Print Page | Close Window

Where is the Evidence?

Printed From: IslamiCity.org
Category: Religion - Islam
Forum Name: Interfaith Dialogue
Forum Description: It is for Interfaith dialogue, where Muslims discuss with non-Muslims. We encourge that dialogue takes place in a cordial atmosphere on various topics including religious tolerance.
URL: https://www.islamicity.org/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27751
Printed Date: 29 November 2021 at 12:40am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: Where is the Evidence?
Posted By: neil
Subject: Where is the Evidence?
Date Posted: 29 January 2014 at 2:21am
For years and years, I have heard claims from Islam that the Bible is corrupted.

NOT ONCE have I seen one shred of evidence to persuade me of this claim.

Who can dispel my view that corruption claims are merely Islam's way of trying to prove, conveniently for themselves, that the Quran harmonizes with the Bible when it obviously doesn't.



Replies:
Posted By: NABA
Date Posted: 02 February 2014 at 2:09am
Assalamalecum, in book of psalms ch 104 v 5 he sets the earth firm so that earth never move.does our earth is static??????? We all know earth rotates, in book of ecclesiastes it is mentioned sun rises and sun sets and hurries back again.i want to ask u we all know that sunrise sunset are manmade words does sun actually rise??? Does sun actually set???? In fact in Quran in Surah Al Anbya ch 21 v 33 Allah mentions about all the celestial bodies moving in their proper course.this is one of the several evidences.


Posted By: Abu Ahmad
Date Posted: 02 February 2014 at 9:27am
Here is the short answer right here -

Gal 1:11-12 I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I (Paul) preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

According to Paul & the unbelievers among the Jews Jesus was dead 5-10 years right?   Paul says Jesus wasn't human. So what is Jesus status in christianity at that point? After the Ascension is Jesus 'God the Son' (trinity) or 'God Himself' or remains forever 'Jesus the man'?

Waiting on your reply.


Posted By: Abu Ahmad
Date Posted: 04 February 2014 at 11:31am
Originally posted by Abu Ahmad Abu Ahmad wrote:

So what is Jesus status in christianity at that point? After the Ascension is Jesus 'God the Son' (trinity) or 'God Himself' or remains forever 'Jesus the man'?

Waiting on your reply.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 09 February 2014 at 12:02pm
I saw this thread when it was first posted, so I wrote an article on this subject on my blog:
http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-history-of-bible-and-quran.html -
http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/the-history-of-bible-and-quran.html

In this article, the evidence for the Bible's corruption is presented along with a comparison of the Quran's preservation.  People like Neil need to look at the evidence instead of their own a priori assumptions.


-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: Abu Ahmad
Date Posted: 10 February 2014 at 12:10am
Originally posted by Raytrek Raytrek wrote:



I would presume, from what I have seen, that Christians actually have more in common with Muslims than Jews, but Christian teachings are too twisted by time for most to see.


Christians are described by ALLAH as astray. Whereas Jews are under His wrath.

You know the bible beliefs are based on the letters of Paul (christ crucified)?

If you notice there is a never ending argument "Did Jesus really say he is God etc?"   There is nothing there except shadowy phrases. Yet the christians say it is proof undeniable.

Where as Paul the Deceiver is shouting from the rooftops that his gospel is direct revelation from God in heaven. And he is constantly being guided by revelation from God.

This is pure Prophethood stuff. Yet the christians deny he is a prophet. Why?

Because once you open your eyes and see Paul is a prophet due to on-going revelation you hear the voice of Jesus.

Beware the False prophet. Wolves in sheeps' clothing. This is christianity "God loves everyone etc."

Bad fruit - christians worship another god - Jesus. Totally against the ten commandments.

The false prophet is NOT Mohammad PBBUH. We openly are raging lions charged with establishing the Kingdom of God on earth by jihad - not wolves in sheeps clothing. And we worship the God of the prophets (as per the ten Commandments).

In'sha'Allah (God willing) I'll post up the warnings of Jesus about Paul and his priests and followers. Plenty of all he says is a direct warning about Paul and his fairytale 'christ crucified' religion.


Posted By: 1914
Date Posted: 10 February 2014 at 9:25am

Originally posted by neil neil wrote:

For years and years, I have heard claims from Islam that the Bible is corrupted.

NOT ONCE have I seen one shred of evidence to persuade me of this claim.

I agree with you here, if anything Muslims tend to misunderstand, misinterpreted or cancel out the verses much like Ahmed Deedat, (a Muslim debater) when they don’t relate or agree with the Quran, I’ll show you some examples in a minute. Deedat on the other hand receive most of his information on the Bible from questionable sources. Here is a quote published from the Indian Views 11/6/57, said Deedat:   

"I have learnt from Mr Joseph Perdu more about ISLAM than I had learnt in the previous 38 years of my life." - INDIAN VIEWS 6/11/57

Deedat was also in an unholy alliance with Dr Mall of the Arabic Study Circle who (Dr Mall) continued to organize Joseph Perdu's lectures among Muslim's in Durban even after Joseph Pedru told Advocate Bawa in the presence of Dr Mall and Pr Wahhajur Rasul that "there was nothing in the Qur'an to show that Prophet Mohammad was the LAST PROPHET." Dr Mall remained silent all the time when Perdu said this. Mr Perdu, in his attempt to sow the seeds of Bahaism among Muslim intellectuals first, further told Advocate Bawa that "ISLAM IS NO MORE" ... ISLAM CAME FOR ONLY A THOUSAND (1000) YEARS". Subsequently Advocate I.M. Bawa issued a Pamphlet against Joseph Perdu and we reproduce the relevant part of Advocate Bawa's pamphlet for the benefit of our readers." (M.D. p.49-50) Then there is Rashad Khalifa, Deedat’s great servant of Islam who now says there are false verses in Surah 9 of the Quran and guess what? Deedat agreed!

"I have in all humility taken the liberty of bringing the scientific findings of that great servant of Islam - Dr Rashad Khalifa Ph.D., in my own humble way... In it I have freely utilised Dr Rashad Khalifa's data and in places I have used his actual eloquent words verbatim for lack of better expression." (Deedat in his booklet - "Al-Qur'an - the Ultimate Miracle"). Ahmad Deedat thus became an accomplice of Rashad Khalifa by aiding and abetting him in his avowed aim to attack the integrity of the Holy Qur'an." (M.D. p.25-26)

Here is another reliable source:

"THE MAJLIS NEWSPAPER published from Port Elisabeth by Maulavi Sadak Desai condemns Deedat in no uncertain terms regarding Deedat's Islamic knowledge, by saying: Firstly, it is essential to state and stress that Mr Deedat is not a man of Islamic learning. He is not qualified to speak on matters pertaining to the Shariah. What is Fardh upon Mr Deedat is the acquisition of the basic rules pertaining to Wudhu, Salaat, Saum, etc. So that he may be in position to discharge his daily Islamic duties. But, Islamic law is not his avenue. Mr Deedat is absolutely confused by claiming that "there is no prohibition against women attending mosque" and "this is not traditionally done". His confusion is the product of his stark ignorance of the Shariah.

These are just a few, there are many, many more. Why would anyone trust the words of a dubious person such as Deedat? You, if you have a wicked agenda.

Here are some examples below from respective members of Islam who seem to revere at one time or another Deedat’s work from what I observed.

Originally posted by NABA NABA wrote:

in book of psalms ch 104 v 5 he sets the earth firm so that earth never move.does our earth is static??????? We all know earth rotates

Since it’s billions of years in existence has the earth ever moved from one location to another, you tell me? Obviously its referring to its permanence not it’s immobility. You would have to look at the original Hebrew text “oh lam” = time indefinite/many years and ‘adh = forever/ everlastingness, eternity, for-ever. This is one out of hundreds and hundreds of verses that Muslims misconstrue and then blame God’s inspired word as being corrupt.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

I saw this thread when it was first posted, so I wrote an article on this subject on my blog:

Another problem with the Muslims faith as per this blog is that they feel that the church counsel of the Roman Catholic (1st mistake ) or historians like Josephus and others (2nd mistake) validate the integrity or canonicity of the inspired word of God, they do not. By the direction of God’s Holy Spirit the traditional Jews, Jesus and the first century Judo-Christians had already accepted them. Also, did the church counsel preserve the ‘Dead Sea Scrolls?’ No. The complete canon of the Hebrew scriptures preceded the Christian church and the church was established on them. (How the church used them is a different story) The eight Jewish writers of the remaining books of the complete Holy Scriptures always referred to and quoted from those Hebrew Scriptures, never from the apocryphal books added to the Greek Septuagint. In short, the deciding of what was the canon or authoritative catalogue of the genuine inspired Hebrew Scriptures was not left to the Christian church as your blog suggests. The Great Synagogue of Jerusalem fixed this canon in the days of Jewish Governor Nehemiah in the fifth century B.C. or shortly afterward. Read it for yourselves here at Nehemiah 10:1-28

The preservation of the Holy Bible is to be credited to no religious organization of the church of Rome. It was accepted by Christ Jesus and the early, early Christian congregation. Luke 24:44 He then said to them: “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was yet with you that all the things written about me in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets and Psalms must be fulfilled.”

As far as evidence of the Bible’s corruption, your blog presented none. The books that do not appear in the canon obviously were not produced under inspiration so who said they were ever lost? They were just historical writings available back in the period when the prophet Jeremiah and Ezra wrote the accounts that we have in the Bible. One Bible encyclopedia suggests that the contents of those books may have been “the familiar oral repertoire of professional singers in ancient Israel who preserved Israel’s epic and lyric traditions.” Unfortunately you assume just because certain books were mentioned in the Bible as usable sources that they too were inspired. They were not, they were historical writings/sources that people back then were very much aware of. So to compare the preservation of the Bible/biblia which consists of 66 little books, written over a time period of 1,600 years and starching back nearly 6,000 years to the Koran written less than 1,400 years ago and written over a time period of 23 years and about one fourth as large as the Bible, there is no comparison, at ALL. The Dead Sea Scroll and other sources can attest to that.

Also, before the end of the second century, there is universal acceptance of the four Gospels, Acts, and 12 of the apostle Paul’s letters. Only a few of the smaller writings were doubted in certain areas because such writings were limited in their initial circulation and took longer to become accepted as canonical. It was not until critics like Marcion came along in the middle of the second century C.E. that an issue arose as to which books Christians should accept.

Therefore, your thesis on the Tanakh and New Testament are totally inaccurate and needs to be recanted or retracted. And your archives and posts from what I’ve seen are seriously flowed with conjectural statements and allegations. For instance, you insist that Ishmael was not a teenager when indeed he was although not strong as one and needed to be carried. In fact, they both gave out according to the account.

But, the Hebrew word ye′ledh here rendered “child” also means “young man” and is so translated at Genesis 4:23 . It was said of the youth Joseph (17 at the time) that he was sold into slavery over Reuben’s protest, “Do not sin against the child [bai·ye′ledh].” Lamech likewise spoke of “a young man [ye′ledh]” as having wounded him at Genesis 42:22

So, Isaac was indeed born and was the primary attention of Abraham’s sacrifice that Muslims vehemently tries to deny, not Hagar. He was the ‘only son’ of Sarah as was promised her when Hagar was dismissed. Genesis 17:16, 19, 21   I will bless her and also give you a son by her; I will bless her and she will become nations; kings of peoples will come from her.” 19 To this God said: “Your wife Sarah will definitely bear you a son, and you must name him Isaac. And I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant to his offspring after him. 21 However, I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this appointed time next year.”

As I mentioned at the beginning, Muslims tend to misunderstand, misinterpreted and cancel out the verses much like Ahmed Deedat (a Muslim debater) when they don’t relate or agree with the Quran. Then they say the Bible has been tampered with, how bias and unreasonable is that? Yet, they have no documented proof of this alleged tampering. Just "my Koran" doesn't say that. As his blog shows they invent scenarios and allegations regarding the scriptures because they don’t match up with the Koran. Why would it match up? The Koran is not part of the Holy Scriptures. I’ve just presented several examples of truth and facts to prove it.



Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 10 February 2014 at 12:54pm
Originally posted by Abu Ahmad Abu Ahmad wrote:

[QUOTE=Abu Ahmad] So what is Jesus status in christianity at that point? After the Ascension is Jesus 'God the Son' (trinity) or 'God Himself' or remains forever 'Jesus the man'?

Waiting on your reply.

Greetings Abu Ahmad,

I think we do not try to answer this... we need not to answer as long as we know the Word. 
We need only to know the Word revealed through Yshwe was, and is, the Divine Word... the things which Yshwe told to us through His disciples,
and those things are yet not fully clear... they will become clear only when we meet our Maker...
and we have the scripture which tells us;
      "for we see now, only as in a glass darkly, but then, we will know in full."
We wait for that day, and we believe in the Divinity of Yshwe, even if it is beyond our current ability to understand fully.  We know we do not have the mind, the breadth, and the width of the Creator...
but we do have the words of Yshwe.

Salaam and blessings,
Caringheart


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: honeto
Date Posted: 11 February 2014 at 6:32pm
Originally posted by neil neil wrote:

For years and years, I have heard claims from Islam that the Bible is corrupted.

NOT ONCE have I seen one shred of evidence to persuade me of this claim.

Who can dispel my view that corruption claims are merely Islam's way of trying to prove, conveniently for themselves, that the Quran harmonizes with the Bible when it obviously doesn't.


Peace,
this subject has been studied in depth several times over, you can do a subject search and find a lot of debate about it.
For me it is simple:
On the three most important aspects, God, Jesus, and Salvation, the Bible is inconsistent. And if you know your Bible you know exactly what I mean.
Christians like you say, God is a trinity. Father, son and the holy ghost. Surprisingly, this concept is inconsistent with the belief taught by all the previous prophets in the old Testament.
Jesus (peace be upon him)is believed to be God in a trinity by most Christians. The Bible on the other hand shows that Jesus prayed, cried and called for help to God. Only God does not pray to, call or cry for help.
Christians say Jesus died for their sins, and some part of the Bible that Jesus paid for the salvation of not just his followers but for all the world. That contradict the same Bible who quotes Jesus himself saying that every idle word that a man speaks he will give an account of it on the judgement day. Also he is quoted to say that if your hand commits a sin cut it off so your whole body would not be thrown in to the hell fire.
This is just a superficial but very important evidence of the current state of the Bible. And it is still going through changes.
I assume you are advance in your study of the scripture to know exact quotes I am talking about, otherwise let me know and I will go over each.
Hasan

-------------
The friends of God will certainly have nothing to fear, nor will they be grieved. Al Quran 10:62



Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 11 February 2014 at 7:55pm
Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

For instance, you insist that Ishmael was not a teenager when indeed he was although not strong as one and needed to be carried. In fact, they both gave out according to the account.

But, the Hebrew word ye′ledh here rendered “child” also means “young man” and is so translated at Genesis 4:23 . It was said of the youth Joseph (17 at the time) that he was sold into slavery over Reuben’s protest, “Do not sin against the child [bai·ye′ledh].” Lamech likewise spoke of “a young man [ye′ledh]” as having wounded him at Genesis 42:22

So, Isaac was indeed born and was the primary attention of Abraham’s sacrifice that Muslims vehemently tries to deny, not Hagar. He was the ‘only son’ of Sarah as was promised her when Hagar was dismissed. Genesis 17:16, 19, 21   I will bless her and also give you a son by her; I will bless her and she will become nations; kings of peoples will come from her.” 19 To this God said: “Your wife Sarah will definitely bear you a son, and you must name him Isaac. And I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant to his offspring after him. 21 However, I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this appointed time next year.”


I have posted a response to your claims on my blog:

http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical.html - http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical.html

Your attempted refutation of my original article suffers from serious flaws which I address in my response. 

I am also working on a response to your claims about the Biblical canon and its alleged preservation.



-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 12 February 2014 at 8:47pm
Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

Another problem with the Muslims faith as per this blog is that they feel that the church counsel of the Roman Catholic (1st mistake ) or historians like Josephus and others (2nd mistake) validate the integrity or canonicity of the inspired word of God, they do not. By the direction of God’s Holy Spirit the traditional Jews, Jesus and the first century Judo-Christians had already accepted them. Also, did the church counsel preserve the ‘Dead Sea Scrolls?’ No. The complete canon of the Hebrew scriptures preceded the Christian church and the church was established on them. (How the church used them is a different story) The eight Jewish writers of the remaining books of the complete Holy Scriptures always referred to and quoted from those Hebrew Scriptures, never from the apocryphal books added to the Greek Septuagint. In short, the deciding of what was the canon or authoritative catalogue of the genuine inspired Hebrew Scriptures was not left to the Christian church as your blog suggests. The Great Synagogue of Jerusalem fixed this canon in the days of Jewish Governor Nehemiah in the fifth century B.C. or shortly afterward. Read it for yourselves here at Nehemiah 10:1-28

The preservation of the Holy Bible is to be credited to no religious organization of the church of Rome. It was accepted by Christ Jesus and the early, early Christian congregation. Luke 24:44 He then said to them: “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was yet with you that all the things written about me in the Law of Moses and in the Prophets and Psalms must be fulfilled.”

As far as evidence of the Bible’s corruption, your blog presented none. The books that do not appear in the canon obviously were not produced under inspiration so who said they were ever lost? They were just historical writings available back in the period when the prophet Jeremiah and Ezra wrote the accounts that we have in the Bible. One Bible encyclopedia suggests that the contents of those books may have been “the familiar oral repertoire of professional singers in ancient Israel who preserved Israel’s epic and lyric traditions.” Unfortunately you assume just because certain books were mentioned in the Bible as usable sources that they too were inspired. They were not, they were historical writings/sources that people back then were very much aware of. So to compare the preservation of the Bible/biblia which consists of 66 little books, written over a time period of 1,600 years and starching back nearly 6,000 years to the Koran written less than 1,400 years ago and written over a time period of 23 years and about one fourth as large as the Bible, there is no comparison, at ALL. The Dead Sea Scroll and other sources can attest to that.

Also, before the end of the second century, there is universal acceptance of the four Gospels, Acts, and 12 of the apostle Paul’s letters. Only a few of the smaller writings were doubted in certain areas because such writings were limited in their initial circulation and took longer to become accepted as canonical. It was not until critics like Marcion came along in the middle of the second century C.E. that an issue arose as to which books Christians should accept.

Therefore, your thesis on the Tanakh and New Testament are totally inaccurate and needs to be recanted or retracted. And your archives and posts from what I’ve seen are seriously flowed with conjectural statements and allegations.


Here is my response to your claims about the Tanakh and New Testament:

http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-on-history-of.html - http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-on-history-of.html




-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: 1914
Date Posted: 15 February 2014 at 10:26pm

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

 "...you insist that Ishmael was not a teenager when indeed he was although not strong as one and needed to be carried. In fact, they both gave out according to the account." 

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Our esteemed Christian detractor is resorting to the same tactics by making hollow assertions with no supporting evidence.

What tactics? What is there to figure out, they were in the wilderness of Be′er-she′ba, lost their way, ran out of water and fell out from exhaustion. Hellooo! Let us be reasonable, okay.

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

"But, the Hebrew word ye′ledh here rendered “child” also means “young man” and is so translated at Genesis 4:23."

Emphases on the word ye’ledh.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

the word referred to a very young child, or even an infant,

Is that so? It is clear you must not understand/read Hebrew.

 

  • #3206.
  • יֶלֶד
  • yeled (409b); from 3205; child, son, boy, youth:—
  • NASB - boy(7), boys(3), child(32), child's(2), children(27), lad(2), lads(1), young(3), young men(6), youths(5).

So, indeed the Hebrew word ye′ledh can be used for child, young man or even youth as I said http://lexiconcordance.com/hebrew/3206.html - ">  solid proof right here.

Again, verses that were interpreted wrongly by Muslims and then blame the Bible as being corrupt/tampered. The child indeed is Isaac, the one of choice!

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

Genesis 17:16, 19, 21   I will bless her and also give you a son by her; I will bless her and she will become nations; kings of peoples will come from her.” 19 To this God said: “Your wife Sarah will definitely bear you a son, and you must name him Isaac. And I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant to his offspring after him. 21 However, I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this appointed time next year.”

 





Posted By: iec786
Date Posted: 17 February 2014 at 12:34pm
Originally posted by neil neil wrote:

For years and years, I have heard claims from Islam that the Bible is corrupted.

NOT ONCE have I seen one shred of evidence to persuade me of this claim.

Who can dispel my view that corruption claims are merely Islam's way of trying to prove, conveniently for themselves, that the Quran harmonizes with the Bible when it obviously doesn't.




My friend for years i have been posting and not one Christian has been able to refute that the Bible is not the word of God and that it has been corrupted beyond repair.I stand by that statement.If you are ready to start a dialog show yourself up.I notice you put up a topic and then hide behind your keyboard.Come forward my boy let us talk man don't hide.


Posted By: 1914
Date Posted: 17 February 2014 at 5:39pm

Other verses that are constantly misapplied by Muslims and then blame the Bible as being corrupted or tampered with.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Here we see that our Christian friend did not explain anything but instead again resorted to unsupported assertions 

Well, let see if yet another accusation is true on a Muslims part.

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

He was the ‘only son’ of Sarah as was promised her when Hagar was dismissed. Genesis 17:16, 19, 21

Supported Chapter and verse identified and explain but you also need to do your reading and gather the whole text not part of a text. In Genesis 18:10 it explains. Look! Sarah your wife will have a son.” Now Sarah was listening at the tent entrance, and it was behind the man.

#1 Sarah, not Hagar was Abraham’s wife. #2 The promise was made to them as a married couple. #3 Isaac was the “only” son of Abraham with Sarah. #4 The covenant which islamispeace does not deny was “only” with Isaac, not Ishmael. #5 It was after Hagar and Ishmael was dismissed from Abraham’s household the promise and or covenant was made, who at that time the “only” son of Abraham and Sarah was Isaac.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

  The question was why it referred to Isaac as Abraham’s “only” son when Ishmael was also his son.  The Christian did not answer this question.

The scriptures never said Ishmael was Abraham’s only son either, it’s when and who the promise was made to and when he said it. I gave you five logical scenarios in understanding the explanation of “only” son, why not accept it? Unless, you’re trying to manipulate and change the meaning of the scriptures to support your Quran. Which is what Muslims like Deedat and others have been doing for centuries as I’ve said.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

  We pointed out in the article that God clearly referred to Ishmael as Abraham’s son (or offspring) in Genesis 21:13, so why would He then refer to Isaac as the “only” son later on?  It is a contradiction, plain and simple.

Look at the scripture and when the statement was made, Genesis 22:2  “Take, please, your son, your only son whom you so love, Isaac” Ishmael and Hagar was no longer part of the family and had left never to return. That is a major reason why it would not have been Ishmael that was to be sacrificed as Muslims suggests, Ishmael was no longer around. In fact, when Ishmael perished, he was not even buried along with Abraham and his family. Here, from this point on he is rightly called “only son”

This should direct the reader’s attention to point #5. Another failed castration attempt on God’s Holy Word, the Bible. But it does shows the contradictions of the Quran when compared with the Bible. Muslims cannot even prove to themselves that Ishmael was the child of sacrifice, why? Because it is not even written in the Quran!!! Why isn't it in your Koran? Clearly, Muhammad was aware. The Quran however, does point to Isaac. I would be happy to show you if you’re truly interested.

So, I gave you not one, not two points but FIVE points why “only son” was appropriately used in regards to Isaac. And that Muhammad himself had no problem with it. Will islamispeace false and inaccurate post be removed from his site? Time will tell but truth will prevail.

1914'



Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 17 February 2014 at 6:46pm
Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

 "...you insist that Ishmael was not a teenager when indeed he was although not strong as one and needed to be carried. In fact, they both gave out according to the account." 

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Our esteemed Christian detractor is resorting to the same tactics by making hollow assertions with no supporting evidence.

What tactics? What is there to figure out, they were in the wilderness of Be′er-she′ba, lost their way, ran out of water and fell out from exhaustion. Hellooo! Let us be reasonable, okay.

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

"But, the Hebrew word ye′ledh here rendered “child” also means “young man” and is so translated at Genesis 4:23."

Emphases on the word ye’ledh.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

the word referred to a very young child, or even an infant,

Is that so? It is clear you must not understand/read Hebrew.

 

  • #3206.
  • יֶלֶד
  • yeled (409b); from 3205; child, son, boy, youth:—
  • NASB - boy(7), boys(3), child(32), child's(2), children(27), lad(2), lads(1), young(3), young men(6), youths(5).

So, indeed the Hebrew word ye′ledh can be used for child, young man or even youth as I said http://lexiconcordance.com/hebrew/3206.html - ">  solid proof right here.

Again, verses that were interpreted wrongly by Muslims and then blame the Bible as being corrupt/tampered. The child indeed is Isaac, the one of choice!

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

Genesis 17:16, 19, 21   I will bless her and also give you a son by her; I will bless her and she will become nations; kings of peoples will come from her.” 19 To this God said: “Your wife Sarah will definitely bear you a son, and you must name him Isaac. And I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant to his offspring after him. 21 However, I will establish my covenant with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this appointed time next year.”

 




Here is my response:

http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical_17.html - http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical_17.html



-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 19 February 2014 at 8:38pm
Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

Other verses that are constantly misapplied by Muslims and then blame the Bible as being corrupted or tampered with.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

Here we see that our Christian friend did not explain anything but instead again resorted to unsupported assertions 

Well, let see if yet another accusation is true on a Muslims part.

Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

He was the ‘only son’ of Sarah as was promised her when Hagar was dismissed. Genesis 17:16, 19, 21

Supported Chapter and verse identified and explain but you also need to do your reading and gather the whole text not part of a text. In Genesis 18:10 it explains. Look! Sarah your wife will have a son.” Now Sarah was listening at the tent entrance, and it was behind the man.

#1 Sarah, not Hagar was Abraham’s wife. #2 The promise was made to them as a married couple. #3 Isaac was the “only” son of Abraham with Sarah. #4 The covenant which islamispeace does not deny was “only” with Isaac, not Ishmael. #5 It was after Hagar and Ishmael was dismissed from Abraham’s household the promise and or covenant was made, who at that time the “only” son of Abraham and Sarah was Isaac.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

  The question was why it referred to Isaac as Abraham’s “only” son when Ishmael was also his son.  The Christian did not answer this question.

The scriptures never said Ishmael was Abraham’s only son either, it’s when and who the promise was made to and when he said it. I gave you five logical scenarios in understanding the explanation of “only” son, why not accept it? Unless, you’re trying to manipulate and change the meaning of the scriptures to support your Quran. Which is what Muslims like Deedat and others have been doing for centuries as I’ve said.

Originally posted by islamispeace islamispeace wrote:

  We pointed out in the article that God clearly referred to Ishmael as Abraham’s son (or offspring) in Genesis 21:13, so why would He then refer to Isaac as the “only” son later on?  It is a contradiction, plain and simple.

Look at the scripture and when the statement was made, Genesis 22:2  “Take, please, your son, your only son whom you so love, Isaac” Ishmael and Hagar was no longer part of the family and had left never to return. That is a major reason why it would not have been Ishmael that was to be sacrificed as Muslims suggests, Ishmael was no longer around. In fact, when Ishmael perished, he was not even buried along with Abraham and his family. Here, from this point on he is rightly called “only son”

This should direct the reader’s attention to point #5. Another failed castration attempt on God’s Holy Word, the Bible. But it does shows the contradictions of the Quran when compared with the Bible. Muslims cannot even prove to themselves that Ishmael was the child of sacrifice, why? Because it is not even written in the Quran!!! Why isn't it in your Koran? Clearly, Muhammad was aware. The Quran however, does point to Isaac. I would be happy to show you if you’re truly interested.

So, I gave you not one, not two points but FIVE points why “only son” was appropriately used in regards to Isaac. And that Muhammad himself had no problem with it. Will islamispeace false and inaccurate post be removed from his site? Time will tell but truth will prevail.

1914'



My response:

http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical_19.html - http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical_19.html


-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 22 February 2014 at 11:09am
Any response from 1914?  You haven't visited since 2/17.

-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: 1914
Date Posted: 23 February 2014 at 8:58pm

Here is a perfect example of the Ahmed Deedat (A Muslim Debater) syndrome. That is, to discredit the Bible if it is not in harmony with the Koran and to take things out of context.  The subject at hand is whether the term “only son” was appropriately used when God used it in reference to Isaac, the only son of Abraham and Sarah. A term in which Muslims vehemently need to deny tooth and nail and I’ll explain why later. First let me say, Christians believe whole heartedly that the Bible is the inspired word of God and that it has been preserved by God over the centuries. Muslims feel that the Koran was transmitted to Muhammad through an angel, much later identified as Gabriel and that it too has been preserved by Allah.

 

However, to believe Muhammad, one would need to accept Ishmael. Why? Because Muslims claim that Muhammad is a descendant of Ishmael and that God’s promise to Ishmael was that he would become a nation. But, little do they know that’s all he would become, a nation of people, nothing more, nothing less. Not a nation of Kings and certainly not of prophets. So for a Muslim, Ishmael is the key to Abraham which the connection to Muhammad is allegedly made, although Muhammad himself never claimed to be a descendant of Ishmael. But, for argument sake let’s say that he was, Ishmael and other descendants of Abraham would never be an heir to the throne of David, why? Because the promise of a Kingdom was made only to Isaac and his line of descendants which the Messiah Jesus Christ would come through. So you can see why it’s imperative that Muslims claim Ishmael as the “only child” of sacrifice and not Isaac. Muslims thus say it was Ishmael that was about to be offered up as a sacrifice and not Isaac, another account that is taken out of context by the Deedat syndrome in order to fit the Koran’s account of Abraham and Hagar rather than Abraham and Sarah. How did Isaac come to be Abraham’s and Sarah ‘only son?’ I’m getting to it but you must read it in its full context!  

 

Genesis 21:10 reads So she said to Abraham: “Drive out this slave girl and her son, for the son of this slave girl is not going to be an heir along with my son, with Isaac!”

Right from the start Ishmael displayed bad traits and had to be driven away. Was her request backed up by the God of Abraham? Yes!

Genesis 21:12 Then God said to Abraham: “Do not be displeased by what Sarah is saying to you about the boy and about your slave girl. Listen to her, for what will be called your offspring/seed will be through Isaac. So the Bible’s view is that Abraham’s seed for blessing all mankind would come through Isaac, not Ishmael.

 

 

But why did God favor Sarah and not Hagar?

Genesis 17:19 To this God said: “Sarah your wife is indeed bearing you a son, and you must call his name Isaac. And I will establish my covenant with him for a covenant to time indefinite to his seed after him. God himself laid down the LAW for an everlasting covenant with Sarah’s son Isaac! What about Ishmael? As promised he would still be fruitful and become a nation of people.

Genesis 17:20 But as regards Ish′ma·el I have heard you. Look! I will bless him and will make him fruitful and will multiply him very, very much.

But again, God is laying down the LAW for Israel and not for Islam by repeating it.

Genesis 17:21 However, my covenant I shall establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this appointed time next year.

Although this fact is plain and simple and repeated by Abraham’s God over and over again, it cannot be true according to Muslims, why? Because the covenant is with Isaac and not with Ishmael, The Ahmed Deedat syndrome in effect.

 

Why in Genesis 22:2 did God say “Take, please, your son, your only son?” Because, here, Isaac was the only son of Sarah and the only son remaining in Abraham’s household at the time that God spoke these words. Qur’an translator Ali admits that “Muslim tradition . . . is not unanimous on this point. Even Some Moslem writers agree with the Biblical account that Isaac was the prospective sacrifice. The Qur’an itself highlights another aspect of Jesus’ activity that further helps us to identify him as the promised seed through whom blessings would come to mankind. At Sura 5:113 we read: “Then will God say: ‘O Jesus the son of Mary! . . . thou healest those born blind, and the lepers, by My [God’s] leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. . . . thou didst show them [the Israelites] the Clear Signs.’”

 

No wonder the Koran never specifies the boy by name in Sura 37:101, 102, it would have caused more of a division within Islam. It would have been a perfect opportunity to mention Ishmael by name in this account but it doesn’t. It is obvious that Muslims so badly need Ishmael and his offspring to claim “heir” to the everlasting covenant that was promised to Isaac and his offspring. This is key in order for Muslims to claim Muhammad as an descendant/messenger/prophet of Ishmael although Muhammad himself never made the claim. But, as you can see it was after Ishmael and Hagar was dismissed from the scene all together the scriptures appropriately used the term ‘only son’ not before they were dismissed as islamispeace link alleges. It also must be emphasized that the Bible mentions Isaac by name several times but the Koran leaves out Ishmael name all together in regards to which son Abraham was going to sacrifice.

 

To sum this up, the Koran or Muhammad never, ever mentions Ishmael as the [child] of sacrifice. And the Koran and Muhammad never, ever mention himself as a descendant of Ishmael. Why would the Koran and Muhammad leave these very important items out, which would confirm and validate Islam’s messenger Muhammad? Simply, because he was not an heir to an everlasting covenant, only Isaac, the ‘only’ son of Abraham and Sarah.



Posted By: NABA
Date Posted: 25 February 2014 at 8:16am
Assalamalecum 1914 y don't u quote ch 2 v 136 and ch 3 v 84, Allah says say "o believers believe in whatever we have given to Abraham and Ischmael and Isaac and jacob and to moses and aron and to all prophets and never make divisions among them"y dont u quote ch 37 v 100 in which prophey Ibrahim (pbuh) asks for a son to Allah then in the next verses story of sacrifice continues.that son was Ischmael (pbuh)


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 25 February 2014 at 8:33pm
Originally posted by 1914 1914 wrote:

Here is a perfect example of the Ahmed Deedat (A Muslim Debater) syndrome. That is, to discredit the Bible if it is not in harmony with the Koran and to take things out of context.  The subject at hand is whether the term “only son” was appropriately used when God used it in reference to Isaac, the only son of Abraham and Sarah. A term in which Muslims vehemently need to deny tooth and nail and I’ll explain why later. First let me say, Christians believe whole heartedly that the Bible is the inspired word of God and that it has been preserved by God over the centuries. Muslims feel that the Koran was transmitted to Muhammad through an angel, much later identified as Gabriel and that it too has been preserved by Allah.

 

However, to believe Muhammad, one would need to accept Ishmael. Why? Because Muslims claim that Muhammad is a descendant of Ishmael and that God’s promise to Ishmael was that he would become a nation. But, little do they know that’s all he would become, a nation of people, nothing more, nothing less. Not a nation of Kings and certainly not of prophets. So for a Muslim, Ishmael is the key to Abraham which the connection to Muhammad is allegedly made, although Muhammad himself never claimed to be a descendant of Ishmael. But, for argument sake let’s say that he was, Ishmael and other descendants of Abraham would never be an heir to the throne of David, why? Because the promise of a Kingdom was made only to Isaac and his line of descendants which the Messiah Jesus Christ would come through. So you can see why it’s imperative that Muslims claim Ishmael as the “only child” of sacrifice and not Isaac. Muslims thus say it was Ishmael that was about to be offered up as a sacrifice and not Isaac, another account that is taken out of context by the Deedat syndrome in order to fit the Koran’s account of Abraham and Hagar rather than Abraham and Sarah. How did Isaac come to be Abraham’s and Sarah ‘only son?’ I’m getting to it but you must read it in its full context!  

 

Genesis 21:10 reads So she said to Abraham: “Drive out this slave girl and her son, for the son of this slave girl is not going to be an heir along with my son, with Isaac!”

Right from the start Ishmael displayed bad traits and had to be driven away. Was her request backed up by the God of Abraham? Yes!

Genesis 21:12 Then God said to Abraham: “Do not be displeased by what Sarah is saying to you about the boy and about your slave girl. Listen to her, for what will be called your offspring/seed will be through Isaac. So the Bible’s view is that Abraham’s seed for blessing all mankind would come through Isaac, not Ishmael.

 

 

But why did God favor Sarah and not Hagar?

Genesis 17:19 To this God said: “Sarah your wife is indeed bearing you a son, and you must call his name Isaac. And I will establish my covenant with him for a covenant to time indefinite to his seed after him. God himself laid down the LAW for an everlasting covenant with Sarah’s son Isaac! What about Ishmael? As promised he would still be fruitful and become a nation of people.

Genesis 17:20 But as regards Ish′ma·el I have heard you. Look! I will bless him and will make him fruitful and will multiply him very, very much.

But again, God is laying down the LAW for Israel and not for Islam by repeating it.

Genesis 17:21 However, my covenant I shall establish with Isaac, whom Sarah will bear to you at this appointed time next year.

Although this fact is plain and simple and repeated by Abraham’s God over and over again, it cannot be true according to Muslims, why? Because the covenant is with Isaac and not with Ishmael, The Ahmed Deedat syndrome in effect.

 

Why in Genesis 22:2 did God say “Take, please, your son, your only son?” Because, here, Isaac was the only son of Sarah and the only son remaining in Abraham’s household at the time that God spoke these words. Qur’an translator Ali admits that “Muslim tradition . . . is not unanimous on this point. Even Some Moslem writers agree with the Biblical account that Isaac was the prospective sacrifice. The Qur’an itself highlights another aspect of Jesus’ activity that further helps us to identify him as the promised seed through whom blessings would come to mankind. At Sura 5:113 we read: “Then will God say: ‘O Jesus the son of Mary! . . . thou healest those born blind, and the lepers, by My [God’s] leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. . . . thou didst show them [the Israelites] the Clear Signs.’”

 

No wonder the Koran never specifies the boy by name in Sura 37:101, 102, it would have caused more of a division within Islam. It would have been a perfect opportunity to mention Ishmael by name in this account but it doesn’t. It is obvious that Muslims so badly need Ishmael and his offspring to claim “heir” to the everlasting covenant that was promised to Isaac and his offspring. This is key in order for Muslims to claim Muhammad as an descendant/messenger/prophet of Ishmael although Muhammad himself never made the claim. But, as you can see it was after Ishmael and Hagar was dismissed from the scene all together the scriptures appropriately used the term ‘only son’ not before they were dismissed as islamispeace link alleges. It also must be emphasized that the Bible mentions Isaac by name several times but the Koran leaves out Ishmael name all together in regards to which son Abraham was going to sacrifice.

 

To sum this up, the Koran or Muhammad never, ever mentions Ishmael as the [child] of sacrifice. And the Koran and Muhammad never, ever mention himself as a descendant of Ishmael. Why would the Koran and Muhammad leave these very important items out, which would confirm and validate Islam’s messenger Muhammad? Simply, because he was not an heir to an everlasting covenant, only Isaac, the ‘only’ son of Abraham and Sarah.



My response:

http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical_25.html - http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/02/response-to-christian-about-biblical_25.html


-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: iec786
Date Posted: 26 February 2014 at 10:31pm
Prophet Ismail (A.S)
Oct 6th, 2013 by Ahmed.
Prophet Ismail (a.s) was the son of Ibrahim (a.s) and Hajar. One day Ibrahim (a.s) took his baby son and wife (Hajar) to the site where Ka’ba can be found today. He gave them some dates and water and started to leave. As Ibrahim (a.s) walked away, Hajar followed and asked why they were being left in this empty place. She understood from his silence that Allah had commanded him to do this. Finally, she asked if Allah had ordered him to do this and he replied that it was so. Upon hearing this, she accepted Allah’s will and returned to the place where Ibrahim (a.s) had left her.

As soon as Ibrahim (a.s) was out of sight, he turned and prayed to Allah to protect and provide for his family which he had left out in the wilderness:
رَّبَّنَآ إِنَّيۤ أَسْكَنتُ مِن ذُرِّيَّتِي بِوَادٍ غَيْرِ ذِي زَرْعٍ عِندَ بَيْتِكَ ٱلْمُحَرَّمِ رَبَّنَا لِيُقِيمُواْ ٱلصَّلاَةَ فَٱجْعَلْ أَفْئِدَةً مِّنَ ٱلنَّاسِ تَهْوِيۤ إِلَيْهِمْ وَٱرْزُقْهُمْ مِّنَ ٱلثَّمَرَاتِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْكُرُونَ
“O our Lord! I have made some of my offspring to dwell in a valley without cultivation, by Thy Sacred House; In order, O our Lord that they may establish regular prayer; So fill the hearts of some among men with love towards them, and feed them with fruits; So that they may give thanks.” (al-Qur’an 14:37)

Ismail (a.s) and his mother lived for some time on the water and dates Ibrahim (a.s) left them, but finally the water ran out, and Ismail’s (a.s) mother could no longer produce enough milk to feed Ismail (a.s). The mother could not bear to see her child suffering, so she ran to the top of nearby Mount Safa to see if she could find someone to help her. When she could see no one, she ran down the mountain and across the valley to Mount Marwa. She ran from one mountain to the other seven times, looking for water or help. After the seventh time she heard a voice and she called out to it for help. When she looked she saw an angel digging the earth with his heel until water flowed forth. That place was the site of Zam-zam. She carefully made a barrier around the place where the water was flowing, and filled her waterbag with her hands. Then she was able to drink water and feed her baby. The angel also told her not to be afraid, that she and her son would be provided for.

Ismail (a.s) and his mother continued to live at this place all by themselves for some time. One day some people of the Jurhum tribe were passing through the valley. They didn’t intend to stop, because they knew that there had never been any water in that valley. But they saw a kind of bird which was known to frequent wet spots, so they followed it to the spring of Zam-zam. There they found Ismail’s (a.s) mother sitting by the water.

Ismail’s mother agreed they could settle there for a while, as long as they did not claim possession to the water. Some of the people of the tribe settled by the water permanently and Ismail grew up amongst them.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 01 March 2014 at 10:57am
Originally posted by iec786 iec786 wrote:

Prophet Ismail (A.S)
Oct 6th, 2013 by Ahmed.
Prophet Ismail (a.s) was the son of Ibrahim (a.s) and Hajar. One day Ibrahim (a.s) took his baby son and wife (Hajar) to the site where Ka’ba can be found today. He gave them some dates and water and started to leave. As Ibrahim (a.s) walked away, Hajar followed and asked why they were being left in this empty place. She understood from his silence that Allah had commanded him to do this. Finally, she asked if Allah had ordered him to do this and he replied that it was so. Upon hearing this, she accepted Allah’s will and returned to the place where Ibrahim (a.s) had left her.

As soon as Ibrahim (a.s) was out of sight, he turned and prayed to Allah to protect and provide for his family which he had left out in the wilderness:
رَّبَّنَآ إِنَّيۤ أَسْكَنتُ مِن ذُرِّيَّتِي بِوَادٍ غَيْرِ ذِي زَرْعٍ عِندَ بَيْتِكَ ٱلْمُحَرَّمِ رَبَّنَا لِيُقِيمُواْ ٱلصَّلاَةَ فَٱجْعَلْ أَفْئِدَةً مِّنَ ٱلنَّاسِ تَهْوِيۤ إِلَيْهِمْ وَٱرْزُقْهُمْ مِّنَ ٱلثَّمَرَاتِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَشْكُرُونَ
“O our Lord! I have made some of my offspring to dwell in a valley without cultivation, by Thy Sacred House; In order, O our Lord that they may establish regular prayer; So fill the hearts of some among men with love towards them, and feed them with fruits; So that they may give thanks.” (al-Qur’an 14:37)

Ismail (a.s) and his mother lived for some time on the water and dates Ibrahim (a.s) left them, but finally the water ran out, and Ismail’s (a.s) mother could no longer produce enough milk to feed Ismail (a.s). The mother could not bear to see her child suffering, so she ran to the top of nearby Mount Safa to see if she could find someone to help her. When she could see no one, she ran down the mountain and across the valley to Mount Marwa. She ran from one mountain to the other seven times, looking for water or help. After the seventh time she heard a voice and she called out to it for help. When she looked she saw an angel digging the earth with his heel until water flowed forth. That place was the site of Zam-zam. She carefully made a barrier around the place where the water was flowing, and filled her waterbag with her hands. Then she was able to drink water and feed her baby. The angel also told her not to be afraid, that she and her son would be provided for.

Ismail (a.s) and his mother continued to live at this place all by themselves for some time. One day some people of the Jurhum tribe were passing through the valley. They didn’t intend to stop, because they knew that there had never been any water in that valley. But they saw a kind of bird which was known to frequent wet spots, so they followed it to the spring of Zam-zam. There they found Ismail’s (a.s) mother sitting by the water.

Ismail’s mother agreed they could settle there for a while, as long as they did not claim possession to the water. Some of the people of the tribe settled by the water permanently and Ismail grew up amongst them.


Wonderful story! Clap


-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: solitair
Date Posted: 04 March 2014 at 3:12am
Originally posted by neil neil wrote:

For years and years, I have heard claims from Islam that the Bible is corrupted.

NOT ONCE have I seen one shred of evidence to persuade me of this claim.

Who can dispel my view that corruption claims are merely Islam's way of trying to prove, conveniently for themselves, that the Quran harmonizes with the Bible when it obviously doesn't.


If you have read the Qur'an and the Bible, you realize that it is the same story. The main differences are that the Bible stops after Jesus. The Qur'an contains the same story as the Bible, but is has the next chapter as well.

One of many interesting theorys is that Paul the Apostle (original name Saul of Tarsus) that started up many churches after the death of Jesus, is the one starting this corruption of the Bible. He lived 500 years before the Qur'an was written.

Now in year 570, a man by the name Muhammed ign Adb Allah, was born. He continued where the Bible ended, and the interesting part is that everything from this story that you find in the bible was written down in Arabic  - where the name of the book is the Holy Qur'an. It has everything, except all the strange contradictions you find in the Bible.

This is in fact a very easy question. You can just start at the beginning of the Bible, and put the Qur'an next to it, and open it also in the beginning. Then you start to compare.

In the beginning - there was no light... and so on.

When the story comes to Adam and Eve in paradise, you will notice important diferences in the two books when it comes to how Adam and Eve fell in to sin or what ever you want to call it.

Bible blames it on the woman, Qur'an does not. Bible said a snake (now we all know woman are afraid of snakes) came to the woman with seduction ?? what ?? If anything the woman would have ran away screaming ...

My point ? And if i may add - im not a muslim - the Qur'an shows you a version that does not have conflicting logic. But the Bible has conflicting logic all the way through.

Now don't just talk about it - if you really want to know, than do what i said - and you will see for yourself.

The reason for these big differences are that Qur'an today is still in its original form, in its original language - a language that still exist in wide use.

The bible have been translated thousands of times, where there is no original versions at all. Just bits and peaces here and there, that nobody really can verify.

You can not find more than one version of the Qur'an, but you sure can find many versions of the Bible.

Example: I tell you today, you are going to come with me to paradise.

This is what Jehova Withneses say Jesus said to the robber hanging next to him on the cross.

Catholic Churce: I tell you, today you are going to come with me to paradise.

So one is saying that the robber is coming with Jesus TODAY, and the the other is telling it TODAY that one day he is comming to paradise. So when is this robber going to paradise ? Today  or in a thousand years ? Bible have conflicting answers depending on the version you read.

Big differences, but  you don't find these if you study the Qur'an, only the bible have these contradictions all over the place...

I can go on and show you thousands of examples where the bible is contradicting itself, but i think that if you really want to know, the best thing is to do what i say. Compare the Qur'an and the Bible, and you will see the complete story. 

This Muslims believe that God had to use one more prophet, to get the Book written properly. And we see today that the bible can not did not really work out, as it can not really be a book from God at all by my standard. For that is is just to self contradicting.

If you want to know what the bible was meant to say, you have to peace it back together. The only way to do that is to use the Qur'an for a guideline, and you will find where the Bible is messed up from all the years of translation and manipulation.


Best of luck -



Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 05 March 2014 at 1:22pm
Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:


If you have read the Qur'an and the Bible, you realize that it is the same story. The main differences are that the Bible stops after Jesus. The Qur'an contains the same story as the Bible, but is has the next chapter as well.

 the name of the book is the Holy Qur'an. It has everything,

Greetings solitair,

Regarding these two things...
The qur'an is not complete.  It includes none of the teachings of Yshwe(known as Jesus).  It claims to respect Yshwe as a prophet yet includes none of His teachings. 
It refers to His teachings, the Injeel, saying that they will be found with the people of the Book, but muslims reject this, saying that 'the Book' was corrupted, but if the Book had been corrupted surely God would have had Muhammad correct it in order that the muslims would have the teachings of Yshwe.

If you read the qur'an, you see clearly that it is not the same story.  There are similarities, but there are glaring differences.  The qur'an contains some of the Truth, but not all.

Salaam and blessings,
Caringheart


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: solitair
Date Posted: 05 March 2014 at 11:31pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:



a)The qur'an is not complete. 
b)If you read the qur'an, you see clearly that it is not the same story. 
c)There are similarities, but there are glaring differences. 
d)The qur'an contains some of the Truth, but not all.



a) The qur'an is complete - by complete we can not talk pages of text, but the actual content explained. The messages, that the God from the Qur'an wants us to receive - is all in there without any holes in the logic like you find in the bible. The messages God from the Bible wants to give us, seem to have many peaces missing, and some are simply contradicting. If you don't agree with this, you have not read eather books properly.

b) I read the que'an - and i see clearly the opposite of what you are telling me, that it is the same story - and i see clearly that the differences are all the parts of the bible that does not appear logical. What does that mean ? That Muslims corrupted the bible ? Or does it mean that they did not corrupt Qur'an.

c) Yes - there are glaring differences, and those are the parts of the Bible that does not make much sense. Those are the parts of the bible that for example blame the woman for the fall of man, the stuff that is man made to control people trough religion. Someone inserted this blame on woman, to have a more obedient wife. It sure was not God that put that stuff in the bible, because God is extremely clear on his views of the woman.

d) I have no idea what the truth is - i am not chirstian and i am not a muslim. I am simply having an objective look at the two books, and there  is no way that all of the bible is all written by the same person / God.

Some stuff in between - really all over the place - seem to be written by someone completely different from the main author.  The quality of the messages are just all of a sudden completely contradicting... and that is what you can not find in the Qur'an. 

Now I think there are two main reasons for this:

1) The Qur'an is written in Arabic, a language that stil is in use, no need for all the translations the bible has gone trough.
2) The Qur'an had the material the religious leaders wanted from the beginning. In other words no need for a change or rewrite.







-------------
Never drag the honest down to the level of the dishonest just to make them equal in the name of fairness, and never drag dishonest up to the level of the honest just so they will not be insulted.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 07 March 2014 at 2:37pm
Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:



a)The qur'an is not complete. 
b)If you read the qur'an, you see clearly that it is not the same story. 
c)There are similarities, but there are glaring differences. 
d)The qur'an contains some of the Truth, but not all.



a) The qur'an is complete - by complete we can not talk pages of text, but the actual content explained. The messages, that the God from the Qur'an wants us to receive - is all in there without any holes in the logic like you find in the bible. The messages God from the Bible wants to give us, seem to have many peaces missing, and some are simply contradicting. If you don't agree with this, you have not read eather books properly.

b) I read the que'an - and i see clearly the opposite of what you are telling me, that it is the same story - and i see clearly that the differences are all the parts of the bible that does not appear logical. What does that mean ? That Muslims corrupted the bible ? Or does it mean that they did not corrupt Qur'an.

c) Yes - there are glaring differences, and those are the parts of the Bible that does not make much sense. Those are the parts of the bible that for example blame the woman for the fall of man, the stuff that is man made to control people trough religion. Someone inserted this blame on woman, to have a more obedient wife. It sure was not God that put that stuff in the bible, because God is extremely clear on his views of the woman.

d) I have no idea what the truth is - i am not chirstian and i am not a muslim. I am simply having an objective look at the two books, and there  is no way that all of the bible is all written by the same person / God.

Some stuff in between - really all over the place - seem to be written by someone completely different from the main author.  The quality of the messages are just all of a sudden completely contradicting... and that is what you can not find in the Qur'an. 

Now I think there are two main reasons for this:

1) The Qur'an is written in Arabic, a language that stil is in use, no need for all the translations the bible has gone trough.
2) The Qur'an had the material the religious leaders wanted from the beginning. In other words no need for a change or rewrite.



Well-said.  Clap


-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 07 March 2014 at 4:51pm
Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


a)The qur'an is not complete. 
b)If you read the qur'an, you see clearly that it is not the same story. 
c)There are similarities, but there are glaring differences. 
d)The qur'an contains some of the Truth, but not all.

b) I read the que'an - and i see clearly the opposite of what you are telling me, that it is the same story - and i see clearly that the differences are all the parts of the bible that does not appear logical. What does that mean ? That Muslims corrupted the bible ? Or does it mean that they did not corrupt Qur'an.

d) I have no idea what the truth is - i am not chirstian and i am not a muslim. I am simply having an objective look at the two books, and there  is no way that all of the bible is all written by the same person / God.

Some stuff in between - really all over the place - seem to be written by someone completely different from the main author.  The quality of the messages are just all of a sudden completely contradicting... and that is what you can not find in the Qur'an. 

Greetings solitair,

I try not to belabor every point but only the ones that most stand out to me.  In this instance...

Indeed the Judeo-Christian scriptures have many authors.  The Qur'an would have one voice because it was revealed by only one person.

You say, you do not find 'the quality of the messages in the Qur'an contradicting', and I find them entirely contradicting... and I find this all the more concerning because of the fact that they do come from the mouth of one person, who claims to speak with the voice of the Creator.

I find the message of Yshwe(known as Jesus) to be cohesive and in keeping with earlier revelations.

Salaam and blessings,
Caringheart



-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: NABA
Date Posted: 08 March 2014 at 2:02am
[email protected] caringheart so u mean to say that u will follow the way of life written by authors who r humans who r to err.U said rightly Quran has one voice, the voice of Allah bcoz it contains solution to every problem of mankind.so y not follow revelation send down by the one who created us.


Posted By: solitair
Date Posted: 08 March 2014 at 3:03am
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


You say, you do not find 'the quality of the messages in the Qur'an contradicting', and I find them entirely contradicting...


It seems to be common for people with your or similar background to say  view the Qur'an as "entirely contradicting". If you don't agree with the Qur'an, or if you don't agree with Islam - that is one thing, but to say that the Qur'an is "entirely contradicting" is just an untrue statement you allow yourself to utter because you are not educated enough to discover how wrong it is.

So this is the chalenge:

We have to keep this simple enough to follow, so lets just start at the beginning of the bible, a story that everybody know very well.

Genesis, the creation of the world, man etc. The same story is in the Qur'an. Show me how that story contains contradictions in the Qur'an.

I am so tired of people just making a claim and not having a clue... so prove your statement of for ever hold your tong about this topic.




-------------
Never drag the honest down to the level of the dishonest just to make them equal in the name of fairness, and never drag dishonest up to the level of the honest just so they will not be insulted.


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 08 March 2014 at 2:24pm
Originally posted by NABA NABA wrote:

[email protected] caringheart so u mean to say that u will follow the way of life written by authors who r humans who r to err.U said rightly Quran has one voice, the voice of Allah bcoz it contains solution to every problem of mankind.so y not follow revelation send down by the one who created us.

Greetings NABA,

I follow the voice of Yshwe, which is the voice recorded in the gospels by those many authors... His Apostles and followers.  The recordings of the men that walked and talked with Yshwe, and did as He commanded them to do in spreading the good news... the news of Christ. 

"Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses."(Deuteronomy)
This was the law given by Moses and repeated by Yshwe;
       in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. (book of Matthew)

I trust in the many.

Salaam and blessings to you,
Caringheart


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: iec786
Date Posted: 08 March 2014 at 11:47pm
Quran the Ultimate Miracle 1 of 7

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8gXcCNJN0U


Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 09 March 2014 at 12:36pm
Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


You say, you do not find 'the quality of the messages in the Qur'an contradicting', and I find them entirely contradicting...


It seems to be common for people with your or similar background to say  view the Qur'an as "entirely contradicting". If you don't agree with the Qur'an, or if you don't agree with Islam - that is one thing, but to say that the Qur'an is "entirely contradicting" is just an untrue statement you allow yourself to utter because you are not educated enough to discover how wrong it is.


I am so tired of people just making a claim and not having a clue... so prove your statement of for ever hold your tong about this topic.

Greetings solitair,

Here are just a few examples:

 2:253  Of those messengers, some of whom We have caused to excel others, and of whom there are some unto whom Allah spake, while some of them He exalted (above others) in degree.

2:285  We make no distinction between any of His messengers.


... and everyone knows that all muslims hold Muhammad as higher than all the rest.
_________

39:4  If Allah had willed to choose a son, He could have chosen what He would of that which He hath created.

6:100  Yet they ... impute falsely, without knowledge, sons and daughters unto Him. ... The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a child?


So, which is it... can allah do whatever he wants or not?
_________

4:3    Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess.

4:129    Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so).


Which is it... many wives or no?  According to the Qur'an it is not possible to treat many wives equally, and according to the Qur'an you should not take more than one if you can not treat all equally... thus, I interpret... thou shalt have only one wife... Yet Muhammad says, 'marry as many as seems good to you'. Ouch

Also, I am sure that, if you know your Qur'an, you will know for yourself that in several places the Qur'an says, 'they must be made to accept the religion of islam', and in another place it says, 'there is no compulsion in religion'.   I am sorry that I don't have the time right now to provide all the exact verses, but you must know them.

asalaam,
Caringheart


-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: solitair
Date Posted: 09 March 2014 at 3:08pm

You told me that YOU found the Qur'an to be be entirely contradicting - but it is not true is it ? Did you even read any of this yourself ?

I find it hard to have respect for people that quote some dishonest Christian website, without reading the scriptures personally. I really hope that you are not doing that.

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


Here are just a few examples:

 2:253  Of those messengers, some of whom We have caused to excel others, and of whom there are some unto whom Allah spake, while some of them He exalted (above others) in degree.

2:285  We make no distinction between any of His messengers.


... and everyone knows that all muslims hold Muhammad as higher than all the rest.


The bible said that we - man - should not judge. Does that mean that God should not judge ? Is god contradicting himself when he said that man should not judge because he himself is judging ?

In the scriptures Qur'an 2:285 and so on, etc God said don't distinguish - (parallel to the bible where he said don't judge) but that does not mean that God can not distinguish.

I hear you, some places he said don't distinguish, and some places he himself distinguish.... but that is not contradicting at all. One is God the other is Man.

This conversation is not going to prove that the Qur'an is contradicting, it is only going to prove how these Christian websites lie to you... because that is where you get this stuff from. You did not read this yourself, if you did you would not write stuff like this... would you ?

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


39:4  If Allah had willed to choose a son, He could have chosen what He would of that which He hath created.

6:100  Yet they ... impute falsely, without knowledge, sons and daughters unto Him. ... The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a child?


So, which is it... can allah do whatever he wants or not?

It is simply talking about whether Jesus is the son of God or not. One of the arguments used by the Church was that Jesus, being born of a virgin mother, had no human father. For that they claim that his father is God in heaven!

In the following verse he makes a mockery of their logic, and is saying that if you believe that everybody must abide by the laws of reproduction that God ordained for human beings (i.e. for anyone to have a son, one must first have a wife, and that every child must have a father and a mother), and you deduce from that that since Jesus had no human father, then his father must be God in heaven, then by the same logic that you use, how could God have a son when he did not have a wife first ?'

He is just turning the logic around, to show how silly their logic is. It becomes clear in 6:101 that he is not addressing the possibility of having a son, but is revealing the silly logic used by those who make Jesus the son of God because he did not have a human father, instead of realizing that it was a miracle by God who can do what ever he wants.

I mean, you have to read this stuff man – not just quote some dishonest Christian website.


Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:



4:3 Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess.

4:129 Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so).

Which is it... many wives or no?  According to the Qur'an it is not possible to treat many wives equally, and according to the Qur'an you should not take more than one if you can not treat all equally... thus, I interpret... thou shalt have only one wife... Yet Muhammad says, 'marry as many as seems good to you'.

Also, I am sure that, if you know your Qur'an, you will know for yourself that in several places the Qur'an says, 'they must be made to accept the religion of islam', and in another place it says, 'there is no compulsion in religion'.   I am sorry that I don't have the time right now to provide all the exact verses, but you must know them.

I really don’t understand your last claims – this about many wifes, and this about only one religion ?? I can not even understand what and where it is that you say there is a contradiction. You have to be more clear on what the contradictions are. Because I seriously can not find them.  



-------------
Never drag the honest down to the level of the dishonest just to make them equal in the name of fairness, and never drag dishonest up to the level of the honest just so they will not be insulted.


Posted By: islamispeace
Date Posted: 09 March 2014 at 8:17pm
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

Originally posted by NABA NABA wrote:

[email protected] caringheart so u mean to say that u will follow the way of life written by authors who r humans who r to err.U said rightly Quran has one voice, the voice of Allah bcoz it contains solution to every problem of mankind.so y not follow revelation send down by the one who created us.

Greetings NABA,

I follow the voice of Yshwe, which is the voice recorded in the gospels by those many authors... His Apostles and followers.  The recordings of the men that walked and talked with Yshwe, and did as He commanded them to do in spreading the good news... the news of Christ. 

"Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses."(Deuteronomy)
This was the law given by Moses and repeated by Yshwe;
       in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. (book of Matthew)

I trust in the many.

Salaam and blessings to you,
Caringheart


Oh really?  How many of your "witnesses" mentioned that 3 "Magi" visited the infant Jesus?  How many mentioned that Herod killed all the male children?  Hmmm...let's count.  One...oh that's it.  Just one!

Even when your "witnesses" recount the same event, they contradict each other.  The story of Jesus' arrest, trial and crucifixion is a perfect example.  The contradictions are too numerous to list here.  Besides, I have already cataloged them on my blog:

http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-crucifixion-of-jesus-in-bible-and.html%20 - http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-crucifixion-of-jesus-in-bible-and.html

So much for the "two witnesses" theory.  By the way, here is what Deuteronomy stated when the witnesses spoke a lie:

"If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse someone of a crime, 17 the two people involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the Lord before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time. 18 The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow Israelite, 19 then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do to the other party. You must purge the evil from among you. 20 The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you. 21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot." (Deuteronomy 19:16-21)




-------------
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)



Posted By: Caringheart
Date Posted: 13 March 2014 at 1:12pm
Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

You told me that YOU found the Qur'an to be be entirely contradicting - but it is not true is it ? Did you even read any of this yourself ?

I find it hard to have respect for people that quote some dishonest Christian website, without reading the scriptures personally. I really hope that you are not doing that.

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


Here are just a few examples:

 2:253  Of those messengers, some of whom We have caused to excel others, and of whom there are some unto whom Allah spake, while some of them He exalted (above others) in degree.

2:285  We make no distinction between any of His messengers.


... and everyone knows that all muslims hold Muhammad as higher than all the rest.

The bible said that we - man - should not judge. Does that mean that God should not judge ? Is god contradicting himself when he said that man should not judge because he himself is judging ?

In the scriptures Qur'an 2:285 and so on, etc God said don't distinguish - (parallel to the bible where he said don't judge) but that does not mean that God can not distinguish.

I hear you, some places he said don't distinguish, and some places he himself distinguish.... but that is not contradicting at all. One is God the other is Man.

This conversation is not going to prove that the Qur'an is contradicting, it is only going to prove how these Christian websites lie to you... because that is where you get this stuff from. You did not read this yourself, if you did you would not write stuff like this... would you ?

Greetings solitair,

I have been reading the qur'an.

Regarding the two verses above, in both cases, 'We' is referring to allah himself.

So 'We', allah, 'have caused some prophets to excel over others'

and also, 'We', allah, makes no distinction between prophets.

So does allah hold some prophets higher than others, or not?

It is common knowledge that all muslims hold Muhammad above the rest.

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


39:4  If Allah had willed to choose a son, He could have chosen what He would of that which He hath created.

6:100  Yet they ... impute falsely, without knowledge, sons and daughters unto Him. ... The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a child?


So, which is it... can allah do whatever he wants or not?

Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

It is simply talking about whether Jesus is the son of God or not. One of the arguments used by the Church was that Jesus, being born of a virgin mother, had no human father. For that they claim that his father is God in heaven!

In the following verse he makes a mockery of their logic, and is saying that if you believe that everybody must abide by the laws of reproduction that God ordained for human beings (i.e. for anyone to have a son, one must first have a wife, and that every child must have a father and a mother), and you deduce from that that since Jesus had no human father, then his father must be God in heaven, then by the same logic that you use, how could God have a son when he did not have a wife first ?'

He is just turning the logic around, to show how silly their logic is. It becomes clear in 6:101 that he is not addressing the possibility of having a son, but is revealing the silly logic used by those who make Jesus the son of God because he did not have a human father, instead of realizing that it was a miracle by God who can do what ever he wants.

I mean, you have to read this stuff man – not just quote some dishonest Christian website.

Regarding this;

What is the difference calling it,
'a miracle by God who can do what ever he wants',
    or recognizing Him as the Son of God?

How do muslims believe that Yshwe, the one born of the virgin, was fathered?  How was her seed fertilized?
Obviously it was fertilized by God Himself, which makes God the Father, however it was accomplished, and by the testimony, it was accomplished by the 'overshadowing of the Holy Spirit of God'.


34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.

37 For with God nothing shall be impossible.
38 And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her.

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:


4:3 Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess.

4:129 Ye will not be able to deal equally between (your) wives, however much ye wish (to do so).

Which is it... many wives or no?  According to the Qur'an it is not possible to treat many wives equally, and according to the Qur'an you should not take more than one if you can not treat all equally... thus, I interpret... thou shalt have only one wife... Yet Muhammad says, 'marry as many as seems good to you'.

Also, I am sure that, if you know your Qur'an, you will know for yourself that in several places the Qur'an says, 'they must be made to accept the religion of islam', and in another place it says, 'there is no compulsion in religion'.   I am sorry that I don't have the time right now to provide all the exact verses, but you must know them.

I really don’t understand your last claims – this about many wifes, and this about only one religion ?? I can not even understand what and where it is that you say there is a contradiction. You have to be more clear on what the contradictions are. Because I seriously can not find them.  

[/QUOTE]

asalaam,
Caringheart



-------------
Let us seek Truth together
Blessed be God forever
"I believe in Jesus as I believe in the sun... not because I see it, but because by it, I see everything else.: - C.S.Lewis


Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 15 March 2014 at 3:19am
Originally posted by neil neil wrote:

For years and years, I have heard claims from Islam that the Bible is corrupted.

NOT ONCE have I seen one shred of evidence to persuade me of this claim.

Who can dispel my view that corruption claims are merely Islam's way of trying to prove, conveniently for themselves, that the Quran harmonizes with the Bible when it obviously doesn't.


BRO, We Muslims does not not try to prove that the Quran harmonize with the bible because Jesus (S) never PREACH the BIBLE, the bible is a collection of books and that collection of books is not the word of God but rather a Greek's translation with interpolation.  What Jesus (S) preach was the Good news:

<>

On one of the days while he was teaching the people in the temple and declaring the good news, the chief priests and the scribes with the older men came near, (Luke 20:1 NWT)

 The blind are seeing again, and the lame are walking about, the lepers are being cleansed and the deaf are hearing, and the dead are being raised up, and the poor are having the good news declared to them; (Matthew 11:5 NWT).

truthnowcome


-------------
LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES!


Posted By: solitair
Date Posted: 15 March 2014 at 4:36am
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

I have been reading the qur'an.


More than 1,6 billion people are able to understand these scriptures.  One of them wrote more than 1 000 books on these subjects, but you might be right - it is possible that he and the rest of the 1,6 billion is just imagining all of it.

I do not want to say anything that will insult you, and i am not trying to make fun of you or anything else of the sort. What i am saying is meant seriously and intended with all due respect for you. But I it is like it is not possible for you to see and understand the reasoning of others some times. I am not expecting you to agree, but at least see how and what other people say, would be nice.

To be unable to even understand something what 1,6 billion other people understand, seems like the problem is on your end... sorry for having to point it out. Again, it is not that you don't agree - but the fact that you don't even understand how and why. I am repeating, that no disrespect is intended here - i just think that you are so convinced about something else that you don't really even try to understand.

So i repeat, you do not actually read the Qur'an.... by that i mean, try to understand how it is saying the things people tell you. If you did, you would like 1.6 billion people, get some of the points by now...

I am not a Muslim - but i am able to read the Qur'an, and understand it just fine. Just like I am able to read and understand The Book of Mormon etc. If  you quote me a scripture from a different religion, i am going to understand how and why you say what you say - but maybe, probable not see it as the truth.

This is honest !

What is dishonest, is when someone is denying something from another faith, without really understanding it, because they are so convinced the other is wrong already.

That is when the person is telling a lie - when they claim to have read what the other is saying...

So i say - what you have done, is not to read the Qur'an.





-------------
Never drag the honest down to the level of the dishonest just to make them equal in the name of fairness, and never drag dishonest up to the level of the honest just so they will not be insulted.


Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 18 March 2014 at 5:04pm
Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:

I have been reading the qur'an.


More than 1,6 billion people are able to understand these scriptures.  One of them wrote more than 1 000 books on these subjects, but you might be right - it is possible that he and the rest of the 1,6 billion is just imagining all of it.

I do not want to say anything that will insult you, and i am not trying to make fun of you or anything else of the sort. What i am saying is meant seriously and intended with all due respect for you. But I it is like it is not possible for you to see and understand the reasoning of others some times. I am not expecting you to agree, but at least see how and what other people say, would be nice.

To be unable to even understand something what 1,6 billion other people understand, seems like the problem is on your end... sorry for having to point it out. Again, it is not that you don't agree - but the fact that you don't even understand how and why. I am repeating, that no disrespect is intended here - i just think that you are so convinced about something else that you don't really even try to understand.

So i repeat, you do not actually read the Qur'an.... by that i mean, try to understand how it is saying the things people tell you. If you did, you would like 1.6 billion people, get some of the points by now...

I am not a Muslim - but i am able to read the Qur'an, and understand it just fine. Just like I am able to read and understand The Book of Mormon etc. If  you quote me a scripture from a different religion, i am going to understand how and why you say what you say - but maybe, probable not see it as the truth.

This is honest !

What is dishonest, is when someone is denying something from another faith, without really understanding it, because they are so convinced the other is wrong already.

That is when the person is telling a lie - when they claim to have read what the other is saying...

So i say - what you have done, is not to read the Qur'an.





Peace unto you!

bro. I fully understand what Christians' believe are and I am convinced they (1.6 billion) were miss lead so what I am doing here is to establish the truth.

Now let me inform you of what you are not aware of.

 

        I begin by quoting a very interesting verse from the book Christians call the Holy Bible. Jesus (S) said:

 

Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creatures. Mark 16:15

   When Jesus (S) made that statement Christians as well as none Christians understood that statement to mean “The BIBLE has to preach to all creatures in the world”; but if we examine the meaning of the word “GOSPEL” we will arrive with another understanding.

    Have you ever asked your self WHAT IS THE GOSPEL? Or IS THE GOSPEL THE BIBLE? You were thought that the Gospel and the Bible are one and the same by face value of words but the Gospel and the Bible is not one and the same, both has a different meaning and should apply appropriately.

To realize the truth the first I will look at the meaning and usage of the word “GOSPEL” and then the word “BIBLE”.

 

THE WORD “BIBLE” AND ITS DEFINITION

Let’s look at the word “Bible”. The Bible (from Greek ὰ βιβλία ta biblia "the books") is the collections of the primary religious text of Judaism and Christianity.

There is no common version of the Bible, as the individual books (Biblical cannon), their contents and their order vary among denominations. Mainstream Judaism divides the Tanakh into 24 books, while a minority stream of Judaism, the Samaritans, accepts only five.

The 24 texts of the Hebrew Bible are divided into 39 books in Christian Old Testaments, and the complete Christian Bible range from the 66 books of the Protestant canon to the 81 books in the Ethiopian Orthodox Bible, to the 84 books of the Eastern Orthodox Bible.

 

From the Bible Dictionary

Bible definition

Bible, the English form of the Greek name _Biblia_, meaning "books," the name which in the fifth century began to be given to the entire collection of sacred books, the "Library of Divine Revelation." The name Bible was adopted by Wickliffe, and came gradually into use in our English language. The Bible consists of sixty-six different books, composed by many different writers, in three different languages, under different circumstances; writers of almost every social rank, statesmen and peasants, kings, herdsmen, fishermen, priests, tax-gatherers, tentmakers; educated and uneducated, Jews and Gentiles; most of them unknown to each other, and writing at various periods during the space of about 1600 years: and yet, after all, it is only one book dealing with only one subject in its numberless aspects and relations, the subject of man's redemption. It is divided into the Old Testament, containing thirty-nine books, and the New Testament, containing twenty-seven books. The names given to the Old in the writings of the New are "the scriptures" (Matt. 21:42), "scripture" (2 Pet. 1:20), "the holy scriptures" (Rom. 1:2), "the law" (John 12:34), "the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms" (Luke 24:44), "the law and the prophets" (Matt. 5:17), "the old covenant" (2 Cor. 3:14, R.V.). There is a break of 400 years between the Old Testament and the New. (See http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/APOCRYPHA - .) ( http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bible - )

 

From the above we can conclude that Jesus (s) never instruct anyone to go into the world and preach the “bible’ because the bible is a “collection of books” which Jesus (s) has no knowledge of when he said: “Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creatures.” (Mark 16:15).


THE WORD “GOSPEL” AND THE MEANING 

This is the definition they give you from where the word came from and the usage; but if we examine how it was by Jesus (s) we will arrive with a different meaning. Let’s read it from the Bible Dictionary.

Bible Dictionary

Gospel definition

 a word of Anglo-Saxon origin, and meaning "God's spell", i.e., word of God, or rather, according to others, "good spell", i.e., good news. It is the rendering of the Greek _evangelion_, i.e., "good message." It denotes (1) "the welcome intelligence of salvation to man as preached by our Lord and his followers. (2.) It was afterwards transitively applied to each of the four histories of our Lord's life, published by those who are therefore called 'Evangelists', writers of the history of the gospel (the evangelion). (3.) The term is often used to express collectively the gospel doctrines; and 'preaching the gospel' is often used to include not only the proclaiming of the good tidings, but the teaching men how to avail themselves of the offer of salvation, the declaring of all the truths, precepts, promises, and threatenings of Christianity." It is termed "the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24), "the gospel of the kingdom" (Matt. 4:23), "the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 1:16), "the gospel of peace (Eph. 6:15), "the glorious gospel," "the everlasting gospel," "the gospel of salvation" (Eph. 1:13). http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gospel -

 

That is how they got the word “gospel”. It was translated from these two Greek words “Euaggelizo / Euaggelion” which literally mean “good news”. So when you see the word “Gospel”, it should read as  “Good News”. I will examine it later on or you can check it out on the net (lexicon). The Jehovah witness rightly translates it as “Good News” and not “gospel”. I will look at the usage and its application in the New Testament.

 

These two words “Euaggelizo / Euaggelion” which literally mean “Good News” and was miss translates as “Gospel”. In Luke Chapter 1: 1 -19 the Greek word “Euaggalizo” was used there for the “announcement” of the birth of John (S) to Zachariah. Quote:

“The angel answered and said to him, "I am Gabriel, who stands in the presence of God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news.” ( http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=lu+1:19&translation=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=na&sr=1 - )

The same Greek word “Euaggalizo” was used for the “announcement” of the birth of Jesus (S) in Luke 2: 1-10. Quote:

“But the angel said to them, "Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people;” ( http://www.studylight.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=lu+2:10&translation=kjv&ot=bhs&nt=na&sr=1 - )

As you can see the word “Good News” was used for making special announcement of importance.

Now, let us see how Jesus (S) used it. It mentioned in Luke 20:1  “And it came to pass, that on one of those days, as he taught the people in the temple, and preached the gospel, the chief priests and the scribes came upon him with the elders”, (Luk3 20: 1); and in Matthew 11:5 it mentioned: “The blind receive their sight, and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.” (Matthew 11:5)

The same Greek word “Euaggalizo” was used there and was translates as “gospel”. As I have established before, the literal meaning of the word is “Good News”. Although the Greek word “euaggalizo” means “good news”; they decided to invent a new meaning (God spell, Good spell and then Gospel) to misguide you. It was rightly translated as ‘good news” in the New World Translation. Luke 20:1 and Matthew 11:5 should read as follows:

On one of the days while he was teaching the people in the temple and declaring the good news, the chief priests and the scribes with the older men came near, (Luke 20:1 NWT)

 The blind are seeing again, and the lame are walking about, the lepers are being cleansed and the deaf are hearing, and the dead are being raised up, and the poor are having the good news declared to them; (Matthew 11:5 NWT).

 

     What was the Good News of so important Jesus (S) was preaching? Now, let’s look at good mark 1:14 and Matthew 4:23 It read as follows…

“Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God”. (Mark 1:14)

23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people. (Matthew 4:23 KJV)

      What is the gospel of the kingdom? Is there any such thing as “gospel of the kingdom”? The try to trick you there! It is the Good News of the King of God, Jesus (S) was preaching the Good News of the coming of God’s Kingdom. The Greek word “euaggolizo” which means “Good news” was used there and they translates it as “gospel”. It was correctly translated as “good news” in the New World Translation. So the verse should as follows: 

“Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the good news of the kingdom of God”. (Mark 1:14)

23Then he went around throughout the whole of Gal´i·lee, teaching in their synagogues and preaching the good news of the kingdom and curing every sort of disease and every sort of infirmity among the people. (Matthew 4:23 NWT)

The Good News Jesus (S) was preaching was about coming of the kingdom of God. This is the definition they give you, from the Bible Dictionary:

Bible Dictionary

 

Gospel definition

 

 a word of Anglo-Saxon origin, and meaning "God's spell", i.e., word of God, or rather, according to others, "good spell", i.e., good news. It is the rendering of the Greek _evangelion_, i.e., "good message." It denotes (1) "the welcome intelligence of salvation to man as preached by our Lord and his followers. (2.) It was afterwards transitively applied to each of the four histories of our Lord's life, published by those who are therefore called 'Evangelists', writers of the history of the gospel (the evangelion). (3.) The term is often used to express collectively the gospel doctrines; and 'preaching the gospel' is often used to include not only the proclaiming of the good tidings, but the teaching men how to avail themselves of the offer of salvation, the declaring of all the truths, precepts, promises, and threatenings of Christianity." It is termed "the gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24), "the gospel of the kingdom" (Matt. 4:23), "the gospel of Christ" (Rom. 1:16), "the gospel of peace (Eph. 6:15), "the glorious gospel," "the everlasting gospel," "the gospel of salvation" (Eph. 1:13).

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gospel - - dictionary.reference.com/browse/gospel

You see that! Jesus (s) never teaches the good news of the grace of Grace of God, nor the good news of Christ, nor the good news of peace, nor the good news of salvation, or even the good news of the everlasting gospel (good news). The everlasting good news is another book, which was yet to come from Heaven, and it mentioned in revelation 14: 6-7, which I will deal with later on; he also never teaches to believe in the bible. Bible is the English form of the Greek name _Biblia_, meaning "books," the name which in the fifth century began to be given to the entire collection of what they termed as sacred books, the name Bible was adopted by Wickliffe, and came gradually into use in our English language.

And just to add, the Qur’an also never in anyway conforms for Christians to judge by the bible (a collection of books). The Qur’an mentioned that the people of the book will be judge by the “revelations” that was revealed to their prophets and not a collection of books (BIBLE).

What Jesus (S) really thought his people it to “REPENT” and believe the Good News of the coming of God’s Kingdom on earth.

Jesus told them: “... saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel”. (Mark: 1:14)

You see, it mentioned there in Mark 1:14 again gospel? It was the good news! It should read as Follows:

“... saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the good news”. (Mark: 1:14)

 It says: “…The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe”; Believe what? Believe the good news of the kingdom of God is at hand. This is what Jesus (S) was preaching, it was for you to “REPENT” and believe the “Good News” of the coming of God’s Kingdom on earth and that was the purpose of his mission. Let’s look it up, it mentioned in Luke 4:43. He said:

I must preach KINGDOM OF GOD to the other cities also, because for THIS PURPOSE I have been sent" (Luke 4:43 NKJV)

     When Jesus (s) said: “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation” (Mark 16:15); He was instructing his disciples to go in all the world and informed the people of the “Good News of the coming of the Kingdom of God. The NWT: And he said to them: “Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. (Mark 16:15 NWT)

He said: “…The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe”

Meaning: “the time is fulfilled” you are fully informed so repent and believe the Good News of the coming of the kingdom of God.

The Kingdom of God was so important he thought his followers to pray for when it will come and the coming of it, the Most High name will sanctify:

“After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.10Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%206:9-13&version=9 - )

Coming of God Almighty kingdom on earth “His’ will” shall be done on earth. What is the will? God’s will is his divine law. The coming Kingdom is a message from God for all nations. He said:

Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”


THAT IS "ISLAM"! When the kingdom of God would have come "SUBMIT TO THE WILL OF GOD WILL BE DONE ON EARTH"


It is narrated that Jesus (S) said: “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.”  (Matthew 7:21-22)

As we can see that the ticket to Heaven has a “condition” and that is, we have to “do the will of the Father” In other words, we have to be obedience to God Law according to Jesus (S) because he said: Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.”


Truthnowcome


-------------
LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES!


Posted By: solitair
Date Posted: 18 March 2014 at 5:17pm
Originally posted by truthnowcome truthnowcome wrote:



Peace unto you!

bro. I fully understand what Christians' believe are and I am convinced they (1.6 billion) were miss lead so what I am doing here is to establish the truth.

Now let me inform you of what you are not aware of.



I am speechless - this is incredible - thank you so much for all this !!


-------------
Never drag the honest down to the level of the dishonest just to make them equal in the name of fairness, and never drag dishonest up to the level of the honest just so they will not be insulted.


Posted By: truthnowcome
Date Posted: 19 March 2014 at 3:02pm
Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

Originally posted by truthnowcome truthnowcome wrote:



Peace unto you!

bro. I fully understand what Christians' believe are and I am convinced they (1.6 billion) were miss lead so what I am doing here is to establish the truth.

Now let me inform you of what you are not aware of.



I am speechless - this is incredible - thank you so much for all this !!


Peace unto you!

You are welcome bro!

That is just a tip of the ICEBERG! You can read a follow up on this thread: JESUS (S) PREACHED THE COMING OF THE QUR'AN (ISLAM)

<>

http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27365 - http://www.islamicity.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27365


WHAT IS THE KINGDOM OF GOD AND HOW IT WILL COME?

His disciples thought that the kingdom of God will come down from Heaven and appear suddenly, it mentioned in Luke 19 11:

And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear. (Luke 19:11)

In Luke 17:20 he told the Pharisees the kingdom of God does not come with Observation:

And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation:” ( http://www.studylight.org/desk/?query=lu+17:20&translation=str&st=1&new=1&sr=1 - - Luke 17:20 )

 

Then he told his disciples how it would come in Matthew6: 31-32:

Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is like to a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field: 32Which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches. (Matthew 6:31-32)

The “grain of mustard seed” is a message; and the “man” is the one who will delivered that message; it mentioned in Revelation 12 and 14; and the coming of that message is the coming of God’s Kingdom on earth. In the book of Revelation Chapter12 it mentioned the coming of a “man child” who would have rule all nations with a rod of iron and at his arrival “then” Salvation and the Kingdom of God will come, God’s Law (his will) shall establish on earth Meaning, the message will be a universal one. Revelation 14 conforms that …. And in Luke 21 he told them to look for the sign for it coming, it was yet to come.

“And she brought forth a MAN CHILD, who was to rule all nations with a rod of iron…Now comes Salvation and strength, and the kingdom of our God… (Rev.12:5-10.)”

      That would be after the demise of Jesus (S)

 

Revelation 14:6-7 it mentioned:

And I saw another angel fly in the midst of haven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people. Saying with aloud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come.” ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation%2014:6-7&version=9 - )

That is the future tense! The book of Revelation Ch. 14: 6-7 which is a part of the Collection of books (The Bible), which is already here; it’s mentioned of an “angel coming from heaven” with the everlasting gospel for all nations. The same Greek word “Euaggelizo” which translates as Gospel which is the Good News, it mentioned also in revelation 14. The NWT got correct translation:

6 And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, and he had everlasting good news to declare as glad tidings to those who dwell on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people, 7 saying in a loud voice: “FEAR God and give him glory, because the hour of the judgment by him has arrived, and so worship the One who made the heaven and the earth and sea and fountains of waters.” (Rev.14: 6-7 NWT)

Note: This everlasting good news was coming from Heaving, an angel was bringing it from Heaven, and it was describe as a “Judgment” to “preach” to all nations. That Judgment was the criterion between rights and wrong, that Judgment there is the Law (His will) to preach unto them that dwell on earth (all nations). What Jesus (S) said? He said: Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be don on earth!”

The Judgment mentioned there was the law it is in Isaiah 42 and John 16:8 it mentioned:

 “Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my Spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentile4- He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he has set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for His LAW. (Isaiah.42:1-4)

“And when he (the Comforter) is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.” (John.16:8)

It says: “till he has set judgment in the earth and the isles shall wait for His LAW”. As we can see the everlasting Good News for all nations is the Judgment to the Gentiles, which is God’s everlasting law on earth.

Allah (S) has described the Qur’an as the “Criterion of judgment between right and wrong”, in fact he name Sura 25 (Chapter 25) Al-Furcon (The Criterion) and this is what he said in verse 1:

Blessed is He who sent down the Criterion (of judgment between right and wrong) to His Servant, that it may be an admonition to all creatures.” (Q.25:1) A book, whereof the verses are explained in detail-A Qur’an in Arabic, for people who understand-Giving Good News and admonition: yet most of them turn away, and so they hear not. (Q.41:3-4)

What revelation says? It says: 6 And I saw another angel flying in midheaven, and he had everlasting good news to declare as glad tidings to those who dwell on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people…because the hour of the judgment by him has arrived....” (Rev.14: 6-7 NWT)

Allah (S) says: “Thus have We revealed it (the Qur’an) to be a judgment of authority in Arabic” (Q.13:37)

Ramadhan is the (month) in which was sent down the Qur'an, as a guide to mankind, also clear (Signs) for guidance and Judgment (Between right and wrong). (Qur’an 2:185)

…it is no less than a Message for all creatures (mankind and jinn). (Q.12:104)

Say, the Holy Spirit (Angel Gabriel) has brought the revelation from thy Lord in truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a guide, and Glad Tidings to Muslims. (Q.16:102)“This Qur'an is not such as can be produced by other than Allah. on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the worlds.” (Qur.10:37)

Allah (S) says: Without doubt it is (announced) in the reveled books (Torah, Gospel) of former people. (Q.26:196) And this is a book which We have sent down, bringing blessing and conforming (the revelation) which came before it. (Q.6:92)

       There is no doubt about it, when we go and look into the revelation of former people it is there in Revelation 14:6-7. Look we have more conformation. It mentioned in the Qur’an:

  1. …so fear Allah and obey me. (Q.3:50); ye who believe! Fear Allah as He should fear, and die not except in a state of Islam. (Q.3:102)
  2. And glorify Him morning and evening. (Q.33:42)
  3. Thus have We revealed it (the Qur’an) to be a judgment of authority in Arabic (Q.13:37)

What Revelation 14-7 says? 

It says: Fear God and Give Glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come!”

Allah (S) said: A book, whereof the verses are explained in detail-A Qur’an in Arabic, for people who understand-Giving Good News and admonition: yet most of them turn away, and so they hear not. (Q.41:3-4)


Solitair, those information were developed during discussion over a period of 15 yrs. Here is the full document (word doc.), the numbering is not in order because I keep updating it. I have more updates to include which I did on Face Book but I will discuss it here first, Inshallah (God willing).

<>

 Download this!

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/79252919/2My%20book.docx -

Br. zainool




-------------
LET'S SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ONCE AND FOR ALL...NO MORE LIES!


Posted By: truthfull
Date Posted: 15 May 2014 at 9:10am
There are many proves.

What does islam mean by corruption

Corruption : corrupting prophet holly book /bible that
Jesus brought

Every religion has holybook brought by
Prophets and not written by normal human

Prove from bible :

One on them is that jesus confirm in bible
That he brought bible

While current bible/gospel written by people
Lived in different time of jesus
So they didn't. See him

Mark 1:15


English Standard Version
and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”

• several gospel/foundd found currently
Also prove corruption



• other point : contradiction

Contradiction prove corruption


The mother of Abijah:

2CH 11:20 Maachah the daughter of Absalom

2CH 13:2 Michaiah the daughter of Uriel

What was the color of the robe placed on Jesus during his trial?

MAT 27:28 scarlet

JOH 19:2 purple


• twisting god speech / corruption holly book
Since holly books are god speech


◄ Jeremiah 23:36 ►
Parallel Verses
New International Version
But you must not mention 'a message from the LORD' again, because each one's word becomes their own message. So you distort the words of the living God, the LORD Almighty, our God.


• there are many other proves related
To facts:

Facts 1: prophet are models they are
Not sinful people,

Bible don't agree

Insulting prophets:

Claiming prophet David killed his solider
Called urai to sleep with his wife bashiba

Claiming david commit two major sins in on time
Killing and committing adultery


• bible claim God powerless Jacob defeat god:

Consider as Insulting God :


Genesis 32:22-32 - Jacob Wrestles With God - That night - Bible ...





Posted By: truthfull
Date Posted: 15 May 2014 at 9:29am
Issac is prophet

We don't deny such fact

By the way, jesus confirm a prophet will come after him and so there will be layer prophets

Issac die before jesus

That mean mentioned prophet is not
Issac

Right or not

Genesis 17 confirm prophet will be decended from ishmael

Genesis 17
And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation.


Language change from Hebrew to Arabic

Hebrew Abram and arabic will be abraham

Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.

. name prophet Muhamad in both
Torah ve bible

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oAO2mCvpZiE



isaiah 21:13 " The burden upon arabia "


Posted By: truthfull
Date Posted: 15 May 2014 at 10:03am
1914

Sarah, not Hagar was Abraham’s wife. #2 The promise was made to them as a married couple. #3 Isaac was the “only” son of Abraham with Sarah. #4 The covenant which islamispeace does not deny was “only” with Isaac, not Ishmael. #5 It was after Hagar and Ishmael was dismissed from Abraham’s household the promise and or covenant was made, who at that time the “only” son of Abraham and Sarah was Isaac.


They change place they lived doesn't
Ishmael will not be prophet


Bible over and over prove coming prophet
Will be descended from ishmael

Read coming prophet will appear from
Paran with holly book

He said: "The LORD came from Sinai and dawned over them from Seir; he shone forth from Mount Paran. He came with myriads of holy ones, from his right hand went a fiery law for them." (Deuteronomy 33:2)


• ishmael lived in paran

Then God opened her [Hagar's] eyes and she saw a well of water. So she went and filled the skin with water and gave the boy a drink. God was with the boy as he grew up. He lived in the desert and became an archer. While he was living in the Desert of Paran, his mother got a wife for him from Egypt. (Genesis 21:19-22








Posted By: truthfull
Date Posted: 15 May 2014 at 10:10am
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:





Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

If you have read the Qur'an and the Bible, you realize that it is the same story. The main differences are that the Bible stops after Jesus. The Qur'an contains the same story as the Bible, but is has the next chapter as well.  the name of the book is the Holy Qur'an. It has everything,
Greetings solitair,Regarding these two things...The qur'an is not complete.  It includes none of the teachings of Yshwe(known as Jesus).  It claims to respect Yshwe as a prophet yet includes none of His teachings.  It refers to His teachings, the Injeel, saying that they will be found with the people of the Book, but muslims reject this, saying that 'the Book' was corrupted, but if the Book had been corrupted surely God would have had Muhammad correct it in order that the muslims would have the teachings of Yshwe. If you read the qur'an, you see clearly that it is not the same story.  There are similarities, but there are glaring differences.  The qur'an contains some of the Truth, but not all.Salaam and blessings,Caringheart






I provide evidence bible corrupted
In my previous reply

Yehwa is not jesus

Jesus confirmed he is prophet from bible :

Read carefully

Enter
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 13:31-35


• bible

Matthew 21:11 The crowds answered, "This is Jesus, the prophet ...





Posted By: truthfull
Date Posted: 15 May 2014 at 10:22am
Originally posted by Caringheart Caringheart wrote:





Originally posted by solitair solitair wrote:

If you have read the Qur'an and the Bible, you realize that it is the same story. The main differences are that the Bible stops after Jesus. The Qur'an contains the same story as the Bible, but is has the next chapter as well.  the name of the book is the Holy Qur'an. It has everything,
Greetings solitair,Regarding these two things...The qur'an is not complete.  It includes none of the teachings of Yshwe(known as Jesus).  It claims to respect Yshwe as a prophet yet includes none of His teachings.  It refers to His teachings, the Injeel, saying that they will be found with the people of the Book, but muslims reject this, saying that 'the Book' was corrupted, but if the Book had been corrupted surely God would have had Muhammad correct it in order that the muslims would have the teachings of Yshwe. If you read the qur'an, you see clearly that it is not the same story.  There are similarities, but there are glaring differences.  The qur'an contains some of the Truth, but not all.Salaam and blessings,Caringheart





I Agree with you

Quran disagree with bible in several
Points since it have been corrupted

Quran disagree prophets were alcholic

Bible claim Noah was alcholic

If so, how could he built huge ark

That mean prophets has no ethic

They are drunk, commit adultery, killer

Doesn't that mean they are sinful


All these description contradict with prophecy

Who wrote bible normal people and there speech
Not sacred

No

While quran Creator word

So you prefer to listen to human over prophets


Posted By: Al Saadiqeen21
Date Posted: 16 May 2014 at 12:43pm
Originally posted by neil neil wrote:

For years and years, I have heard claims from Islam that the Bible is corrupted.

NOT ONCE have I seen one shred of evidence to persuade me of this claim.

Who can dispel my view that corruption claims are merely Islam's way of trying to prove, conveniently for themselves, that the Quran harmonizes with the Bible when it obviously doesn't.
 
I Can the By-BILL Have many mistake , Can you prove that The Holy Qur'aan doesn't Harmonizes with the Bible ?????
 
After you prove the Qur'aan doesn't harmonizes with the BY-BILL
 
So you will know the meaning of the word your useing . You know how some christian always trying flip the script .
 
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harmonize&sa=U&ei=d2l2U9bEEqnnsASYr4II&ved=0CCEQFjAB&usg=AFQjCNGHw8UkXIgqaSK4-z1LxEBqMQmUXQ - Harmonize - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster ...
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harmonize
  • http://www.google.com/url?q=http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dcache:DpMfIuK-VFoJ:http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harmonize%252BThe%2Bmeaning%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bword%2Bharmonizes%26gbv%3D2%26%26ct%3Dclnk&sa=U&ei=d2l2U9bEEqnnsASYr4II&ved=0CCQQIDAB&usg=AFQjCNEM5syRPOngVuWI6sewmk_vnThKmQ - Cached
  • http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&q=related:www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harmonize+The+meaning+of+the+word+harmonizes&tbo=1&sa=X&ei=d2l2U9bEEqnnsASYr4II&ved=0CCUQHzAB - Similar
Definition of harmonize from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary with audio
pronunciations, thesaurus, Word of the Day, and word games.

No Word games nor Hadiyth's , I know you can use the Qur'aan / Bible to back up your cliam ''Yes ''



-------------
One doesn't go to school let His / her's mind to die , They go to school so that their mind will come alive .




Print Page | Close Window

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd. - https://www.webwiz.net