thorpido:
Some muslims and their display of ignorance!
When is a will read out?Is it when the owner of the will dies or when he is still alive?
An understanding of what i just asked gives the needed answer.

Even the quran was not compiled while Muhammed was alive.

intergral:
you be OLODO the Qur'an was fully received by Mohammad (pBUH) and it is not conclusion or stories from his companions it is directly from Allah.... And it has been thesame with out any alteration...... Where ever you go, from the beginning of islam till date and till eternity!

thorpido:
You were there when Muhammed received the quran from Allah?If your answer is not yes then you must be the biggest OLODO!
Are there not occultic books that have remained the same for ages?Is the quran the only book that has remained the same.
You guys don't use common sense before quoting someone.

intergral:
Off track.... This is how you fail exams...

thorpido:
You people don't reason.You just shout.Why are you avoiding my question?

intergral:
still off track... Please try harder

thorpido:
You were there when Muhammed received the quran from Allah?If your answer is not yes then you must be the biggest OLODO!
Are there not occultic books that have remained the same for ages?Is the quran the only book that has remained the same.
You guys don't use common sense before quoting someone.

fbtowner:




i have read few of your post and bliv me its still bunch of riddle

i use to think exactly same way u think

but here is d big question evil spirit do exist not sure u bliv this or let me evil occurrence do occur and ppl need a counter pillar to run to for help as they are ignorants


so if they don't have answer to all this ur question and their faith in christ happen to save them or let me say faith in their bible is always co incidence wit their favour


so using common sense are they daft


to me GOD create man to survive he doesn't care how

Does God tempt?

Rilwayne001:


Infact that is the major reason for this thread, since you believe the gospel of jesus is the bible according to mark mattew PAUL and co. Did jesus read all these gospel attributed to him?

Angelou:
these gospels are testaments and eye-witness accounts of the life and works of christ and were written after his death ..... So your question about him reading them is quite baseless..... Or have u heard of any1 reading his biography before he dies?

Rilwayne001:


Okay good.

Are they all eye-witness to what they wrote? Are those who allegedly wrote the true writer?
So, how do we determine whether what they wrote is true or not?

Angelou:
you determine the authenticity of a document if other unrelated sources testify to such documents' existence

The quran testifies the existence of jesus, and other historical documents such as the ethiopian manusripts gieve accounts of jesus which are compatible to those of d gospel

Rilwayne001:


This is not the anwer to my question man. You said " eye-witness accounts of the life and works of christ and were written after his death....." So, I asked " Are they all eye-witness to what the account they wrote? Are those who allegedly wrote these accounts the true writer? how do we determine whether what they wrote is true or not?



I am not dounbting the existence of Jesus man. The account written about him is my concern.

BTW, do you believe the Quran?

Angelou:
how can you prove that the accounts of his life recorded in the bible isnt true....

As 4 ur second question. I'm a christian and the sole foundation of my belief in d bible and none other

...... Any interest i myt pick on other religion's book is mainly to educate myself about such religion and not believing in it

Rilwayne001:


Were they written by the persons to whom they are ascribed? for it is upon this ground only that the strange things related therein have been credited. Upon this point there is no direct proof for or against, and all that this state of a case proves is doubtfulness

thorpido:
You know the problem I have with islamic knowledge.Islam denies that the gospel of Jesus in the bible was corrupted but the same islam cannot provide the original/authentic gospel of Jesus.
I think that's a big failure on it's part.

malvisguy212:
The Septuagint was the first translation
of the Hebrew Bible; and was made in
the third century B.C. by Jewish scribes,
who were direct descendents of those
trained in Ezra's Great Synagogue of
Jerusalem. They were complete experts
in the text, being very well versed in
Hebrew and Greek.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/tips/what-bible-did-jesus-use-11638841.html
Matthew 21:42
Jesus said to them, "Have you never
read in the Scriptures: "'The stone the
builders rejected has become the
cornerstone; the Lord has done this, and
it is marvelous in our eyes'?

Here,Jesus was quoting the psalm
Psalm 118:22
The stone the builders rejected has
become the cornerstone;

the same psalm which was used on the day of triumph when Christ was saluted with cries of "Hosanna!"

"These are My words which I spoke
to you while I was still with you, that
all things which are written about
Me in the Law of Moses and the
Prophets and the Psalms must be
fulfilled ." (Luke 24:44)

All the prophecy were fullfiled in the gospel.

Jesus referred to Psalm 82:6 as "Law": "Jesus answered them, "Has it not been
written in your Law, 'I said, you are
gods'?" John 10:34.


Why this major prophet were not in the quran? Isaiah,jerimaih ezekiel elijah hosea,this are the prophet that confirmed the coming of the messiah.

malvisguy212:
The Septuagint was the first translation
of the Hebrew Bible; and was made in
the third century B.C. by Jewish scribes,
who were direct descendents of those
trained in Ezra's Great Synagogue of
Jerusalem. They were complete experts
in the text, being very well versed in
Hebrew and Greek.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/bible-study/tips/what-bible-did-jesus-use-11638841.html
Matthew 21:42
Jesus said to them, "Have you never
read in the Scriptures: "'The stone the
builders rejected has become the
cornerstone; the Lord has done this, and
it is marvelous in our eyes'?

Here,Jesus was quoting the psalm
Psalm 118:22
The stone the builders rejected has
become the cornerstone;

the same psalm which was used on the day of triumph when Christ was saluted with cries of "Hosanna!"

"These are My words which I spoke
to you while I was still with you, that
all things which are written about
Me in the Law of Moses and the
Prophets and the Psalms must be
fulfilled ." (Luke 24:44)

All the prophecy were fullfiled in the gospel.

Jesus referred to Psalm 82:6 as "Law": "Jesus answered them, "Has it not been
written in your Law, 'I said, you are
gods'?" John 10:34.


Why this major prophet were not in the quran? Isaiah,jerimaih ezekiel elijah hosea,this are the prophet that confirmed the coming of the messiah.

hayor93:
whreas xstianity has brainwashed u wif d fake gospel of Jesus

Angelou:
and what historical evidence do you have which proves that those gospels of christ's apostles were not originally written by them but merely ascribed to them by anonymous writers.. If you doubt the autthencity of the gospel just because it seem to contradict ur belief, then how come you believe the qur'an....(a book which you never witnessed when it was written and are not even sure whether it is a genuine revelation that it claims to be)

So, Who Wrote Mark and What Were His Sources?

Not even the Bible claims that Mark was an eye witness to Jesus’ ministry. Modern, non Christian biblical scholars believe that the gospel of Mark was written in Syria by an unknown Christian no earlier than AD 70, using various sources including a passion narrative (probably written), collections of miracles stories (oral or written), apocalyptic traditions (probably written), and disputations and didactic sayings (some possibly written). These stories were in circulation year after year, told in different languages and in different countries from that of Jesus.

That’s it. The source for the gospel of Mark is other peoples’ stories and writings. In other words, all of Mark’s sources were at best, second hand, more likely fifth or sixth hand. What happens to stories that circulate orally for years? Obviously, they come to be changed in the retelling. Thus, the source for much of the synoptic gospels is no more than hearsay.

Apologists dismiss the charge of “hearsay” by pointing to the strength of the “oral tradition”. The simple childhood game of “Telephone” is sufficient to illustrate the point that stories told mouth to mouth for 35 years or more can’t possibly retain their original content.

The Gospel of Mark is the first of the Gospels to proffer quotes allegedly from Jesus. We question how authentic these quotes could possibly be, given the convoluted path from Jesus’ lips to “Marks” wax tablets and the years that passed since the words were allegedly spoken. We have written a treatise on the impossibilities of Jesus’ actual words being accurately recorded 40+ years after they were spoken.

Who Wrote Matthew and What Were The Sources?

By the end of the 2nd century the tradition of Matthew the tax-collector had become widely accepted, and the line “The Gospel According to Matthew” began to be added to manuscripts. For many reasons scholars today believe otherwise—fifty five percent of the gospel is copied from Mark, and it seems unlikely that an eyewitness of Jesus’ ministry would need to rely on others for information about it. They believe instead that it was written between about 80–90 AD by a highly educated Jew, intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, standing on the boundary between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values.

A widespread theory holds that the author drew on three primary sources, each representing a distinct community: a hypothetical collection, or several collections, of sayings (called “Q“, and shared with Luke); the Gospel of Mark; and material unique to Matthew (called “M”, some of which may have originated with Matthew himself).

He wrote for a Jewish audience: like “Q” and “M”, he stresses the continuing relevance of the Jewish law; unlike Mark he never bothers to explain Jewish customs; and unlike Luke, who traces Jesus’s ancestry back to Adam, father of the human race, he traces it only to Abraham, father of the Jews. The fact that his linage differs significantly from that of Luke is a real problem for those who claim that the Holy Spirit’s hand guided the writers of the gospels.

The content of “M” suggests that the community for which this gospel was written, was stricter than the others in its attitude to keeping the Jewish law, holding that they must exceed the scribes and the Pharisees in “righteousness” (adherence to Jewish law); and of the three only “M” refers to a “church” (ecclesia), an organised group with rules for keeping order. Biblical scholars generally hold that Matthew was composed between the years c. 70 and 100.


Who Wrote Luke and What Were the Sources?

Most modern critical scholarship concludes that Luke used the Gospel of Mark for his chronology and a hypothetical sayings source Q document for many of Jesus’ teachings. Luke may also have drawn from independent written records. Traditional Christian scholarship has dated the composition of the gospel to the early 60s, while higher criticism dates it to the later decades of the 1st century. While the traditional view that Paul’s companion Luke authored the gospel is still often put forward, a number of possible contradictions between Acts and Paul’s letters lead many scholars to dispute this account.


Who Wrote John and What Were the Sources?

John differs significantly from the synoptic gospels in theme, content, time duration, order of events, and style. Only ca. 8% of it is parallel to these other gospels, and even then, no such word-for-word parallelism occurs as we find among the synoptic gospels. The Gospel of John reflects a Christian tradition that is different from that of the other gospels. It was rejected as heretical by many individuals and groups within the early Christian movement. It was used extensively by the Gnostic Christians. But it was ultimately accepted into the official canon, over many objections. It is now the favorite gospel of many conservative Christians, and the gospel least referred to by many liberal Christians.

They have a totally different agenda in mind for their audience than did the authors of the synoptic gospels. The authors of the synoptic gospels were writing to their fellow Jews and trying to convince them that they could accept Jesus as the Messiah and still remain Jewish. Matthew even indicates that the men should still be circumcised .

John’s teachings , as summed up in John 3:16 are just the opposite of those of the writers of Mark, Matthew and Luke. Whereas John welcomes anyone into the fold, Mark, Matthew and Luke write for and to Jews only. They see Jesus as the Jewish Messiah who has come to return Israel to its former glory.

The gospel identifies its author as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” The text does not actually name this disciple, but by the beginning of the 2nd century a tradition began to form which identified him with John the Apostle, one of the Twelve (Jesus’s innermost circle). Today the majority of scholars do not believe that John or any other eyewitness wrote it and trace it instead to a “Johannine community” which traced its traditions to John; the gospel itself shows signs of having been composed in three “layers”, reaching its final form about 90-100 AD.


Bottom Line

The canonical gospels upon which the Christian faith is built, the ones which present the words of Jesus are writings by unknown authors writing to buttress the particular points they wished to make. The quotations allegedly from Jesus were most likely, made up by the authors to support their positions.

The titles in our English Bibles are later additions; they are not original to the Gospels themselves.
The Gospel narratives are always written in the third person.
The tradition that they were written by two disciples (Matthew and John) and by two companions of the apostles (Mark and Luke) is first attested in the 2nd century!
What we can say for certain about the authors is that they were all highly educated, literate, Greek-speaking Christians of (at least) the second generation, contrast this with the apostles of Jesus, who were uneducated, lower class, illiterate, Aramaic-speaking peasants.
Even IF the gospels had been written by the “eye-witness” apostles, Matthew and John, it is unlikely that they reported everything accurately. Remember that their “testimony” comes thirty years (Matthew) and sixty years (John) after the fact. This would-be “eyewitness” testimony is, at a minimum, 30 years after the events it purports to describe and the authors were in or nearing their dotage. In any event, recent research has found that eyewitness testimony is not reliable. Read an excerpt from an article entitled “34 Years Later, Supreme Court Will Revisit Eyewitness IDs” By Adam Liptak Published: August 22, 2011, NY Times.

Empiree:
Oh woow, this thread surfaced again. Thread i love so much

AllNaijaBlogger:




You can criticize christianity but can't take criticism of your religion

Empiree:
My friend, whatz up. Longtime. I dont think my recent post you quoted up there is in any way suggests your opinion.

You always go south anytime i go East. smh

AllNaijaBlogger:



Why did u say that you like this thread?

Scholar8200:
Did Jesus read the OT books? YES HE referred to them and quoted therefrom many times!

The Gospels were His memoirs and (for want of another word) biography written after His death, resurrection and Ascension! The Epistles were Inspired letters written to instruct the Churches and/or Ministers.

Since all the writings took place after His ascension , how would He read them? But do the Gospels and Epistles agree to the OT that Christ read and refer to( even after Resurrection)? YES!!!

It's quite similar to attempting to refute the biography of a great man written after his death on the grounds that he did not read it!!!

Empiree:
If thats isthe case, it means he approves of it. He never changed anything there like Laws that Christians have abandoned today

Honestly, this is clear enough to suggest corruption. If it was written after him, how the heck it's Divine Books?.

In islam, Quran is Supreme authority. No other books stands in judgement over it not even hadith. Hadith is a collection of sayings and deeds of the prophet collected and written after Muhammad(saw). And every muslim understands that it is not 100% valid. Authenticity of each hadith has to be verified with Quran. That is, it has to be in harmony with Quran. If not, it has to be thrown out or put at the bottom list for further review. That is why we have grades: Sound ahadith, weak ahdith and fabricated ahadith. So how can you say Bible is not corrupted knowingly well it was written after Jesus(peace be upon him)?.

[quote]
Can you reason?. Did Jesus verify what is written after him?. No.

As for inspiration you mentioned, no disciples can take the place f Jesus. Just like no sahaba(companions of the prophet) can take the place of muhammad(p). They are prophet sent with message. Therefore, they are solely responsible for guiding the people no disciples or companions.

Quran was verified and written down in the lifetime of Muhammad(peace be upon him). If Bible is contrary, there is no way you can be sure it is not changed or corrupted. This is what gave birth to different versions of the Bible. But we only have one Quran in Arabic. Got it?

Yes?. How then they changed the Laws?. For instance, pork is forbidden, there is serious punishment for adultery and so on. But all these are neglected by NT and Christians.

And you telling me it has not changed?. If Jesus as you rightly said referred to OT, and nothing suggest he changed the Law rather he fulfilled it, then why did NT is absent or almost absent or devoid of Law and punishments?. Can you see clearly what Muslims are saying ow?

bs

Scholar8200:

And HE also affirmed that there is going to be a New Covenant just as Ezekiel 36,Jeremiah31 prophesied. Now since two Covenants cannot run concurrently, the Old had to give place for the New and that is Why He clearly said He came to FULFIL the Old. Hence the Old has come to Pass (like prophesies do), based on the fact that He fulfilled it!!! By the way He did not say, " I Have come to OBEY the Law, why did He use the Word FULFIL?

Did Moses ever tell the Israelites to Fulfil the Law? THe word then was obey, observe, do etc Why did Moses not tell them FULFIL?
But since the WOrd of God can NEVER be set aside Christ came to FULFIL the Law thus making way for the dispensation of the NT which He also corroborated!

Interesting! Now the writers of the true Gospels etc were inspired by the Spirit of God. (before you throw stones, muslims also claim that the Quran came through an angel to a man and up till that time I doubt if the concept of angels meeting men like was done to Muhammed, was popular among the Arabs, unlike the Spirit Whose Influence fills the OT!)