| | | The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. |  |
| | | كاتب الموضوع | رسالة |
|---|
أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 1:51 pm | |
| The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them.
One finds Christian doctrine littered with claims about God that are unacceptable for anyone with sound disposition or the least bit of intellect, and all of these claims are never backed up with any authentic evidence, that leaves the only explanation being that these are lies that have attributed to God and slander.
One finds God is spoken about in their narrative according to their desires without the least bit of shame. It is claimed that God is one part of three parts or the doctrine of the “Trinity” the idea is that all three parts are interdependent on one another and yet all are Gods, they are namely the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit/ Ghost.
The description of God being divided or part of a trinity cannot be attributed to God at all and is neither logical nor acceptable as God Almighty is in need of no one and is not dependent on anyone.
To compound things we also find the Christians guilty of anthropomorphism, or giving God human attributes. They claim that the essence of God is seated upon the Throne and that His son is upon His right hand side, and no doubt this is something incomprehensible for anyone in their right mind to consider.
As Allah Almighty is the creator of place and is the Creator of time and then how can we consider that it is befitting for him to be encompassed by His own creation.
Allah is exalted above these attributions to Him Almighty.
One will likewise find, that the Christians also attribute to God what the Jews before them attributed to God before them like regret and anxiety as in Genesis 6:6 and rest after hard work as in Exodus 17:31 and sleep and awaking as in Psalms 65:78 and screaming as in Isaiah 13:42. Similarly, the claim that God is like a blazing fire as in Exodus 18:24 and the likes of these are many.
Likewise, one finds that the Christians attribute to God many sons and children (Luke 38:3).
Exalted is Allah from the claims that He took a son unto Himself.
As has been previously mentioned, the Christians believe in the trinity. Part of this belief entails one third of the trinity being “the son”. What is even more alarming is the claim that this son is of human descent and emerged from the womb.
This son was then circumcised after his birth by a few days and was fed from the breast of his mother. In addition, he would drink alcohol as well as eat and would also need to urinate and defecate. These are all attributes unbefitting of the Lord, the Creator of the heavens and the earth.
Another contradiction with sound reasoning is the fact that this so called son was in a state of worship and submission as is mentioned in the Gospel of Mark 35:1. The question must be asked, to whom was this son worshipping? As is logical, only the creation can worship and not the creator. This is further evidence that the Christian belief is in direct contradiction with all logic and reason.
What is more astonishing is the claim as previously indicated that this son would intoxicate himself with alcohol Gospel of Matthew 19:11 and Luke 34:7. These descriptions are unbefitting of a decent human being so how is it imaginable that it describes a creator or a Lord or a God. No doubt this is another lie and slander upon Allah Almighty.
One finds that this so called son was also led astray by the devil for forty days Gospel of Mark 13-12:1 and that this son would cry and become anxious, depressed and weak. The references for these are as follows John 35:11 Matthew 37:26 Mark 33:14 Luke 44: 32. They further claim that this son would be overcome by fear and flee and that he was arrested, bound and tied as is mentioned in the Gospel of John 1:7 John 59:8 and John 12-13:17.
In fact, the claims don’t end there, it is claimed that this so called son’s face was spat on and slapped whilst being unable to do anything about it as was mentioned in the Gospel of Luke 63-64:22, the Gospel of Matthew 27:26, the Gospel of John 22-23:18. If this was not demeaning enough, they then claim that this so called son died upon the cross after being humiliated and tortured. This is all found in Christian belief. All of this is unacceptable for anyone with a sound mind to attribute to God.
As for the third installment in this trinity of their then it is none other than the Holy Spirit / Ghost. The nature of this “spirit” is so nocuous it provides the perfect ammunition for the atheists and disbelievers to attack the existence of God Himself because of it.
And the angel answered and said unto her, "The Holy Ghost shall COME UPON THEE, and the power of the Highest shall OVERSHADOW THEE (Luke 1:35)
Can't you see that you are giving the atheist, the skeptic, the agnostic a stick to beat you with? They may well ask- "How did the Holy Ghost come upon Mary?" "How did the Highest over shadow her? We know that literally it does not mean that: that it was an immaculate conception, but the language used here, is distasteful-gutter language-you agree!? Language unbefitting to be considered the work of God Almighty by anyone with a reasonable intellect.
It is also reported in Christianity that this Holy Spirit used to take the form of a Dove as is mentioned in the Gospel of Mathew 16:3, and this is no surprise when you consider that they claim that this son is of human descent and emerged from the womb. This son was then circumcised after his birth by a few days and was fed from the breast of his mother. In addition, he would drink alcohol as well as eat and would also need to urinate and defecate. These are all attributes unbefitting of the Lord, the Creator of the heavens and the earth.
All of these claims on God or His so called son and the third part of the trinity being the holy Spirit we have made mention of these claims and attributions all of which are wholly inappropriate and far removed from what should be attributed to Allah Almighty, and anyone with a sound disposition and an objective eye and any common sense can see this clearly.
عدل سابقا من قبل أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn في الثلاثاء 25 مايو 2021, 1:13 am عدل 1 مرات |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 1:53 pm | |
| How does this false doctrine manifest itself?
Christian missionaries and preachers alike call to the doctrine of the Divinity of Christ and they do this in the following way: They say either Jesus is divine or that he is a liar or that he is a madman, it must be one of these three possibilities.
But there remains one possibility that is not being entertained by those who like to follow their whims and desires and that is that he was a prophet sent by God and the miracles that were sent with him were given to him by god to prove to them the truth of his message.
It should be noted that these missionaries always target:
The young, who usually have not heard or studied about Islam.
The poor, who are in desperate need of assistance and food and who are given these in place of them becoming Christians.
People who seek positions are given assistance in order to reach their target the only payment they are asked for is that they become Christian.
There is no doubt that the Christians also use the media to further their goals and their belief.
How did Jesus become God.
It is well documented that citations of Jesus being referred to as God are non-existent until the year 325CE when the First Council of Nicaea which was a council of Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in Bithynia by the Roman EmperorConstantine I in AD 325.
Its main accomplishments were settlement of the Christological issue of the relationship of Jesus to God the Father, the construction of the first part of the Nicene Creed, which included the Divinity of Jesus.
And what is more astonishing is that had this voice faded into the background Christendom would still believe in he notion of the prophet hood of Jesus, as is the Muslim position. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 1:55 pm | |
| Some of the qualities that Christianity attributes to God
Christians like the Jews before them attribute much of what the Jews attributed to God as it is contained in the First part of the Bible called the Old Testament.
This is one of many blameworthy characteristics they attributed to God and his messengers as are the following:
a) Poor selection of Prophets
b) Ignorance of the future and the unseen world.
c) A basic lack of wisdom
This anthropomorphism is something indicative of their drawing similarities of God from His creation from their own brains, leading them to describe him in way that are human like.
From these erroneous descriptions is the following
( “ The Lord smelled the soothing aroma; and the Lord said to Himself, “)Genesis8:21 exalted is Allah from what they attribute to Him.
One can also find descriptions about God amongst the Jews and Christians whereby they claim that God regretted and had anxiety, and it is only possible to regret if you make a mistake out of ignorance of the outcome of the act in question. And here is a quote from Genesis 6:6
(And the Lord was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart”). Exalted is Allah from what they attribute to Him.
Its is then no surprise that the Jews and Christians also attribute to God the he becomes tried and that it is necessary for him to rejuvenate after completing arduous work, this is ridiculous to suggest that The One who if he wanted for something to ‘be’ he says be and it is.
And the examples are many where they the Christians attribute derogatory things to God, and anyone with an objective eye and with any intelligence would notice that this is something unacceptable for God Almighty.
- From among some of these incredulous claims is that much like a human God slept and arose from His slumber, in the Psalms 65:78
Exalted is Allah from their attribution to Him Almighty.
- They also say that God breathes out fire from His nose, as is found in Samuel II 22 and Numbers 2 and in Isaiah 30:33
“The breath of the LORD, like a stream of sulfur, kindles it”.
There is no doubt that fire is destructive and damaging unlike light which shines and exalted is Allah from what they attribute to Him.
-It is also said that God ordered the killing of the Amalekites, Samuel I 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Likewise in Numbers 31:17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man.
And the similitudes of these are many, examples of barbaric pillaging of people unbefitting to be described as what God commanded.
Exalted is Allah from their attribution to Him Almighty.
- Similarly, they also claim that God whistles As is mentioned in Zachariah 10:8
“I will whistle for them and gather them in, for I have redeemed them, and they shall be as many as they were before”.
- likewise they say that God also claps with His hands as mentioned in Ezekiel and Numbers 71
Exalted is Allah from their attribution to Him Almighty.
They also claim that God has private parts in some of their descriptions of Him and that he had blood like in passage 28 Chapter 20 from Acts.
They claim for God a head, a face, hair, ears, eyes a torso a heart and a back.
Exalted is Allah from their attribution to Him Almighty.
And there are endless examples of these slanders against God that the Christians are guilty of that the tongue feels shy to make mention of especially when your attributing these limited things to Allah.
|
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:02 pm | |
| Clear contradictions in Christian belief and a refutation of it.
Firstly:
We intend to reproduce in this section those statements of Christ which implicitly or explicitly refute the doctrine of trinity., and that he was the begotten son of God, or God Himself.
It should be made apparent from the onset that it is not found in the Bible today a single clear and apparent verse where Jesus is categorically saying to the people “worship me” or that I he Jesus is God.
The Gospel of John 17:3 contains the following statement. Jesus said,
making supplication to God:
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
The above statement has no other meaning except that the secret of eternal life is that man should believe in Allah as being the only true God and in Jesus as his Messenger. This statement does not say that eternal life lies in believing in Jesus as God
It is apparent then that Jesus original message was one of the oneness of God and the encouragement to worship this one God in order to attain His pleasure.
All of the actions of Jesus indicate this submission and subservience and none of his actions indicate that he was God.
This false doctrine regarding the divinity of Jesus then makes the Christians guilty of a further crime that of associating partners with God, as now you have more than one God.
Exalted is Allah from their attribution to Him Almighty.
Secondly;
We find that the Christians revere the Cross in fact they worship it, this is because of the following three reasons.
1) the crucifix touch the blessed body of Jesus or so it is claimed, if this is the reason for their veneration of the cross to the point of worship, they should also venerate the donkey as it too touched the body of Jesus according to their scripture, he was carried upon a donkey. So the donkey should be revered in their tradition an in fact should be worshiped like the Hindus who worship Cows do and this would give them justification as the cow is of more benefit to humans than the donkey.
The questions must be asked could this cross be a God as the Christian doctrine encourages people to believe and worship?
The answer is of course an unequivocal no.
2) the second explanation is that the Christians consider the crucifix to be the cause of the sacrifice and the reason for the expiation of the sins.
If this is to be considered as the logical explanation hen surely they the Christians should also revere Judas as it is he who as is claimed led the enemies of Jesus to him and was the cause of his death as is claimed by the Christians, had it not been for his intervention they would not have found Jesus nor be able to kill his as is claimed by the Christians.
The questions must be asked could this reverence of the cross be applied to Judas as he was also the cause of the “sacrifice” and the cause likewise of the expiation of the sins” The answer is of course an unequivocal no.
3) the third explanation is that the blood of Jesus is said to have been spilt onto the cross.
If this explanation is to be considered then one has to ask the question why the Christians do not also revere the thorns that were placed on his head as he was being crucified.
The questions must be asked could those thorns that were place upon Jesus be held in the same regard as the cross does as his blood touch both of them.
The answer is of course an unequivocal no.
And can anyone with sound intellect understand or appreciate any of these illogical explanations for their religious malpractice. Of course NO!
Thirdly:
One finds in the book that the Christians hold in their hands today the names of many prophets of God who the Christians claim where Gods and son’s of God in their own right.
This is why if one was to ask a Christian how many sons does your God have? They will surely reply just the one.
An answer that is puzzling how can this be accepted when the Christians have in their scripture the names of many of Gods sons.
This is utterly objectionable and contradictory and makes no sense to anyone of a sound mind.
Fourthly:
The contradiction in respect of the creation of Jesus (pbuh)
The Christians claim that Jesus is the begotten son of God and not the created son.
The question is how is one begotten and not created?
The fact that Jesus was born ultimately means that he was in need of some one to bring him into existence, it also means that before his birth he was not in existence and was nothing and so owned nothing.
What is clear is that Jesus was a creation from among the creation of Allah and He Allah bought him into existence in a miraculous way as he bought Adam (pbuh) into existence without a father and a mother.
They not being satisfied with claiming divinity for Jesus they went one step further and claimed that he was the begotten son of God.
The NIV translation of John 3:16 is different from the King James Version. The translators have removed the word "begotten" and say "one and only" Son. All other translations use "begotten" and the Nicene Creed clearly translates the word "begotten”.
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (John 3:16—KJV)
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16—NIV).
So you see that the word begotten is mentioned in some Versions and omitted in others.
The questions is; is it allowed for someone to add and omit from the words of God
The answer is of course an unequivocal no.
How can the book that the Christians hold in their hands be considered the protected words of God when all of these alterations have taken place?
And if the changes in question were done at the hands of the scholars of the Christians, then what those who are enemies of Christianity like the Jews must have done is only left to the imagination!
Fifthly:
The Christians have clearly exaggerated in regards to Jesus (pbuh) claiming that he is God and further to that worshiping him, whilst at the same time everyone accepts that he was given birth to by Mary (pbuh).
The question that one cannot escape is can a God be born, and can he emerge from the womb of a woman?
And can someone who has a sound brain and intellect consider this child to be a God besides Allah.
Definitely not, and if Allah Almighty wanted to recreate a million Messiahs like Jesus he could do it with just the word ”be” and it is.
As Allah says in his final revelation the Quran.
And it does not befit the Most Gracious to take an offspring! (Maryam 19:92)
All those who are in the heavens and the earth will come to the Most Gracious as His slaves. (Maryam 19:93)
So clearly the Trinity doctrine in Christianity is not something that was professed by Jesus (pbuh) and it was something later added to the body of Christian doctrine over time.
Sixthly:
The contradiction in the belief of the “Trinity”.
The Christians believe that the trinity consists, of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit but yet they do not believe that these three are Gods in their own right rather they believe that the trinity itself is the God.
Then they continue saying the Father is great the Son is great and the Holy Spirit is great, but they are not three greats but rather just one great.
The question must be what is this language the Christians are using.
One should ask also if one of these three parts of the Trinity were to commit the crime of murder, could the punishment be passed to one of the other two parts.
The answer will be no because these three elements are individual.
Another point is that when they refer to the “father” the human beings natural tendency is to think that the father is some huge massive entity.
The “son” bring to mind the image of a young man, perhaps with blue eyes and blonde hair perhaps conjuring an image of a bearded man.
As for the “holy spirit” then the image that is conjured in the heads of the Christians is on of a dove, or a blazing fire, however it is less decisive than the other two.
And so when the question is posed to the Christians which image of God comes to mind when you think about the Lord God, you will receive contradictory answers.
So what does this demonstrate?
This demonstrates that the belief of the Christians is so incomprehensible and corrupt that anyone with any sense will reject it.Anyone with any sense of objectivity who is not simply trying to defend the undependable.
Seventhly:
From among the great contradictions in Christian belief is the claim that they make about Jesus (pbuh) first claiming divinity for him then claiming that he forgave a prostitute her sins as is reported in John 8. “ go and don’t not fall into error again”
The question that is unanswered is why if he Jesus (pbuh) was able to intervene in this situation and demonstrate his mercy for humankind, why did he not likewise intervene when Adam (pbuh) was banished from Paradise, after eating from the forbidden tree, why did he not say to them “ go and do not fall into error again” like he said to the lady mentioned in John?
This shows the great contradictions that make no sense and have no conceivable answer.
Another demonstration of this is in the following story where it is said three people converted to Christianity at the hands of a priest, and they the three converts returned to work, when a follower and beloved person to the priest came and asked what happened when the priest told them about the converts they asked to see them? What have they learnt?
Then they asked each of them about what they each new about the trinity, the first replied to the priest you taught me that I have a God in the heaven and another that Mary gave birth to and another that takes the form of a dove when he descends to the earth, at which point the priest angered by his responses kicked him out and said you are ignorant.
The second said to the priest you taught me that from the three Gods one was crucified and the other two remain. He was also kicked out, then they called for the third convert who was more intelligent then the previous two, he said that I have memorized what you taught me and I have learnt everything you have said, three are one and one is three so one was crucified and so died as a result they all died as they are all one unity.
This doctrine is neither clear for the uneducated nor is it explainable by the scholar.
A proof of this would be the fact that half of the Anglican bishops of England rejected the idea of the divinity of Jesus pbuh. This was reported in the daily news on the 25th of June1984.
Eighthly:
It is reported by Luke, one of the authors of the Gospels (it is claimed that he was inspired by God to write it) that Jesus was the son of Joseph which means the following:
A) That Jesus was not a God or the son of a God because his father was known as Joseph the carpenter and this is in direct contradiction with what the Christians claim in their publications.
B) Regarding Mary, either:
- She was married to Joseph the carpenter and gave birth to Joseph and that contradicts what both the Christians and the Muslims believe which is that Mary was unmarried.
- Or that Mary was not married to Joseph the carpenter and so Luke’s account would lay claim to the fact that she was guilty of a heinous crime and that her child was illegitimately born. This conforms to the Jewish claim which is an absolutely false one.
The corruption that the Bible has undergone from the additions, deletions and alterations have proved difficult for the Christians to explain. An example of this would be the additions to the Gospel of Luke in an attempt to cover this unexplainable contradiction to the eyes of the Christians.
It is clear that there is a contradiction between the Christian doctrine about the divinity of Jesus and what is reported in the Gospel of Luke.
Ninthly
Despite the best efforts of the Christians to explain the divinity of Jesus, one finds contradictions in the chapters that claim hisdivinity. Examples of this include
A) What is reported in the Gospel of John 5:30 that Jesus would say: that he was unable to do anything except with the power of God and his disposition was like the disposition of any of God’s creations. This indicates his humanity and not his divinity.
B) What is reported in the Gospel of Mark 13:32 that Jesus was unaware of the time for the day of judgment meaning that he was unaware of the world of the unseen except if God informed him. Therefore, he his like any other Prophet which again indicates his humanity and not his divinity.
C) That Jesus would become hungry and thirsty. Other than that his needs were like the needs of any human and this indicates his humanity and not his divinity.
D) In the Gospel of Mark, that a man from the Jews came to Jesus asking him who was the first of us all. Jesus replied to him the Lord, the One. This indicates his humanity and his worship to that god and if he believed in the trinity he would have surely taught it to the questioner.
There are numerous examples scattered in the bible that indicate his humanity and contradict his divinity and this stands completely opposite to what Christians believe about his divinity.
Tenthly:
One finds that Christian doctrine is also in contradiction with some of the other Gospels like the Gospel of Peter (which negates his death upon the cross) and like the Gospel of Thomas that exposes the belief of the crucifixion and the death and the subsequent rising from the dead were not absolute doctrines of the Christians in the third and fourth centuries.
This means that Christian doctrine should be considered progressive and change. This is clearly indicative of an idea (the death, the crucifixion and the rising from the dead) that has developed and changed over time.
To add to the mêlée, in Palestine in one of the Gospels that was uncovered, there was a claim that Jesus was born as a human. This contradicts the belief of the Christians today who claim that he was divine.
The question that should be asked in this doctrine of the trinity is surely whether or not it is possible for the Father to sacrifice His son.
To answer this question I should allude to the fact that this question has already previously been answered in another book entitled (The Lord The Creator between the magnification of the Muslims, the slander of the Christians and the Jews and the rejection of the atheists.
However what will follow is a brief answer that was given by Gary Miller, an ex catholic missionary.
He says: it is incorrect to suggest that Allah does everything that is conceivable, for that is not befitting for Allah for example does he do what the foolish people do?
The human instinctively glorifies and magnifies the Lord, and He Allah does that which befits His Lordship.
Here perhaps the questioner would ask, is it possible for Jesus to be a God and a human at the same time?Can he be killed? Is he mortal or does he have eternal life? As humans are mortal and Allah has neither beginning nor end so it is not conceivable that he Jesus was both.
Likewise the human is limited and is unaware of everything whereas Allah is limitless.
It is well documented that he Jesus, would eat and drink and was circumcised on the eight day and that he was breastfed, he was also slapped across the face and humiliated (according to the Christians) all human traits and un-attributable to Allah the creator.
This demonstrates again the clear contradictions in the doctrine of the Christians and proves its falsehood. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:07 pm | |
| The falsehood of ‘Original Sin’ and ‘Atonement’ As it has been shown in the previous chapters the doctrine of the divinity of Christ is a wholly unacceptable one that cannot be rationally explained and the same illogical and irrational reason will bring down the doctrine of the concept of Original Sin.
One should note that the concept of the original sin is one that is built on the foundation of the trinity and it goes without saying that the trinity is baseless and so therefore original sin is also baseless.
Like the similitude of a building that has ten stories but is built upon a foundation that is not sound can it withstand this heavy weight of course not.
Indeed this doctrine the trinity causes the Christian so many problems and predicaments that he is left more confused for example if the Father the Son the Holy Spirit is to be considered what then of Mary the mother of Jesus is she the wife of God?
Were the parents of Jesus unmarried?
Exalted is Allah from these accusations.
If we are to unravel the doctrine of the crucifixion and that Jesus died for the sins of Man we need to ask a question?
Why was it necessary for God to create a human for this purpose?
Was God unable to forgive human kind except with this fabricated assumption?
God ultimately taught us that he is the Forgiver of sins and he turns to all those who repent to Him.
This doctrine that humans have salvation from the sacrifice of Jesus is a doctrine that the natural disposition and logic all reject.
And what is even more strange is we find Jesus in the Bible teaching them how to pray and supplicate: in Mathew14:6
“For if you forgive others their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you”
The question is if it is the case that Jesus was teaching them to ask for forgiveness how can we consider that he died for their sins.
And what about the grave and deadly sins that have been committed after his death? Do they require for Jesus to return and be re-crucified?
Or do we require another man who claims that he is the Son of God in order that he is sacrificed for the sins of humankind.
So falsehood only brings more falsehood like it, if indeed it was the case that God took children who He then sacrificed he should have had hundreds and thousands of them in order to match the number of sins being perpetrated daily especially these days who sordid filth is being propagated and even called to under false names like ‘freedom’.
When one poses the question where did the Christians get this notion from they will give you a perplexing answer, they say because God is sacred and humans are sinners that he could not interact with them.
If you pursued this line of questioning you would find that they have no answer to a further question that is where is the proof for this idea?
You find there is no proof as Jesus did not say at all that he was being sacrificed for the sins of men.
Indeed it was other than Jesus who established this notion and we find Paul responsible for much of it, in fact only 10% of the Bible is actually the word of Jesus (pbuh).
In the end of this chapter three points come to mind to expose the fallacy that is the doctrine of original sin.
1) Deuteronomy 24:16 “Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.
Likewise:
Ezekiel 8:20The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.
So from the above references we see that the idea of original sin is a concept rejected by the Bible, and this was only the result of the various additions deletions and alterations that the Bible has undergone over the centuries as Allah Almighty said in His final revelation:
Had it been from other then Allah, you would have surely found therein many contradictions. (Nisaa 82)
2) The second issue is the problem regarding the ‘sacrifice’ either Jesus is applicable to death or he isn’t if he is then he is not a God and cannot be considered God. The other possibility is that he is god and that he cannot die or be killed and so there was no crucifixion for the sins of man.
3) The Christians have proposed that the Father is tough and harsh and is unable to solve the problems of disobedience like in the story of Adam, whereas the Son is gentle and forgiving.
The issue remains therefore about Jesus (pbuh) in Christianity that he was created, and if so then he cannot be God.
So this misconstrued idea of the Gods or God in Christianity where the three Gods are one and one is composed of three that goes against the simplest rationale and logic, and therefore it is the clearest proof that the idea of salvation through the sacrifice of Jesus and the notion of original sin are both false doctrines.
|
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:10 pm | |
| Christian doctrine regarding the prophets of God.
As we have already mention in the section on the belief of the Jews regarding the prophets of God the Christians also believe the same as their book includes the book of the Jews under the title the Old Testament. To add to the slander of the Jews regarding their prophets the Christians add that Jesus claimed the he was God.
What follows will be an exposure of some of these claims.
-Describing the prophets as being bloodthirsty and wild especially in war
So the people shouted, and the trumpets were blown. As soon as the people heard the sound of the trumpet, the people shouted a great shout, and the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, Then they devoted all in the city to destruction, both men and women, young and old, oxen, sheep, and donkeys, with the edge of the sword. every man straight before him, and they captured the city.
And they burned the city with fire, and everything in it. Only the silver and gold, and the vessels of bronze and of iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the LORD. (Joshua 6:20/21/24)
Likewise they describe the prophet David as falling into the most despicable of acts and in with the interest of
good taste we shall not repeat the same passage but indicate the reference: Samuel 2 11:4-5
It is also claimed the David plotted to kill a man so that he could fornicate with his wife as in Samuel 2 11:6-25
It is also claimed that he, David danced naked without the least bit of shame.
They also claim that Solomon sang the songs that are an integral part of the Bible in these songs that they attribute to Solomon where you find descriptions of women and their bodies, that tongues are shy to make mention of.
They claim also that Solomon worshipped another God at the end of his life as in Kings 1.
The examples are many of slanderous claims against God prophets who he chose to be the shining lights of example for people to follow.
Mary in Christianity
The Christians claim that Mary gave birth to a God, and that this God is one part of the Trinity. A refutation of these points has already followed.
What does the Bible consist of?
To begin with one should appreciate the Bible contains the Old and New testaments. The Old Testament refers to the book of the Jews before Jesus and the New Testament refers to after Jesus.
It consists of four Gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John in addition to the letters of Paul, Peter James and Revelations.
It should also be noted that the accounts of what exactly the Bible is differs according to the various sects within Christianity itself.
THE CATHOLIC BIBLE
Holding the "Douay" Roman Catholic Version of the Bible aloft in my hand, I ask, "Do YOU accept THIS Bible as the Word of God?" For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic Truth Society have published their Version of the Bible in a very short, stumpy form.
This Version is a very odd proportion of the numerous Versions in the market today. The Christian questioner is taken aback. "What Bible is that?" he asks. "Why, I thought you said that there was only ONE Bible!" I remind him. "Y-e-s," he murmurs hesitantly, "but what Version is that?"
"Why, would that make any difference?" I enquire. Of course it does, and the professional preacher knows that it does. He is only bluffing with his "ONE Bible" claim. The Roman Catholic Bible was published at Rheims in 1582, from Jerome's Latin Vulgate and reproduced at Douay in 1609. As such the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version that one can still buy today.
Despite its antiquity, the whole of the Protestant world, including the "cults"* condemn the RCV because it contains seven extra "books" which they contemptuously refer to as the "apocrypha" i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY. Notwithstanding the dire warning contained in the Apocalypse, which is the last book in the RCV (renamed as "Revelation" by the Protestants), it is "revealed":
". . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book”. (Revelation 22:18-19) But who cares! They do not really believe! The Protestants have bravely expunged seven whole books from their Book of God!
The outcasts are:
The Book of Judith
The Book of Tobias
The Book of Baruch
The Buck of Esther, etc.
* This disparaging title is given by the orthodox to Jehovah's Witnesses, the Seventh Day Adventists and a thousand other sects and denominations with whom they do not see eye to eye.
The Roman Catholics, believing as they do that the Protestants have mutilated the Book of God, are yet aiding and abetting the Protestant "crime" by forcing their native converts to purchase the Authorized Version (AV) of the Bible, which is the only Bible available in some 1500 languages of the lesser developed nations of the world.
The Roman Catholics milk their cows, but the feeding is left to the Protestants! The overwhelming majority of Christians — both Catholics and Protestant — use the Authorized (AV) or the King James Version (KJV) as it is alternatively called.
It goes without saying of course that these varying copies have led to many contradictions and has led to war as history can attest to. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:16 pm | |
| What does the Bible call to?
Any reader of the Bible today will be astonished to find sordid tales and false doctrine and slander against God and his messengers, even more shocking than that is that they then attribute this to God Himself.
To begin with one should appreciate the Bible contains the Old and New testaments.
The Old Testament refers to the book of the Jews before Jesus and the New Testament refers to after Jesus. So what has been alluded to before in the section of the Jews shall not be repeated here.
1) The Divinity of humans.
As has already been alluded to and refuted, in order to emphasize the point one should understand that by attributing a son to God one is belittling the nature of that God. If one is not careful he can be deluded by his brain in to one of many theories pertaining to the world and the creator of it, like the Greeks and the Idol worshippers of old did.
If one gave us the option to choose from one of the two propositions:
a) that God is always correct
b) that God is correct sometimes and mistaken others.
We would of course all say that he is the former always correct, and not attribute to God any detracting quality.
Likewise happiness, regret, anxiety.
As God is the creator of the Paradise and the Hell and enters therein whom He likes he enters all those who obey him into the Paradise and is pleased with them, and enters all those who anger Him into the Hell.
Similarly should we say God is:
a) powerful as well as being merciful
b) or weak as well as being powerful.
The former is in agreement with the pure natural disposition of a human when he thinks of his Lord.
It is therefore not befitting to attribute to God any attribute that detracts from his majesty, like any act that is humiliating for example.
It should also be noted that anyone with a sound mind and rationale will reject the idea that that All Powerful lord would need to create another God in order to then sacrifice him for the sake of the sins of humankind. The proposition is preposterous.
If one looks to the basic human needs,like food, drink and clothing then one finds that these are also inapplicable to God and these are not attributable to Him.
It was indeed God who created man limiting him in his place and his needs. He created for them time and subjugated the earth and what it contains, and the night and the day, and the sun and the moon.
Allah is not encompassed by any time or place; He is the First and the Last, after everything ceases to exit.
Similarly, the situations that human beings find themselves in are not attributable to God like sickness, weakness and death as these are human characteristics not godly ones.
The human also requires gratification of his sexual needs through which he procreates. This enables his offspring to inherit from him when he dies. Allah is the creator and sustainer of the universe and everyone is reliant upon him, he created from nothing and did not require any assistance or support and His kingdom is an eternal one.
It is clear therefore that the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus is unacceptable for anyone with a sound mind to consider because of the huge disparity between divinity and humanity.
2) The call to the begotten Son of God.
As indicated previously, the Christian belief that God has a begotten son as was mentioned in Christian scripture. It has already been presented that this concept is completely rejected and baseless as human beings and animals are the only things that are given birth to.
So, how does one associate this lowly act to the Lord of the heavens?
This understanding regarding the born Son of God has lead to discrimination and racism even amongst the ranks of the Christians. One finds the white Christians consider themselves above the non-European black Christians even if they belong to the same church or denomination.
The reason for this dispute is that they claim that their Lord and savior had European characteristics like blonde hair, blue eyes and white skin and anything other than that is inferior.
An example of this would be in the South African protestant churches with a congregation consisting of black Africans and Europeans from Holland who pray segregated.
3) Belittling God and blaming Him
As previously mentioned the book the Christians call the Bible consists of the Old Testament and the New Testament and so the Christians attribute to God what the Jews attributed to God before them.
An example of their slander is that they claim that God ordered Ezekiel to eat faeces an order the children of Israel to eat it. (Ezekiel 4 Numbers 14).
Also that God ordered the children of Israel to steal as is mentioned in Exodus 3 and Numbers 21.
These qualities are no doubt blameworthy and unbefitting of belonging to God and the examples of these are numerous.
4) A call to drinking alcohol and other intoxicants
It goes without saying that a human under the influence of any intoxicants is able to do acts that even the wildest animals would not do. He can kill, maim, steal and rape and even more serious than all this is the spiritual disconnection between himself and his Lord.
Perhaps an intoxicated human can swear at his Lord and His Prophets and Messengers, in addition to the dangers he causes his body and mind as a result of intoxication.
Despite all of this, we find Christianity allowing alcohol and intoxicants and indorsing it claiming that God permitted this to them. Exalted is Allah from what they attribute to Him.
In Christianity, we find exerts from Paul, which show him encouraging the consumption of alcohol. It is said that Timothy used to say, “ Drink only water, but use some barely juice (wine) for your stomach and your health. (Timothy 5:23).
One should ask is it really beneficial for the body to get intoxicated? The answer is of course not.
What is even more astonishing is the claim that the first miracle that Jesus performed was turning water into wine and it has become part of Christian custom to drink wine during their worship and festivities.
5- A call to the killing and pillaging of people.
One would have noticed from the previous chapter that the drinking of wine and intoxicants is something endorsed in Christianity, one of the results of this intoxication is the killing and pillaging of people.
In ones reading of the Bible one finds Jesus who is thought of as God in Christianity calling for the killing of his enemies and people who rejected his dominion over them. (the Gospel of Luke 19:27)
One finds detailed descriptions of where the Bible talk about the killing of men women and children by the sword and not even the animals were spared donkeys were killed and whole cities and villages were burned to the ground. (Joshua)
One finds that revenge is propagated as is mentioned in (Samuel I 15 Number 2)
“Kill every man, woman, and suckling child, and cow and camel and donkey”.
One finds God commanding the Children of Israel to:
“When you draw near to a city to fight against it, offer terms of peace to it. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.
When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. but the women and the little ones, the livestock, and everything else in the city, all its spoil, you shall take as plunder for yourselves. And you shall enjoy the spoil of your enemies, which the LORD your God has given you. (Deuteronomy 20:10)
all of this demonstrate the falsehood that is the claim that this Bible has remained unchanged. It is clear that no God would order the killing and pillaging mercilessly of innocent people giving them no chance to even consider a treaty, this without question demonstrate that this is only encouraging the mass murder of innocent people that occurred, one only needs to look as far as the crusades to see the bloody outcome of these blood thirsty ideas.
6- A call to rape and all sorts of indecencies.
One would have noticed from the previous chapter that the drinking of wine and intoxicants is something endorsed in Christianity, one of the results of this intoxication is rape and indecency.
One finds the Bible littered with examples of people falling into the most abhorrent acts of illicit fornication, rape and incest.
Without mentioning the exact phrases in the interest of taste and decency we shall not repeat the same passage but you can refer to the following passages:
Judges 16:1
Ruth 3:4 and Kings I 1:1-3 for the Illicit fornication between men and women.
One realizes that unsatisfied with just the depravity of illicit fornication the Bible takes it another step forward, and speaker unashamedly about Incest relations
Genesis 19:23-35 for the incest of a father with his two daughters.
Genesis 35:22 for the incest between a man and the wife of his father.
Samuel II 16:22/ 3:11/13:14 for the Incest and rape of a brother of his sister.
Samuel II 16:22 for the incest of a man with his father’s wife.
Not leaving anything to the imagination the scripture also gives detailed accounts of what took place with every sordid detail, there are sections where prostitutes are mentioned with detailed accounts act by act of what they did.
For example:
Ezekiel 16:27 23:1-49
Deuteronomy 38:8-10
Joshua 4:12
Joshua 4:14-15
One finds perhaps the most compelling of these descriptions in the chapter entitles ‘Songs’ where descriptions of women are so vivid they can arouse the reader, and one cannot deny that descriptions of this nature can only but enhance the likelihood of one falling into the crimes in mention.
Perhaps you can look at the issue in terms of levels or a manual that has levels the first level would be ‘Songs’ the second would be Ezekiel and so on and so forth.
What is even more astonishing is that the book of Songs is then attributed to the prophet of God Solomon (pbuh). Claiming that he worshipped an idol in the end of his life.
These chapter also accuse God of commanding Hosea to take for himself a prostitute and that he should have a child with her. (Hosea I :2)
It is likewise claimed that a man should drink from the breasts of his wife as is mentioned in Proverbs 5:18.
It is therefore no surprise that we find all of these unspeakable acts taking place amongst Christians in and amongst their ranks.
It is well known that if someone reads something illicit they become accustomed to that thing and they are more likely to fall into it then if they were unaware to begin with.
Indeed the type of story shapes the personality of the reader.
It is unthinkable that these tasteless accounts have anything to do with Allah Almighty let alone any prophet of God.
7- A claim that the impurity of giving birth to a girl is more then a boy.
Without going into much detail about the claim that the impurity of giving birth to a girl is more then a boy.
The reference is in Leviticus 13:1-5 it is explicitly mentioned here that the period of impurity for a girl is two weeks whereas for a boy its only a week.
8- The claim that women were at fault for deluding Adam into eating the forbidden fruit.
This notion is clear from anyone’s reading of the Bible and is completely incorrect, women were not responsible for deluding Adam (pbuh).
9- A call to not marrying a widow or a divorcee.
This is clear from the prohibition that is found in Leviticus 21:14
On a slight tangent one notices the great difference between Islam and Christianity here when one considers that the Quran dedicates and entire chapter to ‘the Women”. Islam came and raised the station of women.
10- A call to abandoning the practice of circumcision.
As the Christians claim that the practice of circumcision was legislated before them and then was abrogated.
One should note that remaining uncircumcised causes an increase in sexual arousal to the degree that one may fall into all types of illicit acts, it is no surprise then that we find case of sexual deviancy and rape so prominent these days.
Of course if it were the case that a medical practitioner was to announce that a particular person was not in need of circumcision then it would not be required however, the original rule remains the same for both men and women.
11- A call to devour the meat of Pigs (pork)
Again the reference is in Leviticus 11:1 whereby it is claimed that the meat of the pig was prohibited then the prohibition was lifted from them, and the filthy nature of the pig is and has been established by Christian academics themselves.
It is inconceivable that God the One who created man would then command him or permit him to eat something that was as harmful as pigs to ones health.
George Bernard Shaw said “THE MOST DANGEROUS BOOK ON EARTH “ (the Bible), KEEP IT UNDER LOCK AND KEY”
And others said: “The Bible can put indecent thoughts and ideas into the heads of children, if it left as it is the board of censors may deem it only suitable for adults to read. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:34 pm | |
| Jesus in Christianity.
As one reads the scriptures of the Christian one notes that they raised the rank of Jesus (pbuh) from being a mere prophet of God to being God himself or the Son of God as well as being one of the three Gods that make up the Trinity.
The reasons for this claim is that Jesus performed many miracles that were unfathomable for any normal human being to perform, what then do the Christians say concerning the other prophets of God Almighty who were also sent with great miracles.
What is even more strange is that it is reported that when Jesus performed his first miracle in Luke 7:11-17 Fear seized them all, and they glorified God, saying, “A great prophet has arisen among us!”
Which is further proof that Jesus did not claim lordship for himself.
As Allah said in his final revelation to mankind:
AND LO! God said: "O Jesus, son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, 'Worship me and my mother as deities beside God'?" (Jesus)
answered:
"Limitless art in Thy glory! It would not have been possible for me to say what I had no right to (say)! Had I said this, Thou wouldst indeed have known it! Thou knowest all that is within myself, whereas I know not what is in Thy Self. Verily, it is Thou alone who fully knowest all the things that are beyond the reach of a created being's perception. Nothing did I tell them beyond what Thou didst bid me (to say): 'Worship God, (who is) my Sustainer as well as your Sustainer.' And I bore witness to what they did as long as I dwelt in their midst; but since Thou hast caused me to die, Thou alone hast been their keeper: for Thou art witness unto everything. (Maida 116-117)
one also finds that the people would call Jesus by the title the ‘teacher’ and never would they refer to him as God or the son of God as is mentioned in John.
“O’ teacher, we know that you have come from God as a teacher” John 3:1
the name Messiah comes from the Hebrew Mesyaah, and in Arabic comes from the tri-literal to wipe or rub. The meaning originates from when the magicians and fortunetellers would rub an ointment or oil when they began to dram or work
Christians also like to attribute to Jesus that he is the grandson of David (pbuh) whilst simultaneously claiming that he is the son of God, Romans 1:3 Shockingly they attribute to his family origins illegitimacy when they say he came from the offspring of Faarid and Zaarih from Thaamaar.
Notwithstanding the differences of the various denomination’s interpretation of these verses they even differ in the basic birth date for Jesus, with the orthodoxy celebrating on the 7th of January whereas the Catholics celebrate it on the 25th of December.
The Christians know nothing of the teaching of their prophet and one finds that they did not protect their commandments as they were ordered, in John 14:15
“If you love me, you will keep my commandments”.
Every Christian controversialist you question, "Do you keep the laws and the commandments?" will answer, "No!" If you ask further, "Why don't you?" He will if he is a Bible-thumper, invariably reply, "The law is nailed to the cross!" Meaning the law is done away with. "We are now living under grace!"
Jesus (pbuh) in the Christian narrative also is claimed to have spoken derogatorily to his mother calling her And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come”. John 2:4
It has been attributed to Jesus statements that indicate he was bloodthirsty and violent the claim that he said: “Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division”. Luke 12:51.
As has previously been mention they claim that Jesus ordered the killing of all those who rejected his dominion and kingship, Luke 19:27
Finally we find within the Bible that it is said that Jesus (pbuh) was sent to the Israelites only, in the Gospel of Mathew 15:22-26 Jesus says: He answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel”.
Which is further proof that another prophet would emerge with a universal message.
The First Miracle of Jesus.
It goes without saying that a human under the influence of any intoxicants is able to do acts that even the wildest animals would not do. He can kill, maim, steal and rape and even more serious than all this is the spiritual disconnection between himself and his Lord.
What is even more astonishing is the claim that the first miracle that Jesus performed was turning water into wine and it has become part of Christian custom to drink wine during their worship and festivities. Some priests even offer it as part of a Godly meal.
Despite all of this, we find Christianity allowing alcohol and intoxicants and endorsing it claiming that God permitted this to them. Exalted is Allah from what they attribute to Him.
In Christianity, we find exerts from Paul, which show him encouraging the consumption of alcohol. It is said that Timothy used to say, “ Drink only water, but use some barely juice (wine) for your stomach and your health. (Timothy 5:23).
One should ask is it really beneficial for the body to get intoxicated? The answer is of course not, yet despite the filth that is intoxicants Christians lay claim to the fact that the first miracle presented by Jesus was the act of turning water in to wine.
Allah is free from these senseless accusations that he would legislate such an damaging thing for humankind let alone make it the first miracle one of His prophets perform.
Alteration of the Bible and the type of speech that is used in it.
There is little doubt that the Old and New Testaments were both altered, it is because of this reason that we find no two identical manuscripts.
So in the New Testament we find the Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John and no Gospel of Jesus, the reason for this is as the total Bible contains only 10% of the words of Jesus.
The remaining 90% is not attributed to Jesus himself, who then is it attributed to? And why?
The Bible was of course not written down during the lifetime of Jesus and was not documented until 300 years after him.This is why we find no two copies identical.
Let me conclude this "authorship" search with the verdict of those 32 scholars, backed by their 50 co-operating denominations. God had been eliminated from this authorship race long ago. In the RSV by "Collins," invaluable notes* on "The Books of the Bible" are to be found at the back of their production.
We start with "GENESIS" - the first book of the Bible. The scholars say about its "AUTHOR": "One of the 'five books of Moses'“. Note the words "five books of Moses" are written in inverted commas - "“.
This is a subtle way of admitting that this is what people say - that it is the book of Moses, that Moses was its author, but we (the 32 scholars) who are better informed, do not subscribe to that tittle-tattle.
The next four books, "EXODUS, LEVITICUS, NUMBERS and DEUTERONOMY": AUTHOR?
"Generally credited to Moses”. This is the same category as the book of Genesis.
Who is the author of the book of "JOSHUA?" Answer: "Major part credited to Joshua”.
Who is the author of the book of "JUDGES?" Answer: "Possibly Samuel”.
Who is the author of "RUTH" Answer: "Not definitely known" AND
Who is the author of:
1ST SAMUEL?...................................... Answer: Author "Unknown"
2ND SAMUEL....................................... Answer: Author "Unknown"
1ST KING?.......................................... Answer: Author "Unknown"
2ND K 1ST CHRONICLES? Answer: Author "Unknown, probably ..”.
2ND CHRONICLES? ..... Answer: Author "Likely collectly ..”.
And so the story goes. The authors of these anonymous books are either "UNKNOWN" or are "PROBABLY" or "LIKELY" or are of "DOUBTFUL" origin. Why blame God for this fiasco?
Ask any learned Christian man as to whom the Comforter is? You will unmistakingly hear - "The Comforter is the HOLY GHOST!" from John 14: 26. This sentence is only part of verse twenty six. We will deal with the verse fully in due course. But first we must educate the Christian mind with regards to this misnomer — "Holy Ghost”.
"Pneuma" is the Greek root word for SPIRIT. There is no separate word for GHOST in the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, and the Christians now boast 24,000 different manuscripts in their possession of which no two are identical!
The editors of the KJV (The King James Version) alternatively called AV (The Authorized Version) and the DOUAY (The Roman Catholic Version) of the Bibles gave preference to the word "GHOST' instead of the word SPIRIT when translating "pneuma"
The revisers of the RSV (Revised Standard Version) 1 the most up-to-date version of the Bible, are going back, as claimed, to the Most Ancient manuscripts.
These revisers, described as "thirty-two scholars of the highest eminence, backed by fifty co-operating denominations" who courageously re-placed the shady word "ghost" with the word "spirit" Hence from now on you will read in all modem translations
— "The Comforter which is the Holy SPIRIT"! However, the Christian crusaders and the televangelists stubbornly cling to the spooky ("ghost"-ly) past They will not opt for the Newer Versions. It's better fishing with the old bait - the KJV and the RCV (Roman Catholic Version).
It has already been alluded to in the previous points that the book that was once revealed by God to Moses (pbuh) has undergone major alterations deletions and subtractions as well as additions according to the interests and desires of the Jews and Christians after them.
This means that the New Testament that is in the hands of the Christians is unrecognisable compared to what God revealed initially to Moses then to Jesus (pbuh).
As Allah says in Chapter 2 The Cow verse 79:
Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, "This is from Allah," to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:38 pm | |
| The type of Speech contained in the Bible.
The Bible doesn’t resonate what one would consider the words of God as its littered with story’s of Illicit sexual acts of rape and incest, it goes in to details when talking about prostitution and give vivid step by step descriptions of these sordid acts. It pollutes the mind of the reader and perhaps may make him used to the notion of these despicable acts.
Without mentioning the exact phrases in the interest of taste and decency and without repeating the same passage, you the reader can refer to the following passages:
Judges 16:1
Ruth 3:4 and Kings I 1:1-3 for the Illicit fornication between men and women.
One realizes that unsatisfied with just the depravity of illicit fornication the Bible takes it another step forward, and speaker unashamedly about Incest relations
Genesis 19:23-35 for the incest of a father with his two daughters.
Genesis 35:22 for the incest between a man and the wife of his father.
Samuel II 16:22/ 3:11/13:14 for the Incest and rape of a brother of his sister.
Samuel II 16:22 for the incest of a man with his father’s wife.
Not leaving anything to the imagination the scripture also gives detailed accounts of what took place with every sordid detail, there are sections where prostitutes are mentioned with detailed accounts act by act of what they did.
For example:
Ezekiel 16:27 23:1-49
Deuteronomy 38:8-10
Joshua 4:12
Joshua 4:14-15
One finds perhaps the most compelling of these descriptions in the chapter entitles ‘Songs’ where descriptions of women are so vivid they can arouse the reader, and one cannot deny that descriptions of this nature can only but enhance the likelihood of one falling into the crimes in mention.
The language used in these passages is the language of the gutter and the language used by the lowest of people.
Exalted is Allah from being associated with what the Christians associate with him.
The founder of the Trinity doctrine.
Approximately five years after Jesus' ascension into heaven, A twenty-five-year old zealot was on his way to Damascus to pick up a group of Nazarenes (The followers of Jesus called themselves as Nazarenes) for return to Jerusalem when he had a vision in which he claimed Jesus appeared, asking why Saul was persecuting him.
Saul changed his name to Paul and went off into the deserts of Arabia in order to think about just how he was going to go about carrying out what he believed to be a command from Jesus to go out and preach.
Exactly WHAT to do was quite a dilemma for him, however; since the Jews had rejected Jesus and his message, Paul didn't think he stood much of chance of getting through to them, either.
He made up his mind that it would be best to simply dismiss them off and target the Gentiles (non-Jews) instead.
The Romans and the Greeks, who made up the Gentile population of Paul's world, were pagans who worshiped a plethora of gods and goddesses.
Temples and statues of their deities abounded in the land, and Roman law had it that all people, with the exception of the Jews, must pay homage to the gods.
Paul knew that people with such deep-reaching pagan beliefs were not going to accept the idea that grace and salvation could come from a person who was only considered to be a most upright and righteous human being. If Paul wanted quick results in his ministry, he knew that he would have to "modulate" things a bit, taking into account the culture of the Gentiles.
Paul Maier, in his book "First Christians", tells us that thirteen years elapsed between the time Paul "received his calling" and the time that he began preaching.
During that thirteen years, Paul's creative mind put in a lot of overtime; when he finally returned to Damascus, he came back armed with the knowledge that the Gentiles would demand a tangible god within their new religion, and he was prepared to give this to them.
Paul was wildly successful in his subsequent missionary efforts, what with the accommodations he ended up making for the Gentiles. Although the religion of Christianity takes its name from Jesus Christ, Paul of Tarsus must be considered as its true founder, as he is the one who conceived all of its doctrines, and set up its churches throughout the world of his time. Christians don't deny this, either: "No figure in Christian history stands so tall or has had such a tremendous influence as has Saul of Tarsus..”.
In his book "The 100: A Ranking of the most Influential Persons In History", author Michael Hart concurs in saying: "No other man played so large a role in the propagation of Christianity”.
There is one big problem with this picture, however: The teachings of Paul, the true founder of Christianity, cannot be found anywhere in the teachings of Jesus or in those of prophets before him.
The following are some of the innovations that Paul introduced into "his" religion of Christianity.
From among the innovations of Paul.
1. The divinity of Jesus
2. The trinity
3. Atonement
4. Salvation by faith
Using these doctrines Paul achieved phenomenal success in his ministry. The Jews may have brushed Jesus aside, but the Gentiles flocked to Paul's side, as he gave them just what they wanted in their new religion from amongst those thing that they wanted was drinking wine which was permitted for them, circumcision was also lifted from them. The term for the earlier followers of Jesus –Nazarenes was dropped in favor of a new, more 'appropriate' name: Christians, or followers of Jesus Christ.
This new religion of Christianity "...was abundantly interwoven with mythological content drawn heavily from pagan sources..”. along with having a theology "...which was produced as the need arose to suit the mentality of the times..”.
Later Church leaders thought to neatly end the confusion by saying that Jesus was God-incarnate--an eternal being who "chose" to become a man in the womb of Mary.
Jesus had, in other words, two natures--divine and human-- which were united in one single person. While they probably meant well, making a statement such as this only led to more confusion.
The Jews did brush Jesus aside; in a way, however, the religion of Christianity as conceived by Paul has also brushed Jesus aside. Despite what a Christian might say, one will find no evidence wherein Jesus himself puts forth any of the afore--mentioned doctrines within the Gospels. Since Jesus had no plans to start a new religion, it goes without saying that he also did not formulate any doctrines for such.
All Christian doctrines are the work of Paul, based on his desire to gain favor--and new converts--among the non Jews of his time. By incorporating pagan beliefs into the teachings of Jesus, Paul achieved phenomenal success in his ministry, but at the price of tearing down everything that true monotheism stands for.
In so doing, Paul abrogated all teachings of Jesus and gave mankind a set of beliefs that have plagued his sense of reason ever since. It is here --the true nature and role of Jesus, as opposed to the Christian view of such -- where we find the fundamental difference between Islam and Christianity.
Paul would ultimately have a torrid death in fact he was killed by The Emperor Neyron.
The similitude of Paul and his efforts to delude the Christians are like the efforts of Abdullah Ibn Saba’ the Jew who tried to ruin and distort the religion of Islam from its foundation.
He changed some of Islam fundamental doctrines of Islam and founded the Shiites he built the foundation of this new religion upon the mistrust of the Quran and suspecting the wives of the prophet as well as accusing his companions of apostasy.
He claimed that Ali the fourth Caliph was the true successor of the prophet and he was demoted unjustly to be the fourth Caliph.
He is also similar to Paul in that he initially claimed that Ali was divine then, realizing that that would not be accepted claimed he was a prophet of God.
Paul’s doctrine.
One of the most compelling things about the doctrine of Paul is that in many places he even differs with Jesus himself, who they claim is the God of Christianity.
For example: Salvation according to Jesus is though sticking to his commandments as mentioned in Mathew 19:16-17, whereas for Paul salvation is in the belief of the Divinity of Jesus and his crucifixion.
Paul seems to have stolen some or all of his ideas from the ancient Egyptian religions who’s God was Horus.
The question is why should Jesus be more deserving of recognition and not the Horus?
Why should we give Jesus’ story any more credence than what we offer the Horus’s.
Clearly when the base of something is corrupt one cannot expect anything that stems from it to be any better.
From the teachings of Paul.
Modern day science and medical breakthrough explain to us the detrimental effects of alcohol and its addictive nature and the dangers of intoxication are clear for all to see, yet one finds Paul endorsing its consumption and encouraging it in the first of his letters to Timothy 5:35
By endorsing its consumption Paul has belied God Almighty and accused Him of ignorance of the damaging effect of Alcohol, and so demonstrated a lack of wisdom.
As it has already been mentioned he also abrogated the practice of circumcision that was mentioned in the Old Testament not only did he seek to banish the practice he also threatened anyone who practiced it that he would not be benefitted by Jesus
Paul admitted his lies against God and in his Letters 3:7 said “ if God is trusted, he has increased with my lies His majesty”
So Paul was no disciple of Jesus nor was he any prophet of God, rather he was someone who slandered God and established many of Christianities erroneous ideas.
|
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:54 pm | |
| The evolution of the Trinity, the crucifixion and sacrifice and their fallacy.
One finds the Greco-roman lands at the time of Jesus to be futile grounds for idolatry and polytheism, and these were the main beliefs and practices during this period in history.
In fact the oldest manuscript of the Bible is one written in Greek! A language Jesus did not even speak, which is another example of the great inconsistencies in Christianity.
One also discovers that people during this period were greatly awe struck by the sun, so one finds many religions glorifying and sometimes even worshipping the sun.
In fact the similarities between Jesus and the ancient Egyptian Sun God Horus is striking here are a few similarities:
Horus born of a virgin. <> Jesus born of a virgin.
The foster father of Horus was Seb or Seph. <> Jesus was fostered by Joseph.
Horus was of royal descent. <> Jesus was of royal descent.
Horus birth accompanied by three solar deities (star gazers) who followed by the morning star of Sirius bearing gifts. <> Jesus birth accompanied by three wise men (Zoroastrian star gazers) who followed by a star “in the east” bearing gifts.
The birth of Horus announced by angels. <> The birth of Jesus announced by angels.
Herut tried to murder the infant Horus. <> Herod slaughtered every first born in an attempt to kill Jesus the forthcoming messiah.
Horus is baptized at age 30 by Anup the Baptiser at a river. <> Jesus is baptized at age 30 by John the Baptist at a river.
Horus resists temptation by the evil Sut (Sut was to be the precursor for the Hebrew Satan) on a high mountain. <> Jesus resists temptation by Satan on a high mountain.
Horus had 12 followers. <> Jesus had 12 disciples.
Horus performed miracles like healing the sick and walking on water. <> Jesus performed miracles like healing the sick and walking on water.
Horus raised someone from the grave (his father Osiris) <> Jesus raised Lazarus (notice the name similarity) from the grave. Lazarus is short for Elasarus - the “us” on the end is Romanized. Elasarus was derived from “El-Asar” which was the name given to Osiris.
Horus was buried and resurrected in the city of Anu. <> The place Bethany mentioned in John was a derivative of the words “Bet” and “Anu” which translates “the house of Anu”.
The ‘y’ on the end of bethany is interchangeable with the letter ‘u’.
Horus was killed by crucifixion. <> Jesus was crucified.
Horus was accompanied by two thieves at the crucifixion. <> Jesus was crucified with two thieves.
Horus was buried in a tomb at Anu. <> Jesus was buried in a tomb located in Bethany (Bet-Anu).
Horus was resurrected after 3 days. <> Jesus was “said” to resurrected after over a period of three days.
The resurrection of Horus was announced by three women. <> The resurrection of Jesus was announced by three women.
Horus was given the title KRST which means “anointed one” <> Jesus was given the title Christ (Christos) meaning “anointed one”
One finds even the celebration of Christmas is borrowed from when the ancient Egyptians used to celebrate the alignment of particular celestial bodies.
The Biblical evidence against the trinity is compelling. And yet the majority of professing Christians are Trinitarian; and moreover, they stigmatize non-Trinitarians as non-Christian, many claiming that non-Trinitarians are automatically a ‘sect’.
Clearly enough, neither the word ‘trinity’ nor the wording of the Trinitarian formula were known to New Testament Christianity.
In a sense, Jesus ‘became’ God to many Christians all because a group of bishops decided it was so.
But why did this happen? And why was there so much angst to label those who didn’t accept the trinity as heretics? Having read around the history of the early centuries of Christianity, the following are some suggested reasons.
From earliest times, paganism featured many gods often subsumed beneath or within one apparently greater god. Each tribe or territory had their own god, but as they were subsumed within other tribes by conquest or some other form of domination, their god became subsumed beneath the god of the dominant tribe or nation.
Thus there developed pantheons of gods, and yet within the pantheons there was often a hierarchy, and a desire to insist on one hand that the god of the subdued people still existed, and yet on the other hand, an insistence that the god of the dominant group was supreme.
It was generally accepted that there was a "communion of blood and soil" between a nation and their god, in that their god was connected to the land or territory upon which that god's people lived (1).
Hence Naaman wanted to take some soil from Israel back to Syria to symbolize how the God of Israel was his God (2 Kings 5:17). When tribes were taken into captivity, or conquerors came and lived in their land, the gods had to somehow be accommodated within a religious system. And so began the idea of 'godheads'.
The mysterious, ill defined relationships between the members of the supposed 'Trinity' are very similar to those assumed within the godheads of paganism. Apologists for the Trinity are all divided about the nature of the relationships between Father, Son and Holy Spirit; this is a weak point in the whole idea.
And the very same difficulty is encountered by any who would wish to explain or defend the gods within the pagan godheads. Further, it becomes apparent from the literature and sculptured art of early paganism that gods, animals and humans all tend to get mixed up; half-human and half-god. Again, we can see how this came to be reflected in Trinitarian views of Jesus.
It was a mixture of paganism and Christianity which made the changeover from paganism to nominal Christianity less controversial and more painless.
I’ve given some specific examples of this in a European context below. Many scholars have pointed out that the idea of a Divine figure coming to earth to redeem the faithful was a very common pagan myth in the Middle East of the first century (2).
It's easy to see how early Christians would've been tempted to claim that Christ was some form of pre-existent God in order to make their beliefs accommodate the surrounding paganism- and it's understandable that some would've been eager to misinterpret Bible passages to this end.
The idea of a 'trinity' of gods was widespread in paganism. The Egyptians had three main gods, Osiris, Isis and Horus.
Horus was in turn divided into 3 parts or persons:
Horus - the King Horus - Ra
Horus - the Scarabaeus.
Likewise the Hindu Vedas of around 1000 BC claimed that one God existed in three forms:
Agni - Fire, presiding over the earth
Indra - the Firmament, presiding over the mid-air
Surya - The Sun. presiding over the Heavens.
In later Hinduism, the 'trimurti' or trinity of gods became:
Brahma - the creative power
Vishnu - the preserving power
Siva - the transforming power.
So when Theophilus, bishop of Antioch introduced the word 'trias' to Christian literature for the first time in AD170, and the word 'trinitas' was first used by Tertullian in AD200, they were importing pagan concepts which were familiar and had been for millenia.
Remember that the trinity was adopted at the Council of Nicea in AD325. This Council was called by Constantine after he decided he wished to turn the official religion of the Roman empire from paganism to Christianity.
Not long before that Council, Christians had been cruelly persecuted. Some of the delegates at that Council even bore on their faces and in their bodies the marks of that persecution.
The pagans had (falsely) accused the Christians of making Jesus into a God whom they worshipped. Pliny had reported how they “chant antiphonally a hymn to Christ as to a god”.
In the pagan Roman world, only the Jews refused to worship other gods on the basis that there was only one true God.
The fact the Christians did the same led to the perception that they too thought that there was only one God, just that they called Him ‘Christ’.
The Jews likewise wrongly assumed that anyone claiming to be the Son of God was claiming to be God (Jn. 10:33-36; 19:7)- even though Jesus specifically corrected them over this!
As often happens, the perceptions of a group by their enemies often come to define how the group perceive themselves. Constantine was a politician and a warrior. He wasn’t a Bible student, or a theologian, in fact he wasn’t even a very serious Christian.
Although he accepted Christianity, he said he didn’t want to be baptized because he wanted to continue in sin. He seems to have figured that Christianity was the right thing for the empire.
So, Christianity, here we come. Constantine, and many others who jumped on the ‘Christian’ bandwagon, shared the perception of Christ which had existed in the pagan world which they had grown up in. And the pagan perception, as Pliny and many others make clear, was that Jesus was a kind of God. And so when Constantine presided over the dispute amongst the bishops at Nicea about who Jesus was, he naturally assumed that the ‘Jesus is God Himself’ party were in fact traditional Christians.
So the claim of the Christians is as follows:
- Jesus is born to the Virgin Mary in Bethlehem
- By 12 years of age he was teaching.
- He had 12 disciples with whom he would travel and perform miracles.
- He was known as the King of kings and the light of the universe as was the same for some of the Greeks and their Gods
- After the betrayal by Judas he was arrested, crucified and died.
- After three days he arose from the dead.
Why do the Christians celebrate Christmas on the 25th, the only logical connection with this date is again with the ancient Egyptians
Thus, many Christians do not realize that much of the celebration of Christmas is actually of pagan origin.
The Romans celebrated the Feast of the Invincible Sun on December 25th. The early church fathers elected to celebrate the birth of Jesus on this date, although there was no particular reason to choose this one.
To avoid persecution during the Roman pagan festival, early Christians decked their homes with Saturnalia holly.
As Christian numbers increased and their customs prevailed, the celebrations took on a Christian observance.
But the early church actually did not celebrate the birth of Christ in December until Telesphorus, who was the second Bishop of Rome from 125 to 136AD, declared that Church services should be held during this time to celebrate "The Nativity of our Lord and Savior”.
However, since no-one was quite sure in which month Christ was born, Nativity was often held in September, which was during the Jewish Feast of Trumpets (modern-day Rosh Hashanah). In fact, for more than 300 years, people observed the birth of Jesus on various dates.
In the year 274AD, solstice fell on 25th December. Roman Emperor Aurelian proclaimed the date as "Natalis Solis Invicti," the festival of the birth of the invincible sun. In 320 AD, Pope Julius I specified the 25th of December as the official date of the birth of Jesus Christ.
Christmas official, but not generally observed
In 325AD, Constantine the Great, the first Christian Roman emperor, introduced Christmas as an immovable feast on 25 December.
He also introduced Sunday as a holy day in a new 7-day week, and introduced movable feasts (Easter). In 354AD, Bishop Liberius of Rome officially ordered his members to celebrate the birth of Jesus on 25 December.
However, even though Constantine officiated 25 December as the birthday of Christ, Christians, recognizing the date as a pagan festival, did not share in the emperor's good meaning. Christmas failed to gain universal recognition among Christians until quite recently. In England, Oliver Cromwell banned Christmas festivities between 1649 and 1660 through the so-called Blue Laws, believing that Christmas should be a solemn day.
In fact, many Christian scholars contend that Jesus was actually born in summer. This is consistent with the Quranic account that follows, because there is a specific mention of ripe dates falling to Mary (may Allah be pleased with Her) in the Quran (which means): "And shake towards you the trunk of the palm-tree; It will drop upon you fresh ripe dates”. (Quran 19: 25)
A common theme to many Christian holidays is their actual pagan origin. It seems that the early church elders elected to keep many of the celebrations already in practice and redefine them in Christian terms, rationalizing them as a celebration of some aspect of their dogma of the life of Jesus. Nowadays, few may remember the reasons for the various customs that they practice
|
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 2:58 pm | |
| The Fallacy of the Trinity.
The bible reads:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the FATHER, the WORD, and the HOLY GHOST: and these three are one”.
1st Epistle of John 5:7 - AV
This verse is the closest approximation to what the Christians call their Holy Trinity in the encyclopedia called the BIBLE.
This key-stone of the Christian faith has also been scrapped from the RSV without even a semblance of explanation. It has been a pious fraud all along and well-deservedly has it been expunged in the RSV for the English-speaking people.
But for the 1499 remaining language groups of the world who read the Christian concoctions in their mother tongues, the fraud remains. These people will never know the truth until the Day of Judgment.
However, we Muslims must again congratulate the galaxy of D.D.’s who have been honest enough to eliminate another lie from the English (RSV) Bible, thus bringing their Holy Book yet another step closer to the teachings of Islam.
A refutation of the Trinity using irrefutable proofs.
The Christians claim that God is made up of three persons, or hypostases, yet they differ in defining these supposed hypostases: are they traits, beings, or qualities? However, they agree that they are three: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.
They claim that the Son is the Word of the Father, and that the Father knows things through the Word (the Son), and that the Holy Spirit is the life for whose sake the Father lives (according to their stories and blasphemous lies).
So it should be said to them: Is every one of these three persons distinct from the other? Or is each one of them the other?
If they say: Each one of them is the other, it should be said to them: Then why have you made them three?
The number itself indicates contrast and lack of similarity. Thus, by your own words, you have confirmed what you deny, and you have negated what you assert.
But if they say: Every one of these three persons is distinct from the other, it should be said to them: Which one of these three persons do you prefer to the other?
If they say: We do not prefer any of these persons to the other, their own initial words reaffirm that these three persons are one.
Thus, it becomes clear through this debate how much such a false and corrupt belief contradicts itself.
If the ‘three are one’ then why when it is said that Jesus died did they not also die.
Here one must ask is it possible for the Lord to die?
And if the Lord of Christianity died who bought him back to life?
Exalted is Allah from the accusations of the Christians.
So it is clear from these discrepancies the falsehood. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 3:02 pm | |
| The Gospels their authors and the false claim of inspiration.
The four accepted Gospels by the Christian church are Mathew, Mark, Luke and John but there are numerous other Gospels that are differed over.
The Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were written atleast 35 to 70 years after the time of Jesus' ministry, by the people who were not eye-witnesses of the events. The writers relied on oral traditions and some other earlier documents which have not survived.
The information they give is very scanty and there are numerous contradictions between the Gospels e.g. on who were the first witnesses to the resurrection of Christ. (Mark 16:5 a young man, Luke 24:4 two men, Matthew 28:5 an angel, John 20:12 two angels).
Among the many "Gospels" written about this time, these four were accepted as "Canonical" and were, it is claimed, inspired by the Holy Spirit, while many others were rejected and destroyed.
The Gospels like the rest of the New Testament, were written in Greek, a European language,while Jesus spoke Aramaic (a Semitic language related to Hebrew and Arabic).
This implies a further problem of translating Jesus' reported words into Greek. There is no certainty as to what Jesus' original words in his own language, or what they meant in the context of their times.
THE SOURCE OF LUKE'S "INSPIRATION" AND THE FALSEHOOD OF HIS CLAIM
One notices that 85% of Matthew and Luke to Mark or that "mysterious 'Q''’. 1 Let us now allow Luke to tell us who "inspired" him to tell his "most excellent Theophilus" (Luke 1:3) the story of Jesus. In Luke's preamble to his "Gospel”.
He tells us plainly that he was only following in the footsteps of others who were less qualified than him, others who had the temerity to write accounts of his hero (Jesus).
As a physician, as against fishermen and tax collectors, he was no doubt better equipped to create a literary masterpiece. This he did, because "IT SEEMED GOOD TO ME ALSO" to "PUT IN ORDER”. These are his prominent Justifications over his predecessors.
FROM THE GREATEST CONTRADICTIONS OF THE AUTHORS OF THE GOSPELS IS AS FOLLOWS: It is reported by Luke, one of the authors of the Gospels (it is claimed that he was inspired by God to write it) that Jesus was the son of Joseph which means the following:
1) That Jesus was not a God or the son of a God because his father was known as Joseph the carpenter and this is in direct contradiction with what the Christians claim in their publications.
2) Regarding Mary, either:
- She was married to Joseph the carpenter and gave birth to Joseph and that contradicts what both the Christians and the Muslims believe which is that Mary was unmarried.
- Or that Mary was not married to Joseph the carpenter and so Luke’s account would lay claim to the fact that she was guilty of a heinous crime and that her child was illegitimately born. This conforms to the Jewish claim which is an absolutely false one.
The corruption that the Bible has undergone from the additions, deletions and alterations have proved difficult for the Christians to explain. An example of this would be the additions to the Gospel of Luke in an attempt to cover this unexplainable contradiction to the eyes of the Christians.
It is clear that there is a contradiction between the Christian doctrine about the divinity of Jesus and what is reported in the Gospel of Luke.
FROM THE GREATEST CONTRADICTIONS OF THE AUTHORS OF THE GOSPELS IS AS FOLLOWS:
1) one finds that Luke when talking of his ‘inspirations’ he never uses any expressions that indicate definiteness he often other approximations instead, which is strange for someone claiming ‘inspiration’ and this again indicates his dishonesty.
2) One finds that neither Luke nor Mark were from the Disciples of Jesus, at the same time one does not finds accounts of the Disciples claiming that they were inspired by God so what about those that were not even Disciples.
This is no doubt further proof of the lies that they attribute to God.
As Allah said:
And who can be more unjust than he who invents a lie against Allah, or says: "I have received inspiration," whereas he is not inspired in anything; and who says, "I will reveal the like of what Allah has revealed”. (Anaam:93)
- Another proof that the Gospels were not ‘inspired’ is the fact that one see’s the sheer number of contradictions, they are so numerous infact that they outnumber the few times they agree with each other. What that indicates is that the accounts in the Gospels were written independently without any real bases in actual factual events.
- It is well established that there were other Gospels but it was these three that were selected.
- The question must be asked therefore if the authors of the Gospels cannot be relied upon what about the author’s of any of the Gospels.
- There seems to be no measurement for the acceptability or authenticity of any of these Gospels at all no matter how many councils sit and agree like in 325CE when the First Council of Nicaea which was a council of Christian bishops convened in Nicaea in Bithynia by the Roman EmperorConstantine I in AD 325.
- Another irrefutable proof is the differences in the genealogy of Jesus and even claims that from his forefathers were evil doers and fornicators.
Of the four Gospel writers, God "inspired" only two of them to record the genealogy of His "son”. To make it easy for you to compare the "fathers and grandfathers" of Jesus Christ in both the "inspired" lists, I have culled the names only, minus the verbiage. Between David and Jesus, God "inspired" Matthew to record only 26 ancestors for His "son”.
But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus. The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV).
This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter. You will also easily observe that the lists are grossly contradictory. Could both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. God?
Matthew and Luke are over-zealous in making DAVID the King, the prime ancestor of Jesus, because of that false notion that Jesus was to sit on the "THRONE OF HIS FATHER DAVID" (Acts 2:30).
The Gospels belie this prophecy, for they tell us that instead of Jesus sitting on his father's (David's) throne, it was Pontius Pilate, a Roman Governor, a pagan who sat on that very throne and condemned its rightful (?) heir (Jesus) to death.
"Never mind,'' says the evangelist, "if not in his first coming, then in his second coming he will fulfill this prophecy and three hundred others beside" But with their extravagant enthusiasm to trace the ancestry of Jesus physically to David, (for this is actually what the Bible says — THAT OF THE FRUIT OF HIS (David's) LOINS, ACCORDING TO THE FLESH" (literally, not metaphorically Acts 2:30), both the "inspired" authors trip and fall on the very first step.
Matthew 1:6 says that Jesus was the son of David through SOLOMON, but Luke 3:31 says that he (Jesus) was the son of David through NATHAN. One need not be a gynecologist to tell that by no stretch of the imagination could the seed of David reach the mother of Jesus both through Solomon and Nathan at the same time!
We know that both the authors are confounded liars, because Jesus was conceived miraculously, without any male intervention. Even if we concede a physical ancestry through David, both authors would still be proved liars for the obvious reason.
So it is clear that the authors of the Gospels were not ‘inspired’ as they claimed. No son of God would have ancestry who were adulterers.
Exalted is Allah from what the Christians attribute to Him.
|
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 3:08 pm | |
| The Bible and the lost Gospels.
From the previously mentioned points we see that the book the Christians hold sacred cannot be considered as the work of God and we shall see how this manifests itself in this chapter.
One can look at the Bible as a book with no particular author nor a particularly accurate account of anything, let alone talk about the unspeakable acts it describes, to then claim that they were authors by God Himself who is described using only the most beautiful and perfect names and attributes is even more shocking.
When considering this point one should not neglect the fact that this book can never be considered a work of God as it has been altered, though hundreds if not thousands of additions and deletions and revisions.
The point should be made that Jesus (pbuh) never ordered for anything to be written down during his lifetime or after it.
What about the so-called New Testament? 1 Why does every Gospel begin with the introduction
ACCORDING TO ... ACCORDING TO ... Why "according to?"
Because not a single one of the vaunted four thousand copies extant carries its author's autograph! Hence the supposition "according to!" Even the internal evidence proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name.
"And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (JESUS) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (JESUS) saith unto HIM (MATTHEW), follow ME (JESUS) And HE (MATTHEW) arose, and followed HIM (JESUS)”. (Matthew 9:9)
1. The "so-called," because nowhere does the "New Testament" calls itself the New Testament, and nowhere the Old Testament calls itself the Old Testament. And also the word "Bible" is unknown within the pages of the Bible. God forgot to give a title to "HIS" books!
Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the "He's" and the "Him's" of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but some third person writing what he saw and heard — a hearsay account. If we cannot even attribute this "book of dreams" (as the first Gospel is also described) to the disciple Matthew, how can we accept it as the Word of God?
And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man named Mathew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, follow me. And he arose, and followed him.
"HE" AND "HIM" NOT MATHEW!
We are not alone in this discovery that Matthew did not write the "Gospel according to St. Matthew" and that it was written by some anonymous hand. J. B. Phillips concurs with us in our findings. He is the paid servant of the Anglican Church, a prebendary of the Chichester Cathedral, England.
He would have no reason to lie or betray to the detriment of the official view of his Church! Refer to his introduction to the "Gospel of St. Matthew" Phillips has this to say about its authorship.
"EARLY TRADITION ASCRIBED THIS GOSPEL TO THE APOSTLE MATTHEW, BUT SCHOLARS NOWADAYS ALMOST ALL REJECT THIS VIEW”. In other words, St.
Matthew did not write the Gospel which bears his name. This is the finding of Christian scholars of the highest eminence — not of Hindus, Muslims and Jews who may be accused of bias.
Let our Anglican friend continue: "THE AUTHOR, WHOM WE STILL CAN CONVENIENTLY CALL MATTHEW" "Conveniently" because otherwise every time we made a reference to "Matthew" we would have to say — "THE FIRST BOOK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT" Chapter so and so, verse so and so. And again and again "The first book.. “. etc.
Therefore, according to J. B. Phillips it is convenient that we give the book some name. So why not "Matthew?" Suppose it’s as good a name as any other! Phillips continues: "THE AUTHOR HAS PLAINLY DRAWN ON THE MYSTERIOUS 'Q' WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN A COLLECTION OF ORAL TRADITIONS”. What is this "mysterious 'Q'?" "Q" is short for the German word "quella" which means "sources”.
There is supposed to be another document — a common source — to which our present Matthew, Mark and Luke had access. All these three authors, whoever they were, had a common eye on the material at hand. They were writing as if looking through "one" eye. And because they saw eye to eye, the first three "Gospels" came to be known as the Synoptic Gospels.
What also indicates that it is unauthentic:
The fact that many of the books inside the Bible are hotly contested by the various groups and till today parts of the bible are rejected by some Christians.
In fact the earlier copies of the New Testament which were claimed to be from God were later removed.
The inextricable question must be how do the Christians believe in such a book, the author of which is unknown?
And what’s to stop the Clergy from remove another book with the same claim that it is the work of humans now?
There is little doubt that the book Christians call the New Testament is not the words of God by any stretch of the imagination.
The lost Gospels
The most recent discovery of a manuscript in the Egyptian desert that was authored after four hundred years of Jesus, shows numerous books altogether 20 that are omitted in today’s Bible.
There are also other Gospels that are not considered in today’s Bile like the Gospels of Thomas, Peter, Philip, The Childhood of Jacob, the Gospel of Mary Madelyn….
- in the Gospel of Thomas one finds that the early Christians did not consider the death of Christ and his subsequent crucifixion, or resurrection.
- Had the Gospel of Peter been the relied upon version the Christians today would not believe in the Crucifixion.
Summary.
It is dumbfounding that despite all of these claims of the Gospels belonging to these fictitious characters who’s identity remains unknown to this day, there is no Gospel that is claimed to be from Jesus (pbuh) himself.
That leaves only one possible consideration that these books are the works of men that were merely attached to the body of text that was the Old Testament.
This removes it from having any Divine source and so cannot be use to guide to the way of the Lord of the Worlds.
The Evolution of the Bible and how much is attributed to Jesus.
The Old and the New Testament has never been proved through a constant chain of reliable reporters, a fact that we discussed earlier in this book in sufficient detail.
Therefore all these books, in our opinion, are dubious and uncertain and thus any quotation from these books is not acceptable unless it can be proved through undeniable sources that a particular statement really was made by Christ because it is always possible that the verse in question may be a later addition added by the ‘faithful’ at the end of the second century or in the third century in order to refute the Ebionites, Marcionites or the Manichaeans.
It is a prerequisite of believing in a certain book as divinely revealed that it is proved through infallible arguments that the book in question was revealed through a prophet and that it has been conveyed to us precisely in the same order without any change through an uninterrupted chain of narrators.
It is not at all sufficient to attribute a book to a certain prophet on the basis of suppositions and conjectures.
Unsupported assertions made by one or a few sects of people should not be, and cannot be, accepted in this connection.
We have already seen how Catholic and Protestant scholars differ on the question of the authenticity of certain of these books. There are yet more books of the Bible, which have been rejected by Christians. They include the Book of Revelation, the Book of Genesis, the Book of Ascension, the Book of Mysteries, the Book of Testament and the Book of Confession, which are all, ascribed to the Prophet Moses.
Similarly a fourth Book of Ezra is claimed to be from the Prophet Ezra and a book concerning Isaiah’s ascension and revelation are ascribed to him.
In addition to the known book of Jeremiah, there is another book attributed to him. There are numerous sayings, which are claimed to be from the Prophet Habakkuk. There are many songs, which are said to be from the Prophet Solomon.
There more than 70 books, other than the present ones, of the new Testament, which are ascribed to Jesus, Mary, the apostles and their disciples.
The Christians of this age have claimed that these books are false and are forgeries. The Greek Church, Catholic Church and the Protestant Church are unanimous on this point.
Similarly the Greek Church claims that the third book of Ezra is a part of the Old Testament and believes it to have been written by the Prophet Ezra, while the Protestant and Catholic Churches have declared it false and fabricated. We have already seen the controversy of the Catholics and Protestants regarding the books of Baruch, Tobit, Jude, the Song of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus and both the books of Maccabees. A part of the book of Esther is believable to the Catholics but essentially rejected by the Protestants.
In this kind of situation it seems absurd and beyond the bounds of reason to accept and acknowledge a book simply for the reason that it has been ascribed to a prophet by a group of scholars without concrete support.
This assumption, when seen in the light of the statement giving them religious license to change the holy texts for the sake of the truth, is quite feasible and logical.
The historical events described above arc the main cause for the non- existence of any authority supporting the books of the Old and New Testaments. Neither the Jews nor the Christians possess anything to prove the truth of their scriptures.
As we said earlier, when we asked some contemporary Christian scholars to produce authenticated proofs for the truth of their books in our famous public debate, they had to admit that, due to the calamities of the Christians in the first three hundred and thirteen years of their history, all such proofs had been destroyed.
We also tried to find authorities to support the truth of the Biblical books but all our efforts ended in despair as what we found was no more than conjecture, which does not help prove the truth of these books.
It is here one should emphasis that the Quran is a text that is confirmed with an unbreakable chains that are so numerate it is impossible to consider that a lie could have been concocted.
But where did Muhammad, (pbuh), get this knowledge from? He was an Ummi, Arabic for "unlettered". He did not low how to read or write. He is made by God Almighty to answer this very question in the verse above, by saying that it was all by divine inspiration. "No!” says the controversialist. "This is Mohammed’s own concoction.
He copied his revelations from the Jews and Christians.
He plagiarized it. He forged it”. Knowing full-well, and believing as we do, that the whole Qur’an is the veritable Word of God, we will nevertheless agree, for the sake of argument, with the enemies of Muhammad, (pbuh), for a moment, that he wrote it. We can now expect some cooperation from the unbelievers.
Ask him: "Have you any qualms in agreeing that Muhammad was an Arab?" Only an ignorant will hesitate to agree. In that case there is no sense in pursuing any discussion. Cut short the talk. Close the book! With the man of reason, we proceed. "That this Arab, in the first instance, was addressing other Arabs.
He was not talking to Indian Muslims, Chinese Muslims, or Nigerian Muslims. He was addressing his own people, the Arabs. Whether they agreed with him or not, he told them in the most sublime form, words that were seared into the hearts and minds of his listeners that Mary the mother of Jesus, a Jewess, was chosen above the women of all nations.
Not his own mother, nor his wife nor his daughter, nor any other Arab woman, but a Jewess! Can one explain this? Because to everyone his own mother or wife, or daughters would come before other women.
Why would the prophet of Islam honor a woman from his opposition! and a Jewess at that! belonging to a race, which had been looking down upon his people for three thousand years? Just as they still look down upon their Arab brethren today”.
So the Bible today is nothing but a bunch of thought up stories that are unverifiable and have been altered by innumerate additions and deletions, it has pagan influences and is impotent as a text that should be used for guidance.
Another point to consider is that the Bible in its oldest manuscript cannot even be relied upon to give us an accurate account, as it was not the language that Jesus spoke by the consensus of the Christians.
Process of selection:
One finds no other reason for the inclusion of the four Gospels of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John except that they agreed with the prevalent belief at the time.
There seems no other logical, sensible selection process the early Christians were using.
There isn’t even the slightest attempt to attribute these various Gospels to Jesus.
The "gospel" is a frequently used word, but what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus. The Christians boast about the Gospels according to St.
Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke and according to St. John, but there is not a single Gospel "according" to (St).
Jesus himself! We sincerely believe that everything Christ (May the peace and blessings of God be upon him) preached was from God. That was the Injeel, the good news and the guidance of God for the Children of Israel. In his lifetime Jesus never wrote a single word, nor did he instruct anyone to do so.
What passes off, as the "GOSPELS" today are the works of anonymous hands! The question before us is: "Do you accept that the Bible is God's Word?" The question is really in the form of a challenge.
The questioner is not simply seeking enlightenment. The question is posed in the spirit of a debate.
One cannot help noticing that the words attributed to Jesus are few and far between. There are copies of the Bible were his words are put in RED to highlight, in fact only 10% of the Bible is actually the word of Jesus (pbuh), even though it was upon him that it was revealed.
So this book that is claimed to be from God cannot be considered anything of the sort, instead it is a text that has changed and altered according to the whims and desires of its authors. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 5:36 pm | |
| A Glimpse of what the Bible contains and what that proves.
Anyone turning the pages of the Bible will realised that this book is one full of filth ranging from slander against God to claiming His prophets and messengers disbelieved or worshipped idols or fell in to illicit deviancies, all this for the same messengers it is claimed were sent to guide human kind.
Any claim made against the prophet is indeed a claim that God Himself was ignorant when selecting those same messengers.
Here is but a few of these examples from the ‘Sacred’ text that is the Bible:
A) The Bible claims that the prophet Lot (pbuh) fornicated with his daughter:
To continue: the "history" has it that, night after night, the daughters of Lot seduce their drunken father with the noble (?) motive of preserving their father's "seed”. "Seed" figures very prominently in this "Holy Book": forty seven times in the little booklet of Genesis alone!
Out of this another incestuous relationship come the "Ammonites" and the "Moabites," for whom the God of Israel was supposed to have had a special. Later on in the Bible we learn that the Jews are ordered by the same compassionate God to slaughter the Philistines mercilessly — men, women and children.
Even trees and animals are not to be spared, but the Amonites and the Moabites are not to be "distressed" or "meddled" with because they are the seed of Lot! (Deuteronomy 2:19)
No decent reader can read the seduction of Lot to his mother, sister or daughter, not even to his fiancée if she is a chaste and moral woman. Yet you will come across perverted people who will gorge this filth. Tastes can be cultivated!
Read again and mark Ezekiel 23. You will know what color to choose. The "whoredoms" of the two sisters, Aholah and Aholibah. The sexual details here puts to shame even the unexpurgated edition of many banned books. Ask your "born again" Christian visitors, under what category will they classify all this lewdness?
Such filth certainly has no place in any "Book of God”.
A) They claim that Yahootha the son of Jacob fornicated with his sons wife Thaamar, and impregnated her, she then gave birth to Faarid and Zaarih the twins. Genesis 38
B) They claim that David, Solomon and Jesus (pbut) were from the offspring of Thaamar, (Mathew 1)
C) They claim that David fornicated with a woman then plotted against her husband killing him and taking his wife for himself. (Samuel II 11)
D) The accusation that Solomon (pbuh) was an apostate and worshiped idols and built temples for those idols. (Kings I 11)
E) They claim that Aaron built a temple for the Calf and claim he worshipped it. (Exodus 32)
The examples are many and exalted is Allah from the accusation that He chose the likes of these people unbeknown to Him that they would commit these heinous crimes.
The questions is:
How do we expect the young people to protect themselves from falling into the likes of these crimes when their role models from among the prophets fell into them themselves?
The Bible acts as a tool that arouses and increases sexual frustrations in people, which is perhaps why in the countries that are predominantly Christian like the U.S.A and Europe one finds cases of sexual depravity so high.
It is even reported weekly cases where Bishops and priest of the Church themselves are perpetrating some of these crimes.
So it cannot be imagined that this book was authored by God, at the very least it is unbefitting to be attributed to any decent human being.
The bible also contains:
A call to the consumption of alcohol and other intoxicants
It goes without saying that a human under the influence of any intoxicants is able to do acts that even the wildest animals would not do.
He can kill, maim, steal and rape and even more serious than all this is the spiritual disconnection between himself and his Lord.
Perhaps an intoxicated human can swear at his Lord and His Prophets and Messengers, in addition to the dangers he causes his body and mind as a result of intoxication.
Despite all of this, we find Christianity allowing alcohol and intoxicants and indorsing it claiming that God permitted this to them. Exalted is Allah from what they attribute to Him.
In Christianity, we find exerts from Paul, which show him encouraging the consumption of alcohol. It is said that Timothy used to say, “ Drink only water, but use some barely juice (wine) for your stomach and your health. (Timothy 5:23).
One should ask is it really beneficial for the body to get intoxicated? The answer is of course not.
It goes without mention that (as modern science has proven) alcohol consumption is one of the biggest causes of some of the most dangerous diseases.
This falsifies the claim of Paul that he was some type of ‘Inspired’ prophet
The bible also contains:
Vivid descriptions of things that should not even be uttered on the tongue of noble people, like the ‘conception of Jesus’
And the angel answered and said unto her, "The Holy Ghost shall COME UPON THEE, and the power of the Highest shall OVERSHADOW THEE (Luke 1:35)
Can't you see that you are giving the atheist, the skeptic, the agnostic a stick to beat you with? They may well ask- "How did the Holy Ghost come upon Mary?" "How did the Highest over shadow her? We know that literally it does not mean that: that it was an immaculate conception, but the language used here, is distasteful-gutter language-you agree!? Language unbefitting to be considered the work of God Almighty by anyone with a reasonable intellect.
The Bible also contains:
Jesus (pbuh) in the Christian narrative also is claimed to have spoken derogatorily to his mother calling her and Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me?
My hour has not yet come”. John 2:4
This shows how undutiful he was to his mother.
It has been attributed to Jesus statements that indicate he was bloodthirsty and violent the claim that he said:
“Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division”. Luke 12:51.
As has previously been mention they claim that Jesus ordered the killing of all those who rejected his dominion and kingship, Luke 19:27
In general it seems clear to the objective reader that the Bible is not calling to raising the rank of the prophets and messengers of God but rather to diminishing their reputation, this leads one to conclude that this book could not in any way, shape or form have been divinely inspired. |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 5:53 pm | |
| From among the great contradictions in the Bible:
1- The differences in the doctrine of the Trinity.
There is a stark difference between the Church of the West and the Orthodox Church regarding the Trinity.
The contradiction in the belief of the “Trinity”.
The Christians believe that the trinity consists, of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit but yet they do not believe that these three are Gods in their own right rather they believe that the trinity itself is the God.
Then they continue saying the Father is great the Son is great and the Holy Spirit is great, but they are not three greats but rather just one great.
The question must be what is this language the Christians are using.
One should ask also if one of these three parts of the Trinity were to commit the crime of murder, could the punishment be passed to one of the other two parts.
The answer will be no because these three elements are individual.
Another point is that when they refer to the “father” the human beings natural tendency is to think that the father is some huge massive entity.
The “son” brings to mind the image of a young man, perhaps with blue eyes and blonde hair perhaps conjuring an image of a bearded man.
As for the “holy spirit” then the image that is conjured in the heads of the Christians is on of a dove, or a blazing fire, however it is less decisive than the other two.
And so when the question is posed to the Christians which image of God comes to mind when you think about the Lord God, you will receive contradictory answers.
This demonstrates that the belief of the Christians is so incomprehensible and corrupt that anyone with any sense will reject it. Anyone with any sense of objectivity who is not simply trying to defend the undefendable.
This doctrine is neither clear for the uneducated nor is it explainable by the scholar.
A proof of this would be the fact that half of the Anglican bishops of England rejected the idea of the divinity of Jesus (pbuh).
This was reported in the Daily news on the 25th of June1984.
It is universally accepted in Christendom, all orthodox Christians who believe in what they call the Holy Trinity; that the Father is God, the son is God and the Holy Ghost is God, but they are not three Gods but one God. (?) Let an erudite Christian theologian, like the Rev.
Dummelow tell us of this indivisibility, indissolubility of the Christian's "triune" God.
Commenting on "We will come" of John 14: 23 he says —
WHERE THE SON IS, THERE OF NECESSITY IS THE FATHER ALSO, AS WELL AS THE SPIRIT, FOR THE THREE ARE ONE, BEING DIFFERENT FORMS OF THE SUBSISTENCE AND MANIFESTATION OF THE SAME DIVINE BEING. THIS PASSAGE ILLUSTRATES THAT THE PERSONS OF THE HOLY TRINITY ARE INSEPARABLE, AND CONTAIN ONE ANOTHER.
Please don't worry. You are not really expected to understand the above verbiage. In short the Christian believes that the "THREE" (I beg your pardon, the Christian says, "ONE!"), all the three are supposed to be Omnipresent and Omniscient and as such leads us to an amusing and ridiculous conclusion. Jesus (pbuh) according to the Christians agonized on the cross at Calvary.
Being "inseparable," the Father and the Holy Ghost also must have agonized with the Son, and when he died, the other two died with him!
Little wonder we hear the cry in the West — "God is Dead!" Don't laugh. All this imposes on us a more somber responsibility of extricating our Christian brethren from the spiritual quagmire into which they are wallowing.
From among the great contradictions in the Bible:
2- The differences in the Gospels themselves.
In fact the oldest manuscript of the Bible is one written in Greek!
A language Jesus did not even speak, which is another example of the great inconsistencies in Christianity.
The Gospels like the rest of the New Testament, were written in Greek, a European language, while Jesus spoke Aramaic (a Semitic language related to Hebrew and Arabic).
This implies a further problem of translating Jesus' reported words into Greek. There is no certainty as to what Jesus' original words in his own language, or what they meant in the context of their times.
Jesus did not write the revelation nor did he order it to be written, means that the oldest manuscript of the Christians is unreliable as a body of text, as it cannot be considered transmitted by word of mouth.
Surprisingly then that one hears boasting on the part of some Christians that the have 27,000 manuscripts unsurprisingly no two are ever the same.
The earliest of those manuscripts are ones from 300 to 400 years after Jesus (pbuh).
An example would be circumcision:
(Genesis 17:4) obligates it Jesus having been circumcised on the 8th day, however one finds that Paul abrogates this.
As it has already been mentioned he abrogated the practice of circumcision that was mentioned in the Old Testament not only did he seek to banish the practice he also threatened anyone who practiced it that he would not be benefitted by Jesus, he done this to win favor among the Romans who did not like the idea.
Instead of considering Paul a traitor a man who changed the tradition of their prophet and God we find Christians glorifying him.
From among the great contradictions in the Bible:
3- The differences in the Birthday of Jesus.
Notwithstanding the differences of the various denomination’s interpretation of these verses they even differ in the basic birth date for Jesus, with the orthodoxy celebrating on the 7th of January whereas the Catholics celebrate it on the 25th of December.
It is well know that December coincides with winter in the middle-east so how could the shepherd be in the fields. There would have been no grass for their sheep to graze.
The only explanation is one that strengthens the Quranic narrative that Jesus was born during the summer months, and the shepherds were not grazing during the winter.
‘And shake the trunk of this tree and fresh, ripe dates will fall down for you’ Quran (Maryam Verse 25)
From among the great contradictions in the Bible:
Compare the two quotations. How many chariot riders did David slay? Seven hundred or seven thousand?
And further, did he slay 40000 "HORSEMEN" or 40000 "FOOTMEN?" The implication in the conflicting records between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18 is not only that God could not discern the difference between hundreds and thousands, but that He could not even distinguish "CAVALRY" from "INFANTRY!"
It is obvious that blasphemy masquerades in the Christian dictionary as "inspiration!" 700 or 7 000?
It is certainly naught for Bible-lovers' comfort that a whole naught (0) was either added to 700, or subtracted from 7 000, thus making the confused Biblical Mathematics even more confounded! II SAMUEL 10
18. And the Syrians fled before Israel; and David slew the men of seven hundred chariots of the Syrians, and forty thousand horsemen, and smote Shobach the captain of their host, who died there.
I CHRONICLES 19
18. But the Syrians fled before Israel: and David slew of the Syrians seven thousandmen which fought in chariots, and forty thousand footmen, and killed Shophach the captain of the host.
What does this prove, that it was not from Allah almighty nor was or is it befitting for something like this to be attributed to Him. The examples are endless in this regard of these types of numerical contradictions, this is one of many more.
From among the great contradictions in the Bible:
One find a contradiction regarding the ascension one of the authors of the Bible claims: “ none was raised to the heavens except for Jesus”
Whereas at the same time it is claimed that Ezekiel ascended.
The examples are endless in this regard of these types of contradictions; this is one of many more.
What is worse is that this type of logic (or illogic) is actually encouraged and taught by the Christians.
From among the clear contradictions in the Bible:
Of the four Gospel writers, God "inspired" only two of them to record the genealogy of His "son”.
To make it easy for you to compare the "fathers and grandfathers" of Jesus Christ in both the "inspired" lists, I have culled the names only, minus the verbiage. Between David and Jesus, God "inspired" Matthew to record only 26 ancestors for His "son”.
But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus. The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV).
This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter. You will also easily observe that the lists are grossly contradictory. Could both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. God?
From Jesus’ genealogy are 6 people who are considered by the Christian’s adulterers or fornicators.
From among the clear contradictions in the Bible:
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the FATHER, the WORD, and the HOLY GHOST: and these three are one”. 1st Epistle of John 5:7 - AV
This verse is the closest approximation to what the Christians call their Holy Trinity in the encyclopedia called the BIBLE. This keystone of the Christian faith has also been scrapped from the RSV without even a semblance of explanation. It has been a pious fraud all along and well deservedly has it been expunged in the RSV for the English-speaking people.
But for the 1499 remaining language groups of the world who read the Christian concoctions in their mother tongues, the fraud remains.
These people will never know the truth until the Day of Judgment. However, we Muslims must again congratulate the galaxy of D.D.’s who have been honest enough to eliminate another lie from the English (RSV) Bible.
From among the clear contradictions in the Bible:
When this point of the seven masculine pronouns in a single verse of the Bible was mooted by the Muslims in India in their debates with the Christian missionaries, the Urdu version of the Bible had the pronouns presently changed to SHE. SHE. SHE! so that the Muslims could not claim that this prophecy referred to Muhammad (pbuh) — a man!
From among the clear contradictions in the Bible:
This is Christian chicanery; deception I have seen in the Urdu Bible myself.
This is a common trickery by the missionaries, more specially in the vernacular. The very latest ruse I have stumbled across is in the Afrikaans Bible, on the very verse under discussion; they have changed the word "Trooster" (Comforter), to "Voorspraak" (Mediator), and interpolated the phrase — "die Heilige Gees" — meaning THE HOLY GHOST, which phrase no Bible Scholar has ever dared to interpolate into any of the multifarious English Versions.
No not even the Jehovah's Witnesses. This is how the Christians manufacture God's word!
From among the clear contradictions in the Bible:
The closest one can ever get to the original utterance of Jesus (pbuh) in the Christian Scriptures is the Greek word "Para-cletos" which also has to be rejected because the Master did not speak Greek! But let's not be difficult for the purpose of this discussion and accept the Greek word Paracletos and its English equivalent Comforter.
Ask any learned Christian man as to whom the Comforter is? You will unmistakingly hear - "The Comforter is the HOLY GHOST!" from John 14: 26.
This sentence is only part of verse twenty-six. We will deal with the verse fully in due course. But first we must educate the Christian mind with regards to this misnomer
— "Holy Ghost”. "Pneuma" is the Greek root word for SPIRIT.
There is no separate word for GHOST in the Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, and the Christians now boast 24,000 different manuscripts in their possession of which no two are identical!
The editors of the KJV (The King James Version) alternatively called AV (The Authorized Version) and the DOUAY (The Roman Catholic Version) of the Bibles gave preference to the word "GHOST' instead of the word SPIRIT when translating "pneuma"
The revisers of the RSV (Revised Standard Version) 1 the most up-to-date version of the Bible, are going back, as claimed, to the Most Ancient manuscripts.
These revisers, described as "thirty-two scholars of the highest eminence, backed by fifty co-operating denominations" who courageously re-placed the shady word "ghost" with the word "spirit" Hence from now on you will read in all modem translations
— "The Comforter, which is the Holy SPIRIT"! However, the Christian crusaders and the televangelists stubbornly cling to the spooky ("ghost"-ly) past they will not opt for the Newer Versions. It's better fishing with the old bait - the KJV and the RCV (Roman Catholic Version).
From among the clear contradictions in the Bible:
But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus. The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV).
This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter.
From among the clear contradictions in the Bible:
The word Begotten. In (John 3:16) which is then not present in the 1981 copy.
The Muslim takes strong exception to the Christian dogma that "Jesus is the only begotten son, begotten not made".
This is what the Christian is made to repeat from childhood in his catechism. I have asked learned Christians, again and again as to what they are really trying to emphasize, when they say: "Begotten not made".
Can't you see that in the language of the Jew, every righteous person, every Tom, Dick and Harry who followed the Will and Plan of God, was a "Son of God".
It was a metaphorical descriptive term commonly used among the Jews. The Christian agrees with this reasoning, but goes on to say: "but Jesus was not like that". Adam was made by God. Every living thing was made by God, He is the Lord, Cherisher and Sustainer of all.
Metaphorically speaking therefore God is the Father of all. But Jesus was the "begotten" Son of God, not a created Son of God?
Although this pernicious word "begotten" has now unceremoniously been thrown out of the "Most Accurate" version of the Bible, the Revised Standard Version (R.S.V)., its ghost still lingers on in the Christian mind, both black and white. Through its insidious brainwashing the white man is made to feel superior to his black Christian brother of the same Church and Denomination.
And in turn, the black man is given a permanent inferiority complex through this dogma.
The question that should be asked here is can the words of God be altered, with additions and omissions?
How can one consider this to be the work of God?
It is incomprehensible therefore to consider the Bible the word of God as has been shown.
The contradictions regarding the Crucifixion.
The Christian claim is that Jesus was crucified as a sacrifice and for the Sins of man; this is one of the fundamental beliefs in Christian doctrine.
However as will be demonstrated the Bible does not support this theory and actually provides contradictory evidence.
1) The lack of any witness to this event.
As all of the Disciples left Jesus.
Furthermore, one of the alleged witnesses, St. Mark, tells us that at the most critical juncture in the life of Jesus - "All his disciples forsook him and fled" - (Mark 14:50).
Please ask your Christian friend, "Does 'all' mean all in your language, you Englishman?" (This applies to the North American as well) And he will no doubt say - "Yes!” "Does 'almal' mean almal in your language, you Afrikaner?" And no doubt he so the so-called "eye-witnesses" were not really eyewitnesses to the happenings, unless St. Mark is not telling us the whole truth, the "gospel truth". Yet he is supposed to be speaking under oath! You will agree that a case based on such hearsay evidence would be thrown out of Court, TWICE in two minutes, in any Court-of-Law, in any civilized country; that is TWICE in just 120 seconds flat! But a ghost (dogma) of two thousand years standing, upon which hangs the salvation of 1200 million Christians, should not be summarily dismissed. It deserves a little more circumspection. We will therefore entertain the alleged testimonies of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as if they were duly attested.
2) The lack of any witness to this event.
In my country, we enjoy a four-day holiday around Easter, beginning with what is called GOOD FRIDAY.
What makes Good Friday good? They say that because Christ died for their sins on that day.
And in tune with that, every Christian country in the world - Britain, France, Germany, America, Lesotho, Swaziland, Zambia, Zimbabwe, they all commemorate Good Friday.
I have already proved to you that Jesus could not have been on the cross for more than three hours, if at all. For all their rush and hurry, they could not bundle Jesus into the tomb before sunset of Friday.
More than a thousand and one sects and denominations of Christianity, bickering on every aspect of faith, are nevertheless, almost all agreed that Jesus Christ was SUPPOSED to have been in the tomb on the night of Friday.
He was still SUPPOSED to be in the tomb on the day of Saturday. And he was still SUPPOSED to be in the tomb on the night of Saturday.1
But on Sunday morning, the first day of the week, when Mary Magdalene visited the tomb, she found the tomb empty. You will note that I have repeated the word SUPPOSED, SUPPOSED, SUPPOSED, three times. Do you know why? Surely not to rhyme with the other THREE, THREE, THREE of the prophecy.
The reason is that none of the 27 Books of the New Testament record the time of his exit from the tomb. Not a single writer of these 27 "tomes"2 was an eyewitness to his alleged "resurrection".
The only ones who could have told us, authoritatively, a word or two on the subject, have been utterly silenced.
You will no doubt observe from the above table that the grand total amounts to no more than ONE day and TWO nights and, juggle as you may, you will never, never get three days and three nights as Jesus had himself foretold, "according to the Scriptures".
Even Einstein, the Master mathematician, cannot help you for this! Can't you see the Christian is giving a double lie to Jesus from this one prophecy alone.
The Christians blame the devil for this error.
"The Devil!" I say, "If the Devil can succeed in confusing the Christians, and keep them confused for two thousand years in the most simple aspect of Faith, how much easier it would be for the Devil to mislead them in things concerning God?" Mr. Fahey blushed and walked away.
If this is the belief of the trendsetters of Christianity, we may well ask, "is this 'crucifixion' not the mightiest hoax in history?" Should we not, now, more appropriately, call it cruci-fiction?
3) The miracle of Jonah (or Jesus)?.
"For as Jonah was THREE days and THREE nights in the whale's belly; so shall the son of man be THREE days and THREE nights in the heart of the earth”. (Matthew 12:40)
"For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so shall the son of man be . . “. - (Matthew 12:40).
How was Jonah in the whale's belly for three days and three nights - Dead or Alive? The Muslims, the Christians and the Jews again give a unanimous verdict of A-L-I-V-E! How was Jesus in the tomb, for the same period of time - Dead or Alive?
Over a thousand million Christians, of every church or Denomination give a unanimous verdict of D-E-A-D! Is that like Jonah or un-like Jonah in your language? And everyone whose mind is not confused, says that, that is very
DEAD OR ALIVE?
The question arises that, when they threw Jonah overboard, was he dead or was he alive? To make it easy for you to get the right answer, let me help you by suggesting that Jonah had volunteered; when he said:
When a man volunteers, one does not have to strangle him before throwing him; one does not have to spear him before throwing him; one does not have to twist his arms or legs before throwing him. Everyone agrees that that is so.
Now once more the question: Was Jonah dead or alive when he was thrown into the raging sea? We get a unanimous reply - that he was ALIVE!
The storm subsides, perhaps it was a coincidence. A fish comes and swallows him. Was he dead or alive? And again everyone says ALIVE! From the fishes belly he prays to God for help. Do dead men pray? "No!" So he was . . . ALIVE! On the third day the fish vomits him onto the seashore - dead or alive? And the reply again is ALIVE! It is a miracle of miracles! The Jews say that he was ALIVE!
The Christians say that he was ALIVE! And the Muslims say that he was ALIVE! Little wonder that Jesus chose the "SIGN" (miracle) of Jonah as his only "SIGN" (miracle):1 Something on which the followers of three major religions are agreed. Let me recapitulate this Mighty Miracle from the Book of Jonah: ". . . Take me up, and cast me forth into the sea; so shall the sea be calm for you; for I know that for my sake this great tempest is upon you”. (Jonah 1:12)
1. The Christians allege that Jesus was UNLIKE Jonah. Jonah was ALIVE for three days and three nights, whereas Jesus was "DEAD" in the tomb!(?)
2. Jesus said that he would be in the tomb for THREE days and THREE nights, whereas the Christians say that he was in the tomb for only ONE day and TWO nights.
Who is lying, Jesus or the Christians? The contradiction is clear.
4) The contradiction of the body’s of the dead and the spirit of Jesus.
It is claimed in (Luke) the Bible that the bodies of the dead are not flesh and bone like the alive.
Yet we find the description of the body of Jesus after his supposed death described as flesh and bones. In fact they were terrified when they saw him.The reason for their terror was that they thought that the man they saw standing in their midst was not Jesus himself but his ghost.
Ask your "BORN-AGAIN" friends who want to share heaven with you, the reason for the disciples thinking that Jesus was a spirit.
Ask them, "Did he look like a spirit?" And though misguided as they may be, you will hear their answer - "No!" Then why did the disciples of Jesus think that Jesus was a spirit, when he did not look like one? There is no answer! They are speechless.
"But they were terrified and affrighted and supposed that they had seen a spirit”. (Luke 24:37)
5) The proofs that Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified.
The proof lies in the fact that he Jesus according to the following Biblical accounts prepared to fight, then prayed, one must ask if he is sacrificing himself for the sins of man why would he resist capture? Here are the passages.
Jesus will not be a sitting duck for a clandestine arrest by the Jews. He prepares his disciples for the impending showdown. Discreetly, so as not to frighten his disciples, he introduces the subject of defense.
Gently he begins:
"When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye anything?" And they said, "Nothing”.
Then said he unto them, "But now, he that hath no purse, let him take it, and likewise his bag; and he that hath no SWORD, let him sell his garment and buy one!" (Luke 22:35-36)
The situation and the circumstance have changed and as with any wise and able general, the strategy must also change. The disciples were already armed. They had some foresight. They had not left Galilee with bare knuckles.
They responded:
". . . Lord, behold, here are two SWORDS”. And he said unto them, "It is enough". (Luke 22:38)
The question that would bug any thinker is: "Why did they all go to Gethsemane? To pray?
Could they not have prayed in the upper-room? Could they not have gone to the Temple of Solomon, a stone's throw from where they were, if prayer is all that they wanted to do? No!
They went to the Garden so that they might be in a better position to defend themselves! Observe, Jesus does not take the eight with him to pray.
He positions them strategically at the entrance to the courtyard; armed to the hilt, as the circumstances would allow: Where is he taking Peter and John and James now? Further into the Garden! To pray? No! To make an inner line of defense - he had put eight at the Gate, and, now these zealous Zealots, armed with SWORDS, to "wait and watch" - TO KEEP GUARD! The picture is very vivid; Jesus leaves nothing to our imagination. A-n-d HE (alone) prayed!
". . . Sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder”. (Matthew 26:36 ) "And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee. . .
Then saith he unto them. . . tarry ye here and watch with me”. (Matthew 26:37-38 )
JESUS PRAYS FOR RESCUE
MESSIAH SOBS FOR HIS PEOPLE
Why all this bewailing and lamentation? Is he crying to save his skin? It would be highly cynical on his part to do that!
Did he not advise others:
". . . and began to be sorrowful and very depressed. Then saith he unto them, 'my soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even unto death' . . “.
"And he went a little further, and fell on his face (Exactly as the Muslim does in Salaat), and prayed, saying, 'O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt'“. (This is the quality of a good Muslim who submits his will to the will of God). (Matthew 26:37-39)
"And being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat was, as it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground”. (Luke 22:44)
"And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out . . . And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell”. (Matthew 5:29-30)
God almighty answered the pleas of His messenger. There is no doubt that he protected His prophet and his will was above and beyond the abilities of any of the Jews who tried to kill him.
-GOD "HEARD" HIS PRAYERS
Which means that God accepted his prayers to keep him ALIVE!
-ATE FOOD AGAIN AND AGAIN IN HIS POST "CRUCIFIXION" APPEARANCES.
Food only necessary if he was ALIVE! And is only required if you have flesh and bones not a spirit like the Christians claim happens when one dies. So he can’t have been crucified and wasn’t dead either.
-THE QUESTION OF JONAH’S MIRACLE (JESUS’S)
Now once more the question: Was Jonah dead or alive when he was thrown into the raging sea?
We get a unanimous reply - that he was ALIVE! The storm subsides, perhaps it was a coincidence. A fish comes and swallows him. Was he dead or alive? And again everyone says ALIVE! From the fishes belly he prays to God for help. Do dead men pray? "No!"
So he was . . . ALIVE! On the third day the fish vomits him onto the seashore - dead or alive? And the reply again is ALIVE! It is a miracle of miracles! The Jews say that he was ALIVE!
The Christians say that he was ALIVE! And the Muslims say that he was ALIVE! Little wonder that Jesus chose the "SIGN" (miracle) of Jonah as his only "SIGN" (miracle):1 Something on which the followers of three major religions are agreed.
- THE ASCENTION AS A PROOF HE WAS ALIVE
"Touch me not!" (John 20:17)
"Touch me not!", because it would hurt. Though he appears normal to all intents and purposes, he had, nevertheless, been through a violent, physical and emotional ordeal. It would be excruciatingly painful if he allowed her any enthusiastic contact.
Jesus continues:
She is not blind. She can see the man standing there before her. What does he mean by "not yet ascended" - GONE UP - when he was DOWN right there? He is, in fact, telling her that he is not RESURRECTED from the DEAD.
In the language of the Jew, in the idiom of the Jew, he is saying: "I AM NOT DEAD YET!" - He is saying: "I AM ALIVE!" "For I am not yet ASCENDED unto my Father”. (John 20:17)
"And they (the disciples), when they heard that he was ALIVE, and had been seen by her (Mary Magdalene), they BELIEVED NOT”. (Mark 16:11)
All of the above mentioned contradictions and the numerous others that we have not mentioned here point to the same conclusion that this Book that is Sacred to the Christians cannot be considered a work of God because of all the alterations, additions and omissions that have taken place over the years.
|
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 5:58 pm | |
| The Loss of Authenticity of the Bible.
As an answer to this misconception we may be allowed first to point out that the authenticity of the Old and the New Testament has never been proved through a constant chain of reliable reporters, a fact that we discussed earlier in this book in sufficient detail.
Therefore all these books, in our opinion, are dubious and uncertain and thus any quotation from these books is not acceptable unless it can be proved through undeniable sources that a particular statement really was made by Christ because it is always possible that the verse in question may be a later addition added by the ‘faithful’ at the end of the second century or in the third century in order to refute the Ebionites, Marcionites or the Manichaeans.
Or these additions might have been included later on because they supported some commonly held belief. So the chain is missing it is worthy of noting that even the types of Bible differs: The first version: is the Hebrew version and is the version that is used by the Jews and also by the Protestant church among the Christians.
The second version:
is the Greek version, which was the foremost version amongst the Christians until the 15th Century. The Christians used to consider the Hebraic version as abrogated, and until today it remains the official version of the Greek Church and the Church of the East.
The third version: is the Samaritan version, which is the version that the Samaritans use. The differences between these three versions are great and many of the books of the Old Testament were unaccepted by the Christians until the latter parts of the 3rd Century, this demonstrate how unreliable the Torah is as well as the scriptures of the Christians as their scriptures contains the torah of the Jews.
There seems to be no measurement for the acceptability or authenticity of any of these Gospels at all no matter how many councils sit and agree, if another council was to convene now could we discard everything that we have now in terms of doctrine?
Even if the Christians in their delusions believe it to be the word of God we cannot even consider it to be heavenly inspired.
If the earliest copy is in Greek a language that Jesus didn’t even speak how can we consider it the word of God? Add to this the fact that this copy wasn’t discovered except after 200 years after Jesus (pbuh).
What about the so-called New Testament?* Why does every Gospel begin with the introduction - ACCORDING TO ... ACCORDING TO ... Why "according to?" Because not a single one of the vaunted four thousand copies extant carries its author's autograph! Hence the supposition "according to!"
Even the internal evidence proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel, which bears his name. Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the "He's" and the "Him's" of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but some third person writing what he saw and heard - a hearsay account.
If we cannot even attribute this "book of dreams" (as the first Gospel is also described) to the disciple Matthew, how can we accept it as the Word of God? We are not alone in this discovery that Matthew did not write the "Gospel according to St. Matthew" and that it was written by some anonymous hand. J. B. Phillips concurs with us in our findings.
He is the paid servant of the Anglican Church, a prebendary of the Chichester Cathedral, England. He would have no reason to lie or betray to the detriment of the official view of his Church! Refer to his introduction to the "Gospel of St. Matthew" Phillips has this to say about its authorship.
"EARLY TRADITION ASCRIBED THIS GOSPEL TO THE APOSTLE MATTHEW, BUT SCHOLARS NOWADAYS ALMOST ALL REJECT THIS VIEW”.
In other words, St Matthew did not "And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (JESUS) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (JESUS) saith unto HIM(MATTHEW), follow ME (JESUS) And HE(MATTHEW) arose, and followed HIM (JESUS)”. (Matthew 9:9)
The question on everyone’s lips is where did they conjure up the ideas for the Gospels clearly nothing was written at the time of Jesus, it must have been later.
The amazing thing about the Christians' sworn affidavits (writings attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) is that not a single one of them is duly attested. Not a single one bears the signature, mark or thumbprint of its author in the so-called originals.
They now boast of being in possession of over 5000 "originals" of which no two "originals" are identical. Amazing! Little-wonder the Christians themselves label their Gospels as - "The Gospel according to St. Matthew", "The Gospel according to St. Mark", "The Gospel according to St. Luke" and "The Gospel according to St. John".
When Christian scholars are asked why the words "according to"1 are repeated at the beginning of every Gospel, the obvious implication is that they are not autographed. It is only assumed that they are authored by the names the Gospels carry today. The translators of the "New International Version" have unceremoniously expunged the "According top’s" from the four Gospels in their latest translation. Of the alleged Gospel writers, viz., Matthew, Mark, Luke and John it can be categorically stated that 50% were not even the elected Twelve Disciples of Jesus (pbuh).
Add to this that:
- The author of Samuel is unknown
Numerous other books are also unknown; the Christians try to explain this away by claiming that they don’t believe in revelation word by word?
They claim anything can be from God even if the author is unverifiable. So what they claim is paramount to believing that the words of God are not protected.
So there we have it if it isn’t the words of God it leaves only one possibility that it is the words of man, and man in his imperfect way is prone to forgetfulness, let alone the changes and distortions that have taken place after all these years.
Another question is:
Is any part of the Bible verifiable?
The answer is a categorical no.
The Gospels that were written are numerous, however the four agreed upon differ in terms of their content, so which one should be branded authentic?
Of the four Gospel writers, God "inspired" only two of them to record the genealogy of His "son”.
To make it easy for you to compare the "fathers and grandfathers" of Jesus Christ in both the "inspired" lists, I have culled the names only, minus the verbiage. Between David and Jesus, God "inspired" Matthew to record only 26 ancestors for His "son”. But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus.
The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV). This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter. You will also easily observe that the lists are grossly contradictory.
Could both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. God?
There are many books that claim to be from God, and it is upon the reader to search and verify these claims.
Looking at it from another angle one should understand that the book the Christians call the New Testament is not befitting to be attributed to god, the sheer filth that is sprawled across its pages deny that any noble man authored it let alone God, who is free from all imperfection.
Ahmed Deedat mentions a story where someone contacted the board of censors to have 9 paragraphs removed in the name of taste and decency, (Ezekiel 23)
The profanity and detailed descriptions of sordid acts are unbefitting for anyone to read let alone someone in search of guidance.
It leads the reader into a sexual state of arousal and couple that with the intoxication that is permitted in Christianity and you have the ingredients of all things filthy and indecent to take place, like what happens in during the holiday of other festivities.
Ahmed Deedat further challenged the Christian clergy saying to them that they should read these filthy passages to their congregation wives, girls or fiancé. If they are to find it difficult then they should consider how they are reading and spreading this filth all over the world.
The reader will be overcome by his own modesty when reading these passages and the question then is that human more shy and modest than Allah?
Allah Almighty is above and beyond these lowly words they seek to attribute to him.
So the book the Christians claim is Divine inspiration is nothing of the sort.
One also finds that:
That even though Jesus has no paternal family tree (as he was born without a father) the Christians have conflicting reports of his genealogy.
From Jesus’ genealogy are 6 people who are considered by the Christians adulterers or fornicators, who by the Old Testament standard should have been stoned.
To make it easy for you to compare the "fathers and grandfathers" of Jesus Christ in both the "inspired" lists, I have culled the names only, minus the verbiage. Between David and Jesus, God "inspired" Matthew to record only 26 ancestors for His "son”.
But Luke, also "inspired," gathered up 41 forefathers for Jesus. The only name common to these two lists between David and Jesus is JOSEPH and that, too, a "supposed" father according to Luke 3:23 (AV).
This one name is glaring. You need no fine-tooth comb to catch him. It is Joseph the carpenter. You will also easily observe that the lists are grossly contradictory. Could both the lists have emanated from the same source, i.e. God?
One may notice, that they make no mention of Mary’s ancestry. This is because they have no records for her, but they have for Joseph the carpenter.
Another Contradiction
The number of sons God is said to have is one according to the Christians.
"That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair... And when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them..”. (Genesis 6: 2,4)
"...Israel is my son, even my firstborn:" (Exodus 4:22)
"...for I (God) am a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn”. (Jeremiah 31:9)
"...the Lord hath said unto me (David): 'Thou art My son: this day have I begotten thee”. (Psalms 2:7)
"For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God”. (Romans 18:14)
Can't you see that in the language of the Jew, every righteous person, every Tom, Dick and Harry who followed the Will and Plan of God, was a "Son of God".
It was a metaphorical descriptive term commonly used among the Jews. The Christian agrees with this reasoning, but goes on to say: "but Jesus was not like that". Adam was made by God. Every living thing was made by God, He is the Lord, Cherisher and Sustainer of all.
Metaphorically speaking therefore God is the Father of all. But Jesus was the "begotten" Son of God, not a created Son of God? |
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 6:18 pm | |
| Another contradiction:
What about the Injeel? INJEEL means the "Gospel" or "good news" which Jesus Christ
preached during his short ministry.
The "Gospel" writers often mention that Jesus going about and preaching the Gospel (the Injeel):
1. "And Jesus went . . . preaching the gospel . . . and healing every disease among the people”. (Matthew 9:35)
2. "... but whosoever shall lose his fife for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it”. (Mark 8:35)
3. "... preached the gospel. . “. (Luke 20:1)
The "gospel" is a frequently used word, but what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus.
The Christians boast about the Gospels according to St. Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke and according to St. John, but there is not a single Gospel "according" to (St). Jesus himself!
We sincerely believe that everything Christ (May the peace and blessings of God be upon him) preached was from God. That was the Injeel, the good news and the guidance of God for the Children of Israel.
In his life-time Jesus never wrote a single word, nor did he instruct anyone to do so. What passes off as the "GOSPELS" today are the works of anonymous hands! The question before us is: "Do you accept that the Bible is God's Word?"
The question is really in the form of a challenge. The questioner is not simply seeking enlightenment. The question is posed in the spirit of a debate. We have every right to demand in a similar vein.
Similarly one finds additions in more recent copies of the Bible that we don’t find in earlier copies.
This indicates the dubious nature of the scripture and its lack of trustworthiness as a revelatory text.
One also finds that the text is one that has been altered in the new revised versions 11 paragraphs are missing from the beginning of John. This is unacceptable for any seeker of the truth, it indicates a lack of trustworthiness, and the fact that it was clearly being added to by the scholars of Christianity. The same process is repeated year after year.
An example of this:
"And Jesus himself began to be ABOUT ("about" the Holy Ghost did not know for sure) thirty years of age, being (AS WAS SUPPOSED) the son of Joseph . . “. LUKE 3:23.
The words "(as was supposed)" appearing in brackets are not in the original Greek manuscript of Luke! These words are a gloss of the translators.
In the different vernacular languages of the world, like Arabic,Afrikaans, Zulu, etc. the words "as was supposed" are retained in the translations but the brackets are removed.
Thus by removing the brackets the words become the declaration of Luke, and if Luke was inspired then the words are transmuted into an utterance of God. This is how easily the word of man is transformed into the word of God in Christianity.
It is reported by Luke, one of the authors of the Gospels (it is claimed that he was inspired by God to write it) that Jesus was the son of Joseph. This is why according to Christianity itself the four Gospels were not from the authorship of any of Jesus’ disciples. The Gospel that Christians claim is holy and sacred is nothing other then another book authored by humans.
One also notices words in the Bible that the Christians themselves do not know the meanings of.
Words like : Lobeem, Lahbeem, Botruseem, Maltoheem, Amaameem, Katholoheem.
The question is what language is this that is used that none knows the meaning of?
Does Allah reveal words in His scriptures that no one can understand?
If so why?
The answer is no.
One finds that in an attempt to explain some of them the Christians have translated names where is it known that names are not to be translated, so we find Boutros becomes Peter, one can see the clear distinction between the two.
It is these types of additions that have led to the unauthentic nature of the Bible and caused it to lose its trustworthiness as a scripture from God.
One notices other inconsistencies.
The Bible claims that it was Isaac (pbuh) not Ishmael (pbuh) who Abraham (pbuh) offered God after being ordered to sacrifice his son in a dream as a test for him to see if he would answer the command of his Lord.
The say their book says:
The meaning of which: (“ God tested Abraham saying to him take you only son the one that is beloved to you, Isaac and take him to the land of Maryaaand so Abraham took some fire and a knife, and as he looked on there he saw a ram.“) Genesis 2-22
Notice where it is mentioned your “ONLY” son in the above quotation.
In another passage we find that: (“the wife of Abraham Hajargave birth to Ishmael when Abraham was eighty six years old”). Genesis 15/17
In another passage we find again in Genesis 21/5 that: (“Abraham was a hundred years old when Isaac his son was born”)
So it is clear from the two passages that Ishmael was born 14 years before Isaac (pbuh).
So the term you “ONLY’ son must refer to Ishmael as Hajar gave birth to him before the birth of Isaac by fourteen years.
This is further emphasised by other passages that allude to the elder son being offered for sacrifice.
The story also mentions an area Maryaawhere the sacrifice was to take place and the location of a well therein and this is the area that was inhabited by Ishmael along with his mother.
It is manifestly clear that the name Isaac was inserted here wrongfully and demonstrates to us that this was only the result of the various additions deletions and alterations that the Bible has undergone over the centuries as Allah Almighty said in His final revelation:
Had it been from other then Allah, you would have surely found therein many contradictions. (Nisaa 82)
As Allah says in Chapter 2 The Cow verse 79:
Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say, "This is from Allah," to purchase with it a little price! Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for that they earn thereby.
So much so that the early Christians considered the Old Testament as being altered and so refused to recognize the authenticity of the Greek version.
From what has been shown from the few examples it can be deducted to show absolute proofs that what the Jews hold in their hands today cannot be considered to be what was revealed to them by God because of all the alterations, additions and deletion
"The Origin and Growth of the English Bible" —, you will note that all the Biblical "Versions" prior to the Revised Version of 1881 were dependent upon the ANCIENT COPIES — those dating only five or six hundred years after Jesus.
The Revisers of the RSV 1952 were the first Bible scholars who were able to tap the "MOST Ancient Copies" fully, dating three and four centuries after Christ. We agree that the closer to the source the more authentic is the document.
Naturally "MOST" Ancient deserves credence more than mere "ANCIENT”.
But not finding a word about Jesus being "taken up" or "carried up" into heaven in the MOST ANCIENT manuscripts, the Christian fathers expurgated those references from the RSV 1952. from the original scripture.
We find every revision of the Bible different to the one that preceded it, and the meanings differ depending on the place and date of publishing.
The question must be which of these versions should be the relied upon one?
And how does one come to that conclusion?
The answer that is irrefutable is none of these copies. This is because they all inspire doubt in the reader not certainty.
Let us say hypothetically we consider one authentic; if that version is revised and tampered with (as is common place with the Bible) does it have the same level of authenticity as before or not? The answer is of course it doesn’t. This leaves the reader permanently at a loss as to what he holds in his hands, in theory he could have the weakest in terms of authenticity, on the other hand perhaps the copies that come after his copy was published will have been ‘revised’
No doubt this is but a game that the authors of the Bibles play to baffle the poor unaware Christian.
One should note:
That translations don’t constitute versions, a translation is merely an account of the meaning no addition is made to the body of the original text, like the translations of the Holy Quran.
This enables peoples of all over the word to understand the Arabic text however no addition is made to the Arabic text.
However:
What is meant by versions is the fact that there are alterations I the form of deletions additions and omissions.
Here are but a few versions and their difference. Holding the "Douay" Roman Catholic Version of the Bible aloft in my hand, I ask, "Do YOU accept THIS Bible as the Word of God?"
For reasons best known to themselves, the Catholic Truth Society has published their Version of the Bible in a very short, stumpy form. This Version is a very odd proportion of the numerous Versions in the market today. The Christian questioner is taken aback.
"What Bible is that?" he asks. "Why, I thought you said that there was only ONE Bible!" I remind him. "Y-e-s," he murmurs hesitantly, "but what Version is that?" "Why, would that make any difference?" I enquire. Of course it does, and the professional preacher knows that it does. He is only bluffing with his "ONE Bible" claim.
The Roman Catholic Bible was published at Rheims in 1582, from Jerome's Latin Vulgate and reproduced at Douay in 1609. As such the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version that one can still buy today.
Despite its antiquity, the whole of the Protestant world, including the "cults" condemn the RCV because it contains seven extra "books" which they contemptuously refer to as the "apocrypha" i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY. Notwithstanding the dire warning contained in the Apocalypse, which is the last book in the RCV (renamed as "Revelation" by the Protestants), it is "revealed":
“ . . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book”.
(Revelation 22:18-19) But who cares! They do not really believe! The Protestants have bravely expunged seven whole books from their Book of God!
The outcasts are:
The Book of Judith
The Book of Tobias
The Book of Baruch
The Buck of Esther, etc.
Look at a practical example of how these versions disagree:
The bible reads: "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the FATHER, the WORD, and the HOLY GHOST: and these three are one”.
1st Epistle of John 5:7 - AV
This verse is the closest approximation to what the Christians call their Holy Trinity in the encyclopedia called the BIBLE. This keystone of the Christian faith has also been scrapped from the RSV without even a semblance of explanation. It has been a pious fraud all along and well deservedly has it been expunged in the RSV for the English-speaking people.
But for the 1499 remaining language groups of the world who read the Christian concoctions in their mother tongues, the fraud remains. These people will never know the truth until the Day of Judgment.
However, we Muslims must again congratulate the galaxy of D.D.’s who have been honest enough to eliminate another lie from the English (RSV) Bible, thus bringing their Holy Book yet another step closer to the teachings of Islam.
The questionis:
Who is in charge of overlooking these revisions and modifications? The answer is the scriptural scholars among the Christians or the Doctors of Divinity D,D’s.
Their claim is it was done under the guise of clarification but has only added to the confusion.
The undeniable truth is that none has the right to alter the words of God, from where did he get the right to do such a thing?
Examples of the tampering that has taken place over the years
Mrs. Ellen G. White, a "prophetess" of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, in her Bible Commentary Vol. 1, page 14, has this confession to make about the fallibility of the "Holy Bible”.
"THE BIBLE WE READ TODAY IS THE WORK OF MANY COPYISTS WHO HAVE IN MOST INSTANCES DONE THEIR WORK WITH MARVELLOUS ACCURACY.
BUT COPYISTS HAVE NOT BEEN INFALLIBLE, AND GOD MOST EVIDENTLY HAS NOT SEEN FIT TO PRESERVE THEM ALTOGETHER FROM ERROR IN TRANSCRIBING”.
In the following pages of her commentary, Mrs. White testifies further: "I SAW THAT GOD HAD ESPECIALLY GUARDED THE BIBLE" (from what?) "YET WHEN COPIES OF IT WERE FEW, LEARNED MEN HAD IN SOME INSTANCES CHANGED THE WORDS, THINKING THAT THEY WERE MAKING IT PLAIN, WHEN IN REALITY THEY WERE MYSTIFYING THAT WHICH WAS PLAIN, BY CAUSING IT TO LEAN TO THEIR ESTABLISHED VIEWS, WHICH WERE GOVERNED BY TRADITION”.
The mental malady is a cultivated one. This authoress and her followers can still trumpet from roof tops that "Truly, the Bible is the infallible Word of God”. "Yes, it is adulterated, but pure" "It is human, yet divine”. Do words have any meaning in their language? Yes, they have in their courts of law, but not in their theology. They carry a "poetic license" in their preaching.
|
| | | | أحمد محمد لبن Ahmad.M.Lbn
مؤسس ومدير المنتدى
عدد المساهمات : 49318
العمر : 72
| | موضوع: رد: The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. الأحد 23 مايو 2021, 6:39 pm | |
| THE WITNESSES
The most vociferous of all the Bible-thumpers are the Jehovah's Witnesses. On page 5 of their "FOREWORD" mentioned earlier, they confess: "IN COPYING THE INSPIRED ORIGINALS BY HAND THE ELEMENT OF HUMAN FRAILTY ENTERED IN, AND SO NONE OF THE THOUSANDS OF COPIES EXTANT TODAY IN THE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE ARE PERFECT DUPLICATES. THE RESULT IS THAT NO TWO COPIES ARE EXACTLY ALIKE" Now you see, why the whole "foreword" of 27 pages is eliminated from their Bibles.
Allah was making them to hang themselves with their own erudition.
Dr. Graham Scroggie in his aforementioned book, pleads, on page 29. for the Bible:- "AND LET US BE PERFECTLY FAIR AS WE PURSUE THE SUBJECT (Is the Bible the Word of God?).
BEARING IN MIND THAT WE ARE TO HEAR WHAT THE BIBLE HAS TO SAY ABOUT ITSELF. IN A COURT OF LAW WE ASSUME THAT A WITNESS WILL SPEAK THE TRUTH, AND MUST ACCEPT WHAT HE SAYS UNLESS WE HAVE GOOD GROUNDS FOR SUSPECTING HIM, OR CAN PROVE HIM A LIAR. SURELY THE BIBLE SHOULD BE GIVEN THE SAME OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD, AND SHOULD RECEIVE A LIKE PATIENT HEARING”.
The plea is fair and reasonable. We will do exactly as he asks and let the Bible speak for itself.
In the first five books of the Bible — Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy
— there are more than 700 statements, which prove not only that God is NOT the Author of these books, but that EVEN Moses himself had no hand in them.
Open these books at random and you will see:
• "And the Lord said unto him. Away, get thee down..“.
• "And Moses said unto the Lord, the people cannot come. . “.
• "And the Lord said unto Moses, Go on before the people . . “.
• "And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying . . “.
• "And the Lord said unto Moses, Get down, charge the . . “.
It is manifest and apparent that these are NEITHER the Words of God NOR of Moses. They indicate the voice of third person writing from hearsay.
Things are compounded by the fact that many of these books were reported by unknown authors: Let me conclude this "authorship" search with the verdict of those 32 scholars, backed by their 50 co-operating denominations.
God had been eliminated from this authorship race long ago. In the RSV by "Collins," invaluable notes on "The Books of the Bible" are to be found at the back of their production. I am reproducing only a bit of that information on below. We start with
"GENESIS" — the first book of the Bible. The scholars say about its "AUTHOR": "One of the 'five books of Moses'“. Note the words "five books of Moses" are written in inverted commas
— " " This is a subtle way of admitting that this is what people say — that it is the book of Moses, that Moses was its author, but we (the 32 scholars) who are better informed, do not subscribe to that tittle-tattle.
The next four books, "EXODUS, LEVITICUS, NUMBERS and DEUTERONOMY": AUTHOR? "Generally credited to Moses”.
This is the same category as the book of Genesis.
Who is the author of the book of "JUDGES?" Answer: "Possibly Samuel”.
Who is the author of the book of "JOSHUA?" Answer: "Major part credited to Joshua”.
Who is the author of "RUTH?" Answer: "Not definitely known" AND
Who is the author of:
1ST SAMUEL?............ Answer: Author "Unknown"
2ND SAMUEL........... Answer: Author "Unknown"
1ST KING?................. Answer: Author "Unknown"
2ND KING?............... Answer: Author "Unknown"
1st CHRONICLES? …. Answer: Author "Unknown, probably …"
2nd CHRONICLES? …. Answer: Author "Likely collected …"
The books of the Bible:
GENESIS AUTHOR One of the "five books of Moses”.
EXODUS AUTHOR Generally credited to Moses.
LEVITICUS AUTHOR Generally credited to Moses.
NUMBERS AUTHOR Generally credited to Moses.
DEUTERONOMY AUTHOR Generally credited to Moses.
JOSHUA AUTHOR. Major part credited to Joshua.
JUDGES AUTHOR. Possibly Samuel,
RUTH AUTHOR. Not definitely known, perhaps Samuel.
FIRST SAMUEL AUTHOR. Unknown.
SECOND SAMUEL AUTHOR. Unknown.
FIRST KINGS AUTHOR. Unknown.
SECOND KINGS AUTHOR. Unknown.
FIRST CHRONICLES AUTHOR.
Unknown, probably collected and edited by Ezra.
SECOND CHRONICLES AUTHOR. Likely collected and edited by Ezra.
EZRA AUTHOR. Probably written or edited by Ezra.
ESTHER AUTHOR. Unknown.
JOB AUTHOR. Unknown.
PSALMS AUTHOR. Principally David, though there are other writers.
ECCLESIASTES AUTHOR.
Doubtful, but commonly assigned to Solomon.
ISAIAH AUTHOR. Mainly credited to Isaiah. Parts may have been written by others.
JONAH AUTHOR. Unknown.
HABAKKUK AUTHOR. Nothing known of the place or time of his birth.
So the Bible that is claimed to be Sacred and the words of god is nothing but a text far removed from any authenticity, untrustworthy in its accounts, lacking in terms of any sound chain of narration, unknown who exactly authored large parts of it.
All of these factors tell us absolutely that the Bible has lost the reliability that is the cornerstone of any message.
A glimpse of that which remains unchanged from the Bible.
It should be noted firstly that despite all of the alterations in the Bible today, the fact that the oldest version is in a language that Jesus (pbuh) didn’t speak and the fact that the earliest reported version is some three to four hundred years after Jesus, we find therein glimpses of glad tidying being given with a promise of an up and coming messenger.
Despite the best efforts of the Christians to have these verses removed and distorted they have remained in the Bible until today.
Nor can the Christians deny this prophet who will emerge and take the reigns of guidance for human kind.
So likewise the Jews had been waiting for three prophecies to come true:
The first was the emergence of the Prophet Yahya, the second the sending of Jesus the son of Mary and finally the Prophet of end times.
However as was the custom of the Jews they killed Yahya and sought to kill Jesus and likewise rejected the message of Muhammad (pbut).
We find that the references to a successor could not have been referring to Jesus’ own Disciples:
DISCIPLES NOT FIT TO BE SUCCESSORS.
We now come to the four most comprehensive and decisive verses in John. Chapter sixteen to solve the enigma of the Successor to Christ.
For Jesus (pbuh) did truly say: I have yet Many Things to say unto you, but Ye Cannot Bear Them Now. (HOLY BIBLE) John 16: 12
We will later tie up the phrase "many things" from the above verse with "guide you into all truth" from the verse that follows, when discussing it.
For now. let us discuss the phrase — "YE CANNOT BEAR THEM NOW" The truth of this statement "ye cannot bear them now" is repeated monotonously throughout the pages of the New Testament:
And he (Jesus) saith unto them (the disciples).
Why are ye fearful, O Ye Of Little Faith? (HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 8. 26
AND (JESUS) said unto him (Peter) O Thou of Little Faith... (HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 14:31 ... he (Jesus) said unto them (the disciples), O Ye Of Little Faith, why reason among yourselves ... (HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 16: 8 And he (Jesus) said unto them (his disciples).
Where Is Your Faith? (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 8: 25
We must bear in mind that this is not the indictment of Jesus (pbuh) on the indecisiveness of the Jews, but on his very own elect. He stoops down to the level of little children to make things plain to his disciples but he is compelled to burst out in frustration
And Jesus said, Are Ye Even Yet Without Understanding? (HOLY BIBLE) Matthew 15:16 And when he was provoked to breaking point, he rails against his chosen ones — “... O Faithless And Perverse Generation, how long shall I be with you, how long shall I bear with you? (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 9: 41.
So his successor could not be from his Disciples as they are lacking faith, how can one be a prophet whilst lacking faith?
JESUS - REJECTED BY HIS NATION
That was the verdict of the close relations of Jesus (pbuh). What then was the response of his own nation, the Jews, after all his beautiful preaching and mighty miracle workings? His disciple puts it very mildly:
He came unto his own (the Jews) and his own received him (Jesus) not. (HOLY BIBLE) John 1:11
Actually "his own" mocked him. Scorned him and vehemently rejected him. To the extent of making an attempt to crucify him.' Despite two thousand years of Christian persecutions and pogroms, and now their overweening love and infatuation for them, so as to salve their own conscience, the Jews as a people and as a whole can never accept Jesus as their Savior, their Deliverer, their God, simply because of their one sound judgment —
"THAT NO JEW CAN EVER ACCEPT ANOTHER JEW AS A GOD!"
It is only in Islam that the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims can find accommodation — all believing in Jesus Christ (pbuh) for what he really was — one of the mightiest Messengers of God; and not as God or His son!
"SPIRIT" AND "PROPHET" SYNONYMOUS
Howbeit when he, the Spirit Of Truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth (Holy Bible) John 16:13
It has already been established that. Biblically, the word "Spirit" is used synonymously for "Prophet," by the same author in 1 John 4: 1 (as seen earlier).
Hence the "Spirit of Truth" would be the Prophet of Truth. A prophet in whom Truth is personified. He had walked through life so honorably and industriously that he had won for himself even from his pagan fellow countrymen the noble designation of as-Saadiq (the Truthful One) and al-Amin, "the Honest," "the Upright”. "The Trustworthy;" the Man of Faith who never broke his word.
His life, his personality, his teachings are the veritable proof of Muhammad (pbuh) being the embodiment of Truth (al-Amin) — the Spirit of Truth!
COMFORTER TO BE A MAN
If I take the liberty of quoting the prophecy under discussion, with an emphasis on the pronouns, you will agree without any persuasion that the coming Comforter was to be a man and not a ghost.
Howbeit when He, the Spirit of Truth, is come.. He will guide you into all truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak: and He will show you things to come. (HOLY BIBLE) John 16: 13
Please count the number of He's in the above verse. There are s-e-v-e-n! Seven masculine pronouns in a single verse!
There is not another verse in the 66 books of the Protestant Bible or in the 73 Books of the Catholic Bible with seven masculine pronouns, or seven feminine pronouns, or with seven neuter genders. You will agree that so many masculine pronouns in one verse ill befit a Ghost, holy or not!
But the Comforter, Which is The Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. (Emphasis added). (HOLY BIBLE) John 14: 26
You do not have to be a Bible scholar of any caliber to sense that the expression "which is the Holy Spirit" is actually an interpolation. It ought to be in parenthesis, in brackets, like my words which have been interpolated in the quotation, i.e. "(emphasis added)”.
Although the editors of the RSV have expunged dozens of interpolations from their boasted Revised Standard Version, they have retained this jarring phrase, which contradicts other explicit predictions of Jesus (pbuh) on the subject of the Comforter itself.
"HOLY SPIRIT" IS HOLY PROPHET
(i) It may be noted that no Biblical scholar of any standing has ever equated the "paracletos" of John in the original Greek with the Holy Ghost.
Now we can say with one breath that if the Comforter is the "Holy Spirit" then that Holy Spirit is the Holy Prophet!
As Muslims we acknowledge that every true prophet of God is Holy and without sin. But whenever the expression "The Holy Prophet" is used among Muslims it is universally accepted as referring to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
So even if we accept the above incongruous saying — "the Comforter which is the Holy Spirit," as Gospel truth, even then this prophecy will fit Muhammad (pbuh) like a glove, without any stretching of its meaning.
Here is another clear indication:
Nevertheless, I tell you the truth; it is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. (HOLY BIBLE) John 16:7
"AL-MOOUZZI" THE COMFORTER
I implore my brethren who can read the Arabic quotation to memorize it together with the English translation above and create opportunities for using it.
Learn the verses in conjunction with other languages that you know. There will be a definite all-round improvement in your fluency, and proficiency in preaching Islam to other people.
The word "Comforter" above is "al-Moouzzi" in Arabic. I asked the lady, "Who is the "al-Moouzzi" of this prophecy?"
She said, " do not know," She was honest She did not beat around the bush. So I said that we are told in the Holy Qur'an that Jesus Christ (pbuh) had told his disciples — I continued that, This Ahmed is another name for Muhammad, and Muhammad is Moouzzi!" "Very funny," she exclaimed, "these Egyptians" (meaning the Muslim Egyptians) "take us to the cinema, they take us" (meaning Christian women) "to the dance, but no one ever tells us anything about this Moouzzi!"
An integrated explanation of Comforter / Moouzzi of John 16: 7 and Ahmed/Muhammad of The Holy Qur’an 61: 6 will be slotted in place when explaining the Ayat (the verse)
BIBLICAL CONFIRMATION
Remember, that in the sixth century of the Christian Era, when Muhammad (pbuh) was chanting God's words which was systematically "put into his mouth,"' the Arabic Bible had not yet been translated. He could never have known that he was fulfilling and confirming the utterances of his predecessor Jesus (pbuh) to the letter.
So this prophet will come with a complete message to cure the ills of the society none more prominent then alcoholism amazing something encouraged in Christianity.
(a) Give strong drink (hard liquor) to him who is perishing (one who is dying) And wine to those who are bitter of heart. Let him drink and forget his poverty. And remember his misery no more.
(HOLY BIBLE) Proverbs 31:6-7
A very good philosophy to keep the subject nations under subjugation, you will agree.
HIS VERY FIRST MIRACLE
(b) Jesus (pbuh) was no "killjoy," the imbibers say, he turned water into wine in his very first recorded miracle in the Bible: Jesus saith unto them. Fill the water pots with water.
And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them. Draw out now... When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine ... And saith ... (why) thou hast kept the good wine until now. (HOLY BIBLE) John 2: 7-10
Since this alleged miracle, wine continues to flow like water in Christendom.
SOBER ADVICE
(c) Saint Paul the thirteenth self-appointed disciple of Christ, the real founder of Christianity, advises his new convert protégé — Timothy, born of a Greek father and a Jewish mother:
Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities. (HOLY BIBLE) 1 Timothy 5: 23
The Christians accept all the Bible quotations on stimulating and intoxicating drinks given above as the infallible word of God. They believe that the Holy Ghost inspired the authors to pen such dangerous advices.
Rev. Dummelow seems to have some qualms about this verse. He says. "IT TEACHES US THAT IF THE BODY NEEDS THE STIMULANT OF WINE. IT IS RIGHT TO TAKE IT IN MODERATION”.
For further reading on the same topic one can read the works of Zaghlool An-najjar which talk about the miracles scientific and otherwise in the Quran and prophetic traditions "Ahmed", or "Muhammad", the Praised one, is almost a translation of the Greek word Periclytos.
In the present Gospel of John 14:16, 15:26, and 16:7, the word "Comforter" in the English version for the Greek word "Paracletos", which means "Advocate", "one called to the help of another, a kind friend", rather than "Comforter".
Our doctors contend that Paracletos is a corrupt reading for Periclytos and that in the original saying of Jesus there was a prophecy of our holy Prophet Ahmed by name.
Even if we read Paraclete, it would imply to the Holy Prophet, who is "a Mercy for all creatures" (H.Q. 21:107) and "most kind and merciful to the Believers" (H.Q. 9:128) See also note 416 to H.Q. 3:81
The same John, who is supposed to have authored the Gospel bearing his name, also penned three more Epistles, which are also part of the Christian Bible.
Amazingly he has used the same terminology of "Holy Spirit" for "Holy Prophet”.Beloved, believe not every Spirit, but try the Spirits whether they are of God; because many false Prophets are gone out into the World. (HOLY BIBLE) 1 John 4: 1
You can observe that the word spirit is used here synonymously with a prophet. A true spirit is a true prophet, and a false spirit is a false prophet But for the so-called "born-again" Christians who see only with eyes of emotion, I recommend that they lay their hands on C.I. Scofield's Authorized King lames Version of the Bible who with an Editorial Committee of 9 D.D.’s adding their notes and comments.
When they come to the First word "spirit" in the above verse they should give a notation to compare it with Matthew 7: 15 which confirms that false prophets are false spirits.
So according to St. John the Holy Spirit is the Holy Prophet, and the Holy Prophet is Muhammad (pbuh) the Messenger of God.But St. John does not leave us in the air, guessing the true from the false.
He gives us an acid test for recognizing the true Prophet, he says — Hereby know ye the Spirit 1 of God: Every Spirit that confessed that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God.
(HOLY BIBLE) 1 John 4: 2
According to John's own interpretation in verse one above the word "spirit" is synonymous with the word prophet So verse two "Spirit of God" would mean Prophet of God and "Every spirit" would stand for every Prophet You have a right to know as to what the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) says about "Jesus Christ”. 2
MUHUMMED (PBUH) IS THE "PARACLETE"
To the sincere seekers of Truth it is obvious that Muhammad (pbuh) is the promised Paraclete or Comforter, alternatively called Helper, Advocate, Counselor, etc of the prophecies of Jesus (pbuh) in the Gospel of St. John. There are millions of Christians — men and women like our good lady at the Cairo Airport who are hungry for this simple straightforward Message. But alas, we can only weep with Jesus (pbuh) for our utter ineptitude — MUHUMMED (PBUH) IS THE "OTHER"
The Comforter in John 14: 26 can never be the "Holy Ghost" because Jesus (pbuh) had already explained— And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you Another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever. (HOLY BIBLE) John 14: 16
The emphasis here is on the word "ANOTHER," an other, a different one, an additional one, but of the same kind, yet distinctly different from the first. Who is then the first Comforter? The Christian world is unanimous that in this case the speaker himself — Jesus Christ (pbuh) is the first Comforter; then the other, the one to follow must be of like nature, subject to the same conditions of hunger, thirst, fatigue, sorrow and death.
But this promised Comforter was to "abide with you for EVER!" No one lives for even Jesus (pbuh) was mortal so must the coming Comforter also be mortal. No son of man can ever be immortal!
The soul does not really die, but when it separates from the body at the time of the death of the body, the soul will get a taste of death. But our Comforter was to "ABIDE" continue, endure forever.
All Comforters abide with us forever. Moses is here with us today in his teachings. Jesus is here with us today in his teachings and Muhammad also is here with us in his teachings today. (May the peace and blessings of God be upon them all). This is not my novel idea trying to justify the preposterous.
I say this with conviction and on the authority of Jesus Christ (pbuh) himself.
In Luke, chapter sixteen, Jesus (pbuh) tells us the story of the "Rich Man, Poor Man.' At death both find themselves at opposite ends — one in Heaven and the other in Hell.
The rich man (Dives) simmering in Hell cries to Father Abraham to send the beggar (Lazarus) to assuage his thirst.
But when every plea fails, he, as a last favor, requests that Father Abraham send the beggar back to earth to warn his living brothers against their impending doom if they heeded not the warnings of God.
But Abraham said, "If they (those still alive on earth) won't listen to Moses and the prophets, they won't listen even though someone rises from the dead. " (to warn them) (HOLY BIBLE) Luke 16: 31
Jesus (pbuh) uttered the above fact centuries after the demise of the prophets of Israel like Jeremiah, Hosea, Zechariah, etc and over thirteen hundred years after Moses (pbuh).
The Pharisees at the time of Jesus (pbuh) and we today can still listen to "MOSES AND THE PROPHETS," for they are still alive, and with us here today in their teachings.
Another clear reference is as follows:
Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: “‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord’s doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’?
"Therefore I tell you that the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people who will produce its fruit. He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed”. (Matthew 21:42)
Now compare that with what the Prophet Muhammad said about himself:
A. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said, "My likeness and the likeness of the prophets before me is like a man who built a house and completed it, except for one brick of it. So the people took to going around it and marveling at it, saying, 'If only you would place this brick!' I am that brick”. (Sahih al-Jami` al-Saghir)
What the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said agrees with what it says in the Gospel of Matthew: "Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes?"
B. The Arabs were disparate, warring tribes, without king, ruler, or chief, but after the arrival of this prophet, the Seal, Muhammad (pbuh), Allah (Mighty & Majestic) brought their hearts together and reunited them under the leadership of His prophet, Muhammad (pbuh) in whose message they believed and had faith.
Thus the Muslims became a great nation, extending north and south, east and west, by the Bounty and Victory of Allah (Mighty & Majestic).
This agrees with what is mentioned in the Gospel of Matthew, "The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof”.
C. Allah's Messenger (pbuh) said:
The likeness of the Muslims, the Jews, and the Christians is like that of a man who hired a people to do some work for him into the night, for a fixed sum, so he worked for half the day and said, "We have no need of your payment that you agreed to, and the work we have done is in vain”. So he said to him, "Do not do that. Finish your work and receive your payment in full”.
But they refused and left. So he hired others after them and said, "Finish the rest of this day of yours, and you will have what I agreed to pay them”.
So they worked until the afternoon and said, "To you the work we have done is in vain, so keep the payment we have worked for”.
So he said to them, "Finish the rest of your work, for there is very little left of the day”. So he hired others to work for him the rest of the day.
They worked the rest of the day until the setting of the sun, and they received the payment of both other groups. This is their likeness and what they accepted of this light. (Sahih al-Bukhari)
What Allah's Messenger (pbuh) said agrees with what it says in the Gospel of Matthew, "…and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof”.
After the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) came and his companions (may Allah be pleased with them) believed, they began to fight battles and wars to spread true monotheism and the invitation to worship Allah (Mighty & Majestic), exclusively, without associating anything with Him and without believing anything false about Him (Noble & Sublime) or attributing to Him any impairment or shortcoming concerning His Being (Noble & Sublime), and to establish the Islamic empire.
And Allah (Mighty & Majestic) granted victory to His prophet (pbuh) and delighted him with the Islamic empire, established upon the exclusive worship of Allah (Mighty & Majestic), on noble directives, and wise and prudent standards of interaction, on the basis of goodness and virtue. Then his noble companions (may Allah be pleased with them) assumed the mission of spreading the religion of Allah (Mighty & Majestic) around the world.
Only a few years had passed when countries, north and south, east and west, began to be liberated, and all who stood to stop the spread of the true religion, Islam, were broken and defeated. Both the Persian Empire and the Byzantine Empire fell into the hands of the victorious Muslims, and neither empire remained standing.
This was to fulfill what was foretold in the Gospel of Matthew, "And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken”.
Beside what we have mentioned are many other prophecies about the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in the Gospels, but we shall suffice ourselves with what we have already said on the topic.
This another confirmation of:
He who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed”. (Matthew 21:42)
loser look at (Mathew 7:15-20)
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits.
Are grapes gathered from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles?So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruita healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.
Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
We find that the ‘prophet Muhammad brought a message one that was accepted by the masses had it been other than divine it surely would not have lasted the test of time.
All those Muslims who lived under one banner from the farthest east point to the farthest west point under one slogan of the oneness of Allah. He was the final prophet as such, there is no need to send another prophet or messenger after the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), when his (pbuh) nation is competent of conveying the message to all different types of people, in every part of the world, and this confirms what we mentioned in the previous point: that there really has been no prophet or messenger after the coming of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and his message and that the claims of prophecy that some of the blasphemous liars have announced are false and have come to nothing but disappointment and failure, and swift, crushing defeat for such false claims and their proponents.
An example of that is:
Musaylama the Liar, who claimed to be a prophet after the coming of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the success of his mission.
The fate of that liar, Musaylama, was humiliation and shame in this world before the Next, for his name was paired with the quality of lying such that we do not mention his name, Musaylama, without pairing it with that characteristic, lying.
This is proof and testimony of the prophet hood of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and the truth of his message and call, for he (pbuh) informed us that there would be no prophet after him, and what he told us has come true. Thus, this is one of his (pbuh) miracles, since he told us of something unseen, through revelation from Allah (Glorious & Exalted).
Contrary to the deceptive call of Musaylama, the Liar, we find the truthful call of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) to be: We find that it appeared, was granted victory by Allah (Mighty & Majestic), and in fact, we almost never mention the name of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) without it being accompanied by blessings and peace upon him—those who mention his name (pbuh) and those who hear it—saying, "May the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him”.
As we mentioned, no lying phony claiming to be a prophet could fulfill the task of a prophet sent from God the Creator (Noble & Sublime).
He would quickly fold under the obstacles and temptations he would be up against. He would fail to meet up to the tests and challenges facing him.
His false, lying proponents would not be able to bear good fruit due to their blasphemy against Allah Almighty in claiming prophet hood and special, elect status, for it would be a false prophet hood, which therefore would not have the support of Allah (Mighty & Majestic).
That is why no one would be able to fulfill the task of prophet hood, except a prophet sent from God the Creator (Noble & Sublime), who is truthful in is call and message, and who has the support of Allah (Blessed & Exalted).
As in the aforementioned, we have shown the possibility of applying the definitive test, and the result is: that Muhammad (pbuh) is the Seal of the Prophets and Messengers and his message was addressed to all people.
And as for the proof and testimony we have mentioned, we can clarify and confirm that Muhammad (pbuh) is the Seal of the Prophets and Messengers, who was sent to all people, and there will be no other prophet (pbuh) or messenger after him.
And the fruits of his works are clear for all to see again confirming the prophecy in Mathew.
The prophet hood of Jesus and not his divinity.
As has already been alluded to, one cannot trust the account in the Bible because of all the additions and deletions therein. This is compounded by the lack of any reliable chain of narrators confirming its authenticity.
However from amongst what remains in the Bible today are clear indications that the Jesus was indeed a prophet and it rejects all notions of him being divine.
Allah is able to verify the truth even if the disbelievers hate it.
The Gospel of John 17:3 contains the following statement. Jesus said,
making supplication to God:
And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.
The above statement has no other meaning except that the secret of eternal life is that man should believe in Allah as being the only true God and in Jesus as his Messenger. This statement does not say that eternal life lies in believing in Jesus as God.
Add to this what (Luke 6:12) has to say, that Jesus used to pray and worship.
The references are numerous all indicating that Jesus was indeed a man and selected to fulfill the messenger ship that Allah endowed him with.
It is apparent then that Jesus original message was one of the oneness of God and the encouragement to worship this one God in order to attain His pleasure.
All of the actions of Jesus indicate this submission and subservience and none of his actions indicate that he was God.
In fact one doesn’t find a single reference where he is telling people he is God or to worship him.
He refers to himself as the Son of Man in the following references:
(Mathew (30:9) (11:9) (12:32-40) (20:28) (30:24) (25:31) (26:24)
(Mark (2:28) (4:41)(Luke (9:56) (17:24) (8:8) (John (3:13) (5:27) (13:31) (6:27)
There is even explicit mention of Jesus as a prophet. (Luke 7:11-17) when Jesus performed miracles the people would say “a great prophet of God has arisen among us”.
All the evidence points to the irrefutable argument that Jesus was but a man.
|
| | | | | | The Christian doctrine of the Lordship of God and how this belief manifests itself and how Jesus (pbuh) became Divine to them. | |
|
مواضيع مماثلة | |
|
| | صلاحيات هذا المنتدى: | لاتستطيع الرد على المواضيع في هذا المنتدى
| |
| |
| |
