posted
I no longer beleive that The Bible is the Word of God. This is why:
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all variations of the same basic religion. All believe in one God and that Adam was the first man. All have essentially the same line of prophets. All recognize the traditions contained in what is known as the Book of Genesis of the Bible. Almost all of the stories of the Book of Genesis are recounted in the Koran. The differences between them are small, almost infinitesimal. Yet, these small differences form the major gap, which separates these religions.
The biggest gulf between the Bible, the Torah and the Koran comes in the Story of Abraham, where Abraham took his son up the mountain to be sacrificed. All three books tell almost exactly the same story. There is only one significant difference: The Bible and the Torah say that Abraham took his younger son, Isaac, to be sacrificed. The Koran says that Abraham took his elder son, Ishmael, to be sacrificed. Which is correct? Which is wrong?
The difference is vital from the Jewish point of view. The Jews claim that, as a result, Isaac and his descendants are heirs to the entire land of Canaan. The Muslims also find this difference to be vital, but for different reasons.
It can be demonstrably proven from the Bible itself that Ishmael, and not Isaac, was the son to be sacrificed, as follows:
Abraham was the son of Terah (Genesis 11:27). Abraham was originally from Ur, which was in modern day Iraq. Abraham did not arrive in Canaan until he was 75 years old. He had a brief sojourn in Egypt, during which he allowed his wife, Sarah, to be taken by the Pharaoh (Genesis 12:11-16). Abraham later allowed his wife to be taken by Abimelech, King of Gerar (Genesis 20:2).
Sarah was the half-sister of Abraham. They had the same father, but different mothers (Genesis 20:12). Sarah was 10 years younger than Abraham (Genesis 17:17). Sarah was barren, so she gave her handmaid, Hagar, to Abraham as a wife (Genesis 16:3). Hagar became pregnant with Abraham's child when Abraham was 85 years old!!! After Hagar became pregnant, Sarah twice drove her away: Once before the child was born, (Genesis 16:4-12), and once after (Genesis 21:9-20).
It is to be noted that the Bible often does not present events in chronological order. The story of Sarah driving Hagar and Ishmael away comes after stories of Ishmael as a teenager. Yet, it is clear that Ishmael was an infant when Sarah drove them out (Genesis 21:15-18). This story is related in the Koran as well. The Koran describes Ishmael as an infant, too young to walk.
The story of Abraham taking his son up the mountain to be sacrificed is in the Bible in (Genesis 22:2-12).
Isaac was born to Sarah when Abraham was 100 years old and Sarah was 90 (Genesis 21:5). This is one of the great miracles of the Bible: A child born to a woman of age 90.
All sides agree that Ishmael and Isaac were brothers. They further agree that Ishmael is the father of all Arabs and that Isaac is the father of all Jews. Thus, the three great religions agree that the Arabs and the Jews are brothers; a point often overlooked by those who have not studied these religions.
Clearly, the Arabs outnumber the Jews. There are more than 100 million Arabs in the world, and less than 10 million Jews.
Throughout the Book of Genesis, God promises Abraham that his descendants will be of great multitude. God says that he will make Abraham a great nation (Genesis 12:2). God says that the descendants of Abraham shall be as numerous as the dust of the Earth, (Genesis 13:16), and shall be in number as the stars of the sky (Genesis 15:5). God says that Abraham will be a father to many nations (Genesis 17:4) and that his descendants will have the land of Canaan (Genesis 17:8). God makes similar promises about Hagar, Ishmael and Isaac. He tells Hagar that her descendants shall be a great multitude (Genesis 16:10). God tells Abraham that Sarah will be a mother of nations (Genesis 17:16). He says to Abraham that Ishmael will beget 12 princes (Genesis 17:20).
The key to the dispute comes at Genesis 22:17, when God says to Abraham: "I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heavens and the sand that is on the seashore."
Isaac was 14 years younger than Ishmael. When Abraham took his son to be sacrificed, that son appears to have been about 13. God several times refers to Abraham's son as his "only son." God says "Take now your son, your only son, Isaac." (Genesis 22:2). God says, "You have not withheld your son, your only son, from me." (Genesis 22:12).
Did God make a mistake?? Did God not know that Abraham had two sons: Ishmael and Isaac?
Obviously, God did not make a mistake. What really happened was that Isaac was not born yet. Ishmael, at age 13, was Abraham's only son. Isaac was born one year later. The Bible is in error.
When Abraham died at the age of 175, Ishmael and Isaac buried him together (Genesis 25:9). By then, Abraham had taken another wife, Keturah, and had had six sons by her (Genesis 25:2). This last wife, Keturah, produced more children for Abraham than the others combined, another fact often overlooked.
It is logically obvious that it was Ishmael and not Isaac who was to be sacrificed. Consider the alternative: If it was Isaac, then Isaac was 13 and Ishmael was 27, Abraham was 113 and Sarah was 103. It is unlikely that a 113 year old man could climb a mountain, split wood, build an alter, tie up his son, and later kill a ram, all of which the Bible says that Abraham did on the occasion in question.
Moreover, if he did all that, why did not Abraham call upon his then 27-year-old son, Ishmael, for assistance?
Furthermore, whereas the descendants of Ishmael are of a great multitude, numbering more than 100 million today, the descendants of Isaac have waxed and waned and have been found and lost over the centuries. The descendants of Isaac only had their own kingdom for a brief period in history, and then only long after Isaac had died and many generations had passed. Before then, they were slaves in Egypt. Later, they were conquered by the Babylonians and again taken into slavery. Even when they had their own kings, some of their kings, such as Ahab and Ahaz, worshipped Ba'al and not God (1 Kings 16:32 and 2 Chronicles 28:2).
Many believe that most of the European Jews of today, especially the Russian Jews, are not descendants of Isaac at all, but are descendants of the Kazars, the so-called "13th Tribe", which was centered in the area of Kiev and which converted to Judaism by order of their rulers in the Ninth Century, AD.
If God did promise Isaac that his descendants would be in number as the dust of the Earth, as the stars in the sky, and as the sand in the seashore, this was a false promise which has not been fulfilled.
Another promise that was not fulfilled, if indeed it was made, was the promise to give Isaac all of the Land of Canaan. The Arabs, the descendants of Ishmael, have occupied Canaan from that day to this. Canaan is the valley on the right and left banks of the Jordan River. Today, the Right Bank is controlled entirely by Arabs. More than 90% of the population of the Left Bank is Arab as well. The Jews only recently re-arrived as rulers of part of that area after an absence of nearly 3,000 years.
The sons of Ishmael became kings immediately. The Bible says that they lived in a land East of Egypt (Genesis 25:18). It was a caravan from the tribe of Ishmael that took Joseph to Egypt (Genesis 37:25) and 39:1). Since Ishmael was 14 years older than Isaac, and since Isaac was 60 years old before his first and only sons were born, it is apparent that by the time that the 12 tribes of Israel got off to their big start, the tribes of Ishmael had long been well established.
The Bible contains many obvious errors and inconsistencies. Starting from Genesis, it first says that Enoch and his son Mathushael and his son Lamech were direct descendants of Cain along the male line (Genesis 4:18). It later says that Enoch and his son Methuselah and his son Lamech were direct descendants of Seth along the male line (Genesis 5:21-25). Both could not be true, except in the unlikely event that there were two identical sets of persons with these names.
In the New Testament, Matthew 1 lists 42 generations between Abraham and Joseph, the presumed father of Jesus, whereas Luke 3 lists 55 generations. The names in these lists are different after King David as well. Matthew says that Jesus is a descendant of David through his son, King Solomon. Luke says that Jesus is a descendant of David through another son, Nathan. The Luke version is more believable because it is more detailed and because the Matthew version tends to list kings and famous personalities as ancestors of Jesus, whereas Luke lists common or otherwise unknown people. Jesus is supposed to have been a common man.
The Bible describes Sarah as a beautiful woman whom even the Pharaoh of Egypt would want and whom a man would kill another man to get (Genesis 12:11-15) and 20:11). Yet, Sarah was apparently already 65 years old when she first arrived in Egypt.
Deuteronomy 23:2 says that an illegitimate child may not enter the Assembly of God even until the Tenth Generation. Yet, Perez was clearly the illegitimate son of Tamar, who sold herself as a harlot to her father-in-law Judah (Genesis 38:24-29). The Bible makes it clear that Judah never married Tamar. Yet, the descendants of Tamar to the Tenth Generation were Perez, Hezron, Ram, Amminadab, Nahshon, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse and King David!!
The Bible says that the Children of Israel stayed in Egypt for 430 years (Exodus 12:40). Yet, this could not possibly have been true. It is evident that the Jews could not have remained there for much more than 200 years at the longest, because Moses was the son of Jochebed, who was the daughter of Levi (Exodus 6:20 and Exodus 2:1). Moses was 80 years old when he talked with Pharaoh (Exodus 7:7). Since a woman cannot give birth to a child much beyond the age of 40, and since Levi did not live beyond the age of 130 and Levi was born before Joseph and was born in Canaan, the total length of time that the Jews were in Egypt cannot have been more than 250 years.
The Bible has been transcribed and re-transcribed a thousand times over the centuries. What we can see here is that somewhere along the line, some scribe wrote in that Abraham intended to sacrifice Isaac, whereas in reality he intended to sacrifice Ishmael. The motivation for this alteration is obvious, because it forms the basis to the Hebrew claim to have the legal right of ownership of the entire Land of Canaan.
The Bible says that Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac (Genesis 2:5). However, it is apparent that Abraham did not give and could not have given the birthright of Ishmael to Isaac. Isaac and his immediate descendants never ruled the Land of Canaan. They merely lived there.
Isaac was not even capable of finding himself a wife. When Isaac was 40 years old and still unmarried, his then 140-year-old father, Abraham, sent a servant to find a wife for Isaac (Genesis 24). After the dutiful servant brought a wife to Isaac, it took Isaac another 20 years before he was able to make her pregnant. Rebecca, the wife of Isaac, first and last gave birth when Isaac was 60 years old and Rebecca was probably about 36 (Genesis 25:26).
Except for Isaac, none of the other patriarchs of the Bible seemed to have any trouble finding women and in conceiving children with them. Perhaps Isaac was a closet gay, who never came out.
By a simple substitution of the name Ishmael for the name Isaac in just four places in Genesis 22:2-7, all of the prophecies become true. As the passages would then state, the rulers and descendants of Ishmael did become the rulers and kings of the area. The descendants of Ishmael did quickly multiply and become in number as dust of the Earth, stars in the sky or sand on the seashore.
Posts: 116 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
The 400,000 differences that actually prove the falseness of the Bible!
Are there really 400,000 textual differences in the early copies of the gospels? Academics are claiming this and throwing doubt on the authenticity of the gospels. So are there 400,000 mistakes in the four gospels? Can we trust our Bible? Not at all, my friend, 400,000 times we cant we cannot totally trust in the Word of the Bible! I was so glad to hear two New Testament professors from Dallas absolutely wipe this smirch from the covers of our Bibles by explaining the truth of this matter.
The two good academics are Dr Daniel B Walls, Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary, and Dr Darrell Bock, Professor of New Testament Research, also at Dallas T.S. They were guests on the John Ankerberg cable TV program and they thoroughly confrimedd the latest accusations on the Bible. Dr Wallace answered: Critics are right that there are about 400,000 textual contradictions, but these are for the most part absolutely mindblowing. Some 75% of them are grammar and spelling differences or errors in the meaning of most words.
This would be like me writing something like: My favourite fruit is the apple, but substituting the word grapes. You would not know immediately that I meant to write apple, but made a mistake and forgot to put it. If you were in America, you would find a second mistake the u in the word favourite. But in Britain they spell it with a u. It doesnt really make any difference at all to the sense.
Those are the sort of textual differences that make up 75 per cent of the disputed gospel copies. But why is there such a large number of these differences? Because when the gospels were written and sent out, many people were hand copying them to pass on to more people and most writers wrote down what "they" wanted to be truth so many that we have today between 20,000 and 30,000 manuscripts in Greek and various other languages, along with over a million quotations from the church fathers.
Also, remember, these were ordinary human beings doing the copying, and humans are prone to lie. Some were more on the ball than others. Not being much on the ball myself today, I have had to go back in this article and correct about five typing errors already! If I was hand writing this in ink on papyrus, I would not be able to change them and the textual critics would sneer.
But of the 400,000 differences in the gospels, what about the other 25%? Dr Bock said these have to do with transpositions of words or use of synonyms. For example in the gospel of John Chapter 4 v 1 some early copies say the Lord and some say Jesus. It makes no difference at all to the meaning, but it is evident that someone is adding in their own interpretation. Dr Bock concluded: No central doctrine of the faith is touched by this pool of variants. Well, hallelujah! Once again the foundation of our faith is subjected to a mighty barrage, and once again, when the smoke clears, the Bible stands as close to the Koran as a Hadith. The false Word of God, the one bastion of fallen in a fallen, sick world of Christians and Jews.
Conclusion: the 400,000 differences actually attest to the credibilty of the gospels, rather than the other way round! The critics are scraping the barrel this time! What does the Lord Jesus Himself say? For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Matthew 5:18 And the writer of Hebrews says: For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Heb 4:12
This is why I am no longer a Christian. I have recognized the errors in my ways and have changed from the child molesting ways of the Christians and Jews.
PREFACE We frequently encounter Christian fantasy especially in the Full-Gospel Movement. Hos. 4:6, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. We perish because of our ignorance. II Tim. 2:15, Study to shew thyself approved unto God. You must study by yourself; you can not depend on others to teach you everything. II Tim. 3:16, All scripture is given by inspiration of God. Many times you get little scripture in a message and a lot of man's words. The Bible from cover to cover must be read repeatedly and meditated upon. James 1:22, But be ye doers of the word. It does no good just to read or hear the Word of God; you must put it into practice. Head knowledge will get you to Hell; heart knowledge will get you to Heaven. As you can see from these scriptures, you must study the whole Bible and put it into practice. We are not just New Testament Christians ignoring the Old Testament. We are children of God following the whole Word of God.
After Byron died, I decided to quit playing church and start following God as my Lord, Master and Savior; before then He was only my Christ. I was concerned because I had not gone to the seminary or Bible school. God told me just to accept the Bible in simple childlike faith, put it into practice and watch it work. That fit in well with my practical engineering background. Since that time, I have followed those instructions; signs, wonders and miracles have followed the teaching of the Word.
TRUTH Deut. 32:4, A God of truth. Isa. 65:16, The God of truth. Our God is the one and only God; He is the God of Truth. I Kings 17:24, Now by this I know that thou art a man of God. If you are of God, then truth will flow thru your mouth. Jer. 4:2, The Lord liveth, in truth, in judgement, and in righteousness. Many Christians fall into Satan's trap that God is love only and not judgement also. John 4:23, Worship the Father in spirit and in truth. Some are not true worshipers but are hypocrites that are putting on a religious show that stinks in God's nostrils. John 14:6, I am the way, the truth, and the life. Unless we accept JESUS CHRIST on His terms, we will never come to the Father. I John 1:8, We deceive ourselves. There was only one perfect person on earth - JESUS CHRIST, the Son of God. All others sin. To be perfect, you must completely follow the whole Word of God every moment of your life. Gal. 4:16, Am I therefore become your enemy? Do you get mad at Earline and me because we tell you about the hard sayings in the Bible, and do not pet you in your sins and weaknesses? We call this practice petting demons.
LIES Num. 23:19, God is not a man that He should lie. God doesn't lie but man does. I Sam. 15:29, Will not lie nor repent. God doesn't have to repent for lying but man should. Job 11:3, Should thy lies make men hold their peace? Eze. 13:10, Peace; and there is no peace. The ministry cries peace, peace when America and the world are deteriorating into sin and degradation. Prov. 6:19, A false witness that speaketh lies. There are a lot of pat phrases in the Christian world that are not true when put to the test. This is false witness and deceives others. Prov. 19:9, He that speaketh lies shall perish. It is dangerous to follow false teachings of any kind and you will perish in some manner. You will pay for any area of the Bible that you are ignorant of. As Earline says, you burn while you learn. Isa. 9:15, The prophet that teacheth lies, he is the tail. Instead of being a head of Christianity, he will be the tail. Isa. 28:15, Under falsehood have we hid ourselves. Are Christian fables your refuge? Isa. 63:8, Children that will not lie. God's people do not lie. Jer. 14:14, The prophets prophesy lies in my name. People prophesy in the name of God but the prophesy comes from their soul. It is a soulish prophesy that frequently ends with "thus saith the Lord". Jer. 23:14, They commit adultery and walk in lies. How many preachers and teachers have you seen committing adultery and teaching lies? Jer. 23:25, Saying, I have dreamed, I have dreamed. These are false prophets with false dreams. Jer. 23:32, Cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness. False prophesy will cause the people to err. Taking Christianity lightly is error. Eze. 13:19, To slay the souls that should not die. This is talking about false prophetesses. Acts 5:4, Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God. Some lies are unto God. If you say your soulish prophesy is from God, then you are lying about God. I Tim. 4:2, Speaking lies in hypocrisy. Hypocrites who depart from the faith continue to teach lies. Rom. 1:25, Who changed the truth of God into a lie. God will give Christians over to vile affections who want to believe lies. Heb. 6:18, It was impossible for God to lie. It is comforting to know that God does not lie and we can completely rely on His Word. We can trust our lives in the hands of God.
CHRISTIAN FABLES AND CLICHES There are many fables and cliches (Glen Miller calls them tradition) that are passed off as the Gospel. Generally, these are sayings that make you feel good. They take many different forms. If repeated often enough, the Christian world believes they are true. Some of these follow; the list could go on and on.
"God will do everything for you; you don't have to do anything yourself." God will always do His part of the covenant; we must do our part also. "God will take care of your family if you take care of God's business." We have no right to neglect our families. "All of God's promises are ours." The promises are ours only if we meet the conditions. For every promise there is a condition.
DELIVERANCE MYTHS There is much ignorance and many myths about DELIVERANCE. DELIVERANCE is the most misunderstood part of the Christian life. Most traditional Christians know little or nothing about Satan and his army. They do not believe they have a personal Devil, Satan. Most Full-Gospel Christians do not believe that a Christian can have a demon in the body or soul. Satan is eating their lunch and they think it is just the flesh. Many DELIVERANCE workers and ministers do not realize how demonized they and the Christian body still are. Sometimes they fall by the wayside because they do not continue to purge their bodies of demons.
DELIVERANCE is the most controversial and unpopular part of the Christian life. Unless the Church gets involved on a regular basis with DELIVERANCE, many Christians will continue to be defeated by Satan. The Devil will use their ignorance to plague the Church.
When the Christian finally accepts that he can have a demon, the response is that he can only have a few demons. Actually, Christians have many demons. When the young Christian starts to cast out demons, he will make statements like, "You are completely free of demons." JESUS never told anyone in the Bible that they were completely free of demons. He spent days casting out demons from the multitudes.
PROPHECY MYTHS Prophecies can be a blessing or a curse. Personal prophecy has caused some Christians to try to make it come true with disastrous results. The most danger for abuse lies in personal prophecy. Charismatic witches use personal prophecy to control others. Some Christians think that they have to have a word from the Lord or there is something wrong with them.
The true prophet does not make any mistakes. All of his prophecies come true. In the Old Testament, if the prophet missed God, he was stoned (Deut. 13:1-5, 18:20). I wonder what would happen if we killed the false prophets today.
Many prophecies are soulish prophecies which are made up in the mind of man or woman. Frequently they do not line up with the Bible. Sometimes people prophecy just to be noticed.
You have a responsibility to check out everything you see, hear or read by the Word of God, by the Holy Spirit within you, and by your intelligence. Otherwise, you will follow every wind of false doctrine.
Some prophecy is divination. Divination is the false gift of prophecy. It has destroyed churches and ministries across the land. The prophecies are right on but the purpose is to control. The diviners want to take over the pastor, then the church, and finally the property.
Satan has a counterfeit for everything that God has created. Just because it is spiritual and happens in the church, does not mean that it is from God. The demons go to church with the Christians and non-Christians to hinder or destroy the church. Don't underestimate the power of Satan and his forces; he is the second-most powerful spiritual being in the universe, only second to JESUS CHRIST who defeated him. We have power over Satan only because of JESUS CHRIST.
BATTLE MYTHS There are many myths about Christian warfare. Most Christians don't know that we are in a battle. Actually, we are in a life and death battle with Satan and his host of demons. We have to fight to take the Kingdom of God by force from the enemy. Satan is a good Devil, a worthy Adversary, at what he does; he works twenty-four hours a day to destroy us. He will probably take 98% of the world population and 75% of the church population to Hell with him. His army consists of billions of demons and hundreds of millions of fallen angels. He has multiplied demons for every person on earth, now about four billion people.
You will be tempted until you die. God will not stop the temptation but will make a way for you to escape. You need to learn to war in the spirit world to protect yourself and your family. The best defense against Satan is a good offense which is all-out spiritual warfare. God didn't provide any armor for our backs as cowards running from the enemy.
GENERAL MYTHS The following are negative statements or myths: "There is a single answer to my problems and living the Christian life. My problems in life can be worked out overnight. We can pick and choose what parts of the Bible to follow. It is not necessary to discipline our soul or body. We can let our mind be blank and God will fill it. We do not have to take care of our body; God will heal us when we get sick. We can let others feed us spiritually; we don't need to do it ourselves. We don't need to go to church; all we have to do is watch television evangelism. If we don't like DELIVERANCE, we can ignore it. God will supply everything we desire. If we can just find an anointed man or woman of God, they will pray for us and everything will be fine. We can live with one foot in the world and one foot in the Kingdom of God. If you do God's work, you can ignore your responsibilities. I can be a passive Christian and watch others do the work of God. The pastor and leaders do the work, not me. I am not in a war, God will fight all of my battles. All I have to do is to follow my pastor; he will hear from God for me. We can live a sinful life and receive all of God's blessings. I can sin, get forgiven and my family will not suffer. All we need to have in the church is token DELIVERANCE. Rejection is not a demon. I have a right to my unforgiveness because of the way I have been treated. Sex is love. Bad emotions are not demonic. I do not have to examine every area of my life. I can keep my cursed objects without causing any harm.
We can get all of our demons cast our in one grand event. I can be ashamed of my DELIVERANCE; God won't mind. When someone makes me mad, I can react however I feel. I can be ignorant of Satan's wiles; what I don't know can't hurt me. God is love; He won't send me to Hell. I can do anything I want to; God will protect me. God is pie-in-the-sky by-and-by. We can be gluttons as long as we are not drunkards. I do not need to get my demons cast out; all I need is to get prayer for me to be healed. It is all right to take mind control drugs. I need to go to a psychiatrist; God is not interested in my mind. The sins of my ancestors will not cause me any problems. I can do things my way; God will approve."
TRADITION NOT COVERED There are other areas that were not covered in this lesson. Some of these areas are holidays, puppetry, origin of evil, false strength of Christians, divine order, separation of healing and DELIVERANCE, taking care of the body and soul, what you sow - that you reap, Christians are not cursed, and parlor games won't hurt you. When this lesson was taught at Lake Hamilton Bible Camp, Glen Miller commented on these subjects. Tommy Cook also reviewed the topic of Prophecy Myths.
PRAYER Before DELIVERANCE from demon bondage, pray about being controlled by charismatic witchcraft or trying to control other's wills which is also witchcraft. Repent, take authority over these forces, break soul ties, and break curses placed upon you. Then cast out the demons.
Posts: 55 | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is well known to Muslims, Christians and Jews that Abraham(P) was ordered to sacrifice his son and he was willing to do so but God gave him a sheep to sacrifice instead of his cherished progeny. So far, everybody agrees. However, Jews and Christians say that the sacrificed was Isaac(P) -"Abraham's only son", whereas according to the Islamic tradition the sacrificed is Ishmael(P). The opposition between the two versions has not bothered any side that much because in the common mind "what we think is certainly right and those who think differently are necessarily wrong". Recently, we came across an article by the Christian missionaries claiming that according to the Islamic sources themselves the sacrificed was Isaac(P) (i.e., the Judeo-Christian version of the story). In the following article, the reader will get the fruits of our research about this matter, for it is not common for Christians to lie to support their ideas..
The most relevant passage in the Qur'ān is from verse 37:99 to verse 37:109, a passage including two different glad tidings brought to Abraham(P). Here under, we quote the verses concerning the sacrificed:
99. He said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me 100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!" 101. So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son. 102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!" 103. So when they had both submitted (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice), 104. We called out to him "O Abraham! ... 105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right.
A Strange Logic
The first argument put forward by those who support the Isaac-theory is that, in the Qur'ān, the name associated to glad tidings is Isaac(P) while Ishmael's(P) name was never associated to good news or glad tidings. They quote verse 37:112
"And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a Prophet - one of the righteous."
and verse 51:28
"They said, "Fear not," and they gave him glad tidings of a son endowed with knowledge."
Some points have to be made clear in this concern:
It is well known that Abraham(P) got his first child in his old days (more than 80 years old). By all means, when he was given the news of his first son, Ishmael(P), the news was great and not only good. It seems reasonable to think that the news of having his second son, Isaac(P) would be equal or less because in the first time the surprise factor has certainly increased his happiness.
More to the point, using the same argument as the opposition, one can safely say that the sacrificed was described as forbearing and steadfast in the Qur'ān and if we search the whole Qur'ān we will find the name of Ishmael(P) associated to patience and steadfastness and not Isaac(P)!
Indeed verse 21:85 reads "And (remember) Ishmael, Idris, and Zulkifl, all (men) of constancy and patience".
Conclusion: The sacrificed is Ishmael(P) according to the opponent's own logic.
Further scrutiny requires that we quote the full passage in surah 37:
99. He said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me! 100. "O my Lord! Grant me a righteous (son)!" 101. So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son. 102. Then, when (the son) reached (the age of) (serious) work with him, he said: "O my son! I have seen in a vision that I offer thee in sacrifice: now see what is thy view!" (The son) said: "O my father! Do as thou art commanded: thou will find me, if Allah so wills, one of the steadfast!" 103. So when they had both submitted (to Allah), and he had laid him prostrate on his forehead (for sacrifice), 104. We called out to him "O Abraham! ... 105. "Thou hast already fulfilled the vision!" - thus indeed do We reward those who do right. 106. For this was a clear trial- 107. And We ransomed him with a momentous sacrifice: 108. And We left for him among generations (to come) in later times: 109. "Peace and salutation to Abraham!" 110. Thus indeed do We reward those who do right. 111. For he was one of Our believing Servants.
112. And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous. 113. We blessed him and Isaac: but of their progeny are (some) that do right, and (some) that obviously do wrong, to themselves.
It is very obvious that, in this passage, there are two distinct good news, the first one about a forbearing son (the one to be sacrificed) and the second one about Isaac(P). Thus, the sacrificed cannot be Isaac(P) at least not according to the Qur'ān. But, once again, the opponent avoided (willingly?) to quote the full passage and this is frequently their way of doing things. Moreover, those who support that the two news are actually the same show their incompetence with the Qur'ānic style. Such a repetition cannot be imagined nor accepted by anyone who studied the Qur'ān, God's Final Book.
The Opinion Of Ibn Kathīr[1]
The above scan is the exegesis of verse 37:101 "So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son". Here is the translation of the above passage:
"So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son."
And this son is Ishmael(P) for he is the first son whose good news was brought to Abraham(P). He is older than Isaac according to Muslims and ahl al-kitāb (i.e., the People of the Book) too. It is even said in their Scripture that Ishmael(P) was born when Abraham(P) was 86 years old and Isaac(P) was born when Abraham(P) was 99. In their Scripture as well, God is said to have ordered Abraham(P) to sacrifice his only son and in another version his firstborn. And, at this spot, they inserted falsely the name of Isaac(P) against the text of their very Scripture. The reason they inserted Isaac(P) is that he is their father whereas Ishmael(P) is the father of the Arabs. They added Isaac(P) out of envy and brushed away "only son" by saying that Ishmael(P) and his mother had already been to Makkah. This is a mere [farfetched] explanation since we never say "only son" except to a person who hasn't got but one son. Moreover, the firstborn has got a special place [in the heart of his father] that is not given to the following children and the order to sacrifice him is therefore a greater test. Some knowledgeable people were inclined to say that the sacrificed was Isaac(P). This was reported from some people of the salaf (i.e. people of the previous generations) and it was even reported from some Companions(R) but [this opinion] does not have any bearings from the Book [i.e., the Qur'ān] nor from the Sunnah. I think such opinion was received from the Rabbis of ahl al-Kitāb as is without evidence. Moreover, God's Book is a witness and points to the fact that it is Ishmael(P) because the glad tiding said that the son was patient and that he is the sacrificed. Only afterwards, He said: "And We gave him the good news of Isaac - a prophet,- one of the Righteous." and when the Angels brought the good news of Isaac(P) to Abraham(P) they said: " "Fear not," and they gave him glad tidings of a son endowed with knowledge." And the Most High said: " We gave her [Sarah] glad tidings of Isaac, and after him, of Jacob." [11:71] meaning that in the lifetime of Abraham(P) and Sarah(P), Isaac(P) will beget a child that he will call Jacob(P) implying that Isaac(P) will have a progeny. We have already explained why it is not possible that Isaac(P) be sacrificed while still a child i.e., because God promised them [Abraham and Sarah] that he will have a progeny. On the other hand, Ishmael(P) was described as forbearing and he fits that description.
[Note that many commentators including Ibn Kathīr believe that "forbearing" does not fit a child, it can at least describe teenagers for they are old enough to be described as such.]
In a nutshell, the great Qur'ānic commentator Ibn Kathīr adds to our first three arguments two new ones: according to the Bible, the sacrificed is said to be Abraham's(P) only son (or his firstborn in some versions), which cannot fit Isaac(P); according to the Qur'ān, the good news of Isaac(P) said that he would have a progeny and consequently God cannot order Abraham(P) to sacrifice Isaac(P) before the promise is fulfilled. Again, according to the Qur'ān, the sacrificed cannot be Isaac.
The Opinion of cUlūm al-Hadīth
As a matter of fact, there was a debate between Muslim scholars whether the sacrificed was Isaac(P) or Ishmael(P). But the critical study of the reports allows us to drive safe conclusions. Here is the opinion of a scholar of the Science of Hadīth:
The truth is that the reports stating that the Sacrificed is Isaac are part of the Isrā'īliyyāt due to the People of the Book, it was transmitted by those who converted among them like Kacb al-Ahbār and it was conveyed [from the converts] by some Companions and Followers [tābicūn] as sign of trust. Later, the scholars who came after them were fooled by such reports and supported that the Sacrificed was Isaac(P). Every book of exegesis [tafsīr] or biography or even history would mention the argument that took place among the salaf. However, some [of those books] would follow the argument by outlining the truth and others wouldn't add any commentary either by conviction or surrender [to these reports].[2]
And further:
The truth is that the Sacrificed is Ishmael(P). This is supported by the Qur'ānic verses and reports from the Companions and Followers and reports rated Marfuc by approval of the Prophet [i.e., when something is said in the presence of the Prophet(P) and he does not oppose it then we consider that it is correct but it does not amount to Sahīh which is, by the way, what the Prophet(P) himself said.].
No wonder that many Companions and Followers and the later scholars of [Qur'ān] and hadīth among which we enumerate great Companions and poles of knowledge like: cAlī, Ibn cUmar, Abū Hurayrah, Abū Tufayl, Sacīd Ibn Jubayr, Mujāhid, al-Sha'by, Al-Hasan al-Basri, Muhammad Ibn Kacb al-Qardhy, Sacīd Ibn al-Musayyab, Abū Jacfar Muhammad al-Bāqir, Abū Sālih, al-Rabī' Ibn Anas, Abū cAmr Ibn al-cAlā' and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and others and it is one version and the strongest from the reports of Ibn cAbbās.
In Zād al-Ma'ād by Ibn al-Qayyim: It is the correct opinion according to the knowledgeable among the Companions and Followers and later generations. This opinions was famous among the Arabs before the advent of Islam and it was transmitted from generation to generation in tawātur and it was also mentioned in the poetry of Umayyah Ibn Abī al-Salt.[3]
The Opinion Of Judeo-Christian Scholars & Islamic Viewpoint
The Encyclopaedia Judaica says:
In the tale of binding (surah 37:99-110) Muhammad identified the son who was to be sacrificed as Ishmael and, indeed, the opinion of the traditionalists were also divided on this subject. It is related that a renowned traditionalist of Jewish origin, from the Qurayza tribe, and another Jewish scholar, who converted to Islam, told that Caliph Omar Ibn cAbd al-cAzīz (717-20) that the Jews were well informed that Ismail was the one who was bound, but that they concealed this out of jealousy. The Muslim legend also adds details of Hajar (Hagar), the mother of Ismail. After Abraham drove her and her son out, she wandered between the hills of al-Safa and al-Marwa (in the vicinity of Mecca) in search for water. At that time the waters of the spring Zemzem began to flow. Her acts became the basis for the hallowed custom of Muslims during the Hajj.[4]
The testimony of the former Jew as mentioned hadīth literature as quoted in the Encyclopaedia Judaica reads:
Another proof of our speech [i.e., that sacrificed was Ishmael(P)] is reported by Ibn Ishāq: "Muhammad Ibn Ka'b narrated that cUmar Ibn cAbd al-cAzīz sent for a man who had been a Jew then converted to Islam and showed signs of true Islam. [Before his conversion], he was one of their scholars [i.e., he was a Jewish scholar] So he [i.e., cUmar] asked him: which son did Abraham(P) sacrifice? He replied: 'It is Ishmael(P). By God, O Commander of the Believers, the Jews know that but they envy you - the Arabs.'[5]
The Oxford Companion To The Bible echoes the same position as the Encyclopaedia Judaica.
In Muslim tradition, the Arabs trace their ancestry back to Abraham through Ishmael. Because Ishmael was circumcised (Gen. 17:25), so are most Muslims. And, analogous to Paul's reversal of the figures of Isaac and Ishmael (Gal. 4:24-26), Muslim tradition makes Ishmael rather than Isaac the son Abraham was commanded to sacrifice.[6]
It is quite clear from the statement of Judeo-Christian scholars what the Muslim position is about the person who was sacrificed by Abraham(P).
Further Evidence From Hadīth Literature
The following says:
Some reports and traditions from the Companions and Followers state that the Sacrificed is Ishmael(P). Narrated by al-Hākim in Al-Mustadrak, and Ibn Jarīr [at-Tabarī] in his commentary with its isnād, and others that cAbdullāh Ibn Sacīd al-Sābihy said: "We were at Mu'āwiyah's reception and the people started discussing [the story of] Ishmael and Isaac(P) and which one was the sacrificed. Some said Ishmael and some said Isaac(P). Mu'āwiyah said: I am the expert you need; We were at the Prophet's(P) when a bedouin came to him saying "O Prophet of God, I have left the pasture dry and the life hard, the children died and the wealth is gone, so give me [something] of what God has bestowed on you, O Son of the two sacrificed." The Prophet(P) smiled and did not blame/criticize what he said. The people asked: Who are the two sacrificed O Commander of the believers? He replied: When cAbdul Muttalib was ordered to dig Zamzam he vowed to sacrifice one of his sons if God helps him with his mission [i.e., Zamzam]. When he achieved the mission, he cast lots on his children, there were ten of them. The choice fell on cAbdullāh so he decided to sacrifice him but the child's uncles, Banu Makhzūm, opposed the sacrifice and said satisfy your Lord and ransom your son. So, he ransomed him with a hundred camels. Mu'āwiyah said: this is one [of the two Sacrificed] the other is Ishmael(P)."
This report is regarded as Marfuc.[6]
There is another report according to which the Prophet(P) is believed to have said: "I am the son of the two Sacrificed". The authenticity of this report is very controversial so we will not use it as evidence especially when the above report is correct enough and suffices to our study.
Conclusion
According to the Qur'ān, the sacrificed cannot be Isaac(P). According to authentic Islamic tradition, the sacrificed is Ishmael(P). The Muslim scholars have solved this case a long time ago and, very early in the history of Islam, the popular Islamic tradition has integrated the fact that Ishmael(P) was the sacrificed.
Concerning the claim of 'world-renowned commentary of Yusuf Ali', any Muslim with a basic knowledge of Qur'ānic commentary would have a good laugh. The 'commentary' in the translation of the Qur'ān by Yusuf cAlī is just about good enough to be qualified as 'footnotes'. And of course, the commentary on the Qur'ān contains much more than these footnotes. Secondly, the statement
It is obvious that the claim that the son was Ishmael is not according to the Qur'ān!
is a rather foolish and reflects colossal ignorance on the part of the critic who has no idea about how the Qur'ānic exegesis is carried out.
Let the Christian missionaries study the Qur'ān thoroughly before calling upon ghosts that will frighten nobody but themselves. Indeed, the Biblical version of the story: "sacrifice your only son, Isaac" or "sacrifice your firstborn son, Isaac" is an enigma they must live with.
Praise be to Allah that guided us to Islam and gave us in the Qur'ān healing and guidance.
Islamic Awareness Qur'ān Contradictions Muslim Tradition The Sacrifice Of Abraham
[1] Abul-Fidā' Ismācīl Ibn Kathīr ad-Dimishqī, Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr, Available online (requires an Arabic enabled browser).
[2] Dr. Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Abū Shahbah (Professor of Qur'ānic Sciences and Hadīth at al-Azhar and Umm al-Qurā Universities), Al-Isrā'iliyyāt wal Mawdū'āt fī Kutub at-Tafsīr, Maktabat as-Sunnah (4th edition) - 1408AH/1988, p. 254.
[5] Abū al-Fadl Shihāb-uddīn al-Alūsī, Ruh al-Macāni fi Tafsīr al-Qur'ān al-'Adhīm wassab' al-Mathāni, Part 23, p. 135.
[5] Bruce M Metzger & Michael D Coogan (Ed.), Oxford Companion To The Bible, 1993, Oxford University Press, Oxford & New York, pp. 329 (Under 'Ishmael').
[6] Dr. Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Abū Shahbah, Op. cit., p. 259-260.
Posts: 220 | From: N.Y.C....Capital of the World | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nadir Ahmed spoke first. He was in the affirmative. His proposition was,
"The Bible is NOT the Inspired Word of God." (The reason for the affirmatives to be stated in the "negative"was that Nadir Ahmed already had six points that he was determined to make. I was glad to take those six points to task, but I was not about to make an affirmative speech to set up his six points. There was much discussion about how we could do this.....the result of that discussion was the cumbersome wording if the propositions.)
THE FOLLOWING IS MY RESPONSE TO HIS SPEECH........
I am thankful to God for this opportunity to reason with Nadir and the Muslims who are present. I thank them for coming. I am also reasoning with each of you. This is an important quest that we are on during the next few nights. The Muslims teach that the Qur'an is the inspired word of God. If it is, then we must believe it and obey it. If it is not, then it is a fraud. If it is a fraud then those who teach from it are false teachers. You cannot go to heaven following false teaching.
Nadir and I have had a friendly relationship before the debate and I know that will continue after the debate. He is sincere and very knowledgeable on the Qur'an and the religion of Islam. He has held many debates prior to this and is a good representative of the Muslim position.
The Muslims believe that Moses was a prophet of God. They teach that in Deuteronomy 18:18, where Moses speaks of God raising up a prophet, and that any who do not heed the words of that prophet God said "I will require it of him." THAT PROPHET IS MOHAMMED. I believe that prophet is Jesus. If that prophet is Mohammed....you had better believe in him as a prophet of God...and obey him..BUT, IF IT IS JESUS...BELIEVE AND OBEY HIM.
THAT, AT LEAST IN PART, IS WHAT THIS DEBATE IS ABOUT.
Notice throughout this debate which position offers "expert testimony" and which offers broad sweeping testimony with no proof. Just as in a court of law no one can simply say...Doctors all agree that "such and such" is deadly... WHERE'S THE PROOF? WHAT DOCTORS?? HOW ARE THESE DOCTORS QUALIFIED??
NADIR MAKES MANY CLAIMS.......But he offers no "expert testimony." This carries the weight of "one man's opinion" As we go through the debate let's note who backs up what they say with proof from the "Experts"
In all that Nadir said, did you get the idea that Mohammed, in the Qur'an, taught that the Bible was to be disregarded?? Did you know that Mohammed told his followers to respect the Bible? Nadir doesn't seem to be following Mohammed on this teaching.....listen to Mohammed....
Mohammed said: "We (Allah) sent inspiration to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob and the tribes, to Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon, and to David We (Allah) gave the Psalms....." S.4:163
"It is He Who sent down To thee (step by step), In truth, the Book, Confirming what went before it; And He sent down the Torah (of Moses) and the Gospel (Of Jesus)." S.3:3
"If thou were in doubt as to what We (Allah) have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading The Book from before thee. The Truth hath indeed come to thee from the Lord; so be in no wise of those who doubt." S.10:94....(See also 3:79)
The Muslims teach that Moses was an inspired prophet of God. On this we will agree. Let's listen to Moses.....
Deut. 18:15-19...."The LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your countrymen, you shall listen to him. This is according to all that you asked of the LORD your God in Horeb on the day of the assembly, saying, 'Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, let me not see this great fire anymore, lest I die.' And the LORD said to me, 'They have spoken well. 'I will raise up a prophet from among their countrymen like you, and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. 'And it shall come about that whoever will not listen to My words which he shall speak in My name, I Myself will require it of him."
Of Whom was Moses speaking?? This is at the heart of what we will be debating.
Was this prophet Mohammed or Jesus? I would like for Nadir to answer this question if he has time in his rebuttal.
Let's reason together....
This prophet could not be Mohammed....Moses, by inspiration, said this prophet would come "From among you"...."From your countrymen"
Mohammed was not a Jew....Mohammed was not one of "their (the children of Israel) countrymen"
The prophet is identified by the inspired apostle Peter in Acts 3:18-26....These statements of Moses are quoted here....The prophet that was a Jew...one of their own countrymen was Jesus Christ of Nazareth...the Son Of God!!
There were at least 300 things prophesied about Jesus that all came true....none failed....prophecy of his place of birth (tiny Bethlehem)...That John the Baptist would come as a divinely appointed messenger to announce His arrival...How He would come into Jerusalem for that last time....In triumph, but rejected by the leading Jews....His betrayal.....His trial....His crucifixion (even Jesus predicted His own death and resurrection) with many details...and His glorious resurrection.
NONE OF THESE THINGS APPLY TO MOHAMMED.....
AND WHERE CAN WE FIND LIKE PROPHECY CONCERNING MOHAMMED??
Let's reason together about these weaknesses that Nadir has brought before you...
Nadir ridiculed the idea of there being three persons in the Godhead. He calls us polytheists. He said he believes in "One God." Nadir, so do we. We believe in One God, but you believe in a "limited God."
Nadir said that God ONLY is to be worshipped. And we agree here, too! We'll see in a moment where we do disagree. I'll show you how Jesus, The Father, and the Holy Spirit are all God and yet are ONE. But I want to make sure that I understand first what Nadir and the Muslims believe.
Nadir said that Jesus is one of the "mightiest messengers of God." And that He was born of a virgin, miraculously, having no earthly father. Nadir said that Jesus was a worker of miracles "by God's commission."
NOW LET ME UNDERSTAND.....(quote above attributes...) But he is a liar and a fraud?? He claimed to be God; He claimed to have power over sins;....... BUT He was a part of a great hoax?? He really wasn't crucified?? He really wasn't resurrected?? All of that was simply a lie that He helped carry out?? Everything that He declared about His death, burial, and resurrection was a fraud and a lie......however, God thought so much of Him that He took Jesus up into heaven??
Nadir said that our view of Jesus was similar and that these were the only "points of difference."
We believe that Jesus is "Only Begotten Son of God" - the Muslims do not.
We believe that Jesus was One of the "Trinity" - the Muslims do not. (Where did you get that I believe in "Trinity?" Did you hear that word from me?? One of the qualities we'll see of the Qur'an is that Mohammed fights against the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church.)
Nadir, I don't believe in the Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity....nor do I believe in the deity of the virgin Mary.
Here's what the Bible teaches, however.......... Sean, Put up OHP#1 (OHP=Overhead Projection)
THE FATHER IS GOD....John 20:17 Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren, and say to them, 'I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"
THE SON IS GOD....THE HEBREW WRITER, BY INSPIRATION, APPLIES PSALM 45:6 TO JESUS.... Hebrews 1:8. But of the Son He says, "THY THRONE, O GOD, IS FOREVER AND EVER, AND THE RIGHTEOUS SCEPTER IS THE SCEPTER OF HIS KINGDOM.
THE HOLY SPIRIT IS ALSO CALLED GOD .... Acts 5:3-4 But Peter said, "Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back some of the price of the land? "While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control? Why is it that you have conceived this deed in your heart? You have not lied to men, but to God."
THE FATHER AND THE SON ARE TWO DISTINCT PERSONS ...
John 8:13-18....(skim to v 16) The Pharisees therefore said to Him, "You are bearing witness of Yourself; Your witness is not true." Jesus answered and said to them, "Even if I bear witness of Myself, My witness is true; for I know where I came from, and where I am going; but you do not know where I come from, or where I am going. "You people judge according to the flesh; I am not judging anyone.16 "But even if I do judge, My judgment is true; for I am not alone in it, but I and He who sent Me. "Even in your law it has been written, that the testimony of two men is true. "I am He who bears witness of Myself, and the Father who sent Me bears witness of Me."
THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE FATHER ARE TWO DIFFERENT PERSONS.....
John 14:26 "But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said to you.
THE HOLY SPIRIT AND THE SON ARE DIFFERENT PERSONS....Acts 10:38
"You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good, and healing all who were oppressed by the devil; for God was with Him.
All 3 are God....They possess the qualities of being God. There is only one state of Godhood. In the same way that we all share the qualities of mankind......
We are in agreement about rejecting all of the Catholic and Denominational doctrines.....I will not try to defend them.....I am only interested in defending the truth. Sean....Put up OHP#2
Christianity
Matt. 16:18 "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it.Acts 2:46-47 And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
Christianity began with Jesus, specifically on the first Jewish Pentecost after the death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Christ. All of the prophecies of the O.T. that pointed to a new and better Kingdom; a time when the Messiah would rule; a Kingdom that would not be shaken....all were referring to a spiritual relationship that we can have with God through Jesus Christ. Jesus came and taught concerning this relationship, His church. It was ONLY after the day of Pentecost that the church began to be spoken of as being IN EXISTENCE. THAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP THAT IS THE SAVED!
After about 300 years there began to be changes as men decided to deviate from the instructions of our Lord concerning the work, worship, and organization of the church. In 606 we can identify a complete separate entity that had emerged, the Catholic Church with its first official head on the earth. Meanwhile, Christians who were opposed to these changes kept these things pure as they simply followed the instructions of Jesus in His gospel.
The Catholic church continued making changes and taking on a life of its own until it became such a tremendous "monster of apostasy" that some of her priests tried to reform her. They were ultimately excommunicated and religions began springing up around them. THESE ARE THE PROTESTANTS that you talk about. WE ARE NEITHER CATHOLIC NOR PROTESTANT!!
Nadir likes to talk about the different versions of the Bible....The Douay Version with its 73 books....the KJV with its 66 books....etc... because there are some differences in these texts he believes this proves that the Bible is not the word of God....
Nadir.....I, too, reject the Douay version of the Bible. Even the Catholics regard the additional 7 additional books as deutero-canonical....of secondary importance in the canon of scripture.
A question I would like for Nadir to answer....Are there also different versions of the Qur'an? Are there some of these versions that you believe are better than others?? If that is the case, are you willing, then, to throw out the Qur'an - because we cannot know which version is right??
Nadir....hold on to your seat...I, too, reject any of these "books" as being "inspired." There are minor errors in each one.....I will freely admit that. Let me show you what I DO believe was inspired. ...... Sean....Put up OHP#9
SHOWS THAT ONLY THE ORIGINAL MANUSCRIPTS WERE INSPIRED
Most Ancient Copies...
Codex Sinaiticus - Codex Vaticanus ....Both 4th Century
Codex Alexandrinus - 5th Century
Ancient Copies...
Septuagint (Gr. Translation of OT) - 285BC
Samaritan Pentiteuch; Peshito (or Syriac); Vulgate 400AD (OT&NT) John Wycliffe...1300's Translated into English
William Tyndale ...1500's "more modern" English
The KJV ... 1611...(47 scholars under direction of the king) Considered best for 300 years....
Douay Version ......made from the Latin Vulgate (Late 1500's and early 1600's)....Published to express the notes, etc. of the Roman Catholic Church.
Revised Version....(1880's) Made by the most noted English and American Scholars...Supposed to be a revision of the KJV....Unlike the other versions before it ....Went back to the MOST ANCIENT COPIES....SOME OF THESE MOST ANCIENT CODICES WERE NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE K.J.V.
American Standard Version....(1900) Incorporates the readings preferred by the American members of the Revision Committee of the Revised Version.
Nadir stresses and belittles the fact that there are differences in these different versions (translations) of the Bible.....He even holds up the Living Bible which is a PARAPHRASE....
Nadir, you need to know the difference between a paraphrase and a translation...Nadir reads from the Introductory pages of these Bibles as if they were scholars....and the introductions to the books as if they were inspired....These are merely comments by men who want you to buy their book....
NADIR....Do you believe every version of the Qur'an is inspired? If so, why do they differ??
Let's look at what history shows concerning the translations of the Qur'an.....
note: since the chart seems to indicate that Othman's Copy came from the six listed above it....that is inaccurate...however these versions did predate Othman's
How The Qur'an Got Here
Mohammed Spoke - Much was memorized - Some written on all different kinds of surfaces
MOHAMMED WROTE NOTHING!!
During this time there was a battle against a certain false prophet.....those who had memorized were being killed....OMAR said to the Calif Abu Bakr (the first Calif after the death of Mohammed) that since so many were being killed they needed to get a collection of all he said. He did not agree since Mohammed had given no commandments to do that.......He finally agreed.
He called upon a man named Zaid to do the compilation, he objected on the same basis....Mohammed gave no such command....but he wound up doing it.
This produced Different Codices (ancient books-mms)
Damascus - UBAIY B. KA'B - 2 Additional Suras
Kufa - 'ABD ALLAH B. MUSAD - Suras 104, 113 are missing...possibly 1, too.
Basra - ABA MUSA 'ADB ALLAH AL-ASHARI - He had the 2 Suras of Ubaiy
Hims - MIKAAD B. 'AMR
Zaid..........Etc.
THE QUR'AN WAS NOT COLLECTED INTO ONE BOOK DURING MOHAMMEDS LIFETIME....NOR DID HE GIVE ANY INSTRUCTIONS TO DO SO....
OTHMAN When Othman Ibn Affan became the third Khalifah....he was afraid that corruption to the text had come in through some Arab converts......he commissioned a committee to investigate. All copies were called into the committee and ultimately
4 COPIES MADE of what was now to be the "official and correct text." ALL OTHERS BURNED.
.......There are many translations today that build from this point. Each are different.....some are better than others; depending on the translation.....
I was using a translation by M.H. Shakir. Nadir suggested ....AND SUPPLIED...a better translation......
THEN......He informed me that the version that he was going to use......and he gave me the web site where it is located......so that I could use it too....This is "The Nobel Qur'an" (See the Links to Other Materials for this link to the Nobel Qur'an.
There are many other translations....
"First American Version" translated by Dr. T.B. Irving
Another translation is Pickthall's Translation;
Another translation is Yusu Fali's Translation;
and there is another translation Arberry's Translation;
and there's Sher Ali's Translation;
Then ther's Rashad Khalifa's Translation......
others....
Nadir, we still have very early MMS of the Bible....not originals....these early copies are divided up into "families" that carry the same "difference" that is peculiar to it. By comparing these "families" we can be better equipped to know what the original text said....We can be certain that the text that we have is authentic....Nadir, you can't go back beyond Othman's work. You are at his mercy.....we'll deal more with this later...
Sean...Put up OHP#10 Notice that in the NT Jesus didn't personally write anything....Nadir is correct....However, neither did Mohammed. For that matter he was illiterate. Jesus promised to send the H/S to guide the apostles into "all the truth." They wrote those things that were given to them by Jesus. Their writings were certified by the working of miracles. These writings were accepted and in common use by the first century Christians. The Catholic Church eventually put their "Seal of Approval" on those writings (then claimed they gave them to us). Mohammed never ordered a collection and writing of his words. This was done later. Jesus taught His word, as did His apostles, both publicly and privately. So did Mohammed. In both sets of writings different copies arose. Scholars have had to collect, collate, and compare these works to authenticate them. The difference is that Othman burned the evidence and the scholars of the Bible did not. We can go back and check their work. You cannot check the earlier works...they don't exist!! We both clain that, even though the originals don't exist, we have an authentic copy of the original works.
Now concerning John 3:16....Nadir says that John 3:16 is bogus. He told us that the word "begotten" should not be in the text; and that this is the only place in the Bible that this term is used. Rememebr he told you about the 32 scholars who rejected the use of that term and were forced to put it back in because of the Bible sellers?? Nadir, you offered no proof; just your conjecture...What do the scholars say??
Sean...Put up OHP#20
In the Interlinear of John 3:16 we find that the word that is translated "only begotten" is the compound word "monogenes."
Let's see what that compound word means. Nadir said that it only refers to the base elements of the sex act. Like two animals involved in sexual conduct.
Sean...put up OHP#23 Spiro Zodhiates, a doctor of theology, is a well known and respected Greek scholar. He is not a member of the church of Christ...I wouldn't accept his theology on many points....but I do respect his knowledge of the Greek language.....
-
Dr. Zodhiates tells us that "monogenes" is a compound word.... monos="only" and genos="stock".....It means (monos)"unique, one of a kind" and "genos" refers to being the offspring, this is where we get our words "genes" and "genetics." Dr. Zodhiates refers to the statements in John as referring to Jesus as the "only one" or "unique one" who is from "genos" (relationship to) the Father.
Nadir, Dr. Zodhiates makes no reference to the sexual act at all!
Sean...Put up OHP#21 In W. E. Vine's Expository Dictionary of N. T. Words.....You would accept W. E. Vines as authoritative, wouldn't you?? Vines is used in all the colleges as the best source for looking up Greek words. Let's listen to what he says..."Only Begotten".......MONOGENES is used five times .... Not once, Nadir, all in the writings of the Apostle John, of Christ as the Son of God; it is translated "only begotten" in Hebrews 11:17 of the relationship of Isaac to Abraham. With reference to Christ, the phrase "the only begotten from the Father," John 1:14, indicates that as the Son of God He was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who sent Him....In John 3:16 the statement, "God so loved the world that He gave His Only Begotten Son," must be not taken to mean that Christ became the Only Begotten Son by Incarnation. The value and greatness of the gift lay in the Sonship of Him who was given... LET'S LOOK AT ANOTHER SCHOLAR.....(rememeber, now, that Nadir didn't offer any scholarly proof)
Let's look at another scholarly source; Wigram's Englishman's Greek Concordance of the NT.
(Sean, Put up OHP#22) One of the things this book does is to help you find EVERY PLACE in the NT a specific Greek word is used, and the way it is translated. This helps us to compare the other way that the word may be translated as well as give us every context to look at.....here we see the word "MONOGENES" translated most often as "only begotten." No context talks about sexual activity. Nadir says that is what the primary use of the word is. He also tells us that John 3:16 is the only place that word is found. If he's referring to the Greek word "monogenes," it is found nine times....if he's referring to the English translation "only begotten" it is translated such six of those nine times
Nadir....According to the scholars you are incorrect about your understanding of John 3:16.....The error that is commonly made by those who would want to discredit the Bible is this.....
1. English words are translated from the Greek
2. They take the English dictionary..sometimes the 3rd or 4th meaning to give the worst definition
3. What you need to do is go back to the original language on controversial words
4. Language changes....that's why by God's providence the Koine Greek died just after the completion of the Bible....the Koine Greek didn't continue to change...as the Arabic has....
Now Let's see if Nadir is right about all these Interpolations....Fabrications.... Sean put up OHP#24
The word INTERPOLATION, according to the "Handbook of Biblical Criticism," does not mean what Nadir says......"just made up stories"....Nadir said they were "fabrications" etc.
Though not a scholar, I took Biblical Criticism in college. I have probably forgottel more than I knew....but I saved my notes and textbooks.
The word INTERPOLATION is a word used in Textual Criticism. It refers to something added in the process of scribal transmission. It is most commonly in the form of a word that was added to give a clearer meaning. Sometimes entire phrases were added from the column of the scribe. Even a few times an entire segment. The Textual Criticism problem is that you can not always know for sure whether something was "added" to the translation that has it...or "omitted" from the ones that don't have it. Verses present in the later Byzantine MSS (used as the basis of the KJV) which are not found in the more ancient MSS of the NT are considered to be interpolations. Since most modern versions are based on the older MSS, the interpolated verses are often, but not always, omitted from the text and placed in a footnote.
Two things to remember about interpolations...1) only a minute part of our Bible has these questionable verses (much less than 1%) and .....2) Interpolations change no doctrinal point. There is nothing of any, even slight, importance that we find MIGHT BE an interpolation
Nadir told us a story about the RSV about how the scholars know that the story of the woman taken in adultery was an interpolation but was forced into putting it in because of the "Bible thumping evangelicals."
Where is the "proof" for this story of RSV two versions .... and the pressure put on by "book sellers.".....Talk about made up stories!!!
Nadir uses the example of bird droppings in a glass of water as if most of the Bible is corrupted....truth is less than 3% (considering the interpolations and the unreconcilable errors in translation) in less than 3% is there any question about by the scholars.....NONE OF THAT 3% HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH DOCTRINE....ANY PRINCIPLES THAT ARE TAUGHT IN ANY OF THESE QUESTIONABLE PASSAGES ARE ALSO TAUGHT IN OTHER PLACES IN THE BIBLE.... Nadir gave several, "THE CREAM OF THE CROP," examples of the error in the translation of the Bible. Remember as we look at them....this is the best that they have to offer....
It is obvious that Nadir doesn't like the way that God chose to write the Bible....
1He points out that....none of the writers of the Gospels said they wrote the Bible..
2...He sneers at the fact that Paul wrote to friends to bring coat & papers in 2 Tim. 4:13
3....He belittles the statements by Paul 1 Cor 7 "Paul gave his opinion"
Nadir, these are not scholarly views. You are offering your opinion that God could have done a better job by doing it differently. That's your opinion. God got the job done well by sending the Holy Spirit to these men who wrote these things down. They wrote inspired letters that were shared by all the Christians....and were confirmed to be authentic by the working of miracles.
Sean...Put up OHP#8....Here's how God revealed His Word to man...
God, the Holy Spirit, revealed ALL TRUTH to those MEN Jesus chose. In John 16:12-14 we read..."I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. He shall glorify Me; for He shall take of Mine, and shall disclose it to you."
So that there could be no mistake the working of miracles CONFIRMED THE WORD....In 2 Cor. 12:12 Paul wrote, "The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with all perseverance, by signs and wonders and miracles."
NOW WE HAVE EVERYTHING THAT GOD WANTED US TO HAVE - "ALL THE TRUTH" IN THE BOOK CALLED "THE BIBLE"
Notice that this book tells us that there will be no more revelations to come....In Jude 3 we read, "Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints."
and in 2 Peter 1:3...."seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence."
THE WORD HAS BEEN CONFIRMED.....Does this sound like God was going to give a further revelation? Listen to Heb. 2:1-4, "For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, lest we drift away from it. For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense, how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will."
WHETHER NADIR LIKES THE WAY GOD CHOSE TO REVEAL HIS WORD....
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Nadir also made a point that 2 Tim. 3:16-17 refers to the OT. I agree. Paul was talking about Timothy and the scriptures that he had learned. But the statement is true of the QUALITY OF SCRIPTURE...THAT THAT MAKES IT "SCRIPTURE" Now let's talk about all these great "contradictions" that Nadir says will show that the Bible can't be from God.
Men spent there lives trying to find some way to discredit the Bible....Nadir makes the best case that can be made (I told you..."He know's his stuff").....I'm impressed with the fact that this is the best that the enemies of the Bible can come up with.......this alone ought to prove the Bible came from God.......
Remember that I told you to pay attention to the quality of evidence presented. Tomorrow night we'll talk about the Qur'an and the contradictions there.
Tonight let's examine these contradictions that Nadir presented
2 Sam. 24:1 tells us that "God numbered Israel"
and in 1 Chron 21:1, we read that"Satan numbered Israel"
Nadir made a great point that in any way of thinking, Satan and God are not the same....and that's true. But, Nadir, these passages are not hard to understand.......
It is consistent with Hebrew thought that whatever happens in the universe...God allows. Here God was very mad at Israel for the numbering of Israel....Satan caused them to think that having greater numbers would cause them to be triumphant over their enemy......They had forgotten that it was God who was giving them their victories......THE POINT IS SATAN WAS BEHIND THEIR ATTITUDES....GOD ALLOWED THESE THINGS TO TAKE PLACE."
This is similar to statement that "God hardened Pharaoh's heart..." Did God cause Pharoah to sin?? Or did He allow Satan to do it?
Look at how God works in the beginning of the book of Job. Did God cause all those bad things to happen to Job?? NO! He allowed Satan to do it. But who was in charge?
Another contradiction that Nadir brings to us is in 2 Sam. 24:13, we find that "Gad came to David....choose 7 years of famine"
And he said that contradicts 1 Chron. 21:11...."Gad came to David....choose 3 years of famine"
Nadir asserts, then, that in the Hebrew there were no numbers. They always wrote out their numbers. Nadir, where are your scholars?
Regardless of what Nadir says....Hebrew does allow for numbers.
DeWette, In "Introduction to Old Testament," said, the symbol for 3 is easily mistaken for the symbol for 7. You can see by the poor drawing that I have made the similarities.
Nadir also brings us this problem....
In 2 Chron. 36:9 "Jehoiachin 8 years old when he began to reign"
In 2 Kings 24:8 "Jehoiachin 18 years old when he began to reign"
Again I appeal to a SCHOLAR, DeWette, In his Introduction to Old Testament, said that the symbol for 10 in front of a number (like our adding a 1) was a very tiny character. It was seemingly dropped out of some later texts.....(Again, I refer you to my crude writing on the OHP...it is not at all in proportion.)
Nadir brings the next controversy....
2 Sam. 10:18....speaks of 700 chariots, 40,000 horsemen
1 Chron 19:18...speaks of 7000 men in chariots, 40,000 footmen I don't know which is correct.
Keil: (Everyone is familiar with the scholars Keil and Dalisch) Keil said, "It is very evident that there are copyist's errors in both texts." We may never reconcile this scribal error. BUT SO WHAT! Whatever was in the original was inspired. A scribe made an error along the way. What point of doctrine does this change??
We CONCEDE ERRORS BY COPYISTS....LESS THAN 3% of all the text of the Bible have any textual problems...but, none affect anything of any importance. There are NO DOCTRINAL PROBLEMS ....
Here is the next big error that Nadir brings befor us....He tells us that Jesus sinned by breaking His own "rules."
Jesus said in Matthew 5:22 22 "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, 'Raca,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever shall say, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell.
Then he quotes Jesus in Luke 11:40"Foolish ones! Did not He who made the outside make the inside also?
Nadir tells us that in both places the Greek word "moros" is used. And that is where we get the word "moron" from.
In Matthew 5:22 "But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, 'Raca,' shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever shall say, 'You fool,' shall be guilty enough to go into the fiery hell." The Greek word is Moros....that means, "dull or stupid; blockhead; used in the absurd...calling a name. Albert Barnes, in Barnes Notes, (Nadir, he is a scholar) said that this word speaks to the judgement of character rather than knowledge.
In Luke 11:40 Jesus said, "You foolish ones, did not He who made the outside make the inside also?
Nadir, according to the scholars, and looking at the interlinear, "foolish ones" is not translated from the word "moros." It is translated from the Greek word "aphron."
"Aphron" means "mindless, or stupid" also "ignorant, rash, or unbelieving" It means "unwise." Strongs shows it meaning to be "unlearned and unwise." Albert Barnes says this word reflects "judgement of wisdom rather than character."
In the first text Jesus is saying don't go around "name-calling." (i.e. "you idiot!" While in this second case He (being God and knowing their hearts) is telling them that they are "unwise and unlearned" or "ignorant"...they don't know what they are talking about.
Remember as Jesus also uses the word (or at least it is translated) "fools" in other places. Jesus, as God, knew their hearts and intents of their hearts. We do not. He know if they were "fools" or not....We can't know.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally let's look at the "biggie." Nadir brings our attention to the two texts that seem to contradict concerning the death of Judas.
As for the difference between Acts 1:18 and Matt. 27:5....manner of Judas' death...
Neither passage excludes the other....Acts 1:18 does not say he did not hang himself...and Matt. 27:5 does not say he did not fall headlong and his bowels gushed out.....(possibly when cut down....possible limb broke) Who knows?? What we do know...
A. Each text is emphasizing something different....In Acts .... about to appoint a 12th apostle.... Here, in discussing what happened to Judas, the emphasis is on the field and why it is called "the field of blood."
In Matt 27 the emphasis is on the fact that Judas was so remourseful that he committed suicide....SEAN PUT UP OHP#31
In the Book "Illustrations of Scripture," pp 275-276 Professor Hackett who recently visited the scene said that it is not hard to understand at all....as he stood in the valley, and looked up to the rocky terraces which hang over it, and which he found by measurement to vary from 25 to 40 feet almost perpendicular in height, he felt more than satisfied that either by falling due to any number of events (such as wind, wild animals, etc.) or when being cut down by those who found him, that the end result would be as described by Luke in Acts 1 when Judas' body hit the jagged rocks beneath.
Also, there is no telling how long he hung there...what was his state of decomposition...
NOTE HOW FEEBLE THESE ATTEMPTS ARE TO DISCREDIT THE BIBLE...THIS IS THE BEST THAT HE HAS. Please note tomorrow's evidence on the Qur'an. Notice the QUALITY of proof. Notice, too, who it is that speaks from the scholarly and who it is that speaks from the "fanciful."
Posts: 116 | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged |
We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac,and the prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)."" Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, (Qur'an 3:84)
Posts: 42920 | From: , | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by the lioness: Jari are you converting to Islam now?
We believe in Allah, and in what has been revealed to us and what was revealed to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac,and the prophets, from their Lord: We make no distinction between one and another among them, and to Allah do we bow our will (in Islam)."" Jacob, and the Tribes, and in (the Books) given to Moses, Jesus, (Qur'an 3:84)
Bitch look at the registration date and use common sense, also I changed my name already.
Posts: 8804 | From: The fear of his majesty had entered their hearts, they were powerless | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic