Take your words back and redirect them at your father their proper target.
Tell him you are distraught Ari will not speak with you!

Looking for a relationship by force??


Not with me

I am not interested in you
so keep muttering and making faces


Find someone else to play with

^^^^
No, I directed them to you, your mother, your father and your generations----both born and unborn.

Your mistake is you think everyone on the internet, by virtue of the anonymous nature of the internet, is an unimportant entity---thus--- because you're used to bullying members of your useless family, you attempt to bring your imagined importance to the Net; you must be insane!

Relationship with who? In real life you would quake. You need to take that village-chief mentality away from here because even though you might be the most important man in your little hamlet, you are definitely  a nobody on here.

Bring your nose to level, stop with the false air of importance and--- if you're really 60yrs old ---- enjoy your retirement in peace instead of being decimated on the internet into pieces by your mental superiors.

Take your words back and redirect them at your father their proper target.
Tell him you are distraught Ari will not speak with you!

Looking for a relationship by force??


Not with me

I am not interested in you
so keep muttering and making faces


Find someone else to play with

^^^

Like I said, ho*mo, I directed them to your and your family!

Beaf!
Re: Secret £14million Bible In Which 'jesus Predicts Coming Of Prophet Muhammad
« #20 on: February 27, 2012, 02:46 PM »
When you are destined to go astray, you will never see the light!

The poster wasted his time to post this here. These children of lucifer will never be redeemed.

Hahahahahahahahahah, Christians in NL are tough, they grab the tricks no matter how The Devil try to twist it.
No room for terrorism. Jesus Christ of love and Peace predicted a Terrorist?? So kiding and childish this thread.

(galathians 1:8 ) But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
 Can't Muslims get this in thier head? Muhammed contradicts Jesus, so this verse is clear enough. @Opost Wast of efforts indeed.

(AINA) -- Much has been made of the recent discovery in Turkey of a Bible purported to be written in the Aramaic language, 1,500 years ago. The Muslim media, as well as Western media outlets, quickly pounced on this, claiming this Bible contains verses attributed to Jesus Christ, in which Christ predicts the coming of Muhammad. No media outlet has published a facsimile of these verses.

This "Bible" is written on leather in gold letters. The picture of the front cover show inscriptions in Aramaic and a picture of a cross.


For any native speaker of Modern Assyrian (also known as neo-Aramaic), and that would be your average Assyrian today, the inscription is easily read. The bottom inscription, which is the most clearly visible from the published photos, says the following:

Transliteration: b-shimmit maran paish kteewa aha ktawa al idateh d-rabbaneh d-dera illaya b-ninweh b'sheeta d-alpa w-khamshamma d-maran

Translation: In the name of our Lord, this book is written on the hands of the monks of the high monastery in Nineveh, in the 1,500th year of our Lord.

Nineveh is the ancient Assyrian capital and is located in present-day north Iraq, near Mosul.

There are spelling errors that are immediately noticeable.

The first word, b'shimmit maran ("in the name of our Lord", is erroneously spelled with a 't' instead of a 'd'. The 'd' in Assyrian is the genitive, and it prefixes the word that follows. It should read b-shimma d-maran, not b-shimmit maran (note, the last word of the sentence is correctly spelled d-maran ("of our Lord").

The first word also contains another spelling error. The correct spelling for "name" in Assyrian is ashma, with the initial 'a' being silent. Therefore, when correctly spelled, 'in the name of our Lord" should be written as b-ashma d-maran.

The word idateh is misspelled, it should end with an 'a', idata. Also the phrase al idateh ("on the hands" is incorrect, it should read b-idata ("by the hands".

The bottom sentence uses the word ktawa ("book" to refer to the book, but in Assyrian the Bible is never referred to as a "book." One says awreta (Old Testament), khdatta (New Testament), or ktawa qaddeesha (holy book). Given this, since no one has seen the inside of this "Bible," we cannot be sure if it is in fact a Bible.

Most significantly, this writing is in Modern Assyrian, which was standardized in the 1840s. The first bible in Modern Assyrian was produced in 1848. If this book were written in 1500 A.D. it should have been written in Classical Assyrian.

It is highly unlikely for monks to make such elementary mistakes. It remains to be seen whether this book is a forgery, or even what kind of book it is.

The bottom inscription also says the book was written in 1500 A.D,  If the book does contain verses predicting the coming of Muhammad, it is no great accomplishment to predict something 870 years after the fact, since Muhammad founded Islam in 630 A.D,

Most media outlets, as well as Muslim and Christian outlets, lead the story with headlines pronouncing "1500 year old Bible predicts the coming of Muhammad" -- without any evidence to support this.

For Muslims, the implications of the headlines are desirable, that Jesus Christ is a Prophet, just like Muhammad, and not the Son of God. According to Al Bawaba, the Turkish culture and tourism minister, Ertugrul Gunay, said "In line with Islamic belief, the Gospel [this Bible] treats Jesus as a human being and not a God. It rejects the ideas of the Holy Trinity and the Crucifixion and reveals that Jesus predicted the coming of the Prophet Mohammed."

Commenting on the errors in the book, Al Bawaba says in another article:

For example, the book says that there are nine heavens and that the tenth is paradise while in Quran they are seven only and claims that Virgin Mary gave birth to Jesus without any pain while the Quran story says she got labor pains.
According to the gospel, Jesus said to Jewish priests that he is not the Messiah and that the Messiah is Mohammed. This means a denial of the existence of a Messiah, who is in fact Jesus Christ, and makes Jesus and Mohammed seem like they are one and the same person.

The book also contains information that lack historical credibility like the presence of three armies, each made up of 200,000 soldiers, in Palestine whereas the entire population of Palestine 2,000 years ago did not even reach 200,000. In addition, Palestine was occupied by the Romans at the time and it is impossible that Palestine was allowed to have any army or armies of its own.

The last sentence in chapter 217 says that 100 pounds of stones were placed on Christ's body. This confirms that the gospel was written quite recently because the first to use the pound as a unit of weight was the Ottomans in their experiments with Italy and Spain and it was never known during the time of Jesus.

Chapter 20 also stated that the cities of Jerusalem and Nazareth are sea ports.

This same article ends with "According to many studies, the gospel attributed to St. Barnabas was written by a European Jew in the Middle Ages who was quite familiar with the Quran and the Gospels. He, thus, mixed facts from here and there and his intentions remain unknown."

But despite the availability of information on this "Bible," most media outlets, Muslims, liberal and secular organizations have portrayed this discovery as something that undermines Christianity, ignoring the many problems with this book and presenting it as virtual fact. In fact, in their zeal to support the anti-Christian narrative, they have withheld or suppressed information questioning the authenticity of this book. For these organizations and individuals, this is another tool in their arsenal for the attack on the foundations of Christian doctrine.

By Peter BetBasoo and Ashur Giwargis

http://www.aina.org/news/2012022916569.htm

@tiarabubu
This looks like a desperate attempt to disprove the finding

A few of things to note

1. Spelling errors are common place in many ancient writings

2. The book is 1500 years old Not written in 1500AD - The writer shows no evidence of this 'bottom inscription'

3. The vatican will not be keen on getting a book written in 1500 AD because it has no historical value or written in a modern Aramaic,

4. Historical inaccuracies do not disprove the find; there are many inconsistencies in the current gospels

tbaba12345:

@tiarabubu
This looks like a desperate attempt to disprove the finding

A few of things to note

1. Spelling errors are common place in many ancient writings

2. The book is 1500 years old Not written in 1500AD - The writer shows no evidence of this 'bottom inscription'

3. The vatican will not be keen on getting a book written in 1500 AD because it has no historical value or written in a modern Aramaic,

4. Historical inaccuracies do not disprove the find; there are many inconsistencies in the current gospels

I had always assumed the Quran was complete , now you also want to add the Gospel of Barnabas to fill in the gaps or complete the puzzle for want of a better expression.

Please leave us alone, stick to your plagiarised Book 

tiarabubu:



The last sentence in chapter 217 says that 100 pounds of stones were placed on Christ's body. This confirms that the gospel was written quite recently because the first to use the pound as a unit of weight was the Ottomans in their experiments with Italy and Spain and it was never known during the time of Jesus.

Totally, and utterly false.

The pound was derived from the mina used by ancient civilizations. A smaller unit was the shekel, and a larger unit was the talent. The magnitude of these units varied from place to place. The Babylonians and Sumerians had a system in which there were 60 shekels in a mina and 60 minas in a talent. The Roman talent consisted of 100 libra (pound) which were smaller in magnitude than the mina. The troy pound (~373.2 g) used in England and the United States for monetary purposes, like the Roman pound, was divided into 12 ounces, but the Roman uncia (ounce) was smaller. The carat is a unit for measuring gemstones that had its origin in the carob seed, which later was standardized at 1/144 ounce and then 0.2 gram.

Historically, in different parts of the world, at different points in time, and for different applications, the pound (or its translation) has referred to broadly similar but not identical standards of mass or force


P.S: The rest of your article was (my estimation) 99.9% filled with inaccuracies and clear propaganda; I will attempt to show you some points below. In hindsight, I would encourage that its about time the black man looked to the religion of his ancestors and stop squabbling over foreign beliefs.

tiarabubu:


Chapter 20 also stated that the cities of Jerusalem and Nazareth are sea ports.[/b]

And if that is what is actually in Chapter 20 of this Book being debated, then how is that inaccurate? In ancient documents (and maps) Jerusalem (at least) was known as a Sea Port. In present day maps that Sea Port is stated to be in Jaffa (Joppa). Joppa was once under the larger territory of Jerusalem and was not differentiated from its older brother.

tbaba12345:

@tiarabubu
This looks like a desperate attempt to disprove the finding

A few of things to note

1. Spelling errors are common place in many ancient writings

2. The book is 1500 years old Not written in 1500AD - The writer shows no evidence of this 'bottom inscription'

3. The vatican will not be keen on getting a book written in 1500 AD because it has no historical value or written in a modern Aramaic,

4. Historical inaccuracies do not disprove the find; there are many inconsistencies in the current gospels

@ tbaba

You are no an expert in historical manuscripts. So I will not waste time arguing with you. Wait for a more knowledgeable person to dispute this and you can avail it to us. . You really dont have the capacity to debate their findings properly.

They are raising serious posers. These are people who are Assyrians and can read modern Aramaic. They observed that from the photos its written in modern Aramaic. A document this old should be written in classical aramaic .  And also

For any native speaker of Modern Assyrian (also known as neo-Aramaic), and that would be your average Assyrian today, the inscription is easily read.     [/b]The bottom inscription, [b]which is the most clearly visible from the published photos, says the following:

Transliteration: b-shimmit maran paish kteewa aha ktawa al idateh d-rabbaneh d-dera illaya b-ninweh b'sheeta d-alpa w-khamshamma d-maran

Translation: In the name of our Lord, this book is written on the hands of the monks of the high monastery in Nineveh, in the 1,500th year of our Lord.

In view of the controversy and hysteria this book is generating, everyone, including the Vatican, is right to want to study further and establish, scientifically, its authenticity. Keeping the book under wraps, like what the Turks are doing, is just giving room for more speculation. If the book content were really what they say it is, the Turks would have exposed it to scrutiny by now

The book is 1500 years old Not written in 1500AD - The writer shows no evidence of this 'bottom inscription'

Can you read Aramaic? How are you so sure?

The writter (knowledgeable in Aramaic) says the writtings in photo say in the 1,500th year of our Lord, the Turks say a 1,500 year old ''Bible''. Do we believe whats in the manuscript or the Turks who have not yet carbon dated the book?




My advice, wait for a knowledgeable person who has countered this position and bring it to our knowledge. Also, read the article again. This time carefully.

kingoflag:


Totally, and utterly false.

The pound was derived from the mina used by ancient civilizations. A smaller unit was the shekel, and a larger unit was the talent. The magnitude of these units varied from place to place. The Babylonians and Sumerians had a system in which there were 60 shekels in a mina and 60 minas in a talent. The Roman talent consisted of 100 libra (pound) which were smaller in magnitude than the mina. The troy pound (~373.2 g) used in England and the United States for monetary purposes, like the Roman pound, was divided into 12 ounces, but the Roman uncia (ounce) was smaller. The carat is a unit for measuring gemstones that had its origin in the carob seed, which later was standardized at 1/144 ounce and then 0.2 gram.

Historically, in different parts of the world, at different points in time, and for different applications, the pound (or its translation) has referred to broadly similar but not identical standards of mass or force


P.S: The rest of your article was (my estimation) 99.9% filled with inaccuracies and clear propaganda; I will attempt to show you some points below. In hindsight,  I would encourage that its about time the black man looked to the religion of his ancestors and stop squabbling over foreign beliefs.

In your haste you didnt even read properly the source of your quote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_measurement


It says The pound was derived from the mina used by ancient civilizations without stating the years to qualify the statement.

Look at the sentence again, this time carefully; the POUND WAS DERIVED FROM THE MINA USED BY ANCIENT civilisations. It was the mina that was used in ancient civilisation NOT the pound.

If Pounds were the unit of measurement during Jesus' time, or even the Apostles, it would have been mentioned in the Bible. Instead the following are used:

talent (60 minas)
mina (50 shekels)
shekel (2 bekas)
pim (2/3 shekel)
beka (10 gerahs)


Get it?

I have read the link;;

How do you know, i am no expert in historical manuscripts?

Everything i wrote are known facts, Ancient scripts were handwritten and were prone to errors from writing. Spelling errors or historical errors are common place; That is why no two gospel manuscripts that exist today are exactly the same. Mostly because of small spelling errors etc.

But the conclusions reached by your link is very vague.

There will not be such noise over a book written in 1500 AD.  The Turks are not dumb and the vatican will not be requesting a book written in 1500AD.

If i want to fabricate a gospel, will i date it at 1500 AD?

Does an independent carbon dating test have to be done? Yes

based on your link, it is premature to dismiss the finding.

I am not dismissing the findings. AGAIN READ my post nah? 

In view of the controversy and hysteria this book is generating, everyone, including the Vatican, is right to want to study further and establish, scientifically, its authenticity. Keeping the book under wraps, like what the Turks are doing, is just giving room for more speculation. If the book content were really what they say it is, the Turks would have exposed it to scrutiny by now

How do you know, i am no expert in historical manuscripts?

Because if you were you wouldnt dismiss the transcript of the writings in the photos so quickly without a basis. The writers provided a basis, you didnt.

Everything i wrote are known facts, Ancient scripts were handwritten and were prone to errors from writing. Spelling errors or historical errors are common place; That is why no two gospel manuscripts that exist today are exactly the same. Mostly because of small spelling errors etc.

Yea, you are right, even the Koran has errors and variations in script  from different parts of the middle east and also from translations

But the conclusions reached by your link is very vague.

Its your unknowledgeable opinion. its a free world.

There will not be such noise over a book written in 1500 AD.  The Turks are not dumb and the vatican will not be requesting a book written in 1500AD. If i want to fabricate a gospel, will i date it at 1500 AD?

Thats you. But maybe not the monks. Already the picture of the book has been transcribed. You agree there may be errors in that ''Bible'' (based on the articles transcripts) you, at the same time, disagree with the transcripts which shows, in modern Aramaic (not classical) that:

Transliteration: b-shimmit maran paish kteewa aha ktawa al idateh d-rabbaneh d-dera illaya b-ninweh b'sheeta d-alpa w-khamshamma d-maran

Translation: In the name of our Lord, this book is written on the hands of the monks of the high monastery in Nineveh, in the 1,500th year of our Lord.

If the book is 1,500 years old, why would the monks say in the 1,500 year of our Lord? ie 1,500AD.

Even if its written 1,500 years ago, that's 500 years after Christ. And after the Apostles have finished their work - INCLUDING BARNABAS HIMSELF (that the book is ascribed to), why did they choose to add to the gospel? Was it a ''Nostradamus'' feeling they had and wanted to make some prediction? Or one of them (probably named Barnabas), decided to write his thoughts. It is for these reason an international inquiry is needed.


If the Turks are sincere, they should subject the book to international scientific study and not this suspense they are creating, probably to further their agenda since the book is likely to be declared false.

We all know that some religions are very adversed to scientific research to their past and depend on dogma to explain events and accept without question. Christianity is never shy of scientific study. Apart from the study of Egyptology in Egypt (study of ancient Egypt) Christian holy lands are the next most researched. Millions of artefacts are unearthed and these support Biblical accounts. So this once should not be different.

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/biblical-archaeology.htm


But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:8

Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are savage wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Mathew 7:15

1,500-year-old handwritten Bible newly-discovered in Turkey includes depiction of Last Supper
English.news.cn   2012-02-25 04:21:50                
ANKARA, Feb. 24 (Xinhua) -- A handwritten Bible, believed to be 1,500 years old and is recently kept in the Ethnography Museum of Turkish capital Ankara, includes a drawing of the Last Supper, local media reports said on Friday.

The 52-page Bible is written in Aramaic, the language Jesus spoke, and consists the depiction of the Last Supper, which shows Jesus dining with his 12 Apostles, and also a depiction of the crucifixion of Jesus, a symbol of the sun and a cross, according to Turkish newspaper Today's Zaman.

The report added that there is also a depiction of a cave and a large rock which are thought to be the grave of Jesus.

Turkish Culture and Tourism Minister Ertugrul Gunay confirmed on Thursday that the 1,500-year-old Bible was discovered by policeman during an anti-smuggling operation in 2000 and is currently being kept in Ankara, according to Today's Zaman.

A smuggling gang seized during the operation was reportedly convicted of smuggling various items, including the Bible. After that, all the artifacts were kept in a safe at an Ankara courthouse.

The Bible, which was reportedly kept at the courthouse for years, was only recently handed over to the care of the Ethnography Museum of Ankara weeks ago, the newspaper quoted Zulkuf Yilmaz, head of the General Directorate of Museums and Cultural Assets, as saying.

The Bible will be sent abroad for carbon dating in order to determine its actual age, Yilmaz said, adding that the book will be put on public display after restoration.

Regarding claims that the book could in fact be the Gospel of Barnabas, Yilmaz said, "I hope that is the case."

The Gospel of Barnabas contradicts the canonical New Testament account of Jesus and his ministry but has strong parallels with the Islamic view of Jesus. Much of its content and themes are in line with Islamic ideas, and it includes a prediction by Jesus of the Prophet Muhammad coming to earth.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2012-02/25/c_131430464.htm

For those seeking succour from the Gospel of Barnabas.

The "Gospel" shows the crucifixion and grave of Christ. Yet the Koran says both didn't happen.  What contradiction is this 

What a confused "Gospel"

IF and this is for the sake of argument.
The book proves to be genuine it proves nothing about the Genuineness of the Messenger of Islam. Critics may even claim he was  aware of the existence of the book and simply adopted the name  as in the book.

We are already aware that there are "BOOKS" that were rejected from the Christian Canon which are fairly consistent with the Quran in their detail about Jesus and his Life.
The Question for a neutral person is there is no convincing Scientific reason to accept either Islam or Christianity other than FAITH( meaning permanent suspension of logic and reason) just on the basis of any of these writings

tiarabubu:


Even if its written 1,500 years ago, that's 500 years after Christ. And after the Apostles have finished their work - INCLUDING BARNABAS HIMSELF (that the book is ascribed to), why did they choose to add to the gospel? Was it a ''Nostradamus'' feeling they had and wanted to make some prediction? Or one of them (probably named Barnabas), decided to write his thoughts. It is for these reason an international inquiry is needed.


If the Turks are sincere, they should subject the book to international scientific study and not this suspense they are creating, probably to further their agenda since the book is likely to be declared false.

We all know that some religions are very adversed to scientific research to their past and depend on dogma to explain events and accept without question. Christianity is never shy of scientific study. Apart from the study of Egyptology in Egypt (study of ancient Egypt) Christian holy lands are the next most researched. Millions of artefacts are unearthed and these support Biblical accounts. So this once should not be different.

http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/
http://www.allaboutarchaeology.org/biblical-archaeology.htm


But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. Galatians 1:8

Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are savage wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Mathew 7:15

If it is written 1500 years ago, it is probably a copy of an another copy. Many christian manuscripts that exist today are dated at least 400 years after christ.

A simple study of early christianity shows that there were numerous beliefs and gospels:::: The reason you believe what you believe is because the roman empire adopted the pauline doctrine, Any gospel that goes against that was rejected.

Many of these gospels are lost today  because of the crackdown by the church. Which is the true gospel

Biblical archaeology is not the same as christian archeaology:: Again, a simple study of the christian church's history shows how anyone with a different opinion was suppressed  

I can't verify the translation you keep repeating. Neither can you, The rest of the points do not really hold water.

So let's stick with what we know::

The Turks say they have found a gospel which they date 1500 years old

The Vatican wants to see it.

It could be a fake, but then again it could be authentic. It would be

Until then, all we can do is bring arguments and counter-arguments,

tiarabubu:


For those seeking succour from the Gospel of Barnabas.

The "Gospel" shows the crucifixion and grave of Christ. Yet the Koran says both didn't happen.  What contradiction is this 

What a confused "Gospel"

No one is seeking succour from the book; I have read the book and i don't agree with it on many points.

More reason to believe it was not fabricated by a muslim

tiarabubu:

In your haste you didnt even read properly the source of your quote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_measurement



Get it?

In my haste? Are you serious? Well, at least you have a reference. Now, its up to you to "get it".

I'm not here to take a position on supporting one religion over the other, my aim is that you be open minded before issuing condemnation to, and supporting  that, (both of) which are definitely foreign to your race and history.

tiarabubu:

Look at the sentence again, this time carefully; the POUND WAS DERIVED FROM THE MINA USED BY ANCIENT civilisations. It was the mina that was used in ancient civilisation NOT the pound.

If Pounds were the unit of measurement during Jesus' time, or even the Apostles, it would have been mentioned in the Bible.

Holy Molly, how the hell did I miss this?!

My dear, first go read on the history of the pound, then how the Libra came to be, then, how we came to start using the "LBS" abbreviation.

Next, you might want to learn the history of the Bible.

tbaba12345:


If it is written 1500 years ago, it is probably a copy of an another copy. Many christian manuscripts that exist today are dated at least 400 years after christ.

A simple study of early christianity shows that there were numerous beliefs and gospels:::: The reason you believe what you believe is because the roman empire adopted the pauline doctrine,  Any gospel that goes against that was rejected.

Many of these gospels are lost today  because of the crackdown by the church. Which is the true gospel

Permit me to digress a little. My answer to you is simple. Look at how the Koran was complied under Abu Bakr and the efforts made to ensure its sanctity. Can we say that because of the unscientific manner the Koran was complied, the authentic one may have been burnt in error by Abu Bakr? Moreso when the reciters were dying and those alive were accusing each other of adding/omitting from the text.

Can we also say that the heavy crack down on anybody who dares questions the authenticity of the holy Koran is threaten with death prevents the authenticity or otherwise of the book from being analysed and an objective conclusion reached? E.g. Taha Hussein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taha_Husayn)

If this book were Islamic in nature, do you HONESTLY think it would be open for public scrutiny?

So what are you talking about, pal?

Also, see the following link written by Dr. Will Varner, a Professor of Old Testament  and others as an example to educate yourself on the dating of Christian manuscripts (especially the new testament and rise of gnosticism) and also which manuscripts are biblical or  not so you dont spew what you have little idea about

http://christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a023.html  and http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/christia.html and http://www.thewords.com/articles/earlytext.htm

Biblical archaeology is not the same as christian archeaology:: Again, a simple study of the christian church's history shows how anyone with a different opinion was suppressed

 

OK If Biblical archaeology doesnt impact on Christianity and therefore the same as Christian archeaology, you are denying that the earth is round!

It shows how bais you are and its a pity really. I shouldn't believe a word you say and leave you with your bais.

Christian Archeology (more commonly termed "Biblical Archaeology" is the study of archaeological sites in connection to the texts of the Bible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_archaeology


see others related to above
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_archaeology
http://christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html

I can't verify the translation you keep repeating. Neither can you,  The rest of the points do not really hold water.

So let's stick with what we know::

Why where you rushing to challenge the Assyrian writers when I posted their comments? over sabi sabi 

see how you were bragging:

How do you know, i am no expert in historical manuscripts?

Everything i wrote are known facts, Ancient scripts were handwritten and were prone to errors from writing. Spelling errors or historical errors are common place; That is why no two gospel manuscripts that exist today are exactly the same. Mostly because of small spelling errors etc.

And I thought you were one guru Orientalist/historian.   

I told you from the very beginning that YOU LACK THE KNOWLEDGE to challenge what these Assyrian writters wrote. I asked you to get a professional counteraction and avail us. You were jumping around posting challenges to what you know little about. I initially refrained from comments, just posting views of more knowledgeable people because we are all relaying on expert opinion.

see my cautions here:

My advice, wait for  a knowledgeable person who has countered this position and bring it to our knowledge. Also, read the article again. This time carefully. 

You are no an expert in historical manuscripts. So I will not waste time arguing with you. Wait for a more knowledgeable person to dispute this and you can avail it to us. . You really dont have the capacity to debate their findings properly.

They are raising serious posers. These are people who are Assyrians and can read modern Aramaic. They observed that from the photos its written in modern Aramaic. A document this old should be written in classical aramaic .

If the Turks are sincere, they should subject the book to international scientific study

No one is seeking succour from the book; I have read the book and i don't agree with it on many points.

Huray! If you actually did then tell us. We dont need to wait for the Turks! Pray, tell what does it say? 

Then why should we agree it actually and accurately predicts the coming of Prophet Mohammed?




You can continue your grope in the dark. For me I wait for the Turks and experts and not waste time arguing. Ciao!

tiarabubu:

Permit me to digress a little. My answer to you is simple. Look at how the Koran was complied under Abu Bakr and the efforts made to ensure its sanctity. Can we say that because of the unscientific manner the Koran was complied, the authentic one may have been burnt in error by Abu Bakr? Moreso when the reciters were dying and those alive were accusing each other of adding/omitting from the text.

Can we also say that the heavy crack down on anybody who dares questions the authenticity of the holy Koran is threaten with death prevents the authenticity or otherwise of the book from being analysed and an objective conclusion reached? E.g. Taha Hussein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taha_Husayn)

Authentic one?? what are you talking about? Please stop displaying ignorance here,   The Quran was preserved by memorization and by written parts. Many of the companions of the prophets knew the quran perfectly by heart and others had memorized huge portions of it. To prevent it from being lost by the death of people who memorised it, It was put in written form.

Taha husayn says of the Quran:

“But you know that the Qur’an is not prose and that it is not verse either. It is rather Qur’an, and it cannot be called by any other name but this. It is not verse, and that is clear; for it does not bind itself to the bonds of verse. And it is not prose, for it is bound by bonds peculiar to itself, not found elsewhere; some of the binds are related to the endings of its verses, and some to that musical sound which is all its own."

Talking about the unique nature of the Quran,

In spite of his secular stance, he speaks very highly of the Quran,  The preservation of the Quran is agreed  upon by majority of western and eastern scholars of repute. So you really can't win this debate.

tiarabubu:


OK If Biblical archaeology doesnt impact on Christianity and therefore the same as Christian archeaology, you are denying that the earth is round!

It shows how bais you are and its a pity really. I shouldn't believe a word you say and leave you with your bais.

Christian Archeology (more commonly termed "Biblical Archaeology" is the study of archaeological sites in connection to the texts of the Bible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_archaeology


see others related to above
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artifacts_significant_to_the_Bible
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_archaeology
http://christiananswers.net/archaeology/home.html

I think the problem here is the English language,

I said: Biblical archaeology is not the same as christian archeaology

you said : Biblical archaeology doesnt impact on Christianity

Do the two statements sound the same to you?

tiarabubu:

Why where you rushing to challenge the Assyrian writers when I posted their comments? over sabi sabi 

see how you were bragging:


And I thought you were one guru Orientalist/historian.   

I told you from the very beginning that YOU LACK THE KNOWLEDGE to challenge what these Assyrian writters wrote. I asked you to get a professional counteraction and avail us. You were jumping around posting challenges to what you know little about. I initially refrained from comments, just posting views of more knowledgeable people because we are all relaying on expert opinion.

see my cautions here:

My arguments were based on simple arguments based on the information provided.

Even if i could read aramaic, i can't make textual criticism off a computer screen.

Huray! If you actually did then tell us. We dont need to wait for the Turks! Pray, tell what does it say? 

Then why should we agree it actually and accurately predicts the coming of Prophet Mohammed?

You can continue your grope in the dark. For me I wait for the Turks and experts and not waste time arguing. Ciao!

I have read an English copy of the gospel of Barnabas:

It denies the crucifixion of Jesus and puts Judas in his place and predicts the coming of the prophet.

But it talks of a painless birth for Jesus while the Quran talks about Mary undergoing the pain of birth ; There are many other differences,

I think you are the one in the dark because you have no idea of what you are arguing for.

If you read  the book maybe you will be able to come up with a few valid arguments against its authenticity.

Till then,  see ya!!

I didnt want to come back but for one of your replies wherein you pretended not to see my quote:

I think the problem here is the English language,

I said: Biblical archaeology is not the same as christian archeaology

you said : Biblical archaeology doesnt impact on Christianity

Do the two statements sound the same to you?

Read my reply with a quote from a website http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_archaeology  which says

Christian Archeology (more commonly termed "Biblical Archaeology" is the study of archaeological sites in connection to the texts of the Bible.

Also scholars like Peter Roger Stuart Moorey in his book A Century of Biblical Archaeology uses both terms

Now tell me again that Biblical Archaeology is not the same thing as Christian Archaeology. Where u assuming that Christian Archaeologist were made up of people that profess only Christianity? 


For the rest of your reply, I think you have not answered my points well enough

tiarabubu:


Read my reply with a quote from a website http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_archaeology  which says

Christian Archeology (more commonly termed "Biblical Archaeology" is the study of archaeological sites in connection to the texts of the Bible.

Also scholars like Peter Roger Stuart Moorey in his book A Century of Biblical Archaeology uses both terms

Now tell me again that Biblical Archaeology is not the same thing as Christian Archaeology. Where u assuming that Christian Archaeologist were made up of people that profess only Christianity? 


For the rest of your reply, I think you have not answered my points well enough

This is the problem with people who don't do proper research:

When did wikipedia become an authoritative reference? you reference a word put in parenthesis on wikipedia.

Biblical archaeology ( better called Palestinology) refers to study of all historical sites linked to the bible; the historical study of the region of palestine.

These sites include revered Jewish historical sites; sites that have little or no significance in modern day Christianity. It also includes sites that are vital to modern day christianity:

This subtle difference is important.

It is not simply christian archealogy even if that is often used by christians (there is really no such thing), the study of these sites affects Jewish and sometimes Muslim beliefs; It links books in the bible to historical sites: Most of the books in the bible are not exclusively christian:

For better research check out the library on palestinology

http://www.dlir.org/archive/orc-exhibit/items/show/collection/4/id/1652/tag/Yedi%20ot%20ha-Hevrah%20la-hakirat%20Erets-Yisrael%20ye%20atikoteha%20Volume%205

Please do not come up with these kinds of silly arguments: It makes me sad responding to this.

This was foretold in Galatia 1:7-8. ', but ther be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of christ even if we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be eternally accursed' . I'm not surprised that this is coming up now, it's bn predicted.

Gakin95:

This was foretold in Galatia 1:7-8. ', but ther be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of christ even if we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be eternally accursed' . I'm not surprised that this is coming up now, it's bn predicted.

With all due respect, this was no prediction::

Paul had opposition and there were many of the early  christians who differed on paul's interpretation of the gospel.  This verse on this epistle was directed at them.

Study your own history,

The bible makes mention of various books;the book of wars,the book of Gad,the book of Jasher,the annals of the Kings,the book of Iddo the seer amongst others. The mere mention of this books does not mean they are a part of the Holy Bible that have been bowlderized. The books of the Bible as it is today are meant to guide Christians to salvation particularly,prosperity,tolerance generally.
Every other faith and religion wants to add EVIL materials to our Bible.Falsely claiming that these books are manuscripts of old.
The Rosicrusians want to add the book of creation and the book of Jasher. Now the moslems want to give credence to this book of Barnabas.
I would advice they expurgate from the Quran the portion of the Surah that encourages animosity towards Jews and Christians and authorizes their killing after the fast. The Bible is holy. Woe betide those who seek to desecrate it.

i just want to add a few points especially based on the "assyrian article" Mr. "tiarabubu" is selling here.ofcourse,he is selling the article because it is written by "assyrians" forgetting that both hebrew and arabic also have aramaic roots and the assyrians are just ordinary people he is using to impress us with their write-up.

i see the article written based on desperation and fear.the article itself contains errors/mistakes.and also very lame way of thinking;for instance what a book is called in assyrian and what a "holy book" is called.that is ridiculous.a book whether holy or satanic is a book in the end of it.

this text predicting the coming of the Prophet Muhammad (sa) was found.whether 1500 AD is mentioned on it as the time it was written or that it was written 1500 years ago,mistakenly or not,makes no difference.the people who found it (the turks) will do carbon dating and determine the exact date and that is what is important.the turks are telling us the text is 1500 years old.period!

also,for those telling us that the text does not agree with the Quran on everything:who really is trying to tell you here that it must? even the present day bible contains verses which we muslims present as evidence for Islam.yet still we ourselves,the muslims,do not accept everything in the present-day bible.likewise,if the text discovered contains somewhere about our Prophet (sa),it doesn't mean everything in it must agree with what we believe.it wasn't muslims that wrote it 1500 years ago!whether the text discovered or the present-day bible,both will certainly contain errors and beliefs we as muslims dontha believe in because they were written by fallible men and the message of Jesus or the prophets is mixed or rather diluted among the crap the fallible men and transmitters wrote many years later.the point is,Jesus didn't (as our Prophet did with the Quran) pen down the gospels or what he was teaching.there is also the early church and its doctrines formulated,and the bible was tailored in such a way to present a "christian belief system".

to conclude,i as a muslim is only concerned about the verse or place in this new finding where my Prophet (sa) was predicted.whatever other nonsense that is contained therein,is of no significance to me as we will scrutinize each and every word.but really,the prediction of our Prophet (sa) 1500 years ago written in this text,goes to vallidate what the muslims believe in.it shows there is evidence that existed before Muhammad (sa) to support his prophethood,regardless of the text as a whole where the particular prophecy is found in.so if that prophecy is found somewhere in any text or book,then it is a big discovery.no wonder the vatican and the anti-muslim media of the west are showing lot of interest.

jonnycheddars: The bible makes mention of various books;the book of wars,the book of Gad,the book of Jasher,the annals of the Kings,the book of Iddo the seer amongst others. The mere mention of this books does not mean they are a part of the Holy Bible that have been bowlderized. The books of the Bible as it is today are meant to guide Christians to salvation particularly,prosperity,tolerance generally.

if those books are mentioned,it is either they are mentioned as "inspired" or "satanic" influenced.if they are expressed as inspired in your bible,and you believing the bible is "God's word",then you must accept or embrace them if they are found.but defnitely,that is irrelevant to the topic of this thread.

Every other faith and religion wants to add EVIL materials to our Bible.Falsely claiming that these books are manuscripts of old.

your bible did not descend from heaven and was not even written or compiled as one book by those whose words are said to be recorded in it.what became part of the bible or what was rejected,was selected by the early church.it makes no difference if the book of isaiah and matthew are part of the same bible.these are separate books in the bible.

let me make it clearer for you.the catholic bible contains 66 books while the protestant bibles contain 73 books.so really this is no one trying to add what you term "evil" into you bible.from the look of it,there is already enough evil in the bible,honestly speaking to you as a brother i dont intend to simply offend.

The Rosicrusians want to add the book of creation and the book of Jasher. Now the moslems want to give credence to this book of Barnabas.

we cant add anything into anyone's book.but you must not forget that there are many texts recognized by christians that were left out of the bible for not being "canonical".they term these books as "apocrypha".there are many of them.they are rejected mainly because they contain passages the early church disagree with based on their formulated doctrine it imposed on all christians.the docetists for instance in early christian history like the muslims today did not believe Jesus (as) was "crucified".

I would advice they expurgate from the Quran the portion of the Surah that encourages animosity towards Jews and Christians and authorizes their killing after the fast. The Bible is holy. Woe betide those who seek to desecrate it.

shut up! mumu trying to sound like a caesar.

there is nowhere in the bible where we are encouraged to kill christians or even idol-worshippers.there is a place we are told christians are the closest to the muslims.when reading these verses in the Quran you have to take them into context that the message was referring to a particular group among christians.so not every christian is good and not every christian is bad,evil or wicked.the message of the Quran is to deal with each person based on his action and attitude.

@ Gakin95:

Gakin95:

This was foretold in Galatia 1:7-8. ', but ther be some that trouble you and would pervert the gospel of christ even if we or [b]an angel from heaven preach [/b]any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be eternally accursed' . I'm not surprised that this is coming up now, it's bn predicted.

did any angel ever preached any toral, psalm or "gospel" to anyone, ever? if you know any angel that did, we need you to give us his name, who he preached to and what he preached.
if you can't produce any evidence, you will have to agree that Paul may just have made this up without being inspired to write this verse. this will lend to the opinion that he might never have been inspired at all in anything. cursing an Angel is something that no prophet did, how can a non prophet like Paul did except to scare people out of their wit and ability to think?

and as lagosshia said above, if a christian is dissociating himself from a biblical verse, we need to know why since he believes each verse of the NT is "Inspired" by the Holy Spirit God? If he abhors the verse, it is either that he believes that God of the Bible was not correct or it was not from God at all.
if it the former, then christians are finding fault in God, no wonder they find fault in His Messages and His Messengers [as]. if it is the latter, then it is either inspired or made up by man; either way should such a verse or verses or book be trusted since God did not correct the end product?

We can make judgment by the above therefore that whatever Quran supports in the Torah, Sabur, Injil, are what is truly inspired and the rest are either guess work or outright off the spiritual mark.

@aribisaa0

by aribisala0(m)
IF and this is for the sake of argument.
The book proves to be genuine it proves nothing about the Genuineness of the Messenger of Islam. Critics may even claim he was aware of the existence of the book and simply adopted the name as in the book.

We are already aware that there are "BOOKS" that were rejected from the Christian Canon which are fairly consistent with the Quran in their detail about Jesus and his Life.
The Question for a neutral person is there is no convincing Scientific reason to accept either Islam [/b]or Christianity [b]other than FAITH( meaning permanent suspension of logic and reason) just on the basis of any of these writings

While is not a convincing scientific reason, going by your statement above, it is nevertheless a feeling of conviction that can't be quantify and or made physical of its own, though can be acted out. But what convincing scientific reason will satisfy you if by reason you are able to accept that air/wind exist by what it influences or ability to measure its strength, without really capable to say for certain "oh, there is the wind going down the street and it has turned the corner!". I am not sure if you have argued against the existence of God. But if you have, then the logical and most reasonable question is to ask if you can provide the most correct origin of things in this complex universe, if there is no ORIGINAL ORIGINATOR consistently keeping it in best order from beginning to ending? We have to believe that if there is no ORIGINATOR, there is a 50% chance only for things to be in order in this complex "world' of known and yet unknown.

If however you believe that there is an ORIGINATOR, we may have to assume that He has originated human specie for a purpose, blending in this perfectly with the rest of what He originated. The said purpose of which He originates man must be either in internal or external or internal and external instructions from Him. One wonders if it is purposeless, why do we to die at all? There must be a complex yet simple purpose for Him to originate us, as God says in the Quran that He did not create "Jinn" and mankind except to worship Him. Such purpose of worship is to complex, yet simple and direct that one sees the reason fetus is in such crouching position in mother's womb with the head slightly tilted low as if prostrating.

In the complexity of instinctive morality of man; knowing good from evil, one sees that God confirmation of His saying in the Quran where heart, brain, hearing, sight, etc; all the senses are parts in helping us to get to sensibility, realizing evil as faulty quality when we do it as supposing doing good.

It will be wrong therefore that God Almighty will have a purpose for us, yet will not give us guidance in the external, in form of a Book through His Elected Persons from time to time, until the last of them showed up. How do we know how to seek forgiveness from God except through His revelation where He tells us how best to seek it; the way Adam [as] the first person sort it. If we worship God only by instinctive quality in us, each person will have his/her own way, religion. Even the pagans organized their own religion in a structured pattern. So does the humanists by not doing anything at all.

Allah says prostrate then bow to Mary as others in her time used to do. We have seen many jews who still practice it like this, yet others if not all have adopted additionally the praying to the wall. We do not see where Jesus told his disciples to merely make the Lord's prayer and or sing and clap hands, etc when Jesus was seen prostrating, in worship as he prayed. Physical/logic, reason manifested in prayer and worship, it is clear to me that the Quran is very explicit and the muslims have for the most part have been consistent.

On the scientific proofs; All you have to do is to read the Quran on all aspects of academic branches that you can. I am always amazed that the Quran contains such a wide range of academic fields; considering that most in physical sciences have no interest in social sciences, and the reverse is the case even today. But Muhammad [as] was 14 centuries ago, in a poor desert. I wonder how he was able to conduct such a thorough research in a matter of 23 years considering that he was unlettered till the very moment revelation began to descend upon him. And he didn't say they were from his thought, even as he was dying, he didn't claim they were. Where the Quran says that he frowned, I do not think a man writing his own thoughts would have blamed himself.

I advise you to read the Quran and then tell us if you still think that you as a person is not a scientific evidence that God is the One Who revealed the Quran. When Quran in 2 verse 2 says this is the book {Quran], it was not made to a book then. It shows honor as part that are not revealed yet was still in heaven. Then later, the Quran became a compiled Book that we have it here today; same audio/voice, same letters [alphabets].

picture of the bible found in turkey attached below: