iniquity of the father (Adam), 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. 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.” (Ezekiel 18:20-21)
In Islam the notion of original sin is regarded as inconsistent with the justice of Allah. How could a just and loving God make an innocent child responsible for, or at least bear the guilt for the sins of a distant ancestor? (Steve A. Johnson)
*************
In addition, the Bible shows that God repented on several other occasions: I. The Lord was sorry that he made man” (Genesis 6:6). ” I am sorry that I have made them” (Genesis 6:7) ii.”And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do to his people” (Exodus 32:14). Contrary to God’s own word in Numbers 23:19 which states “God is not a man, that he should lie, neither the son of man that he should repent”.
In your language as stated in your comment, this appears to be the FECKLESS nature of God.
It contains the ascription of shortcomings to the Lord, may He be glorified and exalted, and likens Him to created beings. For example, they say that God wrestled with Jacob for an entire night, then Jacob overpowered Him.
And they say that God regretted having created mankind when He saw their disobedience, and He wept until His eyes became swollen, then the angels came to visit Him and comfort Him.
Exalted be God far above what the wrongdoers say.
Who will bear whose burden? (a) “Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2). (b) “Each man will have to bear his own load” (Galatians 6:5).
In Isaiah 5:26, 7:18, Zecharia 10:8, Isaiah 42:13, Jeremiah 25:30, you will find they attribute qualities like shouting, hissing, crying, roaring to God Almighty. Further more in I-Samuel 6:19, it accuses God of slaughtering 50,070 men for looking into the ark of Lord.
In Mark 10:27 it says with God all things are possible and still inscribes the God with incompetence of driving out the people of the valley because they had chariots of Iron (Judges 1:19)
Sabbath as a standing insult to God in the Bible — “… for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested and WAS REFRESHED.” (EXODUS 31:17)
Exalted be Allah, far above what it is stated.
It contains insults and slander against the Prophets. For example, they say that the Prophet of God Aaron made a calf and worshipped it along with the Children of Israel. And they say that Solomon (peace be upon him) apostatised at the end of his life and worshipped idols, and built temples for them.
It says God will shave with a hired razor. He will shave the head and the hairs of the leg.
What an insult to God Almighty.
*************
By Allah, I’m asking how can you be so confident of your teaching ??? How can you be so content with the authenticity of this holy book of yours ? Are you truthful brother ? …..to yourself ?? Please I’m in no need of your honesty and truthfulness, nor is God in need of it, but you run for your redemption. Is that book what you claim to believe in confides you for your salvation ?? with all of the above filth and vile and you BUY IT ????
Wallah you will never reach the truth with the de facto believe and approach unto understanding of your Lord, until you challenge your status quo.
Let me present you with something more displeasing and disturbing which should take away the peace of mind of any true believer of Christ.
*************
It states in the book of Proverbs 31:6-7 that Alchohol is for people who are dying and are in pain and who are in misery. Let them drink and forget their misery, poverty, unhappiness, pain and all sort of problems.
In I-Timothy 5:23 it says, drink no longer water, instead prefer a little wine over it for your stomach and frequent illness.
Lets see what the Qur’an says about it.
“O you who believe! Intoxicants (all kinds of alcoholic drinks), and gambling, and Al-Ansaab (stone altars for sacrifices to idols, jinn, etc), and Al-Azlaam (arrows for seeking luck or decision) are an abomination of Shaytaan’s (Satan’s) handiwork. So avoid (strictly all) that (abomination) in order that you may be successful.
Shaytaan (Satan) wants only to excite enmity and hatred between you with intoxicants (alcoholic drinks) and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allaah and from As-Salaah (the prayer). So, will you not then abstain?”
[Al-Maa’idah 5:90-91]
If you read I-Samuel 18:27, it says that prophet David killed two hundred Palestanians and brought their foreskin and counted them in full and gave it to the king to get married to his daughter Michal.
If you read Numbers 31:15-40, On the face of it, there doesn’t appear to be a problem, but closer examine puts across the message of cruelty that is showcased. It says that kill all the boys and women who have had sexual relationship with a man, but keep the virgins for yourselves. In a battlefield, how do you examine if a woman is virgin or not except to rape and ravish her. And the army kept 32000 women for themselves. They raped and ravished 32000 virgins. What a divine inspiration I must say. But that’s not all. For the men who took part in the war, were given half of the share and there was a share for God too. Out of the 32000 virgins raped, the God got a share of 32 raped women.
The Song of Songs 7:1-4, 8-9 describes women’s vaginas tastes like wine.
Let us look at Song of Solomon 8:10 “Dear brothers, I’m a walled-in virgin still, but my breasts are full— And when my lover sees me, he knows he’ll soon be satisfied.”
She is a virgin with full swelling breasts. When her lover meets her, he will be satisfied from those swelling breasts! Obviously, she is referring to licking, sucking and other pornographic things that I can’t mention here. Believe me this verse is not talking about them worshiping GOD Almighty together when they meet!! It is clearly and indisputably referring to graphic sex that involves her swelling breasts and other things such as intercourse.
In Leviticus 20, it is so explicitly mentioning the different types of sexual relationship between a man and a women that are forbidden that it reflects more of vulgarity than a commandment.
Compare this to the Qur’anic version of impermissible relations in Islam.
Forbidden to you (for marriage) are: your mothers, your daughters, your sisters, your father’s sisters, your mother’s sisters, your brother’s daughters, your sister’s daughters, your foster mother who gave you suck, your foster milk suckling sisters, your wives mothers, your step daughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom you have gone in – but there is no sin on you if you have not gone in them (to marry their daughters), – the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins, and two sisters in wedlock at the same time, except for what has already passed; verily, Allah is OftForgiving, Most Merciful. (Al-Nisa’ 4:23)
In Ruth 3:4-15 is says Ruth had sex in the barn and I-Kings 1:1-4 speaks of David sleeping with a young beautiful virgin.
If you read Genesis 9:21, it says that Noah drank wine and got drunken and lay naked within his tent.
If you read Isaiah 20:3-4, it says that Isaiah remain stripped for 3 years and walked barefooted to get a portent from him Lord.
If you read Judges 19:22-25, it accounts for gang rape taking place.
Rape is a big crime that could actually take the woman’s or the victim’s life away. Let us examine how your HOLY BOOK deals with the rapist: “If a man happens to meet a virgin who is not pledged to be married and rapes her and they are discovered, he shall pay the girl’s father fifty shekels of silver. He must marry the girl, for he has violated her. He can never divorce her as long as he lives. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 22:28)” Although this Verse from the Bible only talks about virgins, but its the only verse in the entire Bible that talks about raping single women. Not to be biased or anything, but the Bible seems to have quite weird things in it that are quite irrational and quite ridiculous. Deuteronomy 22:28 forces the raped woman to marry her rapist. My question to the writers of the Bible is why in the world would any raped female victim want to be in the same town, not the same bedroom !! with her rapist?.
Also, the Bible seems to promote raping of single women: “But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. (From the NIV Bible, Deuteronomy 22:25)” This is quite an interesting verse. We see in Deuteronomy 22:28 that if a man rapes a single woman then she will be forced to be his wife, while if a man rapes a married woman or a woman who is spoken for, in Deuteronomy 22:25, then he shall be put to death. There is absolutely no punishment for the rapist of a single woman in the Bible.
If you read Genesis 19, it gives an account of Lot and his two daughters and how they plan to have sex with his father to continue to progeny.
If you read Genesis 35, it gives an account of Jacob’s first born having sexual relationship with his father’s wife.
Some versions of bible states it as his concubine. Wife and Concubine are synonymous term in the bible. For reference check (Genesis 25:1-2) and (1-Chronicles 1:32-33)
If you read Genesis 38, it gives an account of Judah having sex with his daughter-in-law thinking her to be a prostitute. And she giving birth to Pharez and Zarah, WHO WERE DESTINED TO BECOME THE GREAT GRAND FATHER OF JESUS (Matthew 1:3)
If you read II-Samuel 16:22, it gives an account of Absalom who does wholesale rape with all of his father’s wife in front of all Israel.
Actually this is the fulfillment of God’s own promise to King David. “Thus saith the Lord, Behold, I will raise up evil against thee (David) out of thine own house, and I will take THY WIVES before thine eyes, and give them unto thy neighbour (actually thy son) and he shall lie (have sexual intercourse) with thy wives in the sight of sun (for the whole world to watch the fun). For thou didst it secretly (with Bath-Sheba the wife of Uriah): but I will do this thing before ALL Israel, and before the sun.” (II-Samuel 12:11-12)
If you read Judges 16:1, it states there that Samson went onto Gaza and there he saw a harlot, a prostitute and he went in unto her.
If you read II-Samuel 13, it gives an account of how Amnon plots to rape his sister and after deflowering her he threw her out, for his evil desire was fulfilled and had left no interest in her.
And they say that Lot drank wine until he became drunk, then he committed incest with his two daughters, one after the other!
If you read Ezekiel 23, I have to admit here that before I read it, I have never in my life could have even dreamt of such a text which is full of sex objects. It has so much of lewdness & nudity & vulgarity. Astaghfirullah, I’m forced to be sarcastic here and ask is that what you call this book from God almighty which is so full of voyeurism.
The Song of Songs 8:1-3 says “If only you were to me like a brother, who was nursed at my mother’s breasts! Then, if I found you outside, I would kiss you, and no one would despise me. I would lead you and bring you to my mother’s house– she who has taught me. I would give you spiced wine to drink [i.e., her vagina’s semen!], the nectar of my pomegranates. His left arm is under my head and his right arm embraces me.”
Few points to note from the above:
1. She wished if her boyfriend/lover was her actual brother so she wouldn’t have to take him home in secret.
2. She would sleep with her own brother.
3. She would kiss him publicly.
4. She wants him to feel her body.
5. She wants him to do her all night long!
If you read II-Samuel 11, it narrates how David got lured for Bath-Sheba and had sex with her and ploys to get her husband killed and then got married to her.
Let us look at II-Samuel 11:2-4 “One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful, and David sent someone to find out about her. The man said, ‘Isn’t this Bath-Sheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite?’ Then David sent messengers to get her. She came to him, and he slept with her. (She had purified herself from her uncleanness.) Then she went back home.” This Holy Figure in the Bible is a pervert!.
So what happened to “If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife–with the wife of his neighbor–both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death. (From the NIV Bible, Leviticus 20:10)”????
The woman was not only another man’s wife, but also the wife of his neighbour! Double deadly crimes had been committed by the King against GOD Almighty!
How come Leviticus 20:10 was compromised in the Bible and never applied to King David? Didn’t King David know about this law? Yet, the Jews use his star as their holy symbol; the David Star, and the Christians call Jesus his son; “Son of David”.
By the way, your HOLY BIBLE did not even spare God from illicit sexual aspersions being ascribed to Him: In the case of the conception of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), God Almighty arranged for Mary to conceive Jesus by the intervention of the Holy Ghost, as witnessed in the Bible: (a) “The Holy Ghost shall COME UPON thee (the question is, how?) and the power of the most High shall OVERSHADOW thee (again, how?). LUKE 1:35 Whereas in the case of Isaac, his conception took place in the womb of Sarah by the direct intervention of God himself, as recorded in His Holy Book: (b) “And the Lord VISITED Sarah, as he had PROMISED and FULFILLED what he had SPOKEN. And Sarah CONCEIVED”. (Genesis 21:1-2)
There are atleast 10 different cases of Incest – types and types of incest you can commit.
Although I don’t agree with whole of your bible, since it is our creed that the revelation that was given to Eesa ibn Maryan (Jesus the son of Mary – peace be upon him) has been distorted and the above quotations establishes it for a rational man, however I am in accordance with the reference you gave regarding II-Timothy 3:16. Where the word of God should fall into either of the four categories of teaching, rebuking, correcting and guidance.
Of course we do tell our children, fables, not really for their entertainment value, but that through them some moral may be imparted.
“The Fox and the Grapes”, “The Wolf and the Lamb”, “The Dog and his Shadow” etc. However simple or silly the story, a moral is aimed at.
But what about the moral? God blesses Judah for his incestuous crime! So if you do “evil” (Er), God will slay you; if you spill “seed” (Onan), God will kill you, but a daughter-in-law (Lamat) who vengefully and guilefully collect her father-in-law’s (Judah’s) “seed” is rewarded.
For all of the above mentioned cases of illicit relationship with no further mention of repentance, punishment etc I would be more than glad to know
Under what category will the Christians place this “honour” in the “Book of God?” Where does it fit? Is it Your …
1. DOCTRINE?
2. REPROOF?
3. CORRECTION? or
4. INSTRUCTION INTO RIGHTEOUSNESS?
*************
Even the Bible also perceives God to be perfect (Matthew 5:48); and that His words are pure (Proverbs 30:5); living and powerful (Hebrews 4:12). As such, no man nor any group of men should ever revise God’s Book.
Our conclusion is not upon mere blind belief brother, but based on concrete evidence. Any rational reader who reads the Bible will never find a single verse in it that claims that God is its Author. Neither did He inspired it’s different authors. Instead, one will read the following Biblical verse that clearly implies that God is not the author of the Bible: “For God is not the author of confusion but of peace….” (I-Corinthians 14:33)
And we are in acceptance of it unlike its contradicting counterpart
” . . I make peace, and CREATE EVIL . . .” (ISAIAH 45:7)
“But the spirit of the Lord departed from Saul and AN EVIL SPIRIT from the Lord troubled him. (I-SAMUEL 16:14)
“And for this cause God shall send them a strong delusion, that they should BELIEVE A LIE.” (II-THESSALONIANS 2:11)
The Qur’an says
“Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: “This is from God,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (The Noble Quran, 2:79)”
*************
The parables mentioned by Jesus (peace be upon him) cast doubt on you whether to take them as literal or are they just metaphor. Brother as you said if you solely rely on your understanding, you will be lost, hence you interpret scripture with scripture.
With the amount of refutation I have quoted above which makes Bible not to be the word of God, hence attributing the literal passages which accounts Jesus (peace be upon him) to be the son of God, I will support my statement from Mark 4:11-12.
He told them, “The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that, seeing they may see, and NOT perceive; and hearing they may hear, and NOT understand, LEST at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven” (MARK 4:11-12)
*************
You also did not leave an opportunity to state that
-Jesus (peace be upon him) preached love to all people, to the unbeliever, the pagans, Jews, Arabs etc.
-And he died for the sins of all man, Arabs, Persians, Europeans, Asians and all others.
Brother if you read Luke 14:26 your same Jesus is teaching hatred.
“If any man come to me, and HATE NOT his father, and mother, and wife, and children. . . HE CANNOT be my disciple.” (LUKE 14:26)
The latter version of bible have been translated with softened words
“If you want to be my follower you must love me more than your own father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters–yes, more than your own life. Otherwise, you cannot be my disciple.”
And this is something not new. They keeps obsuring one version of bible from another.
Further reading Matthew we find that he sent his twelve disciples to heal the sick, raise the dead and cleanse the leprosy and that he was sent for the Jews only
These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans. 6 Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew 10:5-6).
A Canaanite woman comes and praises Jesus and seeks help to cure her daughter.
He answered, I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel. The woman came and knelt before him. Lord, help me! she said. He replied, It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs. Matthew 15:24-26
*************
A question which you posed to brother Naved was when we believe so much upon Jesus peace be upon him, then why don’t we accept John 14:6 (No one comes to the Father “EXCEPT” through me – The inverted commas are from my side to highlight its importance). You also suggested to implore outside Islam for unbiased source.
Brother before I urge you to look for sources outside Christianity (within Islam specifically), lets look within Christianity. Book of ACTS 10:34-35 says “…But IN EVERY NATION he that feareth him (God), and works righteousness, IS “ACCEPTED” with him (God). So its a fallacy to make people to believe that no one will reach the Father “EXCEPT” through Jesus (peace be upon him). Either you are deceiving me of my salvation which is only through Jesus or you are deceiving yourself.
Brother its high time for the common Christians to stop believing the lies and start imploring sources within Islam for an unbiased sources that you can compare to your knowledge of Christianity.
Allah (swt) has given you the intelligence and the free will. Wallah exercise your intelligence before its too late and you are made to question on the basis of those two which will cause to take the disbeliever to their promised place.
*************
As for refuting your claims about :-
Holy Qur’an – its compilation during the lifetime of the last and final messenger of Allah, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
You have to understand that the Qur’an was not revealed as a tablet like it was done to Moses (peace be upon him), and it was revealed in an span of around 23 years. So compilation never took in the life of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as the commandments were not complete yet and early restrictions “COULD” be lifted or later revelation “COULD” abrogate early ones.
*************
It is established that the revelations were documented on leathers, palm-stalks, thin white stones and the hearts of men. And it did not had 7 versions unlike present day bible. Instead it had 7 ahruf (styles). And difference started to arose when people were reciting it differently. So Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) united them by giving them one style of Qur’an in the dialect of Quraysh. So standardizing THE SAME WORD OF GOD WITHOUT ADDITION / DELETION / MODIFICATION with one of the ahruf out of the rest is not changing the Word of Allah (may he be exalted).
As for the different versions of Bible, it can be understood as there’s one verse in Bible ‘A’ which is not in Bible ‘B’ and there’s another verse in Bible ‘B’ which is not in Bible ‘A’ and further there’s another verse in Bible ‘C’ which is not present in both ‘A’ & ‘B’. The Roman Catholic version contains 73 books where as the Protestant contains 66 books.
Examples of the revisions of Bible are as follows:
William Tyndale, 1525;
Corvedale, 1535;
The Great Bible, 1539;
The Geneva, 1560;
Rheims, 1582;
King James version 1611;
The 1769 Revision of the King James Version;
Revision of the King James Version, 1870;
English Revised Version 1881-1885;
American Standard Version 1901;
Revision of the American standard version, 1937;
Revised Standard Version of New Testament, 1946;
Revision Standard Version of the Bible, 1952;
Second Edition of the Translation of the New Testament, 1971;
The New King James Version, 1979.
Also as Islam was expanding outside the Arab, amongst the people of language different than Arabic, people coping the Qur’an in their language from different dialects could easily distort the message.
An example of this is that some Arabs don’t pronounce “the”, instead they pronounce “za”, some don’t pronounce “j”, they always pronounce “g”, “ga”. And I don’t think further explanation is required how complicated the situation could be with the above description.
A point to be noted is Uthman (ra) had opposition with some groups and one of those groups martyred him. But none had claimed him to change the word of God. Had the text he promulgated been less than 100% reliable his opponents would have made it an issue and accused him of changing the word of God. But the fact is that these opponents accused him of many things but we do not have any tradition, certainly not an early reliable one, in which they accuse him of changing the word of God.
Another thing to enlighten you with is that the Qur’an was not finally compiled into a book by Uthman (ra), but it was standardized in one style. The first compilation was done under the order of the first caliph – Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him)
*************
As for your oblivious, innocent , ignorant question why was it mandated to be in Arabic. The problem we have with the original bible not available in the language it was revealed, it could have been with the Qur’an as well. You see whenever a difference arises, you always have the original scripture to refer back to, in order to explicitly understand what exactly a revelation means in case of a poor/distortedtranslation.
And how strange and biased statements you have remarked that even if it had been written by the unlettered Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), does that make it a word of God? What standards on earth do you follow. The present day bible written by men (and not Jesus) who were inspired by God as per you makes it a Word of God, whereas IF the last and final prophet himself would have written the book, it could not be the Word of God.
*************
As for explaining the Shariah Law, it is the law which has been ordained by Allah (swt) and is far above the man made laws which keeps changing as per whims. Where we know of the Church imposing ban on scientific research and the scientist were persecuted in the past and now they don’t have issues with gay marriages. Infact the Pastors and Reverand and the Pope were themselves found guilty of sexual abuse – to men and women alike.
Throughout the Church’s history, women have been considered inferior by nature and by law.Roman law, which became the basis for the Church’s laws, gave women a low status in society. Women did not enjoy equal rights in their homes and in civic society and was considered as inferior creatures. Compared to Shariah law which states men and women are equal in status.
(a). . for it is a SHAME for women to speak in the Church” (I-CORINTHIANS 14:34-35)
(b) To chop off her hands for saving her husband’s life. (Deuteronomy 25: 11-12)
(c) Her husband to rule over her. (Genesis 3:16). The head of the woman is the man. (I-Corinthians 11:3). Man can sell his daughter. (Exodus 21:7).
Where Shariah law entitles women of equality and right to choose her husband, right to divorce, entitled to inheritance, etc which was given more than 1400 years ago.
A law which is crystal clear in every matter, whether it relates to punishment for robbery or rape. Whether it relates to share in inheritance or permissible / impermissible trading, or a stipulating a fixed amount of poor due (zakah) which no other religion in the world has constituted – and its a mandate for people with a certain degree of wealth.
How strange is it to hear that people don’t find a problem in the law of the country they live in, where there is no capital punishment for rape, murder, etc. Where there is no order how to fix the problem of poverty and evade cheating/robbery/burglary etc. Where women are used, molested, sold for flesh etc. Where narcotics/drugs/intoxicant along with various types of crimes are rampant and still have issues with the Law of Allah (swt).
*************
I have a question for you though. Does your law have a solution to mankind where women are in excess by nature and every man is getting married. How does your law help those deprived women to satisfy their needs ? To worsen your situation you have gays who will never marry a woman and lesbians who don’t find solace in a man. How does your man-made law in which you believe relieve those women ? Through a brothel ? Or being a KEPT ??
As for the existence of homosexual this is something which shouldn’t be considered unusual in the light of Bible.
The Bible’s reason why human beings become lesbians and homosexuals
‘Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and WORSHIPPED and SERVED the creature (like men and monkeys) more than the Creator… “BECAUSE THEY DO THIS (worshipping men and monkeys), God has given them over to shameful passions. Even women pervert the natural use of their sex by unnatural acts (like lesbianism and bestiality). “In the same way… the men burn with passion for one another (as sodomites and homosexuals) ROMANS 1:25-27.
Don’t worry… Shariah law has a solution.
*************
The answer to your accusation – “why is nearly every muslim country in the world attacking Christians, Jews, Women, etc….”
Isn’t that too far-fetched ?? What do you have to say about
Crusades
World War I
World War II
Nagasakhi
Hiroshima
Killing of 6 Million Jews
Killing and Raping Bosnian and Serbian women
Continous opression on Palestines
Iraq War II (false accusation of WMD)
Afghanistan War (To hunt for one man you destroyed an entire NATION ??)
Guantanamo Bay
National Liberation Front of Tripura (A christian terrorist group in Tripura)
Manmasi National Christian Army (An extremist group from the Hmar tribe, were charged with forcing Hindus to convert at gunpoint)
Lord’s Resistance Army
The Iron Guard
Lancieri or Lance-bearers (A group initially attached to the National-Christian Defense League (NCDL) noted for attacking the Jews of NCDL)
Ku Klux Klan
Army of God
The Lambs of Christ
Concerned Christians
Mormonism
Irish Republican Army (IRA)
The Jewish Underground
Terror Against Terror (A radical Jewish militant organization)
Israeli settlement (A Jewish civilian community built on land that was captured by Israel from Jordan, Egypt or Syria during the 1967 Six-Day War)
Deir Yassin massacre
Lehi Group
Nowhere in Islamic history can one find a doctrine similar to Saint Augustine’s cognite intrare (“lead them in”—i.e. “force them to convert”). In fact the Qur’an says the exact opposite: There is no compulsion in religion (Al-Qur’an 2:256). Augustine’s frightening idea that all must be compelled to “conform” to the “true Christian faith” has unleashed centuries of unparalleled bloodshed. Indeed, Christians have suffered more under the rule of Christian civilization than under pre- Christian Roman rule or any other rule in history. Millions were tortured and slaughtered in the name of Christianity during the periods of the Arian, Donatist and Albigensian heresies, to say nothing of the various Inquisitions, or the Crusades, when the European armies were saying, as they slaughtered both Christian and Muslim Arabs: “Kill them all, God will know his own.”
Despite the ravages of Europe’s violent past, in the 20 th century, Western Civilization took warfare to new extremes. A conservative estimate puts the total number of brutal deaths in the 20 th century at more than 250 million. Of these, Muslims are responsible for less than 10 million deaths. Christians, or those coming from Christian backgrounds account for more than 200 million of these! The greatest death totals come from World War I (about 20 million, at least 90 % of which were inflicted by “Christians”) and World War II ( 90 million, at least 50% of which were inflicted by “Christians,” the majority of the rest occurring in the Far East). Given this grim history, it appears that we Europeans must all come to grips with the fact that Islamic civilization has actually been incomparably less brutal than Christian civilization. Did the Holocaust of over 6 million Jews occur out of the background of a Muslim Civilization?
In fact, less than 5 % of Muslims could be classified as fundamentalist in outlook, and of that 5 %, less than 0.01 % have shown any tendency toward enacting terrorism or “religious violence.” It is thus “the height of illiberalism” to define as terrorists over 1.3 billion Muslims who have nothing to do with “religious violence” because of the misdeeds of a fringe minority of 0.005 %. At most, one in every 200,000 Muslims can be accused of terrorism. That is to say there are a maximum of about 65,000 terrorists worldwide—roughly the same figure as the number of murderers on the loose in the U.S. alone, with over 20,000 homicides a year and a population of only 300 million.
*************
The Abdulaziz ibn Abdullah Al al-Sheikh statement was very appealing to you that he declares that Churches should be destroyed in the Arabian peninsula.
We too having the likings but of different nature –
Ban Qur’an
Burn Qur’an Day
1600 mosques ransacked after 9/11 in UK alone
Ban Veil/Hijab
Babri Mosque demolished
Temple mount
Disallowing praying in Guantanamo Bay
and many more
I wonder what love you were talking about which Jesus (peace be upon him) preached. The above strong demonstration speaks high of the love and affection towards the whole of mankind. A message of love that was sent for the Arab, Africans, Europeans, Asian, everyone.
*************
I feel the need to quote a verse from the bible here.
Judge not, that ye be not judged.
For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged:
and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
And why beholdest thou the mote in thy brother’s eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother,
Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye;
and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye;
and then shalt thou see clearly to cast the mote out of thy brother’s eye.
(Matthew 7:1-5)
*************
NOW THIS IS SOMETHING FOR WHICH I DECIDED TO WRITEUP. AND I WOULD REQUEST, DEMAND, BESEECH, APPEAL, BEG YOU TO GO THROUGH IT WITH A OPEN HEART AND MIND. I WILL BRING FORTH THE TRUTH BY YOUR OWN STANDARDS OF MEASURING – THE HOLY BIBLE.
Jesus told about the false prophet in Matthew 7:14-16 and the bible also tells us about a prophet to come and how do we know the true prophet of God from a false prophet.
1st Epistle of John Ch 4:1
Dear friends, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God:
EVERY SPIRIT THAT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT JESUS CHRIST HAS COME IN THE FLESH IS FROM GOD, BUT EVERY SPIRIT THAT DOES NTO ACKNOWLEDGE JESUS IS NOT FROM GOD. THIS IS THE SPIRIT OF THE ANTICHRIST, WHICH YOU HAVE HEARD IS COMING AND EVEN NOW IS ALREADY IN THE WORLD.
Compare with Holy Qur’an 3:45 and many other Qur’ânic references where Jesus (peace be upon him) is referred to as the CHRIST.
***** NOW READ THE BELOW IN CONFORMITY *****
Genesis 12:2-3 speaks of God’s promise to Abraham and his descendants before any child was born to him.
Genesis 17:4 reiterates God’s promise after the birth of Ishmael and before the birth of Isaac.
In Genesis, ch. 21. Isaac is specifically blessed but Ishmael was also specifically blessed and promised by God to become “a great nation” especially in Genesis 21:13 and Genesis 21:18.
According to Deuteronomy 21:15-17 the traditional rights and privileges of the first born son are not to be affected by the social status of his mother (being a “free” woman such as Sarah, Isaac’s mother, or a “Bondwoman” such as Hagar, Ishmael’s mother). This is only consistent with the moral and humanitarian principles of all revealed faiths.
The full legitimacy of Ishmael as Abraham’s son and “seed” and the full legitimacy of his mother, Hagar, as Abraham’s wife are clearly stated in Genesis 21:13 and 16:3. After Jesus, the last Israelite messenger and prophet, it was time that God’s promise to bless Ishmael and his descendants be fulfilled. Less than 600 years after Jesus, came the last messenger of God, Muhammad, from the progeny of Abraham through Ishmael. God’s blessing of both of the main branches of Abraham’s family tree was now fullfilled.
*************
But are there additional corroborating evidence that the Bible did in fact foretell the advent of prophet Muhammad (pbuh) ?
Long time after Abraham, God’s promise to send the long-awaited Messenger was repeated this time in Moses’ words.
In Deuteronomy 18:18, Moses spoke of the prophet to be sent by God who is:
From among the Israelite’s “brethren”, a reference to their Ishmaelite cousins as Ishmael was the other son of Abraham who was explicitly promised to become a “great nation”.
“I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him. If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I myself will call him to account.” (Deuteronomy 18:18-19)
This text is still extant among them. With regard to the phrase “from among their brethren” – if that prophet were to be from among the Children of Israel, it would have said, “I will raise up for them a prophet from among them.” But it says “from among their brethren” – i.e., from among the sons of Ismaa’eel (Ishamel).
*************
A prophet like unto Moses. There were hardly any two prophets ,who were so much alike as Moses and Muhammad. Both were given comprehensive law code of life, both encountered their enemies and were victors in miraculous ways, both were accepted as prophets/statesmen and both migrated following conspiracies to assassinate them. Analogies between Moses and Jesus overlooks not only the above similarities but other crucial ones as well (e.g. the natural birth, family life and death of Moses and Muhammad but not of Jesus, who was regarded by His followers as the Son of God and not exclusively a messenger of God, as Moses and Muhammad were and as Muslim belief Jesus was).
The Christians say that this prophecy refers to Jesus (pbuh) because Jesus (pbuh) was like Moses (pbuh). Moses (pbuh) was a Jew, as well as Jesus (pbuh) was a Jew. Moses (pbuh) was a Prophet and Jesus (pbuh) was also a Prophet.
If these two are the only criteria for this prophecy to be fulfilled, then all the Prophets of the Bible who came after Moses (pbuh) such as Solomon, Isaiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Malachi, John the Baptist, etc. (pbut) will fulfill this prophecy since all were Jews as well as prophets.
However, it is Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who is like Moses (pbuh):
i) Both had a father and a mother, while Jesus (pbuh) was born miraculously without any male intervention. [Mathew 1:18 and Luke 1:35 and also Al-Qur’an 3:42-47]
ii) Both were married and had children. Jesus (pbuh) according to the Bible did not marry nor had children.
iii) Both died natural deaths. Jesus (pbuh) has been raised up alive. (4:157-158)
iv) Muhammad (pbuh) is from among the brethren of Moses (pbuh). Arabs are brethren of Jews. Abraham (pbuh) had two sons: Ishmail and Isaac (pbut). The Arabs are the descendants of Ishmail (pbuh) and the Jews are the descendants of Isaac (pbuh).
v) Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was unlettered and whatever revelations he received from Almighty God he repeated them verbatim.
“I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.” [Deuteronomy 18:18]
vi) Both besides being Prophets were also kings i.e. they could inflict capital punishment. Jesus (pbuh) said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” (John 18:36).
vii) Both were accepted as Prophets by their people in their lifetime but Jesus (pbuh) was rejected by his people. John chapter 1 verse 11 states, “He came unto his own, but his own received him not.”
viii) Both brought new laws and new regulations for their people. Jesus (pbuh) according to the Bible did not bring any new laws. (Mathew 5:17-18).
*************
THE AWAITED PROPHET WAS TO COME FROM ARABIA
Deuteronomy 33:1-2 combines references to Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. It speaks of God (i.e. God’s revelation) coming from Sinai, rising from Seir (probably the village of Sa’ir near Jerusalem) and shining forth from Paran. According to Genesis 21:21, the wilderness of Paran was the place where Ishmael settled (i.e. Arabia, specifically Mecca).
Indeed the King James version of the Bible mentions the pilgrims passing through the valley of Ba’ca (another name of Mecca) (Psalms 84:4-6)
Isaiah 42:1-13 speaks of the beloved of God. His elect and messenger who will bring down a law to be awaited in the isles and who “shall not fail nor be discouraged till he have set judgement on earth.” Verse 11, connects that awaited one with the descendants of Ke’dar.
Who is Ke’dar? According to Genesis 25:13, Ke’dar was the second son of Ishmael, the ancestor of prophet Muhammad.
*************
MUHUMMED A “COMFORTER” LIKE JESUS, PEACE BE UPON THEM
“And I will pray the father, and he shall give you ANOTHER Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever. (JOHN 14:16)
Jesus (pbuh) was the first Comforter, and ANOTHER would have to be one like him, of the same kind as Jesus, a man and not a Ghost.
*************
MUHAMMAD’S MIGRATION FROM MECCA TO MEDINA: PROPHECIED IN THE BIBLE?
Habakkuk 3:3 speaks of God (God’s help) coming from Te’man (an Oasis North of Medina according to J. Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible), and the holy one (coming) from Paran. That holy one who under persecution migrated from Paran (Mecca) to be received enthusiastically in Medina was none but prophet Muhammad.
Indeed the incident of the migration of the prophet and his persecuted followers is vividly described in Isaiah 21:13-17. That section foretold as well about the battle of Badr in which the few ill-armed faithful miraculously defeated the “mighty” men of Ke’dar, who sought to destroy Islam and intimidate their own folks who turned to Islam.
*************
THE QUR’AN FORETOLD IN THE BIBLE?
For twenty-three years, God’s words (the Qur’an) were truely put into Muhammad’s mouth. He was not the “author” of the Qur’an. The Qur’an was dictated to him by Angel Gabriel who asked Muhammad to simply repeat the words of the Qur’an as he heard them. These words were then committed to memory and to writing by those who hear them during Muhammad’s life time and under his supervision.
Muhammad (pbuh) is prophesised in the book of Isaiah:
It is mentioned in the book of Isaiah chapter 29 verse 12:
“And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.” (Isaiah 29:12). When Archangel Gabrail commanded Muhammad (pbuh) by saying Iqra – “Read”, he replied, “I am not learned”.
*************
Was it a coincidence that the prophet “like unto Moses” from the “brethren” of the Israelites (i.e. from the lshmaelites) was also described as one in whose mouth God will put his words and that he will speak in the name of God, (Deuteronomy 18:18-20). Was it also a coincidence the “Paraclete” that Jesus foretold to come after Him was described as one who “shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak (John 16:13)
Was it another coincidence that Isaiah ties between the messenger connected with Ke’dar and a new song (a scripture in a new language) to be sang unto the Lord (Isaiah 42:10-11). More explicitly, prophesies Isaiah “For with stammering lips, and another tongue, will he speak to this people” (Isaiah 28:11). This latter verse correctly describes the “stammering lips” of Prophet Muhammad reflecting the state of tension and concentration he went through at the time of revelation. Another related point is that the Qur’an was revealed in piece-meals over a span of twenty three years. It is interesting to compare this with Isaiah 28:10 whichspeaks of the same thing.
For it is: Do this, do that, a rule for this, a rule for that; a little here, a little there (Isaiah 28:10).
*************
THAT PROPHET- PARACLETE- MUHAMMAD
Up to the time of Jesus (peace be upon him), the Israelites were still awaiting for that prophet like unto Moses prophecied in Deuteronomy 18:18. When John the Baptist came, they asked him if he was Christ and he said “NO”. They asked him if he was Elias and he said “NO”. Then, in apparent reference to Deuteronomy 18:18, they asked him “Art thou that Prophet” and he answered, “NO” – (John 1: 1 9-2 1).
In the Gospel according to John (Chapters 14, 15, 16) Jesus spoke of the “Paraclete” or comforter who will come after him, who will be sent by Father as another Paraclete, who will teach new things which the contemporaries of Jesus could not bear. While the Paraclete is described as the spirit of truth, (whose meaning resemble Muhammad’s famous title Al-Amin, the trustworthy), he is identified in one verse as the Holy Ghost (John 14:26). Such a designation is however inconsistent with the profile of that Paraclete. In the words of the Dictionary of the Bible, (Ed. J. Mackenzie) “These items, it must be admitted do not give an entirely coherent picture.”
Indeed history tells us that many early Christians understood the Paraclete to be a man and not a spirit. This might explain the followings who responded to some who claimed, without meeting the criteria stipulated by Jesus, to be the awaited “Paraciete”.
It was Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who was the Paraclete, Comforter, helper, admonisher sent by God after Jesus. He testified of Jesus, taught new things which could not be borne at Jesus’ time, he spoke what he heard (revelation), he dwells with the believers (through his well-preserved teachings). Such teachings will remain forever because he was the last messenger of God, the only Universal Messenger to unite the whole of humanity under God and on the path of PRESERVED truth. He told of many things to come which “came to pass” in the minutest detail meeting, the criterion given by Moses to distinguish between the true prophet and the false prophets (Deuteronomy 18:22). He did reprove the world of sin, of righteousness and of judgement (John 16:8-11)
All the prophecies mentioned in the Old Testament regarding Muhammad (pbuh) besides applying to the Jews also hold good for the Christians.
John 14:16
“And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever.”
John 15:26
“But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me.”
John 16:7
“Nevertheless I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you”.
John 16:14
“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you unto all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me”.
The Sprit of Truth, spoken about in this prophecy referes to none other than Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
“Ahmed” or “Muhammad” meaning “the one who praises” or “the praised one” is almost the translation of the Greek word Periclytos. In the Gospel of John 14:16, 15:26, and 16:7. The word ‘Comforter’ is used in the English translation for the Greek word Paracletos which means advocate or a kind friend rather than a comforter. Paracletos is the warped reading for Periclytos. Jesus (pbuh) actually prophesised Ahmed by name. Even the Greek word Paraclete refers to the Prophet (pbuh) who is a mercy for all creatures.
Some Christians say that the Comforter mentioned in these prophecies refers to the Holy Sprit. They fail to realise that the prophecy clearly says that only if Jesus (pbuh) departs will the Comforter come. The Bible states that the Holy Spirit was already present on earth before and during the time of Jesus (pbuh), in the womb of Elizabeth, and again when Jesus (pbuh) was being baptised, etc. Hence this prophecy refers to none other than Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
*************
WAS THE SHIFT OF RELIGIOUS LEADERSHIP PROPHECIED?
Following the rejection of the last Israelite prophet, Jesus, it was about time that God’s promise to make Ishmael a great nation be fulfilled (Genesis 21:13, 18)
In Matthew 21:19-21, Jesus spoke of the fruitless fig tree (A Biblical symbol of prophetic heritage) to be cleared after being given a last chance of three years (the duration of Jesus’ ministry) to give fruit. In a later verse in the same chapter, Jesus said: “Therefore, say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruit thereof” (Matthew 21:43). That nation of Ishmael’s descendants (the rejected stone in Matthew 21:42) which was victorious against all super-powers of its time as prophecied by Jesus: “And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken, but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder” (Matthew 21:44).
*************
OUT OF CONTEXT COINCIDENCE?
Is it possible that the numerous prophecies cited here are all individually and combined out of context misinterpretations? Is the opposite true, that such infrequently studied verses fit together consistently and clearly point to the advent of the man who changed the course of human history, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Is it reasonable to conclude that all these prophecies, appearing in different books of the Bible and spoken by various prophets at different times were all coincidence? If this is so here is another strange “coincidence”!
One of the signs of the prophet to come from Paran (Mecca) is that he will come with “ten thousands of saints” (Deuteronomy 33:2 KJV). That was the number of faithful who accompanied Prophet Muhammad to Paran (Mecca) in his victorious, bloodless return to his birthplace to destroy the remaining symbols of idolatry in the Ka’bah.
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned by name in the Song of Solomon 5:16.
“Hikko Mamittakim we kullo Muhammadim Zehdoodeh wa Zehraee Bayna Jerusalem.” (From the original Hebrew Bible)
“His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters
of Jerusalem.”
In the Hebrew language “IM” is added for respect. Similarly “IM” is added after the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to make it Muhammadim. In English translation they have even translated the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as “altogether lovely”, but in the Old Testament in Hebrew, the name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is yet present.
*************
“And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said, ‘O Children of Israel! I am the messenger of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me and giving glad tidings of a messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmed.’ But when he came to them with clear signs, they said, ‘This is evident sorcery!'” (Al-Qur’an 61:6)
*************
O worshippers of the Messiah, we have a question, to which we want an answer from the one who UNDERSTANDS it.
– If a god dies because of the actions of people who kill him, what is this god?
– Is he pleased with what they did to him? Then they must be lucky for they have earned his pleasure.
– If he is displeased with what they did to him, their power has nevertheless overwhelmed his.
– Did the universe remain without a god who hears all and answers those who call upon him?
– Were the seven heavens left with no god above them when he was buried in the ground?
– Was this universe left with no god to look after it when his hands were nailed (to the cross)?
– How could this god be forsaken by all his creation when they heard him weep?
– How could this wood bear the true god who was tied to it?
– How could iron come close to him and penetrate him and wound him?
– How could the hands of his enemies reach him when they struck the back of his head?
– Was the Messiah brought back to life or is the one who revived him another god?
– What a strange grave it is that could contain a god. What is even stranger is that a womb could contain him, Where he remained for nine months, nourished from blood, then he emerged from the vagina as a tiny baby, opening his mouth and seeking the breast, eating and drinking, with the inevitable consequences thereof. Is that a god?
Exalted be Allaah above the fabrications of the Christians. He will question them all about the lies they told.
O worshippers of the cross, for what reason is that thing (the cross) venerated? Rationally speaking, it should be broken and burned. If god was crucified upon it by force and his hands nailed to it, Then the thing used for that purpose should be cursed and trampled upon, not kissed when you see it. How can the Lord of the Worlds be humiliated on it, then you go and worship it? Then you are the enemies of that god, if you venerate it because the lord of mankind has touched it. That cross is lost but every time we see something similar it reminds us of that cross. Then why you do you not venerate the graves, for a grave once contained your lord?
O worshipper of the Messiah, wake up! He has a beginning and he has an end.
*************
Continuation… Part : 2
************************
Lets analyse what Islam stores for the whole of mankind and what are its teachings.
It teaches us to worship one true Ilah (God) whose proper name is Allah alone.It forbids us to associate partnes to him. It teaches us that the most beautiful name and the hightest attributes belong to him alone. Eg – Creator, Cherisher, Sustainer, Lord, Peace, Merciful, Wise, Compassionate, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnipotent…. and many more. It teaches to seek provision from him alone. It teaches that everything Allah decrees for mankind is for his betterment, even if they don’t understand and he is just.
Its commands to pray 5 times a day.
Prayer keeps the slave in contact with his Lord; if he enters it in a spirit of humiliation and concentration, he will feel tranquil and secure, because he is seeking a “powerful support,” which is Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted. For this reason, the Prophet of Islaam, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to say: “Let us find relaxation and joy in prayer.” If something distressed him, he would hasten to pray. Everyone who finds himself faced with disaster and tries prayer finds strength, patience and consolation, because he is reciting the words of his Lord, which cannot be compared to the effect of the words of a created being. If the words of some psychologists can offer a little comfort, what do you think of the words of the One Who created the psychologist?
It commands to pay zakaat (poor due/obligatory charity). There is no other religion with such a beautiful command. Zakaat purifies the soul from stinginess and miserliness, and accustoms people to being generous and helping the poor and needy. It will bring a great reward on the Day of Resurrection, just like other forms of worship. It is not burdensome, like man-made taxes; it is only 25 in every thousand, which the sincere Muslim pays willingly and does not try to evade or wait until someone chases him for it.
Fasting involves refraining from food and sex. It is a form of worship, and a way in which one can feel the hunger of those who are deprived. It is also a reminder of the blessings of the Creator, and it brings rewards beyond measure.
Hajj is the Pilgrimage to the sacred House of Allaah, which was built by Ibraaheem (Abraham, upon whom be peace). By performing Hajj one is obeying the command of Allaah and the call to come and meet Muslims from all over the world.
It commands all kinds of good and forbids all kinds of evil.
It encourages good manners and proper treatment of others.It enjoins good characteristics like truthfulness, patience, deliberation, kindness, tolerance, modesty, keeping promises, humility, dignity, mercy, justice, courage, friendliness, contentment, chastity, good treatment, trustworthiness, gratitude for favours, self-control at times of anger.
It commands to fulfil his duty towards his parents. There’s no concept of Old Age Home in Islam.It commands to uphold ties, to help the needy and treat neighbours well.It commands to protect and safeguard the wealth of orphan, to be gentle with young and show respect to the old.To be kind to servants and animals. To remove harmful things from the road, to speak kind words. To forgive at the time when one has the opportunity to take revenge.To give debtor time to repay his debt.To visit the sick, greet people with a smiling face.
Some non-Muslims may do these things out of politeness or good manners, but they are not seeking reward from Allaah or salvation of the Day of Judgement.
If we look at what Islam has prohibited, we will find that it is in the interests of both the individual and society as a whole. All these prohibitions serve to safeguard the relationship between the slave and his Lord, and the relationship of the individual with himself and with his fellow-man. The following examples demonstrate this:
Islam forbids the association of anything in worship with Allaah and the worship of anything other than Allaah, because this spells doom and misery. Islaam also forbids visiting or believing soothsayers and fortune-tellers; magic or witchcraft that may cause a rift between two people or bring them together; belief in the influence of the stars on events and people’s lives; cursing time, because Allaah is directing its affairs; and superstition, because this is pessimism.
Islam forbids cancelling out good deeds by showing off, boasting or reminding others of one’s favours; bowing or prostrating to anything other than Allaah; sitting with hypocrites or immoral people for the purposes of enjoying their company or keeping their company; and invoking the curse or wrath of Allaah on one another or damning one another to Hell.
Islaam forbids urinating into stagnant water; defecating on the side of the road or in places where people seek shade or where they draw water; from facing the qiblah (direction of prayer) or turning one’s back towards it when passing water or stools; holding one’s penis in one’s right hand when passing water; giving the greeting of salaam (peace) to one who is answering the call of nature; and putting one’s hand into any vessel before washing it, when one has just woken up.
Islaam forbids the offering of any nafl (supererogatory) prayers when the sun is rising, when it is at its zenith, and when it is setting, because it rises and sets between the horns of Shaytaan (Satan); praying when there is food prepared that a person desires; praying when one urgently needs to pass water, stools or wind, because that will distract a person from concentrating properly on his prayer.
Islam forbids the Muslim to raise his voice in prayer, lest it disturb other believers; to continue offering supererogatory prayers at night when one feels drowsy – such a person should sleep then get up; to stay up all night in prayer, especially one night after another; and to stop praying when there is doubt as to the validity of one’s wudoo’ – unless one hears a sound or smells an odour.
Islaam forbids buying, selling and making “lost and found” announcements in the mosque – because it is the place of worship and remembrance of Allaah, where worldly affairs have no place.
Islam forbids haste in walking when the iqaamah (call immediately preceding congregational prayer) is given, and prescribes walking in a calm and dignified manner. It is also forbidden to boast about the cost of building a mosque; to decorate a mosque with red or yellow paint or adornments which will distract the worshippers; to fast day after day without a break; and for a woman to observe a supererogatory fast when her husband is present without his permission.
Islaam forbids building over graves, making them high, sitting on them, walking between them wearing shoes, putting lights over them or writing on them. It is forbidden to disinter the dead or to take graves as places of worship. Islam forbids wailing, tearing one’s clothes or leaving one’s hair unkempt when a person dies. Eulogizing the dead in the manner of the times of Ignorance (Jaahiliyyah) is also forbidden, although there is nothing wrong with informing others that a person has died.
Islaam forbids the consumption of riba (interest); all kinds of selling which involve ignorance (of the product), misleading and cheating; selling blood, wine, pork, idols and everything that Allaah has forbidden – their price, whether bought or sold – is haraam; najash, which is offering a price for something one has no intention of buying, as happens in many auctions; concealing a product’s faults at the time of selling; selling something which one does not own or before it comes into one’s possession; undercutting, outbidding or out bargaining another; selling produce before it is clear that it is in good condition and free of blemish; cheating in weights and measures; and hoarding.
A partner who has shares in a plot of land or a date palm tree is forbidden to sell his share without consulting his partners. It is forbidden to consume the wealth of orphans unjustly; to bet or gamble; to take anything by force; to accept or offer bribes; to steal people’s wealth or to consume it unjustly; to take something for the purpose of destroying it; to undermine the value of people’s possessions; to keep lost property which one has found, or to keep quiet about it and not announce it, for it belongs to the one who recognizes it; to cheat in any way; to ask for a loan with no intention of repaying it; to take anything of the wealth of a fellow-Muslim, unless it is given freely, because what is taken because of another person’s shyness is haraam; and to accept a gift because of intercession.
Celibacy and castration are forbidden, as is marrying two sisters, or a woman and her aunt (paternal or maternal), whether he marries the aunt after marrying her niece or vice versa, for fear of breaking the ties of kinship.
It is forbidden to make deals in marriage, such as saying “Let me marry your daughter and I will give you my daughter or sister in marriage.” Such reciprocal deals are a form of oppression and injustice, and haraam.
Islaam forbids mut’ah (temporary marriage), which is a marriage contract for a period of time agreed by the two parties, at the end of which the marriage expires.
Islaam forbids intercourse with a menstruating woman, until she has purified herself (by taking a bath after her period ends), and also forbids anal intercourse.
A man is forbidden to propose marriage to a woman when another man has already proposed to her, unless the other man withdraws his proposal or gives him permission.
It is forbidden to marry a previously-married woman without consulting her, or a virgin without seeking her permission.
It is forbidden to wish (a newly married couple) “Bi’l-rafaa’ wa’l-baneen (a joyful life and many sons),” because this is the greeting of the people of Jaahiliyyah, who hated daughters.
The divorced woman is forbidden to conceal what Allaah has created in her womb (if she is pregnant).
A husband and wife are forbidden to speak (to others) about the intimacies of married life. It is forbidden to turn a woman against her husband or to take divorce lightly.
It is forbidden for a woman to ask for another’s divorce, such as asking a man to divorce a woman so that she can marry him. A wife is forbidden to spend her husband’s money without his permission, or to keep away from his bed without good reason, because the angels will curse her if she does that.
A man is forbidden to marry his father’s wife, or to have intercourse with a woman who is pregnant from another man.
It is forbidden for a man to practise ‘azl (coitus interruptus) with his free wife without her permission. It is forbidden for a man to return home from a journey late at night and startle his family, unless he has previously notified them when he will arrive home.
A man is forbidden to take anything of his wife’s mahr (dowry) without her consent, or to keep annoying his wife so that she will give up her wealth.
Islaam forbids women to make a wanton display of themselves (tabarruj).
Islaam forbids the eating of dead meat, regardless of whether it died by drowning, strangulation, shock or falling from a high place; eating blood, pork and anything slaughtered in a name other than that of Allaah or for idols; eating the flesh or drinking the milk of beasts that feed on filth and waste matter; eating the flesh of every carnivorous beast that has fangs and every bird that has talons; eating the meat of domesticated donkeys; killing animals by keeping them and throwing stones at them until they die, or detaining them without food until they die; slaughtering with teeth or nails; slaughtering one animal (for food) in front of another; or sharpening the knife in front of the animal to be slaughtered.
In the area of clothing and adornment, men are forbidden the extravagance of wearing gold. Muslim are forbidden to be naked or to expose their thighs; to leave their clothes long (below the ankles) and trail them on the ground for the purpose of showing off; and to wear clothes that will attract attention.
It is forbidden to bear false witness; to make false accusations against a chaste believing woman; to accuse someone who is innocent; to utter lies; to slander and backbite; to call people by offensive nicknames; to spread gossip and malicious slander; to make fun of the Muslims; to boast about one’s status; to shed doubts on a person’s lineage; to utter slander, insults and obscenities; to speak in an indecent or rude manner; or to utter evil in public, except by one who has been wronged.
Islaam forbids telling lies; one of the worst kinds of lie is to lie about dreams, like fabricating dreams and visions in order to prove one’s virtue, or make some material gains, or to frighten an enemy.
Muslims are forbidden to praise themselves, or to talk in a secret way: two may not converse secretly to the exclusion of a third, because this is offensive. It is forbidden to curse a believer or someone who does not deserve to be cursed.
Islaam forbids speaking ill of the dead; praying for death; wishing for death because of some suffering that one is passing through; praying against one’s self, one’s children, one’s servants or one’s wealth.
Muslims are told not to eat the food that is directly in front of others or to eat from the centre of the dish or platter; rather they should eat from what is directly in front of them or thereabouts, because the barakah (blessing) comes in the middle of the food.
It is forbidden to drink from a broken edge of a vessel, because this could cause harm; or to drink from the mouth of a vessel; or to breathe into it.
It is forbidden to eat while lying on one’s stomach; to sit at a table where wine is being drunk; to leave a fire burning in one’s house when one sleeps; to sleep with Ghamr in one’s hand, like an offensive smell or the remainder of food (grease); to sleep on one’s stomach; or to talk about or try to interpret bad dreams, because these are tricks of the Shaytaan.
It is forbidden to kill another person except in cases where it is right to do so; to kill one’s children for fear of poverty; to commit suicide; to commit fornication, adultery or sodomy (homosexuality); to drink wine, or even to prepare it, carry it from one place to another, or sell it.
Muslims are forbidden to please people by angering Allaah; to offend their parents or even to say “Uff” (the slightest word of contempt) to them; to claim that a child belongs to anyone but his real father; to torture by means of fire; to burn anyone, alive or dead, with fire; to mutilate the bodies of the slain; to help anyone commit falsehood; or to cooperate in wrongdoing and sin.
It is forbidden to obey any person by disobeying Allaah; to swear falsely; to swear a disastrous oath; to eavesdrop on people without their permission; to invade people’s privacy or look at their private parts; to claim something that does not belong to one or that one did not do, for the purpose of showing off; to look into someone’s else’s house without permission; to be extravagant; to swear an oath to do something wrong; to spy on others or be suspicious about righteous men and women; to envy, hate or shun one another; to persist in falsehood; to be arrogant or feel superior; to be filled with self-admiration; to be pleased with one’s arrogance.
Islam forbids taking back one’s charity, even if one pays to get it back; employing someone to do a job without paying him his wages; being unfair in giving gifts to one’s children; bequeathing everything in one’s will and leaving one’s heirs poor – in such a case the will should not be executed; writing a will that concerns more than one third of one’s legacy; being a bad neighbour; or changing a will to the detriment of one or some of one’s heirs.
A Muslim is forbidden to forsake or shun his brother for more than three days, except for a reason sanctioned by sharee’ah; to hold small stones between two fingers and throw them because this could cause injury to eyes or teeth; to include his heirs in a will, because Allaah has already given heirs their rights of inheritance; to disturb his neighbour; to point a weapon at his Muslim brother; to hand someone an unsheathed sword, lest it harm him; to come (walk) between two people except with their permission; to return a gift, unless there is some shar’i objection to it; to be extravagant; to give money to foolish people; to wish to be like someone to whom Allaah has given more of something; to cancel out his charity by giving offensive reminders of his giving; to wilfully conceal testimony; or to oppress orphans or scold one who asks for help or money.
It is forbidden to treat with evil medicines, because Allaah would not create a cure for this ummah which includes something that He has forbidden. It is forbidden to kill women and children in warfare; to boast to one another; or to break promises.
Islaam forbids betraying a trust; asking for charity that one does not need; alarming a Muslim brother or taking away his possessions, whether jokingly or seriously; changing one’s mind after giving a gift, except in the case of a gift from a father to his child; practising medicine without experience; or killing ants, bees and hoopoe birds.
A man is forbidden to look at the ‘awrah (private parts) of another man, and a woman is forbidden to look at the ‘awrah of another woman.
It is forbidden to sit between two people without their permission; or to greet only those whom one knows, because the greeting is to be given to those whom you know and those whom you do not know.
A Muslim is forbidden to let an oath come between him and good deeds; he should do what is good and make expiation for the oath.
It is forbidden to judge between two disputing parties when one is angry, or to judge in favour of one party without hearing what the other has to say.
There are more commands and prohibitions which came for the benefit and happiness of individuals and mankind as a whole. Have you ever seen any other religion that can compare to this religion?
Read this response again, then ask yourself: is it not a great pity that I am not one of them? Allaah says in the Qur’aan (interpretation of the meaning): “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers.” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:85]
*************
I don’t believe there’s a way of resolving this contradiction unless you ignore your common sense and reasoning, and delude yourself with false wishes, as you do in the case of the doctrine of trinity and unity.
You see the intellectual bondages are harder to shatter; the slave himself fights to retain them.
I did not feel the need to explain the misconception on the above as the burden lies with the seeker of the truth who is EARNESTLY SEEKING TRUTH. However I decided to explained with the hope that it will benefit other readers and I pray that it benefits you as well. I have to agree that you were not arrogant in your speech, hence I hope you will give my comment an unbiased approach to seek truth.
I don’t doubt your intention when you state that you are not trying to win an argument nor you are you trying to belittle the last and final messenger Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), but it is what you perceive as truth. And you are spreading the truth which you believe in.
Brother you have stated about the book “Is the Bible the word of God” by Ahmed Deedat that it was written from an Islamic perspective and its objective was to disapprove the word of God right from the beginning.
Brother I would like to state that the comparative religion course which you have undertaken and read Qur’an and Hadith as primary source of inquiries was from the Christian perspective to reject Islam and the last and final Prophet right from the beginning. We know the effect of the Word of God (Al-Qur’an) on heart which is pure – seeking only truth.
Brother, we want for you, what we want for ourselves.
And this is our approach towards judging between the claimant of “Word of God”.
How do we know that a book claimed to be from God is really the Book of God? One of the tests, out of many such tests, is — that a Message emanating from an Omniscient Being MUST be consistent with itself. It ought to be free from all discrepancies and contradictions. This is exactly what the LAST TESTAMENT, the Book of God says:
Do they not consider the Qur’an (with care)? Had it been from anyone besides Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancies. (Qur’an 4:82)
And Allah knows the best.
@ Ab’d, No problem.
First I must admit that I have not read every word of your very lengthy response mainly because I find so much of what I did read to be so very misinformed. I would like to address every individual point that warrants correction, however, I will focus on the big issues and of course the most important issue: is Jesus the Son of God? So let’s look at what you’ve written in order of appearance.
Introduction:
First I must explain something that was also obscure to me before I became a Christian and is imperative in order to have a true frame of reference for the conversation we are having. As you know there are many various denominations, sects and organizations under the “Christian” banner but some are very, very different. So that you know what my frame of reference is, I am myself an Evangelical Christian and belong to a Baptist Church.
The church of ‘Latter Day Saints’ or Mormons for example have a starkly different view of Jesus, the Gospel and many core theologies. Many Evangelical Christians including myself reject Mormonism as false because its founder, the self appointed prophet, altered the core beliefs and added his own. The ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’ are another group which wrongly distorts the core fundamentals of Christianity such as the Trinity among other things which are contrary to the Gospel. Catholics differ as well from Evangelical Christianity in that their priests do not teach directly out the scriptures, they invent their own rituals and consider them biblical, and believe you must have the intermediary of a priest or saint to talk to God and can’t pray directly yourself. Furthermore, the Papacy as it was in post-antiquity Europe was focused on maintaining and increasing its own power rather than on the Gospel. Also, “original sin” does not mean literal guilt for the father’s sin or inheritance of sin from generation to generation. Original sin refers to the fall of mankind from the Garden of Eden when Adam and Eve eat from the tree of knowledge and forever changed the state of mankind. Original sin means that mankind is born into the sinful ways of the world but this does not mean “collective salvation”. Every individual is responsible for their own salvation and this is not weighed by their ancestry. In case you ask, infants as well as any individuals (young child or mentally handicapped person) who lack the ability to understand salvation are innocent in the eyes of God and the Bible makes it very clear they will not be eternally punished if they never attain that level of understanding.
Many organizations and individuals throughout history have done wrong and reprehensible things while claiming to be Christian when that couldn’t be further from the truth; men are fallible, and when they fall they cast a bad light on what they represent even if its unwarranted. Just as you said, you consider the Islamic Terrorists to be “fringe” and non-representative of Islam as a whole.
The rebuttal:
Jesus said: Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. (Matthew 5:17) In this way Jesus died for the sins of all men so that they who believe in him will have everlasting life. Not through good works, not by ritual, not by sacrifices or adhering to the old law but by accepting the final sacrifice of God’s Son for your sins.
***
When you see initially contradictory verses such as what you outlined in John 5:31 and John 8:14 you will never understand them if you don’t read at least several verses before or after to gain context. Sometimes I’m confused by scripture too, I’m not a scholar and sometimes I must go looking to find an answer. The rule is: Interpret Scripture With Scripture. Do you always understand every word of the Quran as you read? Did you the first time? If so, you should be the supreme Islamic scholar of the world since you need no teacher. By the way, Jesus is saying [If ONLY I were to say this about myself, you wouldn’t believe it]…. In chapter 8 while in front of the Pharisees: [I can give account of myself because I know my origin]. For the justification of this interpretation see: http://www.tektonics.org/gk/jesuswitness.html
You Said “ Did Jesus bear his own cross? John 19:17 says a YES while Matthew 27:31-32 says a NO!!! “
You should clearly see that Matthew isn’t saying he didn’t have or carry his own cross. No disrespect intended but if English is not your first language than I can understand where your confusion may come from. Jesus carried his cross until he became too weak, at that time Simon of Cree carried it for him. Why is there sometimes a slight variation in each of the four gospels? Because these EYE WITNESS accounts each were inspired to write slightly different things based on what they individually saw. There are no contradictions, only lack of understanding.
***
I’m not sure what your source is for Bible interpretation but some of your comments were most foul and wrong. I suggest buying yourself a so called “study Bible” in NIV or similar vernacular.
You said: “ The Song of Songs 7:1-4, 8-9 describes women’s vaginas tastes like wine. “
What? You’re not reading the Bible my friend! Song of Songs is a representation of the Bibles teaching that both wisdom and love are gifts from God to be received with gratitude and celebration. My Study Bible explains that scholars view this book as an allegory between God and Israel. There is nothing even remotely close to the vulgarity you wrote in your comment and I’m left to believe your just reading some anti-Christian website to find negative things to say.
***
You Said “Also, the Bible seems to promote raping of single women…”
Again, I must kindly point out that you are wrong. Please buy a physical Bible in a modern dialect so that you can read and understand the truth. If all you do is look on the Internet your leaving yourself open to fallacy. If you do own a Bible, please consider buying a study Bible. In regards to all of your citations of supposed rape advocacy I will refer you back to re-reading those verses in context, they are pretty straight forward and easily understood. What can be confusing is the OLD LAW as it was in the Old Testament. One might read verses that restrict marrying outside of one’s “own people” and think that is racist by today’s standards. What you don’t get just from reading a single verse is that God commanded the Israelites to not mix relations with the evil pagans which surrounded them geographically. So much more could be said about these verses on rape and marriage laws but it requires significant study. All you need to know is that some of the “strange laws” were part of the old messianic law for that culture and for that time but there is absolutely nothing in the Old Testaments that even come close to condoning rape.
***
You Said: “For all of the above mentioned cases of illicit relationship with no further mention of repentance, punishment etc I would be more than glad to know Under what category will the Christians place this “honour” in the “Book of God?” Where does it fit?
The story of David, King of Israel in Samuel 1 and 2 is for all four of your categories. Though David stumbled and sinned he witnessed the GRACE of God which delivered him from his enemies and established one the promises of the messiah which would be fulfilled in Jesus through his line. Again, it takes a lifetime of study to learn what can be learned from the inspired word of God. I’m far from being an expert and I do my best to explain but you must read for yourself if you are to ever understand.
More lack of understanding:
You said: Brother if you read Luke 14:26 your same Jesus is teaching hatred.
“If any man come to me, and HATE NOT his father, and mother, and wife, and children. . . HE CANNOT be my disciple.” (LUKE 14:26)
A vivid hyperbole: one must love Jesus even more than oneself if they are to be his disciple.
Again, do not be ignorant, do not allow yourself to settle on a false and uninformed view.
***
You Said: for it is a SHAME for women to speak in the Church” (I-CORINTHIANS 14:34-35) and Her husband to rule over her. (Genesis 3:16). The head of the woman is the man. (I-Corinthians 11:3). Man can sell his daughter. (Exodus 21:7).
The culture of the early church was that it was disrespectful for women to speak in the church, as many cultural differences exist today in the Middle East and various parts of the world.
Here is the God view of man and woman in a short summary:
God created man, God created woman from man.
God is to be the head of man
Man is to be the head of woman
Man and woman are to be ONE in body and mind with the man being responsible for the
leadership of his family towards God’s will.
Woman is to submit herself to the headship of the man.
Man is to love his wife as himself and be willing to sacrifice himself for her.
This is what the New Testament teaches; I know because I’ve studied it and live it every day with my wife.
By the way this parallels the relationship between Jesus the “bridegroom” and the church his “bride” but that is a whole lengthy response in itself.
***
I find it humorous that you say that Sharia Law is a solution to women outnumbering men and that it is only fair that women be allowed to have their own husband even if that means sharing him with multiple other women. It literally laughed out loud when I read that but in all civility I can only comment that that is not what God expects of his children (man and woman alike). Is this why the Quran says to expect 72 virgin in heaven? Why is the Muslim teaching of heaven in WORLDLY GLORY? Why would heaven be full of sex and other worldly pleasures of the FLESH? Just something to think about.
***
I would like to continue but I’ve not the time to finish the task now. You wrote too much for me to respond to in one sitting and I think it would be best if we continue our conversation in smaller bits at a time for both our sake.
Thank you for being open to discussing and debating these things with a Christian because I know that those who seek the truth will find it.
In closing, a messiah was prophesied to come with many signs signifying his coming, the prophets prophesied of his death and resurrection, and the prophesies of the law being replaced with a new covalent were all foretold… and fulfilled in Jesus Christ.
@ Jeremiah
All praise be to Allah
“Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, “This is from Allaah,” to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby” [Al-Baqarah 2:79]
******
What sources does the NIV Bible use for its translation? It is instructive to read what the Preface of the NIV Bible says. According to the Preface, the textual sources for the Old Testament in the NIV Bible are:
For the Old Testament the standard Hebrew text, the Masoretic Text as published in the latest editions of Biblia Hebraica, was used throughout. The Dead Sea Scrolls contain material bearing on an earlier stage of Hebrew text. They were consulted, as were the Samaritan Pentateuch and the ancient scribal traditions relating to textual changes. Sometimes a variant Hebrew reading in the margin of the Masoretic Text was followed instead of the text itself. Such instances, being variant within the Masoretic tradition, are not specified by footnotes. In rare cases, words in the consonantal text were divided differently from the way they appear in the Masoretic Text. Footnotes indicate this. The translators also consulted the more important early versions – the Septuagint; Aquila, Symmachus and Theodotion; the Vulgate; the Syriac Peshitta; the Targums; and for the Psalms the Juxta Hebraica of Jerome. Readings from these versions were occasionally followed where the Masoretic Text seemed doubtful and where accepted principles of textual criticism showed that one or more of these textual witnesses appeared to provide the correct reading. Such instances are footnoted. Sometimes vowel letters and vowel signs did not, in the judgment of the translators, represent the correct vowels for the original consonantal text. Accordingly some words were read with a different set of vowels. These instances are usually not indicated by footnotes.
As for the Greek text of the New Testament, the Preface says:
The Greek text used in translating the New Testament was an eclectic one. No other piece of ancient literature has such an abundance of manuscript witnesses as does the New Testament. Where existing manuscripts differ, the translators made their choice of readings according to accepted principles of New Testaments textual criticism. Footnotes call attention to places where there was uncertainty about what the original text was. The best current printed texts of the Greek New Testaments were used.
In other words, the sources that were used for the NIV Bible are based on critical texts and are usually refered to as “eclectic” texts. An “eclectic text” is composed of elements drawn from various sources.
Let us now look into the “eclectic” sources that the NIV Bible uses and see whether they qualify as God’s “inspired” and “inerrant” words.
Biblia Hebraica: The “Inspired” Old Testament?
Biblia Hebraica is one of the best-known critical texts of the Hebrew Old Testament and is the standard source for printed Bibles. It was first edited by Gerhard Kittel. The fouth edition of Biblia Hebraica is called Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (BHS) (edited by Karl Elliger and Wilhelm Rudolph) and was authorized by the Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft and the United Bible Societies. Earl Kalland, writing in “How The Hebrew And Aramaic Old Testament Text Was Established” in The NIV: The Making Of A Contemporary Translation, describes the material that the translators of the NIV Bible used for the Old Testament:
While the NIV translators generally used the Kittel Biblia Hebraica published by the Privilegierte Wutembergische Bibelanstalt of Stuttgart and available in the United States through the American Bible Society, until the later edition called Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia was made available, other sources within the framework of the various translators’ expertise were considered….
The text of Biblia Hebraica itself, as well as other critical texts, has its own history resulting more or less in an eclectic text. The evaluation of the critical materials in Biblia Hebraica was constantly in review.
The reason why an “eclectic text” such as Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia exists is because the history of the Masoretic Text itself was fluid. There is no textual source that can be called as “the” biblical text. Emanuel Tov, J. L. Magnes Professor of Bible at Hebrew University and the editor-in-chief of the Dead Sea Scrolls publication project, says:
The biblical text has been transmitted in many ancient and medieval sources which are known to us from modern editions in different languages: We now have manuscripts (MSS) in Hebrew and other languages from the Middle Ages and ancient times as well as fragments of leather and papyrus scrolls two thousand years old or more. These sources shed light on and witness to the biblical text, hence their name: “textual witnesses.” All of these textual witnesses differ from each other to a greater or lesser extent. Since no textual source contains what could be called “the” biblical text, a serious involvement in biblical studies clearly necessitates the study of all sources, including the differences between them. The comparison and analysis of these textual differences hold a central place within textual criticism.
Similarly, Kalland points out that:
The rise of Christianity gave impetus to the Jewish scribes (sopherim) to standardize their texts. Many variations in these texts had already appeared, as is evident from the differences between Greek, Samaritan and Hebrew manuscripts – and even more evident in the Dead Sea Scrolls….
Simply stated, there exists no single text that can be called as the Masoretic Text (except as a generalization). That is one of the reasons why critical texts like Biblia Hebraica exist. The editors of such texts decided what to them was most likely reading of the original. This becomes their text. Then they place in margins the variants and the support for their text and for the variants.
The Kittel’s edition of Biblia Hebraica and its fourth edition Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia is based upon the Codex Leningradensis (L). It is the oldest complete manuscript of the Hebrew Bible dated to 1008 CE and is based upon the textual work of Ben Asher. One can say that the Biblia Hebraica attempts to be a faithful representation of a single manuscript, i.e., Codex Leningradensis. But in those places where Codex Leningradensis is defective, or most likely preserves a faulty reading, the critical apparatus is essential for evaluating the other possible readings from other important sources such as Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, Peshitta, Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) etc. However, scholars have cautioned that Biblia Hebraica does not cite all the readings/evidences and whatever readings/evidences are cited is dependent upon scholar’s insights. Errors can creep in due to assumptions. Ralph W. Klein says:
The common mistake in Old Testament textual studies is to resort to LXX only when the MT, for one reason or another, seems difficult or corrupt. This procedure falls prey to two pitfalls….. In this connection, the following warnings about the uses of apparatuses in Biblia Hebraica must also be issued:
The apparatuses do not cite all synonymous readings or all the evidence for shorter and longer readings. The reason for omitting some of the evidence for variants in LXX or the other versions may be related to the assumption that the MT is correct except where it is obviously difficult or corrupt.
The textual notes in the 1937 edition and in the current reissue are done by a great number of scholars whose presuppositions and assumptions vary and who are gifted with a wide range of text critical insight.
The notes and emendations are often focused only on one word or expression , thus neglecting the wider context in the LXX or other ancient versions.
The apparatuses in the 1937 edition contain errors of fact, as Harry M. Orlinsky has tirelessly pointed out. Many emendations offered are merely conjectures, without manuscript or versional support. While conjectures are at times necessary, they are by definition the most subjective of operations…
In sum, Biblia Hebraica is a helpful collection of variants and scholarly suggestions, but it must be used critically.
********
December 4, 1997 (David W. Cloud, Fundamental Baptist Information Service, P.O. Box 610368, Port Huron, MI 48061-0368, fbns@wayoflife.org) — The following report by the FBIS editor, David Cloud, contains lengthy sections by Michael Penfold and also incorporates part of a report done by Carl Graham.
On January 25, 1997, the Fundamental Baptist Information Service published an article on Virginia Mollenkott, a literary consultant for the New International Version. Many had asked us for information on this woman because of her connection, however significant, with this popular modern version.
Thus we gave a general overview of her life and writings as follows:
Mollenkott is a pro-abortion feminist who claims to be a ‘left-leaning’ Evangelical. In reality she denies the very God of the Bible and worships an idolatrous female god of her own imagination. She grew up in a Plymouth Brethren fellowship and moved in Fundamentalist circles during her early years. She studied at Bob Jones University and taught at Shelton College in the 1950s. She has moved miles from that position, though. Today she is an Episcopalian, serves as professor of English at William Patterson College in New Jersey, and moves in the most radical ecumenical feminist circles. In the 1970s, Virginia Mollenkott was a consultant for the New International Version translating committee. She worked on the NIV during the entire time it was being translated and reviewed.
In 1978 she co-authored (with Letha Scanzoni) the book entitled Is the Homosexual My Neighbor?, in which she called for nondiscrimination toward homosexuality. The book argues that the Sodom account in Genesis does not teach the evil of homosexuality, but the evils of violent gang rape and inhospitality to strangers. The book also claims that ‘the idea of a life long homosexual orientation or ‘condition’ is never mentioned in the Bible’ (p. 71), and that Romans 1 does not ‘fit the case of a sincere homosexual Christian’ (p. 62). This is the exact position taken by one of the actual translators of the NIV, Dr. Marten H. Woudstra, in a report he assisted in producing for the Christian Reformed Church in 1973. More on this later.
In 1979 Mollenkott participated in the 9th General Conference of the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches (a denomination composed largely of homosexuals). In a report which was published by the Christian Century, Sept. 26, 1979, Mollenkott stated, ‘This was the most grateful celebration of Christ I had ever attended…’
In the early 1980s Mollenkott was a member of the National Council of Churches’ committee that produced an inclusive-language lectionary which addressed God in feminine terms. At a news conference at the NCC’s governing board meeting on November 10, 1983, Mollenkott claimed there is some evidence that Jesus Christ was really a woman. She cited the research of biologist Edward Kessel, who argued that Jesus was “born in parthenogenesis; that parthenogenetic births are always female; that in some cases, therefore, he would be willing to refer to Jesus as ‘she’ — up until the last minute of sex reversal, in which case Jesus remains chromosomally female throughout life, but functions as a normal male and looks like a normal male” (Christian Challenge, August 1984).
In October 1985, Mollenkott’s signature appeared on a statement supporting homosexuality which was published in the Sojourners magazine. The statement was also signed by James B. Nelson of the American Lutheran denomination, author of a book which promotes homosexual marriages and homosexual pastors.
In her plenary address before the July 1986, convention of the Evangelical Women’s Caucus International (EWCI), in Fresno, California, Mollenkott warned against “heterosexism,” the idea that everyone must be heterosexual.
In 1987 Mollenkott wrote an article claiming that refusal to ordain homosexual “clergywomen” is unscriptural discrimination. She wrote: “To ask lesbians and gay men to pretend they are like the majority is to deny them the self-identification and affirmation that is the natural legacy of every healthy adult. Forcing gay Christians into silence also denies them the opportunity to celebrate in gratitude to God for their authentic nature and for their life-enriching mutual relationship with a loving partner” (Christianity and Crisis, Nov. 9, 1987).
In 1988 Mollenkott published the book Women, Men, and the Bible (New York: Crossroad Publishing).
In the June 1991, issue of the Episcopal* monthly entitled The Witness, she testified, “My lesbianism has always been a part of me. … I tried to be heterosexual. I married myself off. But what I did ultimately realize was that God created me as I was, and that this is where life was meaningful.”
In 1993 Mollenkott published a book entitled Sensuous Spirituality: Out from Fundamentalism (New York: Crossroad), in which she reflected on her rejection of fundamentalism, her lesbian “coming out,” and her belief in a female God. Mollenkott concludes that “in a very physical sense we are all gay, we are all lesbian, we are all heterosexual, we are all bisexual–because we are all one” (p. 153). Her view of the kingdom of God on earth is a society in which “lesbian women, bisexual people, and gay men are going to be accepted as first-class citizens in the church and in society as a whole” (p. 153). She defines sin as “the absence of trust” (instead of disobedience to God’s law) and defines salvation as “being brought back into a trusting relationship by remembering Who We Are: God’s children, never actually separated from God’s love even though we had imagined we were” (p. 157). Her view of the new birth is as follows: “In the instant of remembering our true identity, we are at-once, restored to a trusting relationship with God, with our Selves, with other people, and with the universe” (p. 157).
Mollenkott claims that providing mutual sexual pleasure, whether it be homosexual or bisexual or whatever, is one of the most important things in life. “Learning to love ourselves and others (including mutual pleasuring) is the greatest contribution we can make to the creation of a just society. And I am confident that the day will come when most Christian churches will teach a creation-positive method of glorifying God and enjoying Her forever” (p. 158). Mollenkott turns sin and righteousness upside down by claiming that it is the “pleasure haters” (those who believe God made the sexual relationship for heterosexual marriage only) who are the “unjust” (p. 158). She claims that her lesbianism “is simply a good gift, as all sexuality is a good gift” (p. 162). She admits that when she first started voicing her lesbianism publicly she “felt slightly soiled, as if I needed a good shower,” but later she recognized “that the soiled feeling was residual heterosexism” (p. 162). Mollenkott worships a woman-made idol she identifies as “our tender Father and our demanding Mother and then again our loving Friend, faithful Companion, and cosmic Lover” (p. 166).
At the November 1993 Re-imagining conference in Minneapolis, Minnesota, which was sponsored by the World Council of Churches, Mollenkott said: “[Jesus] is our elder brother, the trailblazer and constant companion for us–ultimately is among many brothers and sisters in an eternal, equally worthy sibling-hood. First born only in the sense that he was the first to show us that it is possible to live in oneness with the divine source while we are here on this planet. … As an incest survivor, I can no longer worship in a theological context that depicts God as an abusive parent [referring to Christ’s death on the cross] and Jesus as the obedient, trusting child.” At the same conference, Mollenkott said she longed to see the creation of an interfaith “worship community” in which each member respected completely the religion of the others and Christians ceased to make missionary efforts to target members of other religions. She labeled soul-winning evangelism as “imperialistic attempts to make others such as I.”
In 1994 Mollenkott published The Divine Feminine: The Biblical Imagery of God as Female (New York: Crossroad). This book is filled with such heretical statements as, “The pursuit of holy peace within and the pursuit of peace on earth are perhaps the best of all reasons for lifting up the biblical image of God as the One Mother of us all” (p. 19) and “…because God is womanlike–women are Godlike” (p. 78). Mollenkott suggests that “the Lord’s prayer might be addressed to ‘Our Father/Mother who is in Heaven’” (p. 116). (David W. Cloud, “Virginia Mollenkott,” Fundamental Baptist Information Service, Jan. 25, 1997).
When we published the previous information, we hesitated to suggest that the New International Version is weak on homosexuality due to the influence of homosexuals. Having come into possession of more evidence, though, we no longer hesitate. The parallels between the translation of NIV passages dealing with homosexuality and the views of modern homosexual “Christians” are too striking to be incidental.
THERE WAS ANOTHER HOMOSEXUAL INVOLVED WITH THE PRODUCTION OF THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION
Mollenkott aside, we have learned that there was another homosexual involved with the production of the New International Version. This one was directly involved with the translation. His name was Dr. Marten Woudstra, and he was Chairman of the NIV Old Testament Committee.
Consider the following report by Michael Penfold, Box 26, Bicester, Oxon, OX6 8PB, England, UK
“James White’s book The King James Only Controversy (Bethany House Publishers, 1995) includes a question and answer section. One of the questions reads, ‘I’ve been told that there were homosexuals on the NIV translation committee. Is this true?’ On pages 245-246 of his book James White gives the following answer. ‘No, it is not [true]. But due to the consistent bearing of false witness by many KJV Only advocates, Dr. Kenneth Barker, Executive Director of the NIV Translation Centre, had to write a response to the accusation, which I quote below:
[Dr. Barker writes]: ‘It has come to my attention that false rumors are circulating, in both oral and written form, that the NIV is soft on sodomy (that is, homosexual sins). The alleged reason for this is that some NIV translators and editors were homosexuals and lesbians. These charges have no basis in fact. Thus they are simply untrue. And those who make such false charges could be legitimately sued for libel, slander and defamation of character. Here are the facts. It is true that in the earliest stages of translation work on the NIV (in the late 1960s and early 1970s), Virginia Mollenkott was consulted briefly and only in a minor way on matters of English style. At that time she had the reputation of being a committed evangelical Christian with expertise in contemporary English idiom and usage. Nothing was known of her lesbian views. Those did not begin to surface until years later in some of her writings. If we had known in the sixties what became public knowledge only years later, we would not have consulted her at all. But it must be stressed that she did not influence the NIV translators and editors in any of their final decisions.’
“This is a very cleverly worded statement and one which we can allow Virginia Mollenkott to answer herself. In a letter to me [Michael J. Penfold] dated Dec. 18th 1996, in reply to my investigation into her true role on the NIV, Mollenkott wrote the following revealing letter:
“[Virginia Mollenkott writes] ‘I worked on the NIV during the entire time it was being translated and reviewed, although I was never free to attend the summer sessions even when I was invited to do so. Elisabeth Elliot and I were the Stylistic Consultants: our job was simply to make sure the translation would communicate clearly to modern American readers, and that the style was as smooth and understandable as possible. I was never removed, sacked, or made redundant from my work on the NIV; if I were, my name would not have appeared on the list sent out by the IBS. It was Dr. Edwin Palmer, who lived near my college, who invited me to work on the NIV. He had heard me speak and respected my integrity and my knowledge. So far as I know, nobody including Dr. Palmer suspected that I was lesbian while I was working on the NIV; it was information I kept private at that time. Dr. Palmer always sent me the batches of translating to review, and I always returned them (with my comments) to him. I have not kept track of which of my suggestions made it into the final version; I am a busy person, and it was a labor of love in the scriptures. I do not think anything concerning homosexuality was in any of the batches I reviewed. I do not consider the NIV more gay-friendly than most modern translations, so I do not understand why anybody would want to bash the NIV because a closeted lesbian worked on it. I was not a translator; if I were I would have argued that the word/concept “homosexual” is too anachronistic to be utilized in translating an ancient text. But I was a stylist and nobody asked me. I no longer have any contact with the NIV-CBT, but I am often amused to remember that I frequently refused my $5 an hour stipend because I heard the project was running out of money. At the time I was naive about how many millions of dollars are made by a successful Bible translation! Please tell Kenneth Barker for me that although there is much controversy about homosexuality among Biblical scholars, to my knowledge nobody denies that the Bible condemns lying about other people. He should be ashamed of his attempt to rewrite history.
“’Somewhere in my files is the letter I got thanking me for my work on the NIV when the project was completed. I also have the slipcase version sent out to the whole NIV team in 1978 by Zondervan; and I have the tenth-anniversary edition sent out to the whole team in 1988 by the International Bible Society. Various other editions were also sent out gratis to the translation committee and stylists, but I have received nothing since 1988 that I can remember. Because I am idealistic and sincere, it never occurred to me that anyone would lie about my contributions, so I was not meticulous about keeping records. Thank you for anything you can do to set the record straight. You may utilize this letter to do so, and I’d appreciate you sending me a copy of anything you generate. Sincerely, Virginia Ramey Mollenkott.’
“Why could not Dr. Barker have told the truth in the first place? Taking Mollenkott’s words at their face value, the NIV publicity machine has nothing to worry about. Does their anxiety to distance the NIV from homosexual associations reveal something more sinister?
“In the light of the following, I believe it does, as it has now come to light that THE CHAIRMAN OF THE NIV’S OLD TESTAMENT TRANSLATION COMMITTEE, DR. MARTEN H. WOUDSTRA, WAS A HOMOSEXUAL. This is much more serious than Mollenkott’s involvement. Here we have one of the leading scholars on the NIV CBT who is a homosexual. Obviously this fact compromises the whole project, especially as this fact was well known by his colleagues for many years. However, only now is this fact coming to the notice of the general public through articles like the one you are reading.
“Dr. Woudstra, who died in the early 1990s, was a long-time friend of Evangelicals Concerned Inc. This organization was founded in 1976 by New York psychologist, Dr. Ralph Blair, as a nation-wide task force and fellowship for gay and lesbian ‘evangelical Christians’ and their friends. ECI’s address is 311 East 72nd Street, New York, NY 10021. They can be found on the internet at http://www.korpi.com/ECWE/
“It was during a series of research phone calls to Dr. Blair that I first confirmed the fact of Dr. Woudstra’s homosexuality. Blair and Dr. Woudstra were friends. Dr. Woudstra had been on the mailing list of Evangelicals Concerned from its inception, and although he had no formal ties with ECI, on one of his many trips to New York he called in and had tea with Dr. Blair. Dr Blair told me that Dr. Woudstra shared the viewpoint of ECI that lifelong ‘loving monogamous relationships’ between gay men or women were acceptable to God. He believed that there was nothing in the Old Testament (his special area of technical expertise) that corresponded to ‘homosexual orientation’. The ‘sodomy’ of the OT simply involved temple rites and gang rape (Gen 19). Notice the similarity between this view and that of Virginia Mollenkott. Dr. Blair clearly stated to me on the phone on 23rd September 1997 that Dr. Woudstra, a lifelong bachelor, was a homosexual. He intimated that other members of the NIV translation committee were also quietly supportive of ECI, but he was not able to tell me who they were (for obvious reasons). He later called them ‘bigger’ names than Dr. Woudstra.
“As to Dr. Marten Woudstra theologically, he was once the OT Professor at Calvin Seminary, the college of the Christian Reformed Church (Dutch Calvinistic). Over 70% of this denomination’s churches now use the NIV. Dr. Woudstra was considered very ‘conservative’ within Calvin Seminary. He wrote the Joshua Commentary in the New International Commentary on the Old Testament (Eerdmans) which was also contributed to by such illustrious ‘evangelical’ names as F.F. Bruce.
“In 1973 the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) published their official position relative to homosexuality. There is currently discussion, debate and disagreement over the issue of homosexuality within the CRC as in the wider Reformed denominations. For instance, the CRC’s sister denomination, the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, took the position in 1979 of actually approving homosexual behavior within certain bounds. This is a more liberal position than the CRC has ever yet taken. Is it not incredible to think how far the CRC has traveled over the years when one considers some of the former teachers, professors and presidents Calvin Seminary has had, such as Harry Bultema, Herman Hoeksema, H.J. Kuiper, Louis Berkof and William Hendrikson, to name a few.
“In 1970, the CRC Synod appointed a six man committee to study homosexuality. Its report was adopted by the same Synod in 1973. One of the six, Clarence Boomsma, was four times moderator of the CRC and pastor of two CRC churches. In fact Boomsma held the record for the longest pastorate in the CRC; 35 years in the CRC church in Grand Rapids, near the Calvin Seminary.
“I called Clarence Boomsma on the phone in October 1997, and had a long talk about Dr. Woudstra since he had know him for many years and had been his friend. HE TOLD ME THAT DR. WOUDSTRA ASSISTED THEM IN WRITING THE REPORT ON HOMOSEXUALITY. I have a copy of the complete report in my office. It takes a compromised ‘middle line’ between the Biblical anti-homosexuality absolute, and the Reformed Church of the Netherlands liberal acceptance of homosexual behavior within certain bounds.
Let me quote a few lines from the report (Report 42, Art. 53, 1973):
‘In fact, its [homosexuality] origin is so unclear as to be finally a mystery’ (page 613)
‘As the cause of homosexuality is uncertain, so is the possibility of correcting it’ (page 614)
‘Responsibility and the possibility of personal guilt for the homosexual arises at the point where he must decide what he will do with his sexuality. It is here that the Christian homosexual must ask what God’s will is for him in the same way as the Christian heterosexual must ask what he must do in obedience to God with his sex drive’ (page 616)
“[Note here the clever but wrong comparison being drawn. For a man to desire sexual relations with a woman is not wrong within the marriage relationship. However, for a man to desire sexual relations with another man is always wrong in all circumstances].
“‘From this story [Genesis 19, Sodom & Gomorrah] read as an isolated incident we cannot conclude however that homosexualism is here condemned’ (page 617).
Note that this report took the position that a person may be a homosexual by birth (homosexualism) due to the fallen and irregular nature of humanity, but should not practice homosexual acts (homosexuality)!]
“‘In how far the prohibition of homosexualism [in Lev 18:21 & 20:13] is binding on us is therefore a question that remains’ (page 619).
‘It has been suggested that the use of these words [malakoi and arsenokoitai in I Cor 6:9-10] stresses the activity rather than the condition of homosexuality’ (page 619)
“[Note this vital belief of Dr. Woudstra. This is the reasoning behind the very clever translation in the NIV in I Cor 6 ‘homosexual offenders’. Thus the NIV here allows a person to be a homosexual, as long as they don’t offend.]
“The report refers constantly to the ‘Christian homosexual’, and urges that he ‘deserves the same acceptance, recognition, compassion and help that is given to any person (page 626).
Since the report urges a fully functional place in the church for ‘Christian homosexuals’ is it any wonder that, according the Boomsma, the CRC has currently (1997) one openly ‘celibate’ homosexual minister who has ‘come out’. All through the report one is struck with the similarities it bears to the views of Virginia Mollenkott. Even the title of her book ‘Is The Homosexual My Neighbour’ finds an echo on page 631 of the CRC’s Homosexuality Committee’s 1973 report where paragraph 2 begins ‘Love for the homosexual neighbour…’
“The 1973 report advised homosexual ministers to seek pastoral and psychological help to cope with their desires, but stopped short of condoning homosexual practice. Boomsma felt that although the CRC should understand and ‘sympathize’ (page 630) with the struggle homosexuals faced, for which they may bear minimal responsibility (page 631), it could not make an exception and allow such people to engage in ‘homosexual activity’ that is wrong. This is still the view of the CRC in general
“Taking the scriptural principle of two witnesses, I will now add the comments of Clarence Boomsma regarding the sexuality of his friend Dr. Woudstra, the Chairman of the NIV Old Testament Committee. Boomsma made the following statement to me on the phone on 25th October 1997; I wrote it down verbatim: ‘It is generally believed among us [Christian Reformed Church and Calvin Seminary] that Dr. Woudstra was a homosexual.’
“I asked Boomsma if Dr. Woudstra was an ‘active’ homosexual. Although he knew Dr. Woudstra’s views on homosexuality very well and holds in his possession a written dissertation by Dr. Woudstra on the subject, he did not feel free to comment on its contents. However, he did tell me about a ‘[homosexual] incident’ in Dr. Woudstra’s career in which his professorship was at stake. Woudstra survived and was not fired by the Seminary.
“Boomsma also spoke of Dr. Woudstra’s frequent trips to New York ‘which like all large cities has a large homosexual population’. On his return Woudstra would tell Boomsma how much he enjoyed the ‘plays’ in New York. I asked were these ‘gay plays’. Boomsma would only say that New York has a large gay culture and is dotted with gay bars, and it was his impression that his friend, Dr. Woudstra, took part in this side of New York’s social scene.
“I submit this research as I feel it has a direct bearing on how the NIV treats homosexuality. By removing the word sodomy and sodomite from the Old Testament, the language is changed and new ideas are introduced. By speaking of homosexual ‘offenders’ in I Corinthians ch. 6, the NIV allows for people to be homosexual as long as they don’t ‘offend’ by being ‘active’; and this is the position of the Christian Reformed Church, Calvin Seminary, Evangelicals Concerned, and who knows, quite a few other members of the NIV Translation Committee other than the late Dr. Woudstra. The fact that Leviticus denounces homosexuality in total does not worry them as such ethical condemnations do not apply today!
”A corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit” (Matthew 7:17).”
Original Author
Michael Penfold, November 1997
P.O.Box 26, Bicester, Oxon. OX6 8PB, England UK.
THE FOLLOWING IS A COMPARISON OF HOW THE CONCEPT OF SODOMY AND HOMOSEXUALITY IS TREATED IN THE KING JAMES VERSION AND THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION.
The NIV translation allows for the false view that homosexuality as a natural condition is not condemned in the Bible, that the Bible only condemns the misuse of homosexuality. It is much easier to support this strange view from the NIV than it is from the KJV
The following study is expanded from one which was originally put together by Carl Graham entitled Sodomy and the NIV (first published 1991; revised 1996, Twogistates Publishers, 500 Wheeler Dr., Angier, NC 27501) after he researched the connection between the NIV’s rendering of passages touching on homosexuality and the presence of a homosexual on the translation review team. It is amazing to see many direct parallels between Mollenkott’s views about homosexuality and the translation of the New International Version. Graham’s study has been enlarged by Michael Penfold with the addition of sections of the 1973 Christian Reformed Church report on homosexuality and by additional comments by me (David Cloud). As noted earlier, Dr. Woudstra, Chairman of the NIV Old Testament Committee, helped the six-man committee write this report. Thus the 1973 report can be taken as the views of at least one prominent member of the NIV CBT.
After Graham published his booklet, he was threatened with a lawsuit by the publishers of the NIV, the International Bible Society. He was accused of slandering the members of the NIV, and they insisted that he withdraw the booklet immediately or face a possible lawsuit. Graham hired an attorney, who assured him that he was on firm legal grounds. After receiving communication from Graham’s lawyer, the IBC apologized to Graham for the threatening letter and dropped the matter.
Graham wrote his report without the knowledge that a homosexual man headed up the Old Testament New International Version translation team. Graham saw the amazing connection between Mollenkott’s views and the rendering of various NIV passages, and he assumed this connection was caused by some direct input by Mollenkott. It appears now that this was not the case. Mollenkott probably had nothing to do with the translation of these various passages. At least that is what she has testified. There can be no doubt, though, that Dr. Woudstra had a direct role in the translation and that his views were precisely aligned with the views promoted by Mollenkott and other “Christian” homosexuals today.
Some people still believe two and two equals four. The connection between the NIV’s rendering of passages touching on homosexuality and the views of modern “Christian” homosexuals is no accident. It is apparent that there must have been other members of the NIV committee who were like-minded with these modern “evangelical” sodomites. Michael Penfold’s research has confirmed this, but the names of other NIV translators who were sympathetic with homosexual Christianity will possibly not be brought to light until the judgment seat of Christ.
THE SIN OF HOMOSEXUALITY CAN BE CONDEMNED OUT OF THE NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION, BUT IT IS NOT AS PLAIN AS IT IS IN THE AUTHORIZED VERSION. We have seen repeatedly that this is one of the devil’s tactics. He does not necessarily completely change or remove a doctrine; he merely tampers with it. In a fierce warfare, the difference between winning and losing often depends upon very small details. To clandestinely dull a warrior’s sword is tantamount to open sedition.
The sad fact which must be faced is this: IN SCHOLARLY EVANGELICAL CIRCLES, THE IDEA THAT HOMOSEXUALITY IS SOMEHOW COMPATIBLE WITH CHRISTIANITY IS GAINING A WIDENING SYMPATHY. The book by Virginia Mollenkott and Letha Scanzoni, Is the Homosexual My Neighbor (Harper & Row, 1978), received favorable reviews in Christianity Today, The Christian Century, The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, and The Christian Ministry. Joe Dallas, author of A Strong Delusion: Confronting the ‘Gay Christian’ Movement (Harvest House Publishers, Eugene, Oregon, 1996), made the following conclusion: “ENDORSEMENTS FROM SUCH RESPECTED CHRISTIAN PUBLICATIONS WAS PROOF THAT THE GAY CHRISTIAN MOVEMENT WAS GAINING MOMENTUM AND CREDIBILITY.”
End of Reproduced Material
Do YOU personally believe someone who cannot live by the written Word of God can be trusted to translate that Holy Word for you? Would you sit under a Pastor who was a homosexual?
If the answer is NO, then why would you trust a bible that was in part translated, interpreted and rewritten by a homosexual?
If they cannot FOLLOW the Word, it stands that they are corrupt enough to change the Word and corrupt enough to lead you astray, even unto “another Gospel”.
(By the way don’t look for the word sodomy in the NIV, it’s been removed)
It accounts for saying:
Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and WORSHIPPED and SERVED the creature (like men and monkeys) more than the Creator… “BECAUSE THEY DO THIS (worshipping men and monkeys), God has given them over to shameful passions. Even women pervert the natural use of their sex by unnatural acts (like lesbianism and bestiality). “In the same way… the men burn with passion for one another (as sodomites and homosexuals) ROMANS 1:25-27
And once again….. your JESUS (peace be upon him) dying for the sin of mankind.
Let me admit that English is definately not my first language.
I probably need some english classes from you to understand your statement “Every individual is responsible for their own salvation and this is not weighed by their ancestry”. And salvation to you is a mere believe in the crucifixion of Jesus (peace be upon him) for the sin of mankind. which stands contrary to…
“The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son (the progeny of Adam) shall not bear the iniquity of the father (Adam), 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. 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.” (Ezekiel 18:20-21)
You say the difference between Matthew and John with respect to carrying his cross accounts for what they say being an EYE WITNESS.
But…
St. Mark, tells us that at the most critical juncture in the life of Jesus – “All his disciples forsook him and fled” – (Mark 14:50)
I know “ALL” doesn’t mean all in YOUR ENGLISH LANGUAGE. And if that’s not the case I can bet you have a another explanation to that.
As for your laugh on the solution to mankind on plurality of marriage, I thought your bible must have a solution to mankind. It doesn’t. You see this is another test of the true scripture that it stands the test of time. Each ruling has been ordained with so much of wisdom that if the whole of mankind sits down to contemplate – they wont be able to.
And as for this plurality of marriage, this is not something which the last prophet (peace be upon him) started. He only legislated it more reasonable – in favour of women. David, Solomon, Abraham (peace be upon them all) – they all had more than one wife. So what’s the big deal if Islam allows more than one. But you the difference ??? Islam is the only religion on the face of earth which says “Marry only one”. Given the account of fact as English being your first language, I hope you will confirm that permissibility does not mean mandatory. It has only given permission.
Brother…there was again so much I can refute upon, but you see you don’t know what you are speaking and you are not trying to know what I’m speaking. And also it is of no use. You have barely read my previous long thread and its long.. its really long, I admit. I bet I would have been in your place I wouldn’t have read it all too. So when you have just brushed upon my previous comment how am I to expect you to go through following ones.
If you remember I quoted in one of my comment that if it can stand the test of critics – it can claim to be a true religion. You said its not true… the test of truth is to interpret scripture with scripture. This statement atleast doesn’t holds good for you. WHY ?
Where are your ORIGINALS ?
Given the account of your most ancient manuscripts (which are not the ORIGINALS) where scholar of highest eminence themselves are declaring the scriptures to be contradicting and differing from one another, you stand no chance in any of your proclamation – Crucifixion, salvation, son of God .. ANY!!!
When the origin of the bible itself becomes questionable, definately its claimants stands baseless.
You have very surreptitious evaded the contradictions and blasphemy to the Prophets (David, Lot, Noah) and even God himself introducing your frame of reference. However those stands as a challenge to your NIV as well. I URGE YOU TO CHECK. Unless you come up and tell me there are not there in your NIV v2.0
Dont think the contradiction doesn’t ends in your NIV.
Matthew says Judas hanged himself while ACTS states he fell headlong, and burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
Mark says crufixion took place at third hour, John says sixth hour.
Mark says they put Jesus on cross, Peter says they put him on tree.
I hope you wont come up and say one of them wasn’t wearing his watch and the other one his spectacles.
Do they not consider the Qur’an (with care)? Had it been from anyone besides Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancies. (Qur’an 4:82)
Allah says in the Qur’an:
Truly, the religion with Allah is Islam. Those who were given the Scripture (Jews and Christians) did not differ except, out of mutual jealousy, after knowledge had come to them. And whoever disbelieves in the Ayat (proof, evidences, verses, signs, revelations, etc) of Allah, then surely, Allah is swift in calling to reckoning.
But this will never go down the throat of many
Because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand (Matthew 13:13)
They are deaf, dumb, and blind, so they return not (to the Right Path) (Al-Qur’an 2:18)
Verily, it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts which are in the breasts that grow blind) (22:46) and this why they cannot get back to the state of guidance that they were in, since they sold it for misguidance.
And Allah knows the best.
Brother Jeremiah
I would want to re-iterate that Muslims do not seek to put down or desecrete the Holy Bible. It is a matter critical matter of faith for Muslims to believe in the original revelations that came down to Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus, just as it is is important for Muslims to believe in the revelation of the Quran that came to Muhammad, peace be upon him.
The key word here however, is “ORIGINAL”. We all know the origin of the Bible is clouded with centuries of copying, translating and passing down information, now long lost with only copies of manuscripts remaining to remind us of what once was the Bible.
The Bible is a collection of writings by many different authors, the Quran is a dictation (or recitation). The speaker in the Quran – in the first person – is God Almighty (Allah) talking directly to man.
In the Bible you have many men writing about God and you have in some places the word of God speaking to men and still in other places you have some men simply writing about history or personal exchanges of information to one another (ex: Epistle of John 3).
Now I come back to the Quran, and as I mentioned the speaker in the Quran is – in the first person – is God. The book claims throughout that it is the word of God. It names itself 70 times as the Quran. It talks about its own contents. It has self-reference. The Quran states in the first Sura after Fatiha that “This is the book, there is no doubt in it, it is a guidance for those who are conscious of God” and so on and so on…
The Quran does not demand belief – the Quran invites belief, and here is the fundamental difference. The citation of the Bible very often takes the form of what is called in Argumentation: Special Pleading. Special Pleading is when implications are not consistent. When you take something and you say: Well that must mean this, but you don’t use the same argument to apply it to something else.
When I talk about the Bible and quote various verses here and there I am often accused of putting things out of context, to say you have lifted something out of what it was talking about and given it a meaning. I don’t want to respond to the accusation as such, but it doesn’t seem to occur to many people that perhaps those who wrote portions of the Bible in the first place were guilty of the same thing. Maybe they – some of those writers – believed a certain thing and in order to prove it quoted from their scriptures – the Old Testament, the Hebrew writings – quoted out of context to prove their point. There are examples of that kind of thing. In Matthew 2 it said that a king wanted to kill the young child Jesus so he with his family went to Egypt, and they stayed there until that king died, and then they came back.
When the writer of Matthew, whoever he was, because the name Matthew won’t be found in the book of Matthew; when he described this event saying that he came back out of Egypt, he said: “ This was to fulfil a prophecy which is written” and then he quotes Hosea Chapter 11 “Out of Egypt I called my Son”. So he said because Jesus went to Egypt and then came back out of Egypt and we have this passage in the Hebrew scriptures “out of Egypt I called my son” Jesus must have been the son of God. If you look and see what he was quoting, Hosea 11:1 he quotes the second half of a complete sentence, the complete sentence reads: “When Israel was young I loved him and out of Egypt I called my son”. Israel the nation was considered as the son of God. Moses was told to go to Pharaoh and say to him: If you touch that nation of people, you touch my son; warning him, warning Pharaoh: don’t touch that nation, calling the nation “the son of God”. So that this is the only thing talked about in Hosea 11:1. “Out of Egypt I called my son” can only refer to the nation of Israel.
Once I mentioned this point some months ago to a young lady who objected that Israel is a symbolic name for Jesus. You will have a hard time finding that anywhere in the Bible because it isn’t there. You can take an index of the Bible and lookup the word “Israel” everywhere the word occurs and you will find no where in any place that you can connect the word Israel with Jesus. But never mind – suppose it is true, read on, the second verse says “and after that he kept on worshipping Bal”, because this is what the Israelites were guilty of, very often they kept falling back into Idol worshipping. So if that “Israel” really meant Jesus and it means that Jesus is the son of God that came out of Egypt they must also mean that Jesus from time to time used to bow down to that idol Bal.
You have to be consistent, and follow through on what it says. So the point is whoever wrote Matthew and Chapter 2 was trying to prove a point by quoting something out of context, and he undid himself, because if you follow through on it, it can not be so.
The Bible does not contain self-reference, that is, the word ‘Bible’ is not in the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible talk about itself.
Bible has errors and mistakes. Thousands of them. Today you find a mistake in the Bible you have two choices. Either that promise of God in Bible was false that where God said my word wont fade away, he was mistaken, or the portion which has the mistake in it was not a part of the word of God in the first place, because the promise was that it would be safeguarded, it would not be corrupted.
The Quran Has Internal Evidences of its origin. The Quran Has Exact Accuracy and it provides Reason. There are exactly mentioned Scientific Miracles in Quran.
The word “Quran” means “that which is recited; or that which is dictated in memory form.” As such, it is not a book, nor is it something that reaches us only in written form. The documentation in writting about the Quran has been preserved in museums thoughout the world, including the Topekopi Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, the museum in Tashkent, Uzbekistan and also in England. Keep in mind also, the Quran is only considered “Quran” while it is in the recitation form, not in the written or the book form. The word for what is written and held in the hand to be read by the eye is called “mus-haf” (meaning script or that which is written down).
Versions of Bible: Still counting… even you can write one.. LOL!
The original languages of the Bible have all been dead languages for centuries and the documents themselves have been lost in their originals for hundreds and thousands of years.
I know a family where the father reads the King James Version of the Bible, the son would follow the Revised Standard Version of the Bible, his wife had another version of the Bible (maybe something like Jimmy Swaggart’s ‘Good News For Modern Man.” Their priest of course, had the Catholic Bible which has 7 more books in it that the Protestant Bible.
Version of Quran – Only ONE Version – Arabic and it has been Memorized by Millions – Entirely.
The Quran makes the clear challange, that if you are in doubt about it – then bring a book like it. Also, to bring ten chapters like it and then finally, to bring one single chapter like it. 1,400 years – and no one has been able to duplicate it’s beauty, recitation, miracles and ease of memorization.
Quran Describes God’s Nature Exactly. The Quran is clear on who God is and who He is not. There is no room left for doubt after reading the Quran in the Arabic languge: God is One. He is the only Creator, Sustainer and Owner of the Universe. He has no partners. He has no relatives; wives, children or offspring. He is not like His creation and He does not need it for His existance, while all the time the creation is totally dependent on Him. His attributes are clearly spelled out as the epitome of each and every one. He is for instance, the All-Knowing; the All-Hearing; the All-Seeing; the All-Forgiving; the All- Loving; the All-Merciful; the Only One God. There is never a contradiction to this found anywhere in the Quran.
Brother, we do not seek to destroy the Christians or Jews belief in the Word of God, rather it is an obligation for Muslims to call to what is right and to halt that which is evil. Certainly, causing the “People of the Book” (as the Quran refers to Christians and Jews) to fall into disbelief and leave off any faith in God at all, is the very opposite of the direction Muslims should take in presenting any comparison between Islam and what has come down in the past from the Almighty God.
We only seek to bring about more light to the people seeking guidance and pray for all of us to be successful with our Lord in this life and in the Next life and we ask His Guidance and Support in doing so, Ameen.
I commend both of your efforts in thoroughly outlining your stance but I think we’ve reached a point where the conversation is becoming redundant. We have basically been arguing back and forth as to the legitimacy and authority of the Bible versus the Quran with little progression. I propose for a moment we put aside the issue of authenticity and simply reflect of a few questions we have each asked and what some short and precise answers are for those questions.
Here I will answer your most recent question, or comment really, and then ask one question of my own. I propose we continue in this format if you agree.
A:
Hosea 11:1 [ When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. ]
Matthew 2:14-15 [ So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.” ]
You relate these verses as contradictory and false because you understand Hosea 11:1 to be referring to the exodus of the Israelite slaves from Egypt, led by Moses and not referring to a future prophesy of a coming messiah. Matthew chapter 2 indeed recites the partial verse but understand it is in reference to it in its entirety and without the entire prophesy wouldn’t make much sense. Allow me to explain…
Hosea indeed is talking about the nation of Israel, the chosen people of God whom he loves and in order to understand Matthew you must see the typological picture (typology) which is connected between the two. Just as many only Old Testament verses have connection to the coming messiah, specifically Jesus (not going off on a tangent here), there is a symbolism that is evident from just the first verse. There is nothing more complex than the simple understanding that just as scripture is interpreted with scripture, putting this verse in Matthew into context shows that God loved Israel as his chosen people and brought them out of Egypt he also set apart his Son Jesus and brought him out of Egypt as well.
The point is that there are many references to the coming messiah in the Old Testament, sometimes overtly prophetic, sometimes obscure and ambiguous until further review like in Hosea 11:1.
Q:
My question is one that went unanswered before and has several parts but is really just one question. If heaven is of unimaginable glory, that which the human mind cannot even begin to fathom because of God’s majesty and splendor far exceeding any of man’s notion of understanding, why dose the Quran promise the glory of heaven in a material, worldly manner?
Why is dose Islam say that heaven is full of pleasures of the FLESH with 72 virgins? What do women who go to heaven get? I don’t understand how you could believe that God of all creation can’t do any better than a heaven full of sex, besides it’s not supposed to be for your glory or mine, for your pleasure or mine, but to honor and praise HIM.
See what I mean?
@Jeremiahstrong
I have gone thru the entire chain of comments exchanged and it is very clearly understood and well explained that Bible in its present state is not the word of God. So no point explaining to you again, as it seems you will never comprehend the Quran nor benefit from its wisdom. You are here rather to just refute for the sake of refuting. Allah says in the Quran:
When they are told, ‘Follow what God has sent down to you,’They say, ‘We are following what we found our fathers doing.’ What, even though their fathers did not understand a thing and were not guided! (Surah al-Baqarah:170)
As for your Question:
The word hoor has no specific gender. The word hoor is actually the plural of ahwar (applicable to man) and of haura (applicable to woman) and signifies a person having eyes characterized by hauar a special quality bestowed upon a good soul, male or female in paradise and it denotes the intense whiteness of the white part of the spiritual eye.
The Quran describes in several other verses that in paradise you will have azwaj which mean a pair or spouse or companion which means you will have spouses or companions pure and holy (mutaharratun means pure, holy).
I have come across many non-muslims who talk about this question. Quran has even said that wine is permissible in heaven. But no one picks that up, but you would pick up sex being permissible in heaven with hoors. Just want to mention that paradise is a pure place and there is no sin in paradise and lots of things that are not permissible in world would be permissible in paradise without any ills of it. I can explain much more but it would be a waste of effort here. I just want to make to points.
Firstly, Quran does not say anything about “72” hooris anywhere. Secondly, some people call these 72 virgins (which is definitely what you trying to refer here). However this is a false propagation. More Israelis and their friends talk about 72 virgins, as heavenly reward, than Muslims. From what I have been able to trace, it all started with the CBS’ 60-Minutes show in 1996 in which two Palestinian were shown perhaps jokingly referring to Abdullah `Azzam’s book, “Join the Caravan,” which had come out just a few months earlier in 1995. One of them stated that Muslims are promised 72 virgins in heaven for martyrdom. From that point onwards, there has been relentless propaganda that suicide bombers have been blowing themselves up so that they can go to heaven and get their 72 virgins. So this myth started with CBS’ 60 Minutes, which is an extremely pro-Israeli show and is quite notorious for doing a job on those who are against Israel.
The true believer is responsible for conveying the Quran’s facts and miracles to others. Falsehood is bound to vanish when the truth comes. The Quran tells us with the verse: “Rather We hurl the truth against falsehood and it cuts right through it and it vanishes clean away! Woe without end for you for what you portray!” (Surah al-Anbiya’: 18)
“Say: ‘Truth has come and falsehood has vanished. Falsehood is always bound to vanish.’ We send down in the Quran that which is a healing and a mercy to the believers, but it only increases the wrongdoers in loss.” (Surah al-Isra’: 81-82)
– Shazia
The trouble with our discussion is that you throw broad and vague attacks on the Bible and make unsubstantiated rebuttals to my questions regarding the Qur’an.
The theology of 72 virgins in paradise as an undeniably authentic Islamic fact comes from numerous historical Islamic translators of primary Hadiths including:
Shaykh Gibril Haddad, recognized as one of the world’s leading authorities on Sharia Law. And Shaykh Muhammad Salih al-Munajjid of Saudi Arabia.
Even though the Qur’an does not mention the number of virgins, it does say in verse 56:33-39 that Muslim men will be awarded with virgins in Paradise.The actual number of hoori is thus a minor issue and 72 is the number of those hooris confirmed in multiple hadith.The hadiths are a crucial part of Islam but certain Muslims ignore them because they often contain uncomfortable details about Islam. The following examples are taken from so called “well regarded, or authenticated hadiths”:
…he shall be coupled with seventy-two spouses from the wide-eyed maidens of Paradise; and [6] he shall be granted to intercede for seventy of his relatives.” (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal , Sunan al-Tirmidhi)
…Allah be well-pleased with him: The Messenger of Allah said, upon him blessings and peace: “The humblest of the People of Paradise shall have eighty thousand servants and seventy-two wives (Abu Sa`id al-Khudri, Sunan al-Tirmidhi Vol. IV, ch. 21, hadith 2687)
…Abu Umama said, Allah be well-pleased with him: The Messenger of Allah said, upon him blessings and peace: “None is made to enter Paradise by Allah Most High except Allah Most High shall marry him to seventy-two wives, two of them from the wide-eyed maidens of Paradise and seventy of them his inheritance from the People of Hellfire, not one of them but her attraction never lags nor his arousal ever wanes.” (Ibn Majah, Ibn `Adi in the Kamil, and al-Bayhaqi in al-Ba`th wal-Nushur)
And there are many many more references.
The bottom line is that Islam teaches that the martyrs who die in Jihad get 72 wives (virgins). That two of them are “from the wide-eyed maidens of Paradise and seventy of them his inheritance from the People of Hellfire” That these hadith are considered authentic by many Muslim scholars.
Keep in mind I already said there are Muslims however that do not regard the Hadith’s as authentic and ignore them but this dose make them any less part of the historical history of Islam, or any less real and tangible texts that many Muslims DO embrace, including many prominent Muslim leaders.
_________________________
You would probably also say that the notion that Islam is a religion of hate and violence is false propaganda too, but then how do you explain these verses from the Qur’an?
O you who have believed, do not take the disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do you wish to give Allah against yourselves a clear case? (4:144)
O you who have believed, fight those adjacent to you of the disbelievers and let them find in you harshness. And know that Allah is with the righteous. (9:123)
That He may reward those who have believed and done righteous deeds out of His bounty. Indeed, He does not like the disbelievers. (30:45)
We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve for what they have associated with Allah of which He had not sent down [any] authority. And their refuge will be the Fire, and wretched is the residence of the wrongdoers. (3:151)
[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.” (8:12)
…And Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people. (3:86)
O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. (5:51)
Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands and will disgrace them and give you victory over them and satisfy the breasts of a believing people (9:14)
They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper. (4:89)
_________________________
My friend I must take back what I said in my very first post on this blog, I DO come here to refute what you have been given to believe but not in arrogance or condescension. I do wish for you and your family to realize that Islam was created to specifically destroy what God did through his son Jesus by making him nothing more than a “prophet” and that he wasn’t slain, but somehow ascended to heaven conveniently making his resurrection impossible to believe.
I have just given you citations for only TWO topics that should be of concern to every Muslim; the hate within the Qur’an which is supposed to be the word of the loving God of all people, and the widely accepted doctrine of sexual pleasures in heaven which is also in the Qur’an, just not as a numerical seventy-two. Both of these two things are major indicators of not love, but hate and evil (worldly desires of the flesh). If you read through the New Testament you will truly find “words of love” and “words for love” and you will discover the grace of Jesus Christ.
All Praises be to Allah
This is in response to the misunderstanding/misinterpretation of a group of christendom who tries to inject the idea of prophecy of forth-coming messenger – Jesus (peace be upon him).
The inter-relation of Hosea 11:1 and Matthew 2:15 is important because, If Matthew goes out of his way in quoting Hosea 11:1 with regards to its contextual integrity, then the inerrancy of scripture is questionable. Secondly if Matthew is practising arbitrary exegesis in quoting Hosea 11:1, then perhaps the present day exgesis cannot serve as a guide by the great New Testament writers (eg. NIV’s authors). As such a close inspection of the scripture to scripture interpretation is warranted.
Lets unwind the reciprocal relation of Hosea 11:1 (“When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.) and Matthew 2:14-15 (So he got up, took the child and his mother during the night and left for Egypt, where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son).
This view understands Matthew’s fulfillment formula as indicating “??? ???????” (translated “that fulfilled”) a direct fulfillment of prophecy. At the first glance, it appears reasonable on the reading the initial sections of Matthew’s Gospel.
Lets look at some other examples:
{
Isaiah 7:14 – Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.
—–
Matthew 1:23 – “The virgin will conceive and give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel” (which means “God with us”).
}
{
Micah 5:2 – “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times.”
—–
Matthew 2:5-6
5 “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written:
6 “But you, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out of you will come a ruler who will shepherd my people Israel.”
}
Based upon the pattern of these prior precedents, it would seem that the use of the identical fulfillment formula in Matthew 2:15 would also suggest that Hosea 11:1 finds a direct fulfillment.
Proponents of this position couple this interpretation of Matthew’s fulfillment formula with the translation “I called” in Hosea 11:1 as “I will have called.” In other words, they take this verb as a future perfect.
Of all the options, however, this view is probably the most difficult to maintain. Its first problem revolves around the fact that it is built upon too narrow a definition of “??? ???????” (translated “that fulfilled”). A broader definition of this phrase is evident from Matthew’s other uses of it.
The use of this phrase (“??? ???????”) in the form of a fulfillment formula is used five times in Matthew’s infancy narratives
Matthew 1:22 – All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet:
Matthew 2:5 – “In Bethlehem in Judea,” they replied, “for this is what the prophet has written:
Matthew 2:15 – where he stayed until the death of Herod. And so was fulfilled what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Out of Egypt I called my son.
Matthew 2:18 – “A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.
Matthew 2:23 – and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene.
As discussed above, a direct fulfillment of prophecy is in referred to in 1:22 and 2:15.
However, in 2:17-18
[17 Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: 18 “A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.”]
which quotes Jeremiah 31:15,
[This is what the Lord says: “A voice is heard in Ramah, mourning and great weeping, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.”]
a direct fulfillment of prophecy is not suggested though.
Also if Jeremiah 31:15 even a remote prediction of death of babies in Jerusalem? If so, it’s a prophecy that names the wrong city (Ramah versus Bethlehem), the wrong action (captivity versus death), and the wrong outcome (return from captivity versus no return from death).
The fulfillment formula is also used an additional seven times throughout the rest of Matthew’s gospel
Matthew 4:14 – to fulfill what was said through the prophet Isaiah
Matthew 8:17 – This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah: “He took up our infirmities and bore our diseases”
Matthew 12:17 – This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet Isaiah
Matthew 13:35 & Matthew 21:4 & Matthew 26:56 and Matthew 27:9.
Although it is true that “??? ???????” is used various times to refer to Old Testament citations directly fulfilled in the life of Christ (Matt 21:4 – This took place to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet), in other instances the Old Testament quotation is not a forward looking utterance but rather a reflection upon a fact of history (Matt 27:9 – Then what WAS spoken by Jeremiah the prophet WAS fulfilled: “They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price set on him by the people of Israel).
In sum, it is impossible to argue that Matthew’s use of the fulfillment formula always refers to the direct fulfillment of prophecy
In addition, the Gospel of Matthew contains two instances where the verb “???????” is used to indicate something other than a direct fulfillment of prophecy. In 3:15, Jesus says that He fulfilled all righteousness at His baptism. This hardly meets the definition of a prediction. In 5:17, Jesus says that he came to fulfill the law and the prophets rather than abolish them. This passage is not saying that the law and the prophets are predictions of future events.
Furthermore an overly rigid definition of the phrase “??? ???????”, the prediction view also suffers because to take the verb “I called” in Hosea 11:1 as a future perfect is tenuous contextually. On the one hand, the previous verb “I loved” is a definite past preterite that looks back to Israel’s Exodus experience.
SOMETHING TO UNDERSTAND VERY CLEARLY IS THAT
The author of Matthew wants his readers to think that Jesus was the “son” who God was talking about in Hosea 11:1. The author of Matthew rips a piece of Hosea 11:1 out of context, turns it into a prophecy, and manufactures a fulfillment of it by Jesus.
The actual scripture of Hosea 11 states:
When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son(Israel) out of Egypt.
Note:
* The son is Israel and not Jesus.
* There is no prophecy here at all, as the passage is written in past tense the Exodus happening.
AND
in order to make this befitting that Hosea 11:1 is refering to Jesus (peace be upon him), where Hosea 11:1 states (“When Israel was a child, I loved him, And OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON”. Matthew (or its author) removes the words “When Israel was a child, I loved him” and renders only the 2nd part of the verse “OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON”.
Wow! What a manipulation and misquotation of the scripture and the Christians still bask at these distortions and corruptions.
However, despite this subterfuge by the author of Matthew, Christians have no problem rationalizing this so that the whole dishonest scripture twisting exercise by the author of Matthew can appear valid.
LEST ONE ARGUES THAT THE WORD ‘CHILD’ IMPLIES IT WAS ABOUT JESUS (PEACE BE UPON HIM) ONLY:-
let it be clarified that the Hebrew word, nah’-ar, used here implies servitude and has been used in this sense at other occasions in the O.T. (see Num. 22:22, Judges 7:10-11, 1Sam 2:13 etc.) Or it may just be a reference to the infant stature of the House of Israel among the comity of nations as suggested by Adam Clarke in his commentary.
Moreover the very next verse in Hosea supports the contention of our author. It reads;
“As they called them, so they went from them: they sacrificed unto Baalim, and burned incense to graven images.” (Hosea 11:2)
This is a reference to the fact that Moses and Aaron were sent unto Israel to whom they did not hearken (Exodus 6:9) and in later times other prophets were sent unto them to bring them back to the track but they refused time and again. And the verse explicitly makes a mention of Israel making sacrifices to Baalim and committing idolatry with other graven images of which burned incense used to be a part. This cannot even remotely be related to Jesus (peace be upon him). Thus we find the context exposing the manipulation of the Author of the First Gospel, whoever he was!
DOES IT STILL RINGS YOUR BELL TO SOMEHOW GET THE ORIGINAL BIBLE TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIM FOR HOSEA ACTUALLY SPEAKING ABOUT MATTHEWS? You see the author of Matthew after reading Hosea must have experienced Nausea and due to low pressure must have missed half of the phrase.
Coming to the PROPAGANDA OF SCRIPTURE INTERPRETING SCRIPTURE,
Scripture-interprets-Scripture idea is not found in the Bible, and reflects nothing more than yet another hermeneutical choice amongst many. But because it is dressed up in this authoritative truth-claim, it is made out to be the best, if not the only, choice on the market.
It’s a dangerous and insidious lie because it attempts to hide the agent. Its an err to assume that Scripture interprets Scripture.
Take a copy of the Bible. Put it down on a table. Observe it for a while. What does it do? Does it write a commentary on Galatians? Does it exegete some of the trickier passages in Romans? No. That’s what people themselves do. They use Scripture to interpret Scripture, but Scripture, on the whole, just sits there. But the idea of “Scripture interprets Scripture” attempts to hide those great “personalities”. And as well it should, because if you believe that Scripture is infallible truth, then Scripture-interprets-Scripture gives you nothing but infallible truth squared. The moment that we are reminded that the whole process revolves around human involvement, the aura of infallibility is dispelled.
Those heavenly saints use Scripture to interpret Scripture, and they choose the verses that we will use to play off against other verses. They’ve chosen this particular means of hermeneutics and further they choose how to go about it. And the choices they make reflect not the eternal will of God but their own thought processes and their understanding of theology which they are trying to push down the common seeker of truth and general follower.
————–
If they want
Romans 5:18 [Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people]
to mean that everyone gets saved whether they believe or not, they interpret it in the light of
1 Timothy 4:10 [That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe]
But if they want it to mean that not everyone gets saved, they interpret it in the light of
John 3:18 [Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son].
————–
Similarly if they want to propose that Holy Spirit are recieved subsequent to belief they can quote
ACTS 8:14-17
14 When the apostles in Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to Samaria.
15 When they arrived, they prayed for the new believers there that they might receive the Holy Spirit,
16 because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.
where as to project baptism of the Spirit occurs simultaneous to belief they’ll quote
1 Corinthians 12:13
12 Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ.
13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free —and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.
OR
Galatians 3:26-27
26 So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith,
27 for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.
————–
In both cases, they’re using Scripture to interpret Scripture. In both cases, they make the choices about how that Scripture ultimately gets interpreted.
Still if someone is compulsive of this ideology, then it cannot be weighed for different verses on different topic with ambigious meaning. Nevertheless the question of authentic/ORIGINAL source cannot be overlooked with they way people have been playing with scriptures. For 2 Peter 3:16 tells us that mishandling the Word of God can be very dangerous. Indeed, mishandling the Word of God is a path to destruction.
************************
Now as for your unanswered 72 FLESHED VIRGINS WHICH OBVIOUSLY YOU ARE NOT GOING TO GET. Yumm….szzz… feel like Domino PIZZA ? I don’t. I’m thinking of those FLESHED ONES AT THE MOMENT.
What all I understand is out of frustration of losing the enjoyment of those virgin with BOLD FLESH all you are left with is bashing and hurling Islam with your absurd sarcastic defamatory questions.
But believe me brother, bashing is easy, and believe me further, nothing is easier than bashing the gospel of porn bible for claiming that women’s vaginas and breasts taste like “wine”, and that sisters can look lustfully at their biological brothers and wish to have sex with them in bed.
NB: All reference of pornography/incestous relation/nudity/lewdness has already been provided in my previous reply.
Before I make my point on paradise, lets have a look at some of the statements.
Genesis 3:17
To Adam he said, “Because you listened to YOUR WIFE and ate from the tree about which I commanded you, ‘You must not eat of it,’ “Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat of it all the days of your life.
Genesis 3:20
Adam named his WIFE Eve, because she would become the mother of all the living.
These verses called Eve a “wife” and a “mother”.
And I’m sure that the christians don’t treat their wives as muslims treat their sisters. Understand what I mean ??
Obviously they don’t spare their sisters, how can they spare their wives. Well… I can’t blame… its in your holy book… Incest and all… And people do get inspired with holiness.
So assuming that Adam and Eve never got kicked out of Heaven, then how would exactly Eve become a “mother”, who already was a “wife” in Heaven? Obviously through love making.
And your LORD is definately not a fool to fashion men and women with penises and vaginas with no purpose.
Genesis 8:17
Bring out every kind of living creature that is with you—the birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the ground—so they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number on it.
Genesis 9:7
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it.
AND I HOPE YOU HAVE NO OBJECTION THAT YOU MULTIPLY THROUGH YOUR GENITALS.
So we understand that having sex in paradise is not a new concept which Christianity is devoid of. So how come these doubtful question arises in the minds of Christians then ?
It is due to their believe that they will be like “spirits” or “Angels” in Heaven without physical bodies. They believe that once a “Christian” dies, then he/she will go and live with GOD Almighty as a spirit in Heaven.
Matthew 22:29-30
29 Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God.
30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven.
Obviously this contradicts the very teachings of their very own Bible about Adam and Eve having physical bodies in Heaven and that they had sex (being a husband and wife).
Coming to the heart sinking statistics of “72” – VIRGINS with BOLD FLESH which you will not get. There is some good news for Christians too.
Mathew 19:28-29
28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a HUNDRED times as much and will inherit eternal life.
Ahh… Now I’m jealous. We are going to get just 72 women (for matyrs only, [the hadith]), but christians are going to get ONE HUNDRED WOMEN.
So I think you must be happy now AND I HOPE YOU WONT COME BACK TO FIGHT SAYING THEY ARE JUST WOMEN, BUT NOT VIRGINS.
One thing I noticed while looking for references was the many translations do not have the word “wife” whereas many others do have “wife”. This raised me a question to look back at whatever oldest manuscripts we have and I found out that the Greek one doesn’t mention about “wife”, but the Latin one does.
You see brother you asked to put aside the issue of authenticity, but this is one irrefutable question which is never going to leave. On all the above replies I have stated whether it be regard to Hosea-Matthew relation, Scripture-Scripture interpretation, Physical desire in paradise… be it anything, the burning question is always going to be..
Where are your ORIGINALS!!
@All
Point taken. It is very clear and proved over and over and over again that Bible in its present form is not the authentic word of God. No point going round and round in the hope that Jeremiah would see the light. This discussion comes back to the very basic question of the authenticity of the Bible, so since the base is corrupted, we go nowhere on the discussion.
“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 ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah’s Will). Ye People of the Book! Why dispute ye about Abraham, when the Law and the Gospel Were not revealed Till after him? Have ye no understanding? Ah! Ye are those who fell to disputing (Even) in matters of which ye had some knowledge! but why dispute ye in matters of which ye have no knowledge? It is Allah Who knows, and ye who know not! Abraham was not a Jew nor yet a Christian; but he was true in Faith, and bowed his will to Allah’s (Which is Islam), and he joined not gods with Allah. Without doubt, among men, the nearest of kin to Abraham, are those who follow him, as are also this Messenger and those who believe: And Allah is the Protector of those who have faith. It is the wish of a section of the People of the Book to lead you astray. But they shall lead astray (Not you), but themselves, and they do not perceive! Ye People of the Book! Why reject ye the Signs of Allah, of which ye are (Yourselves) witnesses? Ye People of the Book! Why do ye clothe Truth with falsehood, and conceal the Truth, while ye have knowledge?” [Surah Ali ‘Imran 3:64-71]
Brother Jeremiah, as admitted by you many times that you DO NOT read the Long Replies (which takes loads of effort and time as we do not want to spread lie and falsehood.. not even to the thickness of the strands of hair) for the answers, it is pretty much clear how serious you are with your claims and questions. You are just here to refute for the sake of refuting with no Valids with you. As such I do not feel obliged to take you seriously at all.
“When the affair is decided Satan will say, “Allah made you a promise, a promise of truth, and I made you a promise but broke my promise. I had no authority over you, except that I called you and you responded to me. Do not, therefore, blame me but blame yourselves. I cannot come to your aid nor you to mine. I reject the way you associated me with Allah before.” The wrong-doers will have a painful punishment.” (Surah Ibrahim 14:22)
I pray to Allah that Jeremiah and many like him would see the light of truth and honestly attempt to read the final and only authentic and original testament of God… the Quran. Ameen!
“O ye who believe! Obey Allah and His Messenger, and turn not away from him when ye hear (him speak). Nor be like those who say, “We hear,” but listen not: For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are the deaf and the dumb, – those who understand not. If Allah had found in them any good. He would indeed have made them listen: (As it is), if He had made them listen, they would but have turned back and declined (Faith).” [Surah Al Anfal 8:20-23]
Hello Brothers ! I am not as well read or eloquent as brother and friend Naved and Jeremiah.
But would still like to make a few points here .
Dear Brother Jeremiah ,
You have mentioned that your questions have their source from both The Quran and Hadees.
1) I would like to make a naive prayer here that not to consider all Hadees as Authentic Hadees and use them to cite stuff which is exactly opposite to the Message of Quran
The body of literature itself (Ahadith corpus) relies on the authenticity of its chain of narrators (isnads).
Any Hadees which runs contrary to the teachings of the Quran, its own theology or wisdom must be instantly rejected.
018.054
“We have explained in detail in this Quran, for the benefit of mankind, every kind of similitude: but man is, in most things, contentious”
However, it is also unreasonable to suggest complete corruption of the Islamic secondary sources. Classical scholars should be fully appreciated in the endeavours they have made to pass on their efforts to succeeding generations of Muslims. However, it is also a mistake to consider them as ‘authorities’ in such a way that their works become the source of guidance themselves and beyond reproach. Classical or modern works should always be understood, appreciated and critically evaluated in the light of the Quran.
If you want to read in details , you can check this link –
http://www.quransmessage.com/articles/hadith%20FM2.htm
2) You say that the Quran calls you Infidel.
I do not accept this claim
Non-Muslims are not always Kaafir (Disbelievers) and the Quran does not refer to Jews and Christians as disbelievers but as ‘Ahl-e-Kitab’ (People of the Book). Even idolaters are not necessarily ‘Kaffirs’
and I quote :
5:69
Surely those who believe and those who are Jews and the Sabians and the Christians whoever believes in Allah and the last day and does good– they shall have no fear nor shall they grieve.
You may check these links for further clarification:
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=1028.0
http://quransmessage.com/articles/people%20of%20the%20book%20FM3.htm
@Hassan
Idolaters are indeed Kaafirs. Allah says: “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers” [Quran, 3:85]
“Say (O Muhammad): “O mankind! Verily, I am sent to you all as the Messenger of Allah” [Quran, 7:158]
Al-Qaadi ‘Ayyaad said: “Hence we regard as a kaafir everyone who follows a religion other than the religion of the Muslims, or who agrees with them, or who has doubts, or who says that their way is correct, even if he appears to be a Muslim and believes in Islam and that every other way is false, he is a kaafir.” [Al-Shifaa’ bi Ta’reef Huqooq al-Mustafaa, 2/1071]
Whoever regards others as intermediaries between him and Allah and calls upon them to ask them to intercede for him, is a kaafir according to scholarly consensus. Whoever does not regard the Mushrikeen as kaafirs or doubts that they are kaafirs or regard their way as correct, is a kaafir according to scholarly consensus.
Whoever says that the Jews and Christians are not kaafirs is disbelieving in the words of Allah: “And their hearts absorbed (the worship of) the calf because of their disbelief” [Quran, 2:93]
Also read Quran 4:46, 4:150-151, 4:155-157, 5:73
“Surely, in disbelief are they who say that Allah is the Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary)…” [Quran, 5:17]
What is there left to say after these clear statements from Allah, may He be exalted? We ask Allah to guide us. May Allah bless our Prophet Muhammad. Ameen!
and I conclude with the following verses from the Quran:
003:064
“Say: “O People of the Book! come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but God; that we associate no partners with him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than God.” If then they turn back, say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah’s Will)”
029:046
“And do not dispute with the followers of the Book except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our Allah and your Allah is One, and to Him do we submit”
Oh I missed the Topic of Hoors – Yes a lot muslims do believe in that interpretation of The Quran and you have Quoted from Tirmidhi .
I strongly object not all Muslims believe in “Hurs” ..
The term ‘Hur’ is one of the most abused and graphically portrayed concepts in Islamic secondary sources. Its restricted interpretation to denote female virgins finds no support in the Quran, or for its male-centric bias.
You may read on :—
http://quransmessage.com/articles/sexy%20female%20virgins%20for%20men%20in%20heaven%20FM3.htm
@Hassan
I do not agree with you brother. The believer must submit to the rulings and decrees of Allah. Allah says: “The only saying of the faithful believers, when they are called to Allah (His Words, the Quran) and His Messenger, to judge between them, is that they say: ‘We hear and we obey.’ And such are the successful (who will live forever in Paradise)” [Quran, 24:51]
If the believer is confused about anything in the rulings of Allah, and he does not know what it means or what the reason behind it is, then he must say as those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: “We believe in it; the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses) are from our Lord” [Quran, 3:7]
“And your Lord is not at all unjust to (His) slaves” [Quran, 41:46]
The description of al-hoor al-‘iyn is mentioned in more than one place in the Quran. 56:22-23, 55:58, 56:35-37
What is proven in the saheeh Sunnah is that the martyr men will have seventy-two hoor ‘iyn. The least of the people of Paradise will have two wives, and some will have more than that.
It was narrated that al-Miqdaam ibn Ma’di Yakrib said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The martyr has six blessings with Allah: he will be forgiven from the first drop of blood shed; he will be shown his place in Paradise; he will be protected from the torment of the grave; he will be safe from the greater terror; a crown of dignity will be placed on his head, one ruby of which is better than this world and everything in it; he will be married to seventy-two wives from al-hoor al-‘iyn; and he will intercede for seventy of his relatives.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1663; Ibn Maajah, 2799; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi. There are more hadiths.. but will keep it short here.
The mistake in people’s conception is that al-hoor al-‘iyn will serve the man. This is not correct, rather the ones who will serve the people of Paradise will be boys of everlasting youth. Allah says: “And round about them will (serve) boys of everlasting youth. If you see them, you would think them scattered pearls” [Quran, 76:19]
Al-hoor al-‘iyn will be wives of the men in Paradise, in addition to their wives from among the people of this world. Allah says: “So (it will be). And We shall marry them to Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes” [Quran, 44:54]
“They will recline (with ease) on thrones arranged in ranks. And We shall marry them to Hoor (fair females) with wide lovely eyes” [Quran, 52:20]
Some people who say it is male-centric… this is a mistake in our understanding and due to state of our hearts. Fairness or justice is to be found in the rulings of shari’ah, not in what a person thinks who does not know shari’ah and its rulings, let alone the reasons behind them.
Allah says: “And We shall remove from their breasts any (mutual) hatred or sense of injury (which they had, if at all, in the life of this world); rivers flowing under them, and they will say: ‘All the praises and thanks be to Allah, Who has guided us to this, and never could we have found guidance, were it not that Allah had guided us! Indeed, the Messengers of our Lord did come with the truth.’ And it will be cried out to them: ‘This is the Paradise which you have inherited for what you used to do’” [Quran, 7:43]
There is nothing but joy and happiness in Paradise; there is no room for hatred and rancour in the hearts of the people of Paradise. Al-hoor al-‘iyn are something which Allah has created to honour the people of Paradise and to increase their delight. Moreover a man will be given the strength of one hundred men for intercourse, so the large number will not have any effect on a woman, and her feelings towards her co-wives and her husband’s concubines will not be like her feelings in this world.
It was narrated that Zayd ibn Arqam said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said to me: “A man in Paradise will be given the strength of one hundred men in eating, drinking, desire and intercourse.” A Jewish man said: “The one who eats and drinks will need to relieve himself.” The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said to him, “The way in which one of them will relieve himself will be by means of sweat which will come out through his pores, and thus the food in his stomach will be digested.”
“Do they then seek the judgement of (the days of) Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allah for a people who have firm Faith?” [Quran, 5:50] Narrated by Ahmad, 18827; classed as saheeh by Ibn Hibbaan, 16/443; and by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 1627.
It was narrated from Anas that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The believer in Paradise will be given such-and-such strength for intercourse.” It was said, “O Messenger of Allah, will he really be able to do that?” He said, “He will be given the strength of a hundred (men).” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2536; classed as saheeh by Ibn Hibbaan, 16/413; and by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 8106.
And Allah knows best.