107 replies to this topic

[placid]

Hi Haydar,

Quote from Post 21:
placid, do you view the King James Bible translation to be as good as any other modern translation?

The King James is very good as a translation because King James commissioned 47 Bible Scholars and linguists to translate it from the Greek and Hebrew, --- plus the few passages written in Aramaic.

The Latin Vulgate had been translated from Latin to English and the Rheims-Douay English Version was published in 1609-10 --- (of which I have a copy).  
--- Placed side by side with the King James Version they are the same, except for the choice of words of the translators, and the extra books of history in the Douay.

The scholars and linguists produced the King James Version in 1611.
The fact that it (and the Douay) are still available is amazing in itself.

There are many good versions that I compare for study, but I believe the best is The New King James.
It doesn’t change the verse structure, just updates the language.  

There are some who believe in the King James only, and reject the newer versions.
When they have said that to me, I have asked, “What does the word ‘holpen’ mean?”  --- They don’t know.
Then I have said, “In Luke 1:54, it says ‘He hath holpen His servant Israel in remembrance of His mercy.’” --- And they still don’t really know.
--- So, I show them what it says in newer versions. --- In the NKJ it says:
1:54. He has helped His servant Israel, In remembrance of His mercy,

‘Holpen’ is simply the past tense of giving ‘help’ in the Old English.
--- Which has been updated, the same as the ‘thee’s’ and ‘thou’s’ have been updated.

However, Mr Pickthall, the English Muslim, wrote his translation in the Old English, did he not? --- And his translation is from about the 1900’s, so there were still many who used the Elizabethan English in literature.

[UmmAhmad]

Son of Placid, on 23 July 2012 - 09:34 PM, said:

That was long and drawn out?
Once every so often somebody finds this list, posts it and expects Christians to answer each one by one while any attempt is rejected anyway.
I made some points, I asked some questions.
If you didn't even read that much why reply? See what I mean about shallow?

Wow, I didn't realize that skimming through something someone wrote was considered shallow. I must have been a shallow A and B student while I was in school.

[Abu Hadi]

It seems that they're making into a personal / personality issue because they can't answer the questions posed in the thread.

[Hasnain Ali1]

Salaam my brothers and sisters in Islam and in Humanity

a simple fact that people will always protect their faith even if they them selves know that it is some what false or incorrect, it is instinct to do so, same as how we will defend Islam, even Though Islam(true Islam) is the absalute truth and one who studies and looks into it would agree from any school of thought from west to east if they be truthful, however as a former christian i defended being one and defended it, even thou i did not believe in many of the prime christian beliefs, and my own arrogance and pride would not allow me to listen to reason and logic, at the end i had no choice but to accept the truth( after much of my own reaserch) and became a Muslim( a follower of the Prophet and the family of the Prophet), but at the end of the day it is how you bring about the dialogue and point and facts, the truth will speak for its self.

Salaams

[Izrail]

Quite a big list. i'll knock out the first one quickly and hit the sack (Its 2:45am here).

1. It can't be both? God is the all powerful creator and Satan, despite his disobedience and spitefulness, is still a servant thats allowed to exist to enact portions of Gods plan and nothing else. As I was taught, one writer referenced just the mesenger(Satan) of this test for David, and another took out the middleman and went straight to the source (God). No contradiction to my mind when you look at it that way.

P.S. I'll try to keep all my answers concise, so as to make things easier for casual readers. Please endeavor  to do the same for any questions/refutations you might have concerning my answers. I'll most likely ignore walls of text, to be quite frank.

PPS. When we finish the discussion on this topic, would it be possible to have a similiar thread on your book(Quran) and its contradictions? If its offensive to you, I'm fine with not making that thread. Your forum = your rules.

Good night interwebs, be safe.

[Hasnain Ali1]

@ Izrail

you are most welcome to post a conradiction in the Quran or Open a thread or topic, if you can find one a contradiction that is

[placid]

Hi Abu,

Quote from Post 25:
As you can see, there is not only a difference in the Names, but also in the amount of generations between David(a.s) and Jesus(a.s).
I have heard many explainations for this amoung Christians, even some say that they are tracing his lineage in different ways, one for Jews and one for Gentiles. Some Christians also say that this is irrelevant, because his father was God(astaghfirAllah). Either way, a person who examines the issue with a fair and clear mind can only come to a few conclusions when examining this fact in light of the claim by Christians that every word in the Bible is divinely inspired (i.e. God(s.w.a) wrote it thru using the pens of men)

Response: --- You are right, there is a big difference in the two lists of ancestors.
If you notice the intro to Luke’s Gospel account,---  you can see his purpose in writing. Luke was the only Greek writer in the NT, he was a medical doctor and also a historian. Luke was writing his account for the Greek readership, Luke 1:
1 Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us,
2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us,
3 it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus,
4 that you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.

The Greeks were quite exaxting, and Luke would have to get this information of the Genealogy from the records in Jerusalem. There is nothing to say that any of this list was inspired by God, because it was history, --- and Mary descended from Nathan, the son of King David.

Matthew, who was a Jew, followed the descends from Solomon, the son of King David to Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus. --- Here again, Matthew had the option of skipping some unimportant generations and picking it up later with perhaps great grandchildren.

This is what you find in the OT, so this is why I say, these questions should be asked of a Jewish scholar. --- For instance: --- In the great Babylonian empire, Belshazzar is called the ‘son’ of Nebuchadnezzar.

Here is the history from the Zondervan Bible Dictionary:
Quote: In Daniel, he is referred to as the ‘son’ of Nebuchadnezzar. This is in conformity to general Semitic usage where one’s descendant is frequently referred to as his ‘son.’ --- Nebuchadnezzar died in 562 BC after a forty two year reign, and was followed in quick succession by Amel-Marduk (562-560). He was replaced by Nergal-Shar-usar who reigned from 560-556 BC. He was succeeded by Labashi-Marduk, his weak son who reigned for a few months, and then was overthrown by revolution.
One of the conspirators Nabonitus (Nabonaid) now descended the throne. Though a revolutionary, he was still a man of culture and religious zeal for the gods of Babylon. He is sometimes styled, the “World’s first archaeologist.” Nabonidus is thus the last true king of Babylon, and the father of Belshazzar whom he constituted co-regent with him as he himself retired to Arabia, presumably to consolidate the weakening empire. Belshazzar continued to reign till 539 BC when Babylon was captured by the Medes and the Persians. --- End of quote.

Matthew ended his list by saying, Matthew 1:
16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ. --- (Jesus was recorded as the Son of Joseph, but Matthew brings the genealogy from David --- to Joseph.)

Luke brings the genealogy from David --- to Mary, but words it this way in Luke 3:
23 Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli,
To stick to the male line, it could have been written, ‘Joseph, the son-in-law of Heli.’ --- But for those who believe the virgin birth of Jesus, as God purposed, then there is no problem. --- They both acknowledge Jesus as a descendant of David.

Records of history don’t need to be inspired by God, --- they just need to be recorded accurately, even if we don’t understand their method of recording.  


Placid

[Abu Hadi]

Hi Placid,

That's interesting and all but doesn't answer the question posed. A couple of points here.

1) So you don't believe that every word in the bible is divinely inspired. So then, can you tell me which words are divinely inspired and which are not ? That would be helpful to me and many others on the site who would absolutely follow the words of Almightly God(s.w.a) but have little interest in following the words of historians who are fallible like us.

2) The genealogy given, if it is Joseph's genealogy, would be irrelevant to Jesus(a.s) since Muslims and Christians agree that Joseph was not the father of Jesus.
So why would a paternal genealogy be given in two separate places ? Is this not a mistake ? Also, if one of the authors would 'skip generation', why would he not note this in the text ? Wouldn't this also be considered a mistake by any reasonable person ?

Also, if this is the geneology of Mary(a.s), why would it end with Joseph (who is not the father of Mary) ?

Edited by Abu Hadi, 25 July 2012 - 09:01 AM.

[Son of Placid]

UmmAhmad, on 24 July 2012 - 01:54 PM, said:

Wow, I didn't realize that skimming through something someone wrote was considered shallow. I must have been a shallow A and B student while I was in school.

Wow, first you said didn't read, now you say skimming. There is a discrepancy so now I'm not sure if I can believe you were an A and B student.

Abu Hadi, on 24 July 2012 - 06:05 PM, said:

It seems that they're making into a personal / personality issue because they can't answer the questions posed in the thread.

Actually it's recorded here a dozen times over the last few years. Anyone actually interested in answers could look back. If you remember Maimonides from years gone by, his response was that he would answer the OT contradictions but as he got started others came back with all sorts of arguments to the point he realized he'd never get thru it and quit.

[Son of Placid]

Hasnain Ali1, on 25 July 2012 - 02:59 AM, said:

@ Izrail

you are most welcome to post a conradiction in the Quran or Open a thread or topic, if you can find one a contradiction that is

The equivalent to dumping the 101contradiction list of answering christianity.com, would be found in the site 60 questions Muslims don't like...
Really want to go there?

Part two is dump them in a thread and answer them all in sequence and in a timley manner...to my irrefutable satisfaction.
Sounds about as much fun as this thread, eh.

[UmmAhmad]

Son of Placid, on 25 July 2012 - 08:41 PM, said:

Wow, first you said didn't read, now you say skimming. There is a discrepancy so now I'm not sure if I can believe you were an A and B student.



Actually it's recorded here a dozen times over the last few years. Anyone actually interested in answers could look back. If you remember Maimonides from years gone by, his response was that he would answer the OT contradictions but as he got started others came back with all sorts of arguments to the point he realized he'd never get thru it and quit.

Actually I said I didn't read it all= skimming. You know, the english language has words with the same meanings.

[Abu Hadi]

Son of Placid, on 25 July 2012 - 09:04 PM, said:

The equivalent to dumping the 101contradiction list of answering christianity.com, would be found in the site 60 questions Muslims don't like...
Really want to go there?

Part two is dump them in a thread and answer them all in sequence and in a timley manner...to my irrefutable satisfaction.
Sounds about as much fun as this thread, eh.

Hi Son of Placid,

This is why I only brought two. Neither of which has been answered so far. You want to take a go at it ?

I don't think we should just c/p from other sites. If you'd like, bring one or two from that site so we could answer.
The contradictions should be about the text of the Quran, not interpretations or translations. You could quote the ayat and Surat
(Chapter and Verse) and we could discuss, if you like. This is what I did with the Bible verses.

[placid]

Hi Abu,

Quote from Post 35:
That's interesting and all but doesn't answer the question posed. A couple of points here.
1) So you don't believe that every word in the bible is divinely inspired. So then, can you tell me which words are divinely inspired and which are not ? That would be helpful to me and many others on the site who would absolutely follow the words of Almightly God(s.w.a) but have little interest in following the words of historians who are fallible like us.

Response: --- Most gladly will I tell you because this is the philosophy of many,--- it is either all or nothing. --- if there is one word out of place, throw it all out.
I will answer the Genealogy question first, then come back to this.  

Quote:  2) The genealogy given, if it is Joseph's genealogy, would be irrelevant to Jesus(a.s) since Muslims and Christians agree that Joseph was not the father of Jesus.

Response: --- Matthew wrote to the Jews so emphasizes the fulfilling of prophecy to the Jews. --- The genealogy of Joseph was important for the lineage to be recorded in the line of the Father, even though Joseph was a foster father.

Notice, Matthew starts his account, “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham.” --- This is the Message, --- that Jesus came from God through the virgin birth, --- “God said ‘Be!’ – and he was.” --- and He was proclaimed to be the Son of David, and the Son of Abraham.
Had he been identified as an ‘illegitimate child,’ He would not have been accepted in the lineage of David, would He?
So Matthew ends the genealogy this way:
16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ.
17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations, and from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations.

Matthew says there were 42 generations, so he acknowledges there are gaps by not listing them all (which answers your question below).
--- However, grand-sons and great grand-sons are still sons, are they not?
--- Also, adopted sons are still sons, --- So Jesus was ‘adopted’ by Joseph, before He was born.

The angel spoke to Joseph in the next verses in Matthew 1:
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit.
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly.
20 But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”
--- This verified what Matthew said above, “Joseph, the husband of Mary, to whom was born Jesus.” --- It goes on to say this:
22 So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying:
23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”

All of this is ‘inspired by God’ in the most positive way, by prophecy and fulfillment. --- And these verses show the obedience of Joseph:
24 Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife,
25 and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus.

So this whole Chapter is ‘inspired Scripture.’ --- It gives the genealogy of Joseph as a descendant of David and provides the conditions for fulfilling God’s prophecy.

Jesus was born from a human body, so He was human, but the name Immanuel, meaning, “God with us” --- indicates the indwelling Word (Logos) that came from God (Surah 3:45). --- So in this sense, Jesus had God as His Father instead of a human father.
--- Jesus always called God “His Heavenly Father.”


Quote: So why would a paternal genealogy be given in two separate places ? Is this not a mistake ? Also, if one of the authors would 'skip generation', why would he not note this in the text ? Wouldn't this also be considered a mistake by any reasonable person ?

Response: --- No mistake. Luke was tracing the genealogy of Mary who was the real link from David to Jesus, through David’s son Nathan. In explaining the virgin birth to the Greeks, Luke would want to give “An orderly account.” Luke 1:1-3.

Notice the wording in Luke 3:
23 Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph.
Jesus was the son of the Virgin Mary, --- which says in itself that He had no father.
So that concludes that Joseph was His adopted or foster father.
Also Joseph couldn’t have been descended from both Solomon and Nathan, so the (as was supposed) switches the genealogy to the Maternal rather than the Paternal line.

(I’ll give more on the inspiration of Scripture later)


Placid

[Hasnain Ali1]

Hi son of plasid i have read through some of those questions u refered to, i already have some answers for u, and would really like to answer them, i would like to read all the questions first, however i think it would be a great idea if you open a thread, i would love to answer all those questions, just to add the ones who run from answering those questions are ones who lack knowledge and histrory of Islam. It would def make a great thread. Please kindly create the thread or would you like me too

[Abu Hadi]

placid, on 26 July 2012 - 08:09 AM, said:

Hi Abu,

Quote from Post 35:
That's interesting and all but doesn't answer the question posed. A couple of points here.
1) So you don't believe that every word in the bible is divinely inspired. So then, can you tell me which words are divinely inspired and which are not ? That would be helpful to me and many others on the site who would absolutely follow the words of Almightly God(s.w.a) but have little interest in following the words of historians who are fallible like us.

Response: --- Most gladly will I tell you because this is the philosophy of many,--- it is either all or nothing. --- if there is one word out of place, throw it all out.
I will answer the Genealogy question first, then come back to this.  

Quote:  2) The genealogy given, if it is Joseph's genealogy, would be irrelevant to Jesus(a.s) since Muslims and Christians agree that Joseph was not the father of Jesus.

Response: --- Matthew wrote to the Jews so emphasizes the fulfilling of prophecy to the Jews. --- The genealogy of Joseph was important for the lineage to be recorded in the line of the Father, even though Joseph was a foster father.

Notice, Matthew starts his account, “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham.” --- This is the Message, --- that Jesus came from God through the virgin birth, --- “God said ‘Be!’ – and he was.” --- and He was proclaimed to be the Son of David, and the Son of Abraham.
Had he been identified as an ‘illegitimate child,’ He would not have been accepted in the lineage of David, would He?
So Matthew ends the genealogy this way:
16 And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ.
17 So all the generations from Abraham to David are fourteen generations, from David until the captivity in Babylon are fourteen generations, and from the captivity in Babylon until the Christ are fourteen generations.

Matthew says there were 42 generations, so he acknowledges there are gaps by not listing them all (which answers your question below).
--- However, grand-sons and great grand-sons are still sons, are they not?
--- Also, adopted sons are still sons, --- So Jesus was ‘adopted’ by Joseph, before He was born.

The angel spoke to Joseph in the next verses in Matthew 1:
18 Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows: After His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit.
19 Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly.
20 But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.
21 And she will bring forth a Son, and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.”
--- This verified what Matthew said above, “Joseph, the husband of Mary, to whom was born Jesus.” --- It goes on to say this:
22 So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying:
23 “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”

All of this is ‘inspired by God’ in the most positive way, by prophecy and fulfillment. --- And these verses show the obedience of Joseph:
24 Then Joseph, being aroused from sleep, did as the angel of the Lord commanded him and took to him his wife,
25 and did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son. And he called His name Jesus.

So this whole Chapter is ‘inspired Scripture.’ --- It gives the genealogy of Joseph as a descendant of David and provides the conditions for fulfilling God’s prophecy.

Jesus was born from a human body, so He was human, but the name Immanuel, meaning, “God with us” --- indicates the indwelling Word (Logos) that came from God (Surah 3:45). --- So in this sense, Jesus had God as His Father instead of a human father.
--- Jesus always called God “His Heavenly Father.”

Hello Placid,


The statements of Matthew and Luke are very simple. They are a geneology. Everyone knows what a geneology is. When you say X is the son of Y everyone knows what that means. You are adding layers of complexity into a simple issue in order to obviscate the reality that you are not willing to face. You cannot have two people give two different geneologies of a person and they are both correct. This is impossible. If you want to add in 'foster son', 'grandson' etc. YOU ARE ADDING THIS, IT IS NOT IN THE TEXT. The words of the Almighty Creator stand on their own without the need for complicated scenarios and 'what ifs' in order to make them to make sense.

placid, on 26 July 2012 - 08:09 AM, said:

Quote: So why would a paternal genealogy be given in two separate places ? Is this not a mistake ? Also, if one of the authors would 'skip generation', why would he not note this in the text ? Wouldn't this also be considered a mistake by any reasonable person ?

Response: --- No mistake. Luke was tracing the genealogy of Mary who was the real link from David to Jesus, through David’s son Nathan. In explaining the virgin birth to the Greeks, Luke would want to give “An orderly account.” Luke 1:1-3.

Notice the wording in Luke 3:
23 Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph.
Jesus was the son of the Virgin Mary, --- which says in itself that He had no father.
So that concludes that Joseph was His adopted or foster father.
Also Joseph couldn’t have been descended from both Solomon and Nathan, so the (as was supposed) switches the genealogy to the Maternal rather than the Paternal line.

(I’ll give more on the inspiration of Scripture later)


Placid

The text says 'son' , not foster son or step son. See above. Do you think Almighty God doesn't know how to express the concept of step son, foster son, or grandson So that you have to add this in for Him(astaghfirAllah) ? Do you need to inform God of something he is not aware of ?


Also, what about your thoughts on the second part of my post concerning Genesis 1.?

Edited by Abu Hadi, 26 July 2012 - 08:49 PM.

[Son of Placid]

Hasnain Ali1, on 26 July 2012 - 12:50 PM, said:

Hi son of plasid i have read through some of those questions u refered to, i already have some answers for u, and would really like to answer them, i would like to read all the questions first, however i think it would be a great idea if you open a thread, i would love to answer all those questions, just to add the ones who run from answering those questions are ones who lack knowledge and histrory of Islam. It would def make a great thread. Please kindly create the thread or would you like me too

That would be fine with me if you wanted to do such a thread. I will be tremendously busy over the next couple weeks so I may only get to read. Please skip the stupid questions. One of the reasons I haven't tossed the site into the mix is not to insult "our" intelligence with some of the ridiculous statements they make.

[coldcow]

Leave the Bible alone.  Islam can stand on its own merit.  It doesn't need to try and attack other people's religions to gain validity.

Plus, I'm sure if you searched for "contradictions in the Qu'ran", or "mistakes in the Qu'ran" you'd come up with quite a few websites.

[iere]

coldcow, on 27 July 2012 - 04:59 AM, said:

Leave the Bible alone.  Islam can stand on its own merit.  It doesn't need to try and attack other people's religions to gain validity.

Plus, I'm sure if you searched for "contradictions in the Qu'ran", or "mistakes in the Qu'ran" you'd come up with quite a few websites.

It is very interesting to see so much time spent on the matter

Just for fun, I did a google search and found the same thing about the Qu'ran...people have time. LOL!

[placid]

Hi Abu,

I said I would answer the question on genealogy first, and I did.
You mentioned something important, which if you apply it to the Former Scriptures, you will have the right answer. --- You said:
Quote: “The words of the Almighty Creator stand on their own.”

Don’t you think that all of the discrepancies in Scripture have been noticed by every generation? --- And because the writing has been inspired by Almighty God, --- no one has the authority to correct them. --- Nobody has the authority to change one word, --- and it says the same in the Quran
--- It is simple to say, --- anyone who criticizes the writing of the Scriptures, is really criticizing God, and revealing that they do not accept God by faith.

So, with this second answer, whether you believe it or not depends on whether you believe God’s word or not.
--- However, the great proof of God is ‘the fulfillment of prophecy. 2 Peter 2:
20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,
21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

The reason there is no question about the validity of Jesus is because of the prophecies in Isaiah. They were written some 700 years before Jesus was born, and the two Scrolls of Isaiah were two of the best preserved Scrolls that were found in the Kumran caves, which are called ‘The Dead Sea Scrolls.’

--- So, simply said, the prophecies are as they have been written. --- Isaiah 7:
(1) --- 13. Then he said, “Hear now, O house of David! Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will you weary my God also?
14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.

---  Fulfilled in Matthew 1:23. “Behold, the virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,” which is translated, “God with us.”

(2) --- Isaiah 9:6. --- For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
7 Of the increase of His government and peace There will be no end,
Upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, To order it and establish it with judgment and justice
From that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this.

--- Fulfilled in Luke 1:30. Then the angel (Gabriel) said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus.
32 He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David.
33 And He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.”

--- And in 2:10. Then the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy which will be to all people.
11 For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.
12 And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.”

--- And again in Matthew 2:1. Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the East came to Jerusalem,
2 saying, “Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we have seen His star in the East and have come to worship Him.”
11 And when they had come into the house, they saw the young Child with Mary His mother, and fell down and worshiped Him. And when they had opened their treasures, they presented gifts to Him: gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

(3) --- Isaiah 11:1. There shall come forth a Rod from the stem of Jesse,
And a Branch shall grow out of his roots. (Jesse was the father of David)
2 The Spirit of the Lord shall rest upon Him,
The Spirit of wisdom and understanding, The Spirit of counsel and might,
The Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord.

--- And Jeremiah 23:5. “Behold, the days are coming,” says the Lord,
“That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness;
A King shall reign and prosper,
And execute judgment and righteousness in the earth.

--- And again, Jeremiah 33:15. ‘In those days and at that time
I will cause to grow up to David A Branch of righteousness;
He shall execute judgment and righteousness in the earth.
16 In those days Judah will be saved, And Jerusalem will dwell safely.
And this is the name by which she will be called:
THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS

(4) --- There are many more, but I will conclude with this from Isaiah 61:
1. “The Spirit of the Lord God is upon Me,
Because the Lord has anointed Me
To preach good tidings to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives,
And the opening of the prison to those who are bound;
2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,
And the day of vengeance of our God;
To comfort all who mourn,

--- Fulfilled in Luke 4:
16 So He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up. And as His custom was, He went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day, and stood up to read.
17 And He was handed the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when He had opened the book, He found the place where it was written:
18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,[j]
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
19 To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”
20 Then He closed the book, and gave it back to the attendant and sat down. And the eyes of all who were in the synagogue were fixed on Him.
21 And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”
22 So all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth. And they said, “Is this not Joseph’s son?”


Placid

[Hasnain Ali1]

salamz

please note that there are no contradictions in the Quran, if the west finds something in the translation that is then due to the lack in the translators ability to get an english word for the Aribic Word, for example the word Rabi witch the closeset word to it in the english languge in Lord, but Rabi Also means sustanier and nurisher so and and so forth. but the translation of the Quran is just that a translation, it can never replace the Aribic original, the Quran has stood the test of time and has never been changed, and it shall never be changed.

there is only one faith one religion submission to God peacfuly(Islam) , it was the Faith of Prophet Adam(AS) to Prophet Muhammad(AS), God set down the Prophets with a certian message for a certion people who only had a limited capasity of intellectual understanding. so it is a pazzel, on must just figure it out

May peace be with you

PS Islam Is a Verb and is not a man made title

Edited by Hasnain Ali1, 27 July 2012 - 07:43 AM.

[Abu Hadi]

This is the main problem with doing a comparison between the Bible and the Quran. For the Quran, we have a text in the original language that is intact and unchanged for 1400 years. There is no such a thing with the Bible. For the New Testament (which is the main part of the Bible for Christians), the earliest complete text of it dates to more than 300 years after the death of Jesus (The Codex Vaticanus) and is in a language he didn't speak or write, namely Greek. So this is the main issue. I don't think any amount of debate or discussion will solve that.

Edited by Abu Hadi, 27 July 2012 - 07:56 AM.

[Hasnain Ali1]

placid, on 27 July 2012 - 07:16 AM, said:

Hi Abu,


Don’t you think that all of the discrepancies in Scripture have been noticed by every generation? --- And because the writing has been inspired by Almighty God, --- no one has the authority to correct them. --- Nobody has the authority to change one word, --- and it says the same in the Quran
--- It is simple to say, --- anyone who criticizes the writing of the Scriptures, is really criticizing God, and revealing that they do not accept God by faith.

So, with this second answer, whether you believe it or not depends on whether you believe God’s word or not.
--- However, the great proof of God is ‘the fulfillment of prophecy. 2 Peter 2:
20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,
21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.


Placid

Hi Placid (salamz)

with regards to you reply here i highly disagree, the reason being that a number of verses in the bible are not inspired by the Almighty, but by men who hijacked the bible and took the word of God for a ride, and change a few things here and there.

in 325 Ad the council of Nicea voted in that Isa(jesus) would be son of God, where a nother part of christians disagreed with that motion, but since the pagans where the majority they won the vote and Isa became the sone of God, but in the bible, there are a number of verses where Isa says he is not the son of God.
so you have the false and fabricated verses and Original verses saying two diff things, and contradicting each other, hence the reason Isa(AS) said

” It is the expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgement: Of sin because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more; of judgement, because the prince of this world is judged.

“I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. How be it when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come

“He shall glorify me; for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.”(John 18:7-14)

Similar references have been recorded in John, 14:26 and 15:26.

so that the believers may be put aright, and the histroy and events made clear,

Salamz

[Son of Placid]

The council of Nicea didn't decide Jesus was the son of God, they decided Jesus was God, although if they had gone to the trouble of changing the Bible to make Jesus God then where is the verse where Jesus says "I am God"?
Constantine's plan was to get everyone on the same page, decide what was true, what was heresay and make a book all could follow. Without rewriting the books to say "I am God" I'd say he did a pretty good job of convincing the masses.

Still doesn't make Jesus into God, nor does the Bible say so.

[coldcow]

Hasnain Ali1, on 27 July 2012 - 07:42 AM, said:

please note that there are no contradictions in the Quran, if the west finds something in the translation that is then due to the lack in the translators ability to get an english word for the Aribic Word

Yeah yeah, that's what you say.  To some non-Muslim on the internet he just sees a verse about people used to be 40 cubits tall, or how inheritance split up among family adds up to 5/3 or something like that, and then how the Earth was made in 6 days, and then it was made in 2 days, etc.  I don't remember the exact details as i haven't looked into these things in years, but you get my point.

So what I'm saying is, leave the Bible alone.  Islam is good enough to stand on its own merit without having to try and degrade someone else's religion to make it look better.  It's also just not nice.  I'm sure you wouldn't like it if people started making fun of the Qu'ran, or Islam in general.

[placid]

Hi Hasnain,

Quote from Post 48:
with regards to you reply here i highly disagree, the reason being that a number of verses in the bible are not inspired by the Almighty, but by men who hijacked the bible and took the word of God for a ride, and change a few things here and there.
in 325 Ad the council of Nicea voted in that Isa(jesus)  would be son of God, where a nother part of christians disagreed with that motion, but since the pagans where the majority they won the vote and Isa became the sone of God, but in the bible, there are a number of verses where Isa says he is not the son of God.
so you have the false and fabricated verses and Original verses saying two diff things, and contradicting each other,

Response: --- While you are right about the council of Nicea making some changes, they did not change the words of Scripture.
All the Books of the New Testament were written in the first century and were preserved as written. The Church Fathers, who followed the Apostles were devout and continued in spreading the Gospel throughout the ‘then known’ world, in spite of being persecuted by both the Jews and the Romans.

By about 300 AD, the Church leaders were becoming less spiritual and more political and --- under the influence of the Roman Government, became allied with them, and agreed to a Church structure, following that of the Pharisees, with a hierarchy of councils, priests --- and a Pope, who would be the ‘figurehead’ of the New Church. --- They would then make laws to guide the Church and the Church then would speak with one voice. --- It was to be a ‘universal’ Church taking dominion over other Churches, and it was called, ‘The Roman Catholic Church.’ (Catholic means ‘universal’)

--- They could not change any Scriptures, since the NT had been translated into different languages by then and distributed to different countries.
They could not gather them all up and make changes, --- but they had a ‘council’ that began to ‘interpret’ their new doctrines (which they would then impose on other Churches).
In 325 at Nicea, as you said, --- they wrote the Nicene Creed, and this was a faulty doctrine that has misled the masses ever since.

The independent Churches did not accept it so some were persecuted and some leaders were imprisoned and put to death.    
This is where violence began within Christianity, and the Roman Church used their power to dominate others, --- they were wrong. --- However, the Evangelical Churches continued to follow God’s word, in spite of persecution.

The faulty trinity doctrine of the Nicene creed has been the most divisive, because, as Son of Placid said:
“The council of Nicea didn't decide Jesus was the son of God, they decided Jesus was God”
They didn’t change any Scripture, --- they just taught their faulty doctrine, which has found its way into most Churches as a ‘traditional Church Doctrine.’
--- It has been on of the greatest controversies here on Sniachat’

There is no verse where Jesus said He was God.
However, when the angel Gabriel (the same Gabriel that gave the revelations to Muhammad) came to Mary to announce the birth of Jesus, it says in Luke 1:
30 Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
31 And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son, and shall call His name Jesus.
32 He will be great, and will be CALLED the Son of the Highest;

And again in these verses which follow:  
“The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be CALLED the Son of God.

And Jesus was, and is, CALLED the Son of God, --- and Jesus always called God His heavenly Father.
(More later)


Placid