Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Arminmo said:

Not the past scripture ?! So the past scripture has nothing wrong with it! Let’s see:

“You are the Christ [the Messiah], the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16)

Compare it to:

Quran 6:101

[He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing.

 

@Son of Placid that’s the proof of corruption of your gospels, lots of lies narrated by “unknown writers” about jesus.

We've been over the "son of God". Jesus continually called God His Father. He called His people children of God. He preached how to become a child of God, He started the Lord's Prayer with "Our Father" not His Father, everyone's Father.  How is Jesus a child of God more than anyone else? How is your creator not your father?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

Jesus continually called God His Father.

That’s what we are trying you to understand!

”who” said jesus called god father and then himself son? Who narrated that? “Unknown writers!”

God has denied such a thing. That’s just one example of corruption in your gospels.

Edited by Arminmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Lut (as) was the first person that stands against Hemosexuality. 

Lut didn't want the people trying to rape angels. From what I understand, angels are non sexual beings. How could he offer up his daughters?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Son of Placid said:

Lut didn't want the people trying to rape angels. From what I understand, angels are non sexual beings. How could he offer up his daughters

Because they come to him as human beings (men) not in angel form in Quran mentioned that if you see angels in their true form it is sign of end of the world. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

How is your creator not your father?  

 I just showed you the verse:

Quran 6:101

[He is] Originator of the heavens and the earth. How could He have a son when He does not have a companion and He created all things? And He is, of all things, Knowing.

word:companion (wife)

when god doesn’t have any wife how can he have son ? Don’t you think, he is just everyone’s creator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Arminmo said:

That’s what we are trying you to understand!

”who” said jesus called god father and then himself son? Who narrated that?

God has denied such a thing. That’s just one example of corruption in your gospels.

You are trying to make me think like a trinitarian, lol. 

Jesus said, "Our Father, who art in Heaven..." You must know the Lord's prayer. It's red letter.

Every time Jesus called God "Father", He also said, "who art in Heaven", quite simply, a Heavenly Father. 

It is interesting that in the prophesy, it says "He will be called the son of God" , and He was, but Jesus never called Himself the son of God. 

There is so much implied, volumes of books on what every word means and how it applies to an assumed context, cross referenced to vague similarities, all to turn the words to three in one, all with the same agenda from various sources. My father had a library bigger than my bedroom. He also considered them worthless and they are long gone. Woe to those...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ashvazdanghe said:

Because they come to him as human beings (men) not in angel form in Quran mentioned that if you see angels in their true form it is sign of end of the world. 

I haven't looked at this Islamically yet. From the Torah I understand angels were much more prominent and took on human form often way back then. There are also references where they were in angelic form, in the high temple, Holy of Holies. Cherabims, and Seraphims, two main forms. One was to praise, the other for interaction. I'd have to go back a look to remember which was which. 

I'm very sure the next time you see an angel in their true form it's at least the end of your world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

Read up on 'Comma Johanneum'.

John's epistles were written in Koine Greek, the language has no punctuation. Every language it's been translated into has punctuation.

In some grand trinitarian scale this must mean something but it doesn't make sense if you don't start with a trinitarian mind.

You guys really need to find some trinitarians to rattle.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Son of Placid said:

John's epistles were written in Koine Greek, the language has no punctuation. Every language it's been translated into has punctuation.

In some grand trinitarian scale this must mean something but it doesn't make sense if you don't start with a trinitarian mind.

You guys really need to find some trinitarians to rattle.. 

I have no stake in these Trinitarian VS. Unitarian battles. 
The OP asked a question about controversies regarding authenticity of some parts  of the Bible. I pointed to this debate as a response since it is a controversy of big doctrinal importance.

Edited by AbdusSibtayn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AbdusSibtayn said:

I have no stake in these Trinitarian VS. Unitarian battles. 
The OP asked a question about controversies regarding authenticity of some parts  of the Bible. I pointed to this debate as a response since it is a controversy of big doctrinal importance.

That was my point. The OP asked for biblical accuracy, everybody hits em with "doctrines", assuming the scriptures have been twisted to the prove their faulty doctrines. Well, it wasn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, andres said:

What Jesus preached you find  described in the New Testament. There is no indication whatever that God sent a Book to Jesus. The only Book Jesus had was the Hebrew Bible. It still exists and it is identical to the one Jesus and his fellow Jews read.

But you must see there is a disconnect. 

We do not know what Jesus preached is in the Bible because he never came into contact with it and confirmed it or had any influence in its editing.

What do you think Jesus was preaching? When we hear the phrase "Jesus was preaching the gospel", this could not have been the bible, as by your own admission, the bible did not exist at that time, so what was Jesus preaching?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, iraqi_shia said:

But you must see there is a disconnect. 

We do not know what Jesus preached is in the Bible because he never came into contact with it and confirmed it or had any influence in its editing.

What do you think Jesus was preaching? When we hear the phrase "Jesus was preaching the gospel", this could not have been the bible, as by your own admission, the bible did not exist at that time, so what was Jesus preaching?

Jesus and other Jews had the Hebrew Bible. He did not "live" long enough to see any Christian writings. The oldest documents we have concerning Jesus teachings are the letters and Gospels collected in the New Testament. The NT is not long enough to cover everything Jesus said,  and since it is written by humans, it is not perfect, but NT is far the best documentation on Jesus that we have got.

Edited by andres

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, andres said:

Jesus and other Jews had the Hebrew Bible. He did not "live" long enough to see any Christian writings. The oldest documents we have concerning Jesus teachings are the letters and Gospels collected in the New Testament. The NT is not long enough to cover everything Jesus said,  and since it is written by humans, it is not perfect, but NT is far the best documentation on Jesus that we have got.

I think its fair to say that Jesus did not simply preach the Hebrew texts, as that would make his position and Christianity completely redundant.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

I think its fair to say that Jesus did not simply preach the Hebrew texts, as that would make his position and Christianity completely redundant.

 

Agreed. Had he only preached Judaism, Christianity had not been born. If you compare the New testament and the Hebrew bible, you will see the difference. No stoning punishments, Jesus is more modern

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

I think its fair to say that Jesus did not simply preach the Hebrew texts, as that would make his position and Christianity completely redundant.

 

6 minutes ago, andres said:

No stoning punishments, Jesus is more modern

 Not agreed.

as we all know torah is corrupted, so god gave him the untouched knowledge of the book. Not this exact corrupted Torah.

about stoning , we can’t talk about Christianity because untouched bible “injeel” does not exist. In Quran we still have stoning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

it says "He will be called the son of God" , and He was,

Other than prophecies written by unknown writers, on what basis you say “he was” son of god???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Son of Placid did you see the top video ?!

i thought you said “god was supposed to preserve Torah and New Testament ! “ is that what you call preserve?!

this video was just one proof that non of your books can be reliable. And you don’t have the untouched words of prophets, let alone saying jesus had the same knowledge of the book (corrupted Torah).

Edited by Arminmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Arminmo said:

You still know nothing about your corrupted books :

I know a lot more about our books than you do. The Torah is the only Torah there ever was. Noone has ever seen or heardabout the "uncorrupted Torah". Not until Muslims found out that the Torah differed from the Quran. Which logically must have been after the Quran was written. The thought that the Torah and the Quran both could contain errors was unthinkable for Muslims. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Son of Placid said:

Note it's in present tense, not past tense. This is a warning forward.

You have to study not only this verse but the ones before, to realize that it is referring to the Jews who use to alter divine words and conceal the truth. The Jews living in Medina were expected to support Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) as it had been clearly mentioned in their scripture. However they were very ignorant and turns out that the pagans (Awz and Khazraj) who use to oppose the Jews, were the ones who ended up supporting Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Do you then hope that they would believe in you? While a party from among them indeed used to hear the words of Allah, then altered it after they had understood it, and they know(this). (Quran 2:75)

This verse is now addressed to the believers about true nature of the Jews.

And when they meet those who believe, they say, "We have believed"; but when they are alone with one another, they say, "Do you talk to them about what Allah has revealed to you so they can argue with you about it before your Lord?" Then will you not reason? (Quran 2:76)

The verse "do you talk to them about what Allah has revealed" clearly shows that some of the Jews may have even been condemned for publicly confirming the truth of Islam and the arrival of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh).

 "What! Do they not know that Allah knows what they conceal and what they proclaim?"( Quran 2:77).

"So woe to those who write the scripture with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn."(Quran 2:79)

Therefore your claim that "Nowhere in the Quran has the alteration of divine words been mentioned" is completely false. Anyway, these verses confirm the evil of the previous generations.

Edited by ali_fatheroforphans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, andres said:

Jesus and other Jews had the Hebrew Bible. He did not "live" long enough to see any Christian writings. The oldest documents we have concerning Jesus teachings are the letters and Gospels collected in the New Testament. The NT is not long enough to cover everything Jesus said,  and since it is written by humans, it is not perfect, but NT is far the best documentation on Jesus that we have got.

The best document we have concerning Jesus' uncorrupted teachings are only found through revelation, which the current NT clearly isnt. By the words of its writers, it is but a pamohlet aimed at convincing the reader of its unknown and non-eye witnesses' own doctrines Jn20:31"But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." 

In the process, these writers, with their very shallow and distorted knowledge of both the true events surrounding jesus' life as well as the Hebrew bible on which they based most of their misinterpretations (mostly because of their ignirance of the original Hebrew text), have painted Jesus as a false messiah and false prophet. This can be shown through many examples one of which is Jesus' failed prophecies of return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/04/2018 at 8:16 AM, Son of Placid said:

 

You'll have to bring to light some of these "insane" contradictions. 

Among them, and not the least, having far reaching ramifications and going back to the book of Genesis is the fact that Isaac was never Abraham's "only son".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×