Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Ibn Abu Talib

Interesting article on the Dead Sea Scrolls

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

(bismillah)

The Dead Sea Scrolls Prove That Jesus Has Not Died !

In 1947 a group of children stumbled upon the first set of scrolls in a cave on the shores of the dead sea. These scrolls were immediately identified as the work of a very devout sect of the Jewish community that lived centuries before the birth of Jesus (pbuh). Hershel Shanks says in his book Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls: "Such was the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, manuscripts a thousand years older than the oldest known Hebrew texts of the Bible, manuscripts many of which were written a hundred years before the birth of Jesus and at least one of which may have been written almost three hundred years before the journey of Mary and Joseph to Bethleham" (Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, Hershel Shanks, pp. 7-8).

An immediate frantic search ensued through the remaining caves in the region in order to find what other ancient scrolls could be discovered therein. A small group of "international" scholars in Israel were given exclusive access to them and the rest of the world was all but totally barred from gaining even the slightest glimpse of the texts (Prof. Eisenman observes that one of the major stumbling blocks for the publication of the scrolls was that "in the first place, the team was hardly international") . Prof. Robert Eisenman was one of the key players in the drama that finally lead to the release of the scrolls. In his book The Dead

Sea Scrolls Uncovered we read: "In the spring of 1986, at the end of his stay in Jerusalem, Professor Eisenman went with the British scholar, Philip Davies of the University of Sheffield, to see one of the Israeli officials responsible for this - an intermediary on behalf of the Antiquities Department (now 'Authority') and the International Team and the Scrolls Curator at Israel Museum.

They were told in no uncertain terms 'You will not see the Scrolls in your lifetimes'".

This stung them into action, and as a result of this statement, a massive effort was launched and five years later, through a whirlwind of media publicity, absolute access to the scrolls was attained. Prof. Eisenman eventually received 1800 pictures of the previously unpublished scrolls. The book goes on to describe how "Eisenman was preparing the Facsimile Edition of all unpublished plates. This was scheduled to appear the following spring through E. J. Brill in Leiden, Holland. Ten days, however, before it's scheduled publication in April 1991, after pressure was applied by the International Team, the publisher inexplicably

withdrew and Hershel Shanks (author of Biblical Archiology Review) and the Biblical Archeology Society to their credit stepped in to fill the breach". However, finally in September 1991, the archives were officially opened and two months later the 2-volume Facsimile Edition was published.

We have already read the words of Mr. Tom Harpur in the preface to his book: "The most significant development since 1986 in this regard has been the discovery of the title "Son of God" in one of the Qumran papyri (Dead Sea Scrolls) used in relation to a person other than Jesus.....this simply reinforces the argument made there that to be called the Son of God in a Jewish setting in the first century is not by any means the same as being identical with God Himself." For Christ's Sake, pp. xii. So why

don't we study these scrolls in a little more detail and see what else we can learn ?

The Dead Sea Scrolls consist of fragments from many manuscripts, however, some of the most interesting among them are the Pesher texts. The Pesher texts are strings of interpretations of Biblical verses compiled by the most knowledgeable among the Jews. The word itself is derived from the Hebrew root word p-sh-r, which means, "to explain". The texts consist of Biblical passages followed by the words pesher ha-davar "the interpretation of the matter is", and then the interpretation itself.

The basis of all of these texts is the notion that all of history is preordained by God. In other words, God is not restricted to looking at matters as "past", "present", or "future", rather, all of time is an open book to God Indeed, this is the essence of how prophets receive "prophesies", because God "sees" the future. So, remembering that we are henceforth quoting from texts that have been carbon dated at about 100 years or more before the coming of Jesus (pbuh), and that this dating is confirmed by literary analysis, and that the authors were a sect of very religious and devout Jews, considering all of this let us see what they have to say:

Those who have studies the scrolls have noticed a common theme prevalent throughout these manuscripts, that is, most of the pesher texts prophesize the coming of a "Teacher of Righteousness" who will be sent by God to the Jews. This "Teacher of Righteousness" will be opposed by the "Teacher of Lies" and the "Wicked Priest". These scrolls also predict the coming of two messiahs. These two messiahs are referred to as a 1) priestly and a 2) temporal messiah. What we had here was a society of very devout Jews who were convinced that the time of the coming of the two messiahs was at hand, therefore, they set about preparing for their advent by detaching themselves from the mainstream society, and dedicating their lives to their worship and the preparation for their imminent arrival.

In The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, by Robert Eisenman and Michael Wise, we read that the early scrolls spoke of two messiahs, but that later on, the communities of the Jews began to combine them into one messiah: "As we have suggested, contrary to the well-known 'two-Messiah' theory of early Qumran scholarship, these references to the 'Messiah of Aaron and Israel' in the Damascus Document are singular not plural... and one possible explanation for it is that it is evoking a Messiah with both priestly and kingly implications, like the somewhat similar recitations of Hebrews" (The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered, Robert Eisenman and Michael Wise, p. 162).

"According to the dominant view in the sectarian texts from Qumran, two messiahs were to lead the congregation in the End of Days, one priestly, and the other lay" (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, pp. 321-322).

The Jews had prophesies of two messiahs. The first was best known to them for his "religious" or "priestly" works which he would perform. The second was best known to them for his "kingly" works; his bringing of an epoch of peace.

These two prophesies refer to Jesus (pbuh) and Muhammad (pbuh). Jesus (pbuh) was best know for his "priestly" works. However, he never lead an army, and he never established a kingdom or a government. Quite the opposite, he called to peace and submissiveness and to leave the rule of the land to others (Matthew 22:21). He told his followers that he yet had many things to teach them but they could not bear them yet and that another would be coming after him who would teach them the complete truth (John 16:7-14).

Muhammad (pbuh) too began his ministry preaching submissiveness and passiveness. However, his ministry was nurtured by God almighty to a point where it was able to defend itself and establish justice in the earth and abolish evil. His followers fought several wars in self defense and against injustice. The Islamic empire finally stretched from China to Spain and even those who did not follow Muhammad (pbuh) knew him well. However, what did they know him for? They knew him for his "kingly"

actions and not for the "priestly" side of him that his followers knew.

"And fight against them until persecution is no more and religion is for God alone. But if they desist then let there be no hostility except against wrongdoers" -The Qur'an, al-Baqarah(2):193

"Those unto whom We gave the Scripture recognize him Muhammad as they recognize their sons. But verily, a party of them conceal the truth while they know it" --The Qur'an, al-Baqarah(2):146

Over time, the prophesies of the Jews began to become a little blurred, and this in addition to the continuous persecution of many nations towards the Jews eventually lead to their blending of these prophesies into one single prophesy and their aggrandizing of this one all- conquering wondrous event that would finally relieve them of their persecution and pave the way for them to march forth conquering all nations, and establishing themselves as the protectors of the kingdom of God. For this reason, when we read the Gospel of Barnabas, we find that when the Jews ask Jesus (pbuh) whether he is "the messiah" he

replays that he is not "the messiah" that they are expecting.

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law." --Matthew 10:34-35

This is because he understood their question. They were not asking him for his title, rather, they wanted to know whether he was the one who would finally fulfill all of their prophesies of leadership, power, and grandeur that they had been waiting for for so many centuries. For this reason, he told them that he was not "the messiah", but that "the Messiah" they were waiting for would not come until later. He was referring to the SECOND messiah in their prophesies. (the Jews had expectations of three prophecies to be fulfilled)

Lawrence Schiffman says regarding Pesher Habakkuk: "It (Pesher Habakkuk) describes the struggle between the Teacher of Righteousness and his opponents - the Man of Lies (also termed the Spouter or Preacher of Lies) and the Wicked Priest. The Spouter is pictured as heading a community. The dispute between the Teacher and the Spouter is seems to have been based on matters of religious interpretation and law. The Wicked Priest is said to have begun his rule in truth but then to have abandoned the way of truth. He then persecutes the Teacher, confronting him on the holiest day of the year, the Day of Atonement". (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, p. 228).

This prophesy also continues in Pesher Psalms: "This text also mentions the familiar dramatis personae: the Teacher of Righteousness, termed 'the priest'; the wicked priest; and the Man of Lies. The Wicked Priest persecuted the Teacher and sought to kill him. The man of lies lead people astray".(Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, p. 229).

What we begin to see in all of this is the story of the coming of Jesus (pbuh), his selection of Judas as one of the apostles, the deviance of Judas from the truth, how a sect of the Jews persecuted Jesus (pbuh), how this sect tried to deceive the masses and differed with Jesus (pbuh) regarding the truth of God's message, and finally, how they schemed with Judas to kill Jesus (pbuh). The Teacher of Righteousness is thus a reference to Jesus (pbuh); the "priestly" Messiah. The Wicked Priest is a reference to Judas, and the Spouter of Lies is most likely the leader of the "chief priests and Pharisees" who persecuted Jesus (pbuh) and are mentioned so often in the Bible.

Many Christian scholars have snatched up these prophesies in order to prove the validity of their claim that Jesus (pbuh) was indeed sent by God and that the Jews are required to follow him. However, they have been thwarted in their attempts by one other quite amazing piece of evidence that the Jews continually manage to refute their claims with, specifically, that the Dead Sea Scrolls claim that the coming messiah will be persecuted and that the Wicked Priest will try to kill him, but that the Wicked

Priest will not be successful and that it is he who will receive the fate he wished for the messiah.

In interpreting Psalms 37:32, "The Wicked watches for the righteous, seeking to put him to death," the text states: 'Its interpretation concerns the Wicked Priest who watched out for the Teacher of Righteousness and sought to put him to death'" (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, p. 233). So Judas will try to kill Jesus (pbuh).

"The Wicked Priest began his career with the support of the sectarians, but he quickly lost his way and began to transgress in order to increase his wealth". (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, p. 233).

"And said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for thirty pieces of silver". --Matthew 26:15

"Various theories have sought to identify the Teacher with Jesus, claiming that he was executed by the Wicked Priest. However, had that been the case, the text would not have gone on to explain how God took vengeance against the priest by turning him over to the 'ruthless ones of the nations'. And according to this text, the teacher certainly survived the ambush. Indeed the entire passage is an interpretation of Psalms (37:33) where the text continues, "The Lord will not abandon him (the Righteous), into his hand (the Wicked); He (The Lord) will not let him (the Righteous) be condemned in judgment (by the wicked)." (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, pp. 233-234).

The author goes on to quote Pesher Habakkuk with regard to the Wicked Priest's intentions and his punishment. He says: "Ultimately, however, the Wicked Priest was punished: '.. because of his transgression against the Teacher of Righteousness and the men of his council, God gave him over to the hands of his enemies to afflict him with disease so as to destroy him with mortal suffering because he had acted wickedly against His chosen one'.

The Wicked Priest's enemies tortured him which represents divine punishment for his attacks on the Teacher of Righteousness. The sufferings of the Wicked Priest are even more graphically described in another passage: 'and all his enemies arose and abused him in order for his suffering to be fit punishment for his evil. And they inflicted upon him horrible diseases, and acts of vengeance in the flesh of his body'. But the one who suffered was the Wicked Priest, not the Teacher of Righteousness.

"The enemies of the Wicked Priest, the nation against whom he had made war, are said to have tortured him, so that his life ended in mortal disease and affliction." (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, p. 234). If we read the Gospel of Barnabas, we will find that when Judas came with the Roman troops in order to betray Jesus (pbuh), God raised Jesus (pbuh) unto Him and saved him. He then made Judas look and even speak like Jesus (pbuh) so that the Romans dragged him (Judas) away with them kicking and screaming that he was not Jesus (pbuh) but Judas. Even the Apostles were totally bewildered.

After the Romans had their fill afflicting Judas with all manner of abuse and torture, he was finally taken to trial. By now he had totally given up hope of ever being believed. So now when he was asked, "art thou Jesus?" He replied "Thou sayest". In other words, "you will not believe me if I say otherwise, so why fight it any more". His enemies (the Romans) then took him, mocked him, kicked him, cut him, spat on him, humiliated him, and tortured him. Finally, they put him up on the cross. It appears, however, that shortly after they took him down, he disappeared from his tomb (maybe to live in disease and torment and die later on if he was not already dead). The Gospel of Baranabas then goes on to describe how Jesus (pbuh) returned to the apostles to tell them of how God had saved him from the hands of the Jews and the Romans and how the traitor (Judas) was taken instead.

This is exactly what the Qur'an has been saying for 1400 years now; that Jesus (pbuh) was not forsaken by God to be killed by the conspiracy of the Jews and Judas, but that "it was made to appear so to them":

"But when Jesus became conscious of their disbelief, he cried: Who will be my helpers in the cause of Allah? The disciples said: We will be Allah's helpers. We believe in Allah, and bear you witness that we have surrendered (unto Him). Our Lord! We believe in that which You have revealed and we follow him whom You have sent. Enroll us among those who witness (to the truth). And they (the disbelieves) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers" --The Qur'an,

A'l-Umran(3):52-54.

"And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger, and they slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; for of a surety they slew him not" --The Qur'an, Al-Nissa(4):157

. The scrolls then go on to describe how "Kittim" (the Roman empire) and the kings of Greece would both try to take Jerusalem (the symbol of the faithful), but that it would be Kittim (the Romans) who would finally be successful.

"Some texts also speak about an eschatological prophet who will announce the coming of the Messiah, a figure similar to Elijah in the rabinnic tradition" (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, p. 323).

Referring to the manuscript titled The Rule of the Community, verse 9:11-12, Mr. Schiffman says: "this text unquestionably refers to two messiahs who will be announced by an eschatological prophet and based on a the cave 4 manuscripts of Rule of the Community, the original publication team argued that this passage was added to the text later in the history of the sect. However, the evidence in these manuscripts does not sufficiently support such an assertion. As far as we can tell, the two-messiah concept was part of Rule of the Community from the time it was composed". (Reclaiming the Dead Sea Scrolls, Lawrence H. Schiffman, p. 324).

"And when there came unto them (the Jews) a Scripture from Allah, confirming that in their possession though before that they were invoking Allah (for the coming of Muhammad ) in order to gain victory over those who disbelieved, then when there came unto them that which they had recognized, they disbelieved in it. So let the curse of Allah be on disbelieves" --The Qur'an, Al-Baqarah(2):89

The Dead Sea Scrolls make mention of many more quite amazing and illuminating prophesies and parallels with the teachings of the Qur'an and Islam and There is so much more that could be said about the Dead Sea Scrolls and their confirmation of the Qur'an and the mission of Muhammad , however, that will have to be left to a future article where, God willing, many more detailed examples of this sort shall be analyzed in detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very interesting.

But two assumptions stand out.

1. That the predicted second messiah was Muhammad.

2. That there is any veracity in the so called Gospel of Barnabas.

The problems with taking Muhammad as being the successor to Jesus is that Muhammad taught so much that was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus.

Muslims have attempted to counter this by claiming that those parts of the Gospels which contradict the teachings of Muhammad are forgeries or corruptions.

But if the teachings of Jesus, as reviled in the Gospels, are indeed forged, then the question must be asked, who did such a thing and why.

The teachings of Jesus, directly contradict the behaviour and attitudes of almost every institution in existence at that time which could have conceivably been in a position to do such a thing.

A claim of forgery will need a little more evidence than simply claiming contradiction with a much later document.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very interesting.

But two assumptions stand out.

1. That the predicted second messiah was Muhammad.

2. That there is any veracity in the so called Gospel of Barnabas.

The problems with taking Muhammad as being the successor to Jesus is that Muhammad taught so much that was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus.

Muslims have attempted to counter this by claiming that those parts of the Gospels which contradict the teachings of Muhammad are forgeries or corruptions.

But if the teachings of Jesus, as reviled in the Gospels, are indeed forged, then the question must be asked, who did such a thing and why.

The teachings of Jesus, directly contradict the behaviour and attitudes of almost every institution in existence at that time which could have conceivably been in a position to do such a thing.

A claim of forgery will need a little more evidence than simply claiming contradiction with a much later document.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A claim of forgery must also be backed up with documented proof dating to BEFORE the Gospels, and not after, to which the "corruptions" can be compared against.

This issue has been raised many times, and it's a brick wall for many here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problems with taking Muhammad as being the successor to Jesus is that Muhammad taught so much that was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus. which contradict the teachings of Muhammad are forgeries or corruptions.

But if the teachings of Jesus, as reviled in the Gospels, are indeed forged, then the question must be asked, who did such a thing and why.

The teachings of Jesus, directly contradict the behaviour and attitudes of almost every institution in existence at that time.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

whether jesus was contradicting the institutions of his time is not the issue.all the messengers were send by god.so its not possible that they contradict themselves.its like sayin GOD has contradicted himself.jesus himself said he did not come to innovate but to compliment the teachings of the messengers before.the quran says the same thing but to compliment and complete.

all the corruption is from christianitys plytheisatic tendency.the quran says GOD never sent a messenger to worship other than him.and it says it is inconceivable that GOD will choose a man for him to tell the people worship me instead of THE ONE WHO SENT me or alongside HIM as equals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A claim of forgery must also be backed up with documented proof dating to BEFORE the Gospels, and not after, to which the "corruptions" can be compared against.

This issue has been raised many times, and it's a brick wall for many here.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

there is no need for the original of the past .the bible of today is a witness against itself.many contradictions which means it is not authentic.even christian scholars know this like donald morgan and his biblical inconsistencies which is of recent.but the quran have cited this 1400 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whether jesus was contradicting the institutions of his time is not the issue.all the messengers were send by god.so its not possible that they contradict themselves.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If, for the sake of argument, we accept that, then there can be only one of two possibilities.

1. Most of those who are said to have been sent by God, and are therefore considered to be perfect were not sent by God at all, but are frauds.

Abraham seduced one of his slaves. Then when he tired of her, cast her and their child into the desert to die.

David who committed adultry, theft and lied.

These are but two examples.

God speaks to us all, but we have to listen.

We can believe that sometimes God speaks to some, with words intended to be told to others. We can call these people prophets.

We know that those who proclaim messages from God frequently are very imperfect. It is for us to use our common sense and our knowledge of the 10 Commandments to separate what is from God and what is not.

The 10 Commandments have not been changed. They stand in their literal meaning, as delivered by Moses, then reaffirmed, between 1000 and 2000 years later by Jesus.

If the records of Jesus teachings are corrupt, the question is, who would do such a thing?

2. That the accounts of the lives of the prophets, as recounted in Israelite texts are also corrupt.

all the corruption is from christianitys plytheisatic tendency.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There is no polyethism in Christianity.

This is just another piece of nonsense put about by Muslims to avoid having to face the truth.

It is Muslims who put partners with God, by assuming their leaders have the authority to judge people on behalf of God.

.the bible of today is a witness against itself.many contradictions which means it is not authentic

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Your reasoning is flawed.

The Gospels are a record of the life of Jesus and His teachings. They were written by men. There is no suggestion that they are the words of God, but what they recount is the teaching of God's word.

That teaching says we must submit ourselves to the 10 Commandments.

Not for reward.

Not for fear of punishment.

But because this is the word of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
there is no need for the original of the past .the bible of today is a witness against itself.many contradictions which means it is not authentic.

With no orginals, how can you prove it's been changed?

Was it changed before or after Mohammed told you to observe the previous books? (Torah, Bible). If before, then he was telling you to observe corrupt books. This puts HIS divine knowledge into question. If after, then your claim falls flat on it's face, as the Biblical document of 1400 years ago are pretty much the same today.

.even christian scholars know this like donald morgan and his biblical inconsistencies which is of recent.but the quran have cited this 1400 years ago.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Really? What verses.... :dry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Way

I shouldn't get too concerned about quotes alleging to come from Donald Morgan.

He's a well known atheist who makes his living writing endless books and articles attacking Christianity.

There have been a number of similar people quoted recently in this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Way

I shouldn't get too concerned about quotes alleging to come from Donald Morgan.

He's a well known atheist who makes his living writing endless books and articles attacking Christianity.

There have been a number of similar people quoted recently in this forum.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for that surfinfo.

I've stopped replying to posts that quote aethists, which if investigated further, would say the same thing of any religion.

They are used here to prove/disprove things about Christianity, when the same arguments could be used against Islam. Not worth the time of day.

Nice one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would the Bible be the "word of God" if it said it was?

Peace

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Doubt it.

But then the Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God.

1 Don't worship any other god

2 Don't worship any idol

3 Don't abuse the name of God

4 Rest one day in seven

5 Honor your father and mother

6 Don't kill

7 Don't commit adultery

8 Don't steal

9 Don't lie about other people

10 Don't covet others goods or relationships.

There you go, now this forum does as well!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Way

I shouldn't get too concerned about quotes alleging to come from Donald Morgan.

He's a well known atheist who makes his living writing endless books and articles attacking Christianity.

There have been a number of similar people quoted recently in this forum.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

are the things that he says provable?please he brought out the verses that explicitly contradict themselves.just search on the web.no wonder this man is an atheist.he might be confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Doubt it.

But then the Bible isn't the word of God. It contains the word of God.

1 Don't worship any other god

2 Don't worship any idol

3 Don't abuse the name of God

4 Rest one day in seven

5 Honor your father and mother

6 Don't kill

7 Don't commit adultery

8 Don't steal

9 Don't lie about other people

10 Don't covet others goods or relationships.

There you go, now this forum does as well!!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

"dont worship any other god".great to hear that from you to avoid a clash with the muslims?were on earth have a prophet preached trinity? jesus himself did not.the theory of athanasius imposed on the "followers" of jesus which proliferated sects in christianity.did arius agree with athanasius? til today there are unitarians in christianity .and also mormons.if this was preached by jesus why did it cause such tension?the majority acceptin it does not make it right anyway.this is an innovatiopn not by jesus .this same 10 commandments the quran preach them,so the muslims are right also? there is no innovation in the path of GOD.(surat al fath)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If, for the sake of argument, we accept that, then there can be only one of two possibilities.

1. Most of those who are said to have been sent by God, and are therefore considered to be perfect were not sent by God at all, but are frauds.

Abraham seduced one of his slaves. Then when he tired of her, cast her and their child into the desert to die.

David who committed adultry, theft and lied.

These are but two examples.

God speaks to us all, but we have to listen.

We can believe that sometimes God speaks to some, with words intended to be told to others. We can call these people prophets.

We know that those who proclaim messages from God frequently are very imperfect. It is for us to use our common sense and our knowledge of the 10 Commandments to separate what is from God and what is not.

The 10 Commandments have not been changed. They stand in their literal meaning, as delivered by Moses, then reaffirmed, between 1000 and 2000 years later by Jesus.

If the records of Jesus teachings are corrupt, the question is, who would do such a thing?

2. That the accounts of the lives of the prophets, as recounted in Israelite texts are also corrupt.

There is no polyethism in Christianity.

This is just another piece of nonsense put about by Muslims to avoid having to face the truth.

It is Muslims who put partners with God, by assuming their leaders have the authority to judge people on behalf of God.

Your reasoning is flawed.

The Gospels are a record of the life of Jesus and His teachings. They were written by men. There is no suggestion that they are the words of God, but what they recount is the teaching of God's word.

That teaching says we must submit ourselves to the 10 Commandments.

Not for reward.

Not for fear of punishment.

But because this is the word of God.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i dont understand how you can argue in this way.did jesus contradict abraham?you have totaslly twisted everything.where in the 10- commandment is trinity?this same men that your bibvle allegedly put as sinners are the same ones that it praises as the best for humanity to copy.where did jesus oppose thosde before him?is god nopt perfect enough to chose the best for humanity?or is there a reason why they acted "badly"?this does not still prove anything.jesus said he did not come to innovate but compliment.you "ll find out that even those men preached against adultery and oppression.so were trhey hypocrites?then why did jesus not oppose them?another fraud? all this just to prove your trinity.you are choked ,right?turning and twisting ,not leavin a stone unturned.

who corrupted the bible?people like you to stuff trinity into it.

if you decide who is a prophet and what is from god and what is not ,whaty prevents you from accepting the quran and the prophet muhammad (pbuh) since he also preached the 10 commandments.

"no polytheism in christianity"trinity just some decoration and help for the "father",right? :angel:

muslims do not partner with god.muslim leaders dont have authority but the sacholars do.they use the law of god.they are not judging they are implimenting.nice try.

so your vgopspel is imperfect written by men as you said.no better than our hadiths many of which were fabricated on the tongue of the prophet to praise or defend some.or just for them to have something to say.

Edited by mehdi soldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With no orginals, how can you prove it's been changed?

Was it changed before or after Mohammed told you to observe the previous books? (Torah, Bible).  If before, then he was telling you to observe corrupt books.  This puts HIS divine knowledge into question.  If after, then your claim falls flat on it's face, as the Biblical document of 1400 years ago are pretty much the same today.

Really? What verses....  :dry:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ofcourse before the prohet (pbuh) .his knowledege is from a divine souerce.god knows what he sent and what he did not.he didnt tell us to observe them.the true books are known to god.and he could have had access.chek donald morgan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"dont worship any other god".great to hear that from you to avoid a clash with the muslims?were on earth have a prophet preached trinity?

....this same 10 commandments the quran preach them

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hmm, the trinity argument again.

If some people find comfort in the trinity then that is a matter for them. It isn't my place, nor yours to judge others. We are discussing Islam here, not the beliefs of some Christstians.

Muslims attempt to follow a version of the 10 Commandments as modifiied by the Israelites to suit their leaders.

This is what Jesus specifically taught against.

Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else has any right to sit in judgement of another person on behalf of God.

To do so is putting yourself on a par with God.

i dont understand how you can argue in this way.did jesus contradict abraham?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I did not say any such thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmm, the trinity argument again.

If some people find comfort in the trinity then that is a matter for them. It isn't my place, nor yours to judge others. We are discussing Islam here, not the beliefs of some Christstians.

Muslims attempt to follow a version of the 10 Commandments as modifiied by the Israelites to suit their leaders.

This is what Jesus specifically taught against.

Neither you, nor I, nor anyone else has any right to sit in judgement of another person on behalf of God.

To do so is putting yourself on a par with God.

I did not say any such thing!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

i dont know what you are arguin about.you accept that the bible is not the word of god but contains the word of god.this is what the muslims have always being trying to say.we are not judging .we reasoning things out.trinity was not preached by any messenger.an innovation started after jesus.

you tried to point out that jesus did not follow the steps of those before him by saying they sinned.and sayin they could be fraud while the bible praise them and jesus never opposed them.so one tep forward.the bible is not the word of god.

another step forward that abraham ,david....were not opposed by jesus.so as jesus said he did not innovate anything.lets dont run away from where we started about the bible and then trinity.so if the past prophet did noy preach trinity and also jesus,the next step is for you to reject the trinity.then you will realise the foillowin:

judaiosm is rebellious and only for jews

christianity is confused,corrupt ,polytheistic and cannot guide.

islam monotheistic ,believe in all the messengers and prophets and universal.

now you can see that the prophets do not contradict themselves in teachin the word of go ,nuch as you claimed prophet muhammad (pbuh) contradicted jesus (as) and jesus (as) contradicted the others.you even went further to say those prophets were sinners .meaning hypocrites yet the bible praises them and jesus did not oppose them ,makin him another fraud? now you can see the non contradiction of islam and all the messengers and the falsity of trinity and christianity.

check out:http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html

Edited by mehdi soldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trinity was not preached by any messenger.an innovation started after jesus.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Trinity is a philosophical device which brings comfort to some.

Muslims tend to rant about there being only one God as if this is something only they know and accept. For Christians, this fact is as obvious as water being wet!!

Most Christians, even those who accept the trinity, find this ranting to be incomprehensible.

All Christians know there is only one God.

you tried to point out that jesus did not follow the steps of those before him by saying they sinned.and sayin they could be fraud while the bible praise them and jesus never opposed them.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, I was pointing out that Jesus came to reaffirm the truth of the 10 commandments.

I was also pointing out that those who have been given the title of prophet, at times, clearly behaved in ways which were reprehensible and often contrary to the 10 Commandments which are the laws of God.

judaiosm is rebellious and only for jews

christianity is confused,corrupt ,polytheistic and cannot guide.

islam monotheistic ,believe in all the messengers and prophets and universal.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

God gave Moses the 10 commandments. The people whom Moses was leading were almost certainly originating from many different parts of the world. It is likely that Moses was a member of the Egyptian ruling class, probably the Governor of a large city and led the people out of that city on the orders of God.

The claims that all of these people were decendents of a single family and were enslaved were probably fabricated later to create a sense of cohesion within the emerging nation.

The stories in Genisis were probably a collection accumulated from the various backgrounds of those people. It is certainly true that creation stories such as the Garden of Eden exist in other cultures, including Indo China!

The people who assumed leadership after Moses clearly lacked faith to carry our God's Commandments. It was they who adapted the commandments to give themselves authority to defy them, such as the authority to order killing.

Jesus was sent to reaffirm the literal truth of the 10 Commandments and to clarifiy them.

check out:http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, well, Donald Morgan is the latest source to be wheeled out by your leaders who seem to tell you what to think. (I say this because it is rather surprising how many Muslims are suddenly quoting Donald Morgan.)

I wonder if you would be so quick to cite this fellow if you know what he was actually saying??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Trinity is a philosophical device which brings comfort to some.

Muslims tend to rant about there being only one God as if this is something only they know and accept. For Christians, this fact is as obvious as water being wet!!

Most Christians, even those who accept the trinity, find this ranting to be incomprehensible.

All Christians know there is only one God.

No, I was pointing out that Jesus came to reaffirm the truth of the 10 commandments.

I was also pointing out that those who have been given the title of prophet, at times,  clearly behaved in ways which were reprehensible and often contrary to the 10 Commandments which are the laws of God.

God gave Moses the 10 commandments. The people whom Moses was leading were almost certainly originating from many different parts of the world. It is likely that Moses was a member of the Egyptian ruling class, probably the Governor of a large city and led the people out of that city on the orders of God.

The claims that all of these people were decendents of a single family and were enslaved were probably fabricated later to create a sense of cohesion within the emerging nation.

The stories in Genisis were probably a collection accumulated from the various backgrounds of those people. It is certainly true that creation stories such as the Garden of Eden exist in other cultures, including Indo China!

The people who assumed leadership after Moses clearly lacked faith to carry our God's Commandments. It was they who adapted the commandments to give themselves authority to defy them, such as the authority to order killing.

Jesus was sent to reaffirm the literal truth of the 10 Commandments and to clarifiy them.

Yes, well, Donald Morgan is the latest source to be wheeled out by your leaders who seem to tell you what to think. (I say this because it is rather surprising how many Muslims are suddenly quoting Donald Morgan.)

I wonder if you would be so quick to cite this fellow if you know what he was actually saying??

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

very smart ,but very illogical and false.i dont even know now what you are arguing about.just to be seen as smart in darkness.

1you accepted the bible is not the word of god.

2you now accept that the trinity is confusing and there is only one god ,the god of jesus himself.

3you implicity accept that the prophrts are hypocrites.were they doing it for a reason.or did jesus covered their "mess"?

4you accepted that jesus did not copme to innovate but to reaffirm the truth of the 10commandments of which trinity is not part.

so youve accepted the logic which is contrary to christian beliefs .now do you sincerely think yopu are still christian?!

you refuted trinity implicitly.rejected the bible being the word of god.again implicitly acknowledge that the stories of genesis are not authentically biblical.you accepted that there is no innovation in the path of god in other words the 10 commandments as a source.

to tell you the truth i have no problem with you if you truly practice what you claim to believe because it is not christian.neither are u a jew.you accept jesus.your next step is for you to prove that jesus is a creature of god and a messenger.then you are closer to islam.then i swear you will easily become muslim insha Allah.you will see that the prophet muhammad (pbuh) also did not innovate to contradict his predecessor.by yourself refutin what you did and acceptin what you claim to believe have gone against yopurself from where i started the debate about prophet muhammad (pbuh) contradictin jesus (as) and jesus contradictin other.thank you very much.i have never had a more successful and bright debate than this.

i swear that i never knew about morgan from anyone.it was coincidentally that i came across his work .we care less about him.its just that he made it easier for us by give oroves and citing the contradiction.this ios great to make you accept that the bvible is not authentic.a witness against itself.you have accept it is not the word of god but contains the word of god written by men like the muslim hadith which are prone to error and fabrication.how do you still depend on it for your guidance?

Edited by mehdi soldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1you accepted the bible is not the word of god.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, I said the Bible contains the word of God. It is self evident that it is an historical document, recounting the lives and teachings of a great number of people.

2you now accept that the trinity is confusing and there is only one god ,the god of jesus himself.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I said no such thing. The trinity is a philosophical device. The relationship of jesus to God is complicated by Jesus not being as other men. Jesus was created for a purpose.

3you implicity accept that the prophrts are hypocrites.were they doing it for a reason.or did jesus covered their "mess"?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I said no such thing. I said that those who are accorded the title of prophet clearly have, at times, behaved in ways which are reprehensible and even in difiance of God's Commandments.

4you accepted that jesus did not copme to innovate but to reaffirm the truth of the 10commandments of which trinity is not part.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not quite. The trinity is a philosophical device used by some to understand the mysteries which others understand in other ways.

so youve accepted the logic which is contrary to christian beliefs .now do you sincerely think yopu are still christian?!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nothing I have said is contrary to the teachings of Jesus.

Nothing I have said is contrary to the beliefs of most Christians.

you refuted trinity

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I did no such thing! The trinity is a philosophical device used by some Christians.

then i swear you will easily become muslim insha Allah.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would never even consider joining with any group which defies the Commandments of God.

you will see that the prophet muhammad (pbuh) also did not innovate to contradict his predecessor.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm sorry, but he most certainly did. He supports killing and judging people on behalf of God.

i swear that i never knew about morgan from anyone.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I accept your word. But I do suggest that before you quote Morgan or anyone else you check what they are actually saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, I said the Bible contains the word of God. It is self evident that it is an historical document, recounting the lives and teachings of a great number of people.

I said no such thing. The trinity is a philosophical device. The relationship of jesus to God is complicated by Jesus not being as other men. Jesus was created for a purpose.

I said no such thing. I said that those who are accorded the title of prophet clearly have, at times, behaved in ways which are reprehensible and even in difiance of God's Commandments.

Not quite. The trinity is a philosophical device used by some to understand the mysteries which others understand in other ways.

Nothing I have said is contrary to the teachings of Jesus.

Nothing I have said is contrary to the beliefs of most Christians.

I did no such thing! The trinity is a philosophical device used by some Christians.

I would never even consider joining with any group which defies the Commandments of God.

I'm sorry, but he most certainly did. He supports killing and judging people on behalf of God.

I accept your word. But I do suggest that before you quote Morgan or anyone else you check what they are actually saying.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

my dear you said and accepted what the muslims have always being trying to say.

1the bible is not the word of god but contain the word of god .did you actually read what i wrote.

2you said the trinity is not accepted by all christians .you also accepted that jesus came to reaffirm the 10commandments taught by those before him.in other words jesus did not come to innovate.you will find out trinity is not part of the 10 commandments but as you said some cxhristians accept it (on thyeir own) for their comfort.

3 you did not answer me whether the prophets acted "badly" for a reason or they were hypocrites ,thus making jesus one of them because he did not oppose them.the purpose of this is over.you have said jesus came to reaffirm in other words not to innovate.

4you will be lieing if you say jesus innovated anything or taught the trinity.if he did christianity would not have witnessed what it did in the days of athanasius.

5you are contradicting yourself.or you have not answered anything.you have to think clearly and consistently.you are talkin with a muslim.i dont accept half arguments just to free your image.

6morgan who you oppose is more convincing than you because vhe cited concrete evidence.can show me the innovations or contradictions of islam or rather your misconceptions ,so that i can clear them.

7when you talk about killing ,its as if you are an atheist.i can proof the righteousness of our prophet only if you can cite your misconceptions.

finally ,lets dont try to twist things to get away from them.lets prove everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
finally ,lets dont try to twist things to get away from them.lets prove everything.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jesus was sent to reaffirm and clarify the 10 Commandments.

Any laws or customs which contradict the 10 Commandments are to be ignored.

The proof is in the Gospels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sorry, but he most certainly did. He supports killing and judging people on behalf of God.

That should read as he supported killing people who attacked the Muslims and only in defense and he left the judgement to God. He prayed for forgiveness like all humans, unlike Christianity Islam is very emphatic on forgiveness coming only from He who has created us rather than from His son.

The proof is in the Gospels

Oh, you mean the same Gospels with the whole Genealogy issue between two of them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That should read as he supported killing people who attacked the Muslims and only in defense and he left the judgement to God.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No it shouldn't.

Muhammad's teachings support killing people. His reasons are irrelevant. Killing people is forbidden by the 6th commandment. There are no exceptions.

Oh, you mean the same Gospels with the whole Genealogy issue between two of them?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Any issues are in the minds of those who put these ideas into Muslim's mouths.

I appreciate that, like all Muslims, you will try to claim that you thought of this yourself, but the uniformity of the many issues against Christianity endlessly spouted by so many Muslims from so many diverse parts suggests that they are all taught the same things.

You might try asking yourself why it is that your leaders want you to think these things?

What is it they don't want you to know?

Why don't they want you to read the facts for yourself?

What are they frightened of?

What are you frightened of?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No it shouldn't.

Muhammad's teachings support killing people. His reasons are irrelevant. Killing people is forbidden by the 6th commandment. There are no exceptions.

Any issues are in the minds of those who put these ideas into Muslim's mouths.

I appreciate that, like all Muslims, you will try to claim that you thought of this yourself, but the uniformity of the many issues against Christianity endlessly spouted by so many Muslims from so many diverse parts suggests that they are all taught the same things.

You might try asking yourself why it is that your leaders want you to think these things?

What is it they don't want you to know?

Why don't they want you to read the facts for yourself?

What are they frightened of?

What are you frightened of?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Muslims do not frieghten easily.

What does all of this have to do with the "Dead Sea Scrolls"?

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it shouldn't.

Muhammad's teachings support killing people. His reasons are irrelevant. Killing people is forbidden by the 6th commandment. There are no exceptions.

Any issues are in the minds of those who put these ideas into Muslim's mouths.

I appreciate that, like all Muslims, you will try to claim that you thought of this yourself, but the uniformity of the many issues against Christianity endlessly spouted by so many Muslims from so many diverse parts suggests that they are all taught the same things.

You might try asking yourself why it is that your leaders want you to think these things?

What is it they don't want you to know?

i thank GOD i now know what you meant.you are suprised that muslims are in uniformity in arguing against christians?well if i would have said this to you you might not have accepted it.this is to show you how truthful and straight forward islam is.the truth is constant as is also falsehood.this shows that we dont invent things or make up stories.we continue to support the truth and oppose the falsehood.imagine how stupid it will be if 10 muslims oppose different things and contradict themselves.christians do that against islam.some dont like islamic law while others dont mind.some says its the prophet.and others trivial issues like polygamy and divorce.just to have something to say.you dont know what to accept as right or wrong in uniformity.

concerning the prophet (pbuh) and the wars.i dont know anyone who will just fold hios arms watchin his enemies eliminate him.you know that the previous messengers failed in their missions.non ever was totally successful in his mission.even those of their followers later lost their faith.jesus (as) had to be saved by GOD.the prophet muhammad (pbuh) came to succeed much that the unbelievers may dislike it.and he never killed an innocent soul.in the quran it is forbidden to kill an innocent soul.dont worry lets hope we will be in the second coming of jesus (as) and the mahdi (as) ,then you will see them fighting against the unbelievers.

Edited by mehdi soldier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No it shouldn't.

Muhammad's teachings support killing people. His reasons are irrelevant. Killing people is forbidden by the 6th commandment. There are no exceptions.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Jo,

Didn't we cover this in another thread. The translation of the 6th commandment as "Thou Shalt Not Kill" is incorrect, it is "Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder". The Old Testement establishes the principle of capital punishment for certain crimes "An eye for an eye, A tooth for a tooth..."

Why not just put that one to bed and move on....???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does this have to do with the dead sea scrolls?

The "Scrolls" are a good indicater of how the Essenes lived but there is nothing new. They adopted Zoroastrian philosophy some almost word for word.

Zoroastrian is the fountain of semetic religions.

Peace

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Jo,

Didn't we cover this in another thread. The translation of the 6th commandment as "Thou Shalt Not Kill" is incorrect, it is "Thou Shalt Not Commit Murder". The Old Testement establishes the principle of capital punishment for certain crimes "An eye for an eye, A tooth for a tooth..."

Why not just put that one to bed and move on....???

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No the 6th commandment says Don't Kill.

This was clarified by Jesus.

Jesus also made a very clear statement on the principal of an 'eye for an eye'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No it shouldn't.

Muhammad's teachings support killing people. His reasons are irrelevant. Killing people is forbidden by the 6th commandment. There are no exceptions.

First, since I am not a Christian I am under no obligation to shudder in my shoes at the thought of violating the 6th Commandment. If it coincides with Islam, I'll believe it. Otherwise not.

Second, HIS REASONS ARE IRRELEVANT???

In the New Testament, Jesus Christ is quoted as saying that he had come to bring the sword, to "set father against son and mother against daughter" (Luke 12:53)

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me" (Luke 19:27).

Like Moses and other Prophets as according to the corrupted Old Testament ordered the murder of men as well EVERY WOMAN AND CHILD? Simply because they were non-believers?

Third, "Thou shalt not kill" is rather ambigous.

Thou shalt not kill the suicide bombers.

Thou shalt not kill the Iraqi insurgents or the Wahabi extremists who are intent on killing all things non-Muslim.

Thou shalt not kill the crazy man running at you with an axe, despite the fact that you have a gun in your hand and your one chance at life is to shoot before he reaches you.

Thou shalt not kill the chicken and the goat and the cow and the other meaty things for they are your animal friends.

Therefore, thou shalt also abstain from visiting the unholy grounds of KFC, the butchers or the farmyard.

Thou shalt furthermore refrain from fishing. The fishes are your animal friends.

Thou shalt scorn the use of insecticide and pesticides. Do not kill the little creepy-crawlies.

From a Jew, but a well informed Jew :D :

For me, one of the most irksome cases has always been the rendering of the sixth commandment as "Thou shalt not kill." In this form, the quote has been conscripted into the service of diverse causes, including those of pacifism, animal rights, the opposition to capital punishment, and the anti-abortion movement.

Indeed, "kill" in English is an all-encompassing verb that covers the taking of life in all forms and for all classes of victims.

That kind of generalization is expressed in Hebrew through the verb "harag."

However, the verb that appears in the Torah's prohibition is a completely different one, " ratsah" which, it would seem, should be rendered "murder." This root refers only to criminal acts of killing.

It is, of course, not just a question of etymology. Those ideologies that adduce the commandment in support of their gentle-hearted causes are compelled to feign ignorance of all those other places in the Bible that condone or command warfare, the slaughter of sacrificial animals, and an assortment of methods for inflicting capital punishment.

Rashbam concludes his discussion of the topic with the following words:

And this is a refutation of the heretics, and they have conceded the point to me. Even though their own books state "I kill, and I make alive" (in Deuteronomy 32:39) --using the same Latin root as for "thou shalt not murder"--they are not being precise.

From the words of these French Jewish scholars, we learn that the "thou shalt not kill" translation stems from the Latin Bible translation that was in use in the medieval Roman Catholic church. Indeed, the Vulgate (as that translation is designated) employs the Latin verb occidere which has the sense of "kill" rather than "murder." By demonstrating that the Vulgate itself employed the root occidere in Deuteronomy, when the Almighty himself is speaking of his own power over the lives of his creatures--in a context where it cannot conceivably be rendered as "murder"--Rashbam aggressively proved the error of the traditional Christian understanding of the sixth commandment.

It is not surprising, therefore, to hear that his Christian interlocutors acknowledged their error without a fight.

This still raises some difficult questions about the Latin Vulgate translation. The author of that translation, Saint Jerome (died in 420), spent much of his career in the Land of Israel, where he consulted frequently with Jewish scholars whose interpretations he often cites with great respect.

Even the Septuagint, the old Greek translation of the Bible, translated the commandment with a word that means "murder" rather than "kill."

St. Augustine, basing himself on the standard translations, made it clear that the commandment does not extend to wars or capital punishment that are explicitly ordained by God.

The fact remains, however, that even the Jewish translators were not unanimous in maintaining a consistent distinctions between the various Hebrew roots.

Don Isaac Abravanel and others noted that ratsah is employed in Numbers 35:27-30 both when dealing with an authorized case of blood vengeance, and with capital punishment--neither of which falls under the legal category of murder.

Any issues are in the minds of those who put these ideas into Muslim's mouths.

I appreciate that, like all Muslims, you will try to claim that you thought of this yourself, but the uniformity of the many issues against Christianity endlessly spouted by so many Muslims from so many diverse parts suggests that they are all taught the same things.

I have never once in my seventeen year old life EVER attended a khutbah or sermon by some Islamic leader. My experience is limited to listening to Majlis in Muharram. And using my brains which God saw fit to give all humans, yet so few use.

If the same errors keep being repeated the same solution will always be used to solve it.

If my 5 year old sister says 2 + 2 = 5 I'll show her by taking two pencils and adding two more pencils to them that two added by two makes four. So would anyone else from any other part of the world, due to the simple fact that it takes the same key to open the same lock.

If you are made insecure by the fact that so many people unanimously raise the same questions that you, as I've noticed, HAVE FAILED TO ANSWER, then there is something wrong with your religion.

You might try asking yourself why it is that your leaders want you to think these things?

What is it they don't want you to know?

Why don't they want you to read the facts for yourself?

What are they frightened of?

What are you frightened of?

Why dont they want me to read the facts for myself? What facts? I have read the Bible, I have read books by Christians...what more do you want me to read?

What I am frightened of is winding up as a poor insecure person like yourself who cannot answer the questions put to you. That's why I read and talk to people and keep an open mind.

Why don't you read some facts for yourself?

Why do you respond by changing the subject?

Is the subject I raised too hot for you?

Why can't you give straight answers?

What are you afraid of learning?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very interesting.

But two assumptions stand out.

1. That the predicted second messiah was Muhammad.

2. That there is any veracity in the so called Gospel of Barnabas.

The problems with taking Muhammad as being the successor to Jesus is that Muhammad taught so much that was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Jesus.

Muslims have attempted to counter this by claiming that those parts of the Gospels which contradict the teachings of Muhammad are forgeries or corruptions.

But if the teachings of Jesus, as reviled in the Gospels, are indeed forged, then the question must be asked, who did such a thing and why.

The teachings of Jesus, directly contradict the behaviour and attitudes of almost every institution in existence at that time which could have conceivably been in a position to do such a thing.

A claim of forgery will need a little more evidence than simply claiming contradiction with a much later document.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

Sorry for the late response. The internet was out.

I wouldnt call it an assumption. The documents spoke of two messiahs. The Kingly one refers to none other than Muhammad(pbuh). Jesus(pbuh) was known as the Messiah which is also known as the chosen one. Muhammad(pbuh) was also known as Mustafa which means the chosen one. Thus, the Kingly messiah speaks of Muhammad(pbuh).

Indeed, there were many Christian during his time who were waiting for an Arab prophet. Needless to say, the moment they heard of him, most embraced Islam. Even at the age of 12, Muhamad(pbuh) was foretlod to his uncles that he would become a Prophet by a Christian monk, Bahira. The monk also told his uncles to keep him away from the Jews since they would kill him.

Surah 10:94

If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in nowise of those in doubt.

This verse was taken to the Christians and Jews. But they did not deny it. This was highlighted by the hostile anti Islamic author, Sir Willaim Muir, who said that the Christians back then probably had a gospel which is now lost. He also wondered why the Christians did not refute the verse and disprove his Prophethood. From that, we can see the many possibilites of Muhammad(pbuh) being the Prophet of God.

The teachings of Jesus in the NT is not entirely original. I can prove that much of what Jesus of the NT said, was said by Pagan sages a 1000 years earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

Sorry for the late response. The internet was out.

I wouldnt call it an assumption. The documents spoke of two messiahs. The Kingly one refers to none other than Muhammad(pbuh). Jesus(pbuh) was known as the Messiah which is also known as the chosen one. Muhammad(pbuh) was also known as Mustafa which means the chosen one. Thus, the Kingly messiah speaks of Muhammad(pbuh).

Indeed, there were many Christian during his time who were waiting for an Arab prophet. Needless to say, the moment they heard of him, most embraced Islam. Even at the age of 12, Muhamad(pbuh) was foretlod to his uncles that he would become a Prophet by a Christian monk, Bahira. The monk also told his uncles to keep him away from the Jews since they would kill him.

Surah 10:94

If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in nowise of those in doubt.

This verse was taken to the Christians and Jews. But they did not deny it. This was highlighted by the hostile anti Islamic author, Sir Willaim Muir, who said that the Christians back then probably had a gospel which is now lost. He also wondered why the Christians did not refute the verse and disprove his Prophethood. From that, we can see the many possibilites of Muhammad(pbuh) being the Prophet of God.

The teachings of Jesus in the NT is not entirely original. I can prove that much of what Jesus of the NT said, was said by Pagan sages a 1000 years earlier.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It's funny how everything seems to refer to Mohammed these days. Anything else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(bismillah)

Sorry for the late response. The internet was out.

I wouldnt call it an assumption. The documents spoke of two messiahs. The Kingly one refers to none other than Muhammad(pbuh). Jesus(pbuh) was known as the Messiah which is also known as the chosen one. Muhammad(pbuh) was also known as Mustafa which means the chosen one. Thus, the Kingly messiah speaks of Muhammad(pbuh).

Indeed, there were many Christian during his time who were waiting for an Arab prophet. Needless to say, the moment they heard of him, most embraced Islam. Even at the age of 12, Muhamad(pbuh) was foretlod to his uncles that he would become a Prophet by a Christian monk, Bahira. The monk also told his uncles to keep him away from the Jews since they would kill him.

Surah 10:94

If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in nowise of those in doubt.

This verse was taken to the Christians and Jews. But they did not deny it. This was highlighted by the hostile anti Islamic author, Sir Willaim Muir, who said that the Christians back then probably had a gospel which is now lost. He also wondered why the Christians did not refute the verse and disprove his Prophethood. From that, we can see the many possibilites of Muhammad(pbuh) being the Prophet of God.

The teachings of Jesus in the NT is not entirely original. I can prove that much of what Jesus of the NT said, was said by Pagan sages a 1000 years earlier.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The internet was out? Funny nobody else had that problem... ;)

So Mohammad was both the Kingly one and the Chosen one? :wacko: Two prophets in one ....

btw Isn't it claimed that Abul Qasim came to confirm the message sent to the previous prophets??? That would mean that his teachings were not entirely original either....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The internet was out? Funny nobody else had that problem... ;)

So Mohammad was both the Kingly one and the Chosen one?  :wacko:  Two prophets in one ....

btw Isn't it claimed that  Abul Qasim came to confirm the message sent to the previous prophets??? That would mean that his teachings were not entirely original either....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

(bismillah)

From your response, it can be easily concluded that you more devoid of knowledge than the authors of the bible themselves. :lol:

Yes, my internet was out. So what? Just because I had problems with the internet does not make it mandatory that everyone should havve problems as well.

Did you even read my post? I said that Messiah also means the chosen one.

Muhammad(pbuh) was called the chosen one, the trustworthy one,etc.etc. The scrolls said that a kingly messiah will come. in other words, the kingly chosen one will come. And it refers to the final messenger of Allah.

Yes, he came to confirm that which was reveleaed originally to the People of the Book, and he brought new laws. So what's wrong with that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...