Dr. W. Graham Scroggie of the MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE, Chicago, one of the most prestigious Christian Evangelical Mission in the world, answering the question — "Is the Bible the Word of God?" (also the title of his book), under the heading: IT IS HUMAN, YET DIVINE. He says on page 17:

"Yes, the Bible is human, though some, out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men, and bear in their style the characteristics of men." (Emphasis added).

Another erudite Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, says on page 277 of his book, "The Call of the Minaret":

"Not so the New Testament . . . There is condensation and editing; there is choice, reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come through the mind of the Church behind the authors. They represent experience and history."

If words have any meaning, do we need to add another word of comment to prove our case? No! But the professional propagandists, after letting the cat out of the bag, still have the face to try to make their readers believe that they have proved beyond the shadow of any doubt that the Bible is the "irrefragable 6 Word of God." Their semantic gymnastics — equivocating, and playing with words — is amazing!

firdaus4us:

Dr. W. Graham Scroggie of the MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE, Chicago, one of the most prestigious Christian Evangelical Mission in the world, answering the question — "Is the Bible the Word of God?" (also the title of his book), under the heading: IT IS HUMAN, YET DIVINE. He says on page 17:

"Yes, the Bible is human, though some, out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men, and bear in their style the characteristics of men." (Emphasis added).

Another erudite Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, says on page 277 of his book, "The Call of the Minaret":

"Not so the New Testament . . . There is condensation and editing; there is choice, reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come through the mind of the Church behind the authors. They represent experience and history."

If words have any meaning, do we need to add another word of comment to prove our case? No! But the professional propagandists, after letting the cat out of the bag, still have the face to try to make their readers believe that they have proved beyond the shadow of any doubt that the Bible is the "irrefragable 6 Word of God." Their semantic gymnastics — equivocating, and playing with words — is amazing!

Who are these "christians"? Do they purport to speak the mind of christianity? Are the words of two nondescript individuals suddenly to be taken as authority that the bible is not the Word of God? Who are these "most prestigious Christian Evangelical Mission in the world"? Has anyone ever heard of them?

Even the bible says, not every that says Lord, Lord will enter into my kingdom! The way to prove that the Quran is the word of some Allah is to EXPLAIN THE INCONSISTENCIES IN IT AND NOT BY GOING UNDERHAND SEARCHING IRRELEVANT PROPAGANDIST WEBSITES TO SLANDER CHRISTIANITY! You left several questions as pertaining the quran and your immoral prophet unanswered in other threads only to rush here and open another one for christians to "confess"! "confess" what? I have no dealings with people who are not qualified to speak on behalf of my Saviour, the bible alone is enough proof that the Word of God is truly what it is!

@firdaus4us,

What really are you getting at? In trying to discredit the Bible as the mere word of men, you don't seem to realise that you're discrediting the Qur'an in very fact! 

Dr. W Graham Scroggie and Kenneth Cragg (whoever they were/are) may have seemingly supplied you with the munition you supposed helped your case; but you've only shot yourself in the leg. Let me show you:

1. If your 'scholars' had supposed that the Bible is 'condensation and editing', let's apply that to what the Qur'an says:
Q. 003.003 YUSUFALI:
It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong).

So, does your "condensation and editing" begin with those who discredit the Bible or with the "He" who purportedly sent down and confirmed what you read in the Bible? May God have mercy on your 'scholars'!

Now, that is the "semantic gymnastics" your scholars have levelled at your *Allah* in the Qur'an. If the Bible is not the "irrefragable Word of God," then who is the "He" in the Qur'an who sent down (step by step) what you read in the Bible - including the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus)??

2. Not only did the Qur'an claim that *Allah* sent down the Law and the Gospel, but it is also claimed that "He" confirmed what you read in that precious Book:

Q. 005.046 YUSUFALI:
And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.

Did you notice how emphatically the Qur'an "confirmed" both the Law and the Gospel? Who are these scholars of yours that shortchanged you so badly? What have they proven to you, other than that as a matter of fact, if there's any "semantic gymnastics" it would have to be first levelled at the one who purports to have both sent down, revealed and confirmed what your scholars are quarrelling about! Isn't that amazing??

3. "Professional propagandists," you say? Well, that may well be in your on little carping; but here's a little something for you to ponder on - even the Qur'an respects the Bible so much that it asks us Christians to hold on to what has been revealed therein! Take a look -

Q. 005.068 YUSUFALI:
Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord."

It is interesting that even when Muhammad received such a "revelation," he still had some misgivings about this quote; so he added -

"It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith."

Would anyone take Muhammad seriously in the latter part of this claim? If there's any cause to do so, let me ask you this question - did *Allah* send down, reveal and confirm a revelation to anyone to increase obstinate rebellion and blasphemy after having claimed that the reason for such a revelation was to serve as a "guidance and light" and "an admonition to those who fear Allah" (Q. 005:046) as well as "as a guide to mankind" (Q. 003.003)??

So, who's fooling who and who are your professional propagandists - those decrying the Bible or those who know it is actually the ultimate light and guide to mankind?

Let me offer you this: take time to read through the Bible - page by page, prayerfully and with an open heart - and then see if at all your 'scholars' have done you a good service at all! It is truly amazing that for all the complaints and hoo-ha that may be levelled from whatever quarters, even the Qur'an could not find a fault with Jesus Christ!

firdaus4us,

did u read the whole book?

Of course the bible is both human and divine. Human because it was written by human beings, but divine because it was inspired by God. The bible itself says that much and christians agree. It's like someone telling another person to write him a letter. What interests us isn't so much the style as the Spirit behind the letters. Plus, we have the Holy Spirit who helps us know the Will of God.


Concerning editing over the years, there is proof that the bible hasn't been changed. Whatever editions are minor, plus, there is no fundamental christian doctrine that rests on a disputed verse of the bible.

@firdaus4us,

firdaus4us:

Dr. W. Graham Scroggie of the MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE, Chicago, one of the most prestigious Christian Evangelical Mission in the world, answering the question — "Is the Bible the Word of God?" (also the title of his book), under the heading: IT IS HUMAN, YET DIVINE. He says on page 17:

"Yes, the Bible is human, though some, out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men, and bear in their style the characteristics of men." (Emphasis added).

Another erudite Christian scholar, Kenneth Cragg, the Anglican Bishop of Jerusalem, says on page 277 of his book, "The Call of the Minaret":

"Not so the New Testament . . . There is condensation and editing; there is choice, reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come through the mind of the Church behind the authors. They represent experience and history."

If words have any meaning, do we need to add another word of comment to prove our case? No! But the professional propagandists, after letting the cat out of the bag, still have the face to try to make their readers believe that they have proved beyond the shadow of any doubt that the Bible is the "irrefragable 6 Word of God." Their semantic gymnastics — equivocating, and playing with words — is amazing!

This is not news. I've seen it everywhere, and its absolutely true though and even them, the christians know that. But as matter of fact, we should avoid posting such, coz its like casting pearls before swines. Will they ever appreciate your efforts?

@m4malik

It is now confirmed that u are not getting the messages of the Holy Quran right. Thanks God that at least u believe in the part(s), that "support" ur argument! Well, all the verses u quoted just confirmed that Allah sent down Books before the Quran. Do u know that these books were sent to these prophets(for guardian over their wards) directly from God.

Also, God's Books to the prophets, basically contain His words/messages for mankind not the prophet words or his companions.

Do u know that Bible was written years after Jesus left the surface of the earth?

kindly read through the words below with open mind.

[b]
The most "authoritative" accounts of a historical Jesus come from the four canonical Gospels of the Bible. Note that these Gospels did not come into the Bible as original and authoritative from the authors themselves, but rather from the influence of early church fathers, especially the most influential of them all: Irenaeus of Lyon who lived in the middle of the second century. Many heretical gospels got written by that time, but Irenaeus considered only some of them for mystical reasons. He claimed only four in number; according to Romer, "like the four zones of the world, the four winds, the four divisions of man's estate, and the four forms of the first living creatures-- the lion of Mark, the calf of Luke, the man of Matthew, the eagle of John (see Against the Heresies). The four gospels then became Church cannon for the orthodox faith. Most of the other claimed gospel writings were burned, destroyed, or lost." [Romer]

Elaine Pagels writes: "Although the gospels of the New Testament-- like those discovered at Nag Hammadi-- are attributed to Jesus' followers, no one knows who actually wrote any of them." [Pagels, 1995]

Not only do we not know who wrote them, consider that none of the Gospels got written during the alleged life of Jesus, nor do the unknown authors make the claim to have met an earthly Jesus. Add to this that none of the original gospel manuscripts exist; we only have copies of copies.

The consensus of many biblical historians put the dating of the earliest Gospel, that of Mark, at sometime after 70 C.E., and the last Gospel, John after 90 C.E. [Pagels, 1995; Helms]. This would make it some 40 years after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus that we have any Gospel writings that mention him! Elaine Pagels writes that "the first Christian gospel was probably written during the last year of the war, or the year it ended. Where it was written and by whom we do not know; the work is anonymous, although tradition attributes it to Mark, " [Pagels, 1995]

The traditional Church has portrayed the authors as the apostles Mark, Luke, Matthew, & John, but scholars know from critical textural research that there simply occurs no evidence that the gospel authors could have served as the apostles described in the Gospel stories. Yet even today, we hear priests and ministers describing these authors as the actual disciples of Christ. Many Bibles still continue to label the stories as "The Gospel according to St. Matthew," "St. Mark," "St. Luke," St. John." No apostle would have announced his own sainthood before the Church's establishment of sainthood. But one need not refer to scholars to determine the lack of evidence for authorship. As an experiment, imagine the Gospels without their titles. See if you can find out from the texts who wrote them; try to find their names.

Even if the texts supported the notion that the apostles wrote them, consider that the average life span of humans in the first century came to around 30, and very few people lived to 70. If the apostles births occured at about the same time as the alleged Jesus, and wrote their gospels in their old age, that would put Mark at least 70 years old, and John at over 110.

The gospel of Mark describes the first written Bible gospel. And although Mark appears deceptively after the Matthew gospel, the gospel of Mark got written at least a generation before Matthew. From its own words, we can deduce that the author of Mark had neither heard Jesus nor served as his personal follower. Whoever wrote the gospel, he simply accepted the mythology of Jesus without question and wrote a crude an ungrammatical account of the popular story at the time. Any careful reading of the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) will reveal that Mark served as the common element between Matthew and Luke and gave the main source for both of them. Of Mark's 666* verses, some 600 appear in Matthew, some 300 in Luke. According to Randel Helms, the author of Mark, stands at least at a third remove from Jesus and more likely at the fourth remove. [Helms]
* Most Bibles show 678 verses for Mark, not 666, but many Biblical scholars think the last 12 verses came later from interpolation. The earliest manuscripts and other ancient sources do not have Mark 16: 9-20. Moreover the text style does not match and the transition between verse 8 and 9 appears awkward. Even some of today's Bibles such as the NIV exclude the last 12 verses.

The author of Matthew had obviously gotten his information from Mark's gospel and used them for his own needs. He fashioned his narrative to appeal to Jewish tradition and Scripture. He improved the grammar of Mark's Gospel, corrected what he felt theologically important, and heightened the miracles and magic.

The author of Luke admits himself as an interpreter of earlier material and not an eyewitness (Luke 1:1-4). Many scholars think the author of Luke lived as a gentile, or at the very least, a hellenized Jew and even possibly a woman. He (or she) wrote at a time of tension in the Roman empire along with its fever of persecution. Many modern scholars think that the Gospel of Matthew and Luke got derived from the Mark gospel and a hypothetical document called "Q" (German Quelle, which means "source". [Helms; Wilson] . However, since we have no manuscript from Q, no one could possibly determine its author or where or how he got his information or the date of its authorship. Again we get faced with unreliable methodology and obscure sources.
John, the last appearing Bible Gospel, presents us with long theological discourses from Jesus and could not possibly have come as literal words from a historical Jesus. The Gospel of John disagrees with events described in Mark, Matthew, and Luke. Moreover the book got written in Greek near the end of the first century, and according to Bishop Shelby Spong, the book "carried within it a very obvious reference to the death of John Zebedee (John 21:23)." [Spong]
Please understand that the stories themselves cannot serve as examples of eyewitness accounts since they came as products of the minds of the unknown authors, and not from the characters themselves. The Gospels describe narrative stories, written almost virtually in the third person. People who wish to portray themselves as eyewitnesses will write in the first person, not in the third person. Moreover, many of the passages attributed to Jesus could only have come from the invention of its authors. For example, many of the statements of Jesus claim to have come from him while allegedly alone. If so, who heard him? It becomes even more marked when the evangelists report about what Jesus thought. To whom did Jesus confide his thoughts? Clearly, the Gospels employ techniques that fictional writers use. In any case the Gospels can only serve, at best, as hearsay, and at worst, as fictional, mythological, or falsified stories [/b]

@davidylan

Thanks for that criticism about some of the Church leaders.

A lot of inconsistencies occurs in the Bible. Check out these and pls read it with open mind to receive guardians.


[b]The Bible is an unreliable authority because it contains numerous contradictions. Logically, if two statements are contradictory, at least one of them is false. The biblical contradictions therefore prove that the book has many false statements and is not infallible.

Examples of Old Testament Contradictions

The contradictions start in the opening chapters of the Bible, where inconsistent creation stories are told. Genesis chapter 1 says the first man and woman were made at the same time, and after the animals. But Genesis chapter 2 gives a different order of creation: man, then the animals, and then woman.

Genesis chapter 1 lists six days of creation, whereas chapter 2 refers to the "day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens." Genesis 1:2-3 claims that God created light and divided it from darkness on the first day; but Genesis 1:14-19 tells us the sun, moon, and stars weren't made until the fourth day.

Chapter 1 reports that the fruit trees were created before the man, while chapter 2 indicates they were made after him. Genesis 1:20 says the fowl were created out of the waters; Genesis 2:19 alleges they were formed from the ground.

Contradictions are also seen in the biblical story of a worldwide flood. According to Genesis 6:19-22, God ordered Noah to bring "of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort . . . into the ark." Nevertheless, Genesis 7:2-3 relates that the Lord ordered Noah to take into the ark the clean beasts and the birds by sevens, and only the unclean beasts by twos.

Genesis 8:4 reports that, as the waters of the flood receded, Noah’s ark rested on the mountains of Ararat in the seventh month. The very next verse, however, says the mountaintops could not be seen until the tenth month.

Genesis 8:13 describes the earth as being dry on the first day of the first month. But Genesis 8:14 informs us the earth was not dry until the twenty-seventh day of the second month.

The Old Testament contains an interesting contradiction in the story of the census taken by King David and the resulting punishment of the Israelites. God was so angered by the census that he sent a plague that killed 70,000 men. According to II Samuel 24:1, the Lord had caused David to take the census - which makes the punishment appear even more nonsensical. But an attempt was later made, at I Chronicles 21:1, to improve God’s image by claiming that Satan incited the census.

Further, the Old Testament is contradictory as to whether the Lord commanded the Israelites to sacrifice animals to him. At Jeremiah 7:22, God denies he ever gave the Israelites commandments about animal sacrifices. In contrast, Exodus 29:38-42 and many other verses depict God as requiring the Israelites to offer animal sacrifices.

Examples of New Testament Contradictions

In the New Testament, there are contradictions between the genealogies of Jesus given in the first chapter of Matthew and the third chapter of Luke.

Both genealogies begin with Jesus’ father, who is identified as Joseph (which is curious, given that Mary was supposedly impregnated by the Holy Ghost). But Matthew says Joseph’s father was Jacob, while Luke claims he was Heli. Matthew lists 26 generations between Jesus and King David, whereas Luke records 41. Matthew runs Jesus’ line of descent through David’s son Solomon, while Luke has it going through David’s son Nathan.

The story of Jesus' birth is also contradictory. Matthew 2:13-15 depicts Joseph and Mary as fleeing to Egypt with the baby Jesus immediately after the wise men from the east had brought gifts.

But Luke 2:22-40 claims that after the birth of Jesus, his parents remained in Bethlehem for the time of Mary’s purification (which was 40 days, under the Mosaic law). Afterwards, they brought Jesus to Jerusalem "to present him to the Lord," and then returned to their home in Nazareth. Luke mentions no journey into Egypt or visit by wise men from the east.

Concerning the death of Judas, the disloyal disciple, Matthew 27:5 states he took the money he had received for betraying Jesus, threw it down in the temple, and "went and hanged himself." To the contrary, Acts 1:18 claims Judas used the money to purchase a field and "falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out."

In describing Jesus being led to his execution, John 19:17 recounts that he carried his own cross. But Mark 15:21-23 disagrees by saying a man called Simon carried the cross.

As for the crucifixion, Matthew 27:44 tells us Jesus was taunted by both criminals who were being crucified with him. But Luke 23:39-43 relates that only one of the criminals taunted Jesus, the other criminal rebuked the one who was doing the taunting, and Jesus told the criminal who was defending him, "Today shalt thou be with me in paradise."

Regarding the last words of Jesus while on the cross, Matthew 27:46 and Mark 15:34 quote Jesus as crying with a loud voice, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Luke 23:46 gives his final words as, "Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit." John 19:30 alleges the last words were, "It is finished."

There are even contradictions in the accounts of the resurrection – the supposed event that is the very foundation of the Christian religion. Mark 16:2 states that on the day of the resurrection, certain women arrived at the tomb at the rising of the sun. But John 20:1 informs us they arrived when it was yet dark. Luke 24:2 describes the tomb as open when the women arrived, whereas Matthew 28:1-2 indicates it was closed. Mark 16:5 declares that the women saw a young man at the tomb, Luke 24:4 says they saw two men, Matthew 28:2 reports they saw an angel, and John 20:11-12 claims they saw two angels.

Also in the resurrection stories, there are contradictions as to the identity of the women who came to the tomb,[7] whether the men or angels the women saw were inside or outside the tomb,[8] whether the men or angels were standing or sitting,[9] and whether Mary Magdalene recognized the risen Jesus when he first appeared to her.[10]

As a final example of a New Testament contradiction, the conflicting accounts of Paul’s conversion can be cited. Acts 9:7 states that when Jesus called Paul to preach the gospel, the men who were with Paul heard a voice but saw no man. According to Acts 22:9, however, the men saw a light but didn't hear the voice speaking to Paul.

The foregoing examples are just a few of the hundreds of contradictions contained in the Old and New Testaments. Each contradiction is an instance where at least one of the verses is wrong. Thus, hundreds of contradictions mean there are at least hundreds of incorrect statements in the Bible.[/b]

There are more to come!

firdaus4us,

I must apologise on behalf of all the Christian posters thus far. No has posted a direct response to your initial request asking Christians "to confess". Please forgive this oversight on behalf of my brethren and allow me to rectify that wrong;

[size=16pt]Jesus is Lord!!!!!!![/size]

God (of the bible) bless

TV01:

I must apologise on behalf of all the Christian posters thus far. No has posted a direct response to your initial request asking Christians "to confess". Please forgive this oversight on behalf of my brethren and allow me to rectify that wrong;

Hi TV01,

I'd kindly like to ask that you exclude me from that apology - in all fairness I don't owe firdaus4us any apology so far, as long as his original post did not make any sense at all, judging from the content of his first entry on this thread. "Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father" (Phil. 2:11) is the quintessential confession of the Christian faith; but the gentleman is asking us to deny that confession, and I can't take part in his exercise!

firdaus4us:

It is now confirmed that u are not getting the messages of the Holy Quran right. Thanks God that at least u believe in the part(s), that "support" your argument!

My dear firdaus4us,

You still miss the point, and until you acknowledge the simple statements of the Qur'an about the roundabout arguments you're posting, there'll be no end to all the confusion you're helping yourself with. And no thanks, I never said I believed in any part(s) of the Qur'an to "support" my arguments. 

firdaus4us:

Well, all the verses u quoted just confirmed that Allah sent down Books before the Quran. Do u know that these books were sent to these prophets(for guardian over their wards) directly from God.

Your mistake again. *Allah* did not send down Books before the Qur'an, and what you're supposing is only a claim by Muhammad in the Qur'an which you have not taken the time to study and check out. In the quotes I referenced earlier from the Qur'an about *Allah* sending down and confirming the Law of Moses, have you pondered for a moment that it was Moses who actually wrote down what he was instructed by God to write? Let me reference a few texts to show how this is so -

Exo. 24:4 - And Moses wrote all the words of the LORD, and rose up early in the morning, and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel.

Exo. 34:27 - And the LORD said unto Moses, Write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words I have made a covenant with thee and with Israel.

Deut. 31:9 - And Moses wrote this law, and delivered it unto the priests the sons of Levi, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and unto all the elders of Israel.

You'll find pretty much the same situation with the rest of the writers in the Bible; and collectively these are all referred to as men inspired and moved by the Holy Spirit to write down whatever they did write. The point therefore is, God did not send down books before the Qur'an; rather, He inspired men to write down what He gave them in instruction to do - and that is what we know as the Law of Moses and the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

firdaus4us:

Also, God's Books to the prophets, basically contain His words/messages for mankind not the prophet words or his companions.

I may well agree with you that the message or words were God's own and not man's - which is precisely what your scholars missed, because you ought to have remembered this from the onset before quoting misdirected fellows who see the inspired messages only as man's own and not God's Word. The only point I disagree with you is this: God did not send down Books - rather, He both instructed and inspired the writers who subsequently penned down what we read today.

firdaus4us:

Do u know that Bible was written years after Jesus left the surface of the earth?

That is interesting to note - and you really have a big problem here. If the Bible was written years after Jesus left the earth, then please deal with these questions:

(1) Since the Bible did not exist in Jesus' day, where did He get the Old Testament quotes He used in His teachings in many places? Let me show you a few:

   ¤ when defeating the temptations of the Devil, Jesus clearly said in Matt. 4:4 --
      "It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
      Where did He get this quote from if the OT did not exist centuries earlier? (see Deut. 8:3).

   ¤ in commending John the Baptist as a true Prophet sent by God, this is what Jesus said in Matt. 11:10-11 --
     "For this is he, of whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee: Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist."
     Now, where did Jesus get this quote from if Malachi (another OT book) did not exist in His day?? (see Mal. 3:1).

   ¤ when refuting the wrong practices of His day, Jesus clearly said Matt. 21:13 --
     "It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer."
     Where then did Jesus get this quote from if not that Isaiah 56:7 already recorded it in the OT?

2. Now if the Bible was written years after Jesus left the surface of the earth, then perhaps the Qur'an got it all wrong by claiming otherwise! How else could the Qur'an claim that *Allah* sent down and confirmed the same Law of Moses, the Psalms of David (Sura 4:163 - "and to David We gave the Psalms", and several other Biblical narratives even before Jesus was born, and then some Muslim scholars today turn round and make the bogus claim that the Bible was written years after Jesus?

As for the rest of your story lines, pretty much the same common sense should make you see the fallacy of your arguments; because in trying to "disprove" the Bible, you only end up disproving the Qur'an that claims *Allah* sent down and confirmed what you're arguing against!

This "Allah" sef! On the last day the mischievous fellow must be arrested and charged with decieving millions of people!

In one word he claims to have "sent" down and "confirmed" the torah and the psalms and yet he's people claim that bible has been corrupted. Who could have corrupted "Allah's" "sacred" words?

Allah and Momo must be sent to prison for life without possibility of parole!

@davidylan do you mean allah the moon god that later became allah the Muslim god in a split second.

@firdaus4them,I hope you can last the rest of this thread because so far,you guys start them and disappear when the going gets rough.
I just hope you are ready to cook if not quietly turn off the grill.

To second my friend TV01,Jesus is indeed Lord and there's nothing anyone can do 'bout it.

@ Babyosisi,

Yes that very fellow called "Allah" the one some misguided fellows where worshipping as the moon god before he blinded the eyes of one renegade called Mohammed who in turn decided to decieve his followers using the name of his itinerant "friend" allah!
The fellow does not seem to remember with what he "created" his own followers, in one place he says sperm dot ( i'm not sure he even remembers his high school biology), next he says clay, dust, water! Is the guy serious?
Another place the same fellow called "Allah" who claims not to have a son nor father says "we"! Who is he refering to or was he seeing visions?

maybe the 'we' was him allah(the moon god), his 3 daughter goddess and Muhammad (WAS),abi? lol.

Read more about allah.

The Gods of the Quraysh
The Quraysh tribe into which Muhammad was born was particularly devoted to Allah, the moon god, and especially to Allah's three daughters who were viewed as intercessors between the people and Allah.

The worship of the three goddesses, Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, and Manat, played a significant role in the worship at the Kabah in Mecca. The first two daughters of Allah had names which were feminine forms of Allah.

The literal Arabic name of Muhammad's father was Abd-Allah. His uncle's name was Obied-Allah. These names reveal the personal devotion that Muhammad's pagan family had to the worship of Allah, the moon god.

Praying Toward Mecca
An Allah idol was set up at the Kebah along with all the other idols. The pagans prayed toward Mecca and the Kabah because that is where their gods were stationed[/color][color=#990000].

It only made sense to them to face in the direction of their god and then pray. Since the idol of their moon god, Allah, was at Mecca, they prayed toward Mecca.

The worship of the moon god extended far beyond the Allah-worship in Arabia. The entire fertile crescent was involved in the worship of the moon.

This, in part, explains the early success of Islam among Arab groups that traditionally had worshiped the moon god.

The use of the crescent moon as the symbol for Islam which is placed on the flags of Islamic nations and on the top of mosques and minarets is a throwback to the days when Allah was worshiped as the moon god in Mecca.

While this may come as a surprise to many Christians who have wrongly assumed that Allah was simply another name for the God of the Bible, educated Muslims generally understand this point.

More details if interested,

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/islam.htm

Some people, would quote that a Muslim confess to support their belief and attest that , and that the confession statement should be used to qualify the Muslims, all over the world. Addressed as an authoritative source.

Now some Muslims do the same in this thread, and interestingly enough, they apply the sense of reasoning that they choose not to apply when they are committing the same slanter.

I find this very interesting

My say to this Christian that confesses is pretty simple, if what he says has valid religious backings in regards to original doctrine plus facts, then it is substantial otherwise it should be rejected.

@babyosisi and davidylan

Doing what you do best, attacking personality rather than talking about what the thread starteer said. Have you heared of what they call, the adhominem fallacy? You might want to read that, might educate you

logical,this is the first time I've seen you make some sense.
A muslim lifts some writing by a "Christian" and seeks to hold that as valid opinion despite what the Bible says in a bid to discredit Christianity.

In Christianity there are no hadiths or extra writings.
The Bible is the full and final authority and if anything written by anyone,by whatever label, contradicts the Bible,it is more useful if it were used to wipe the derriere after a massive bowel movement.

By the way,the history of allah,I'm sure you know too well,I pasted it for the benefit of others, so pretend you didn't see it.

@babyosisi
I am just who I am always are, objective and reasonable, with sincere intentions and from what I found out, you are confused my dear.

Logical:

@babyosisi
I am just who I am always are, objective and reasonable, with sincere intentions and from what I found out, you are confused my dear.

You are certainly entitled to your opinions m'dear and I will not seek to harm you.
That is the beauty of democracy, found in Christ also but not found in autocracy.

Logical:

@babyosisi
I am just who I am always are, objective and reasonable, with sincere intentions and from what I found out, you are confused my dear.

Dear much as i hate to break the bad news to you, the confusion is entirely in your camp! First you accuse me of "attacking personality", if that "personality" is in the form of pointing out the inconsistencies in the quran and the incongruity of the postings from firdaus4them, then i am guilty as charged!
You have "successfully" skirted every attempt at answering questions directly pointed at you and at the same time you pride yourself in being "sincere, objective and reasonable"?
I think not!

babyosisi
I read through the site. For the reply please check:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongods.html

To read about Dr. Robert a Morey, check:

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

http://www.revisionisthistory.org/debate2.html.

http://www3.sympatico.ca/shabir.ally/badawi.htm

To others,
If you wish to learn and know who is Allah, visit this site:

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongods.html

Unfortunately the christians in general are either taking their religion as a jest or because of the station of the organ in the body known as the Heart, they do not see the truth. If the haert is good the whole body is good, but if it is bad so does the whole body.

Some even called Allah the moon god. They do not remember that in Igbo language God is called Chineke. Please forgive me , if I did not spell it correctly. Even the Yoruba that i belong to, I do speak it very badly and do write it even worse.

Again, in the Christian Bible written in arabic, God is known as Allah. To my sister babyosisi; I wonder why the Muslims destroyed the idols that you have mentioned and the other 357 when makka was conquered. Why is it that the muslims do not have any Imagery or idol, infact Muslims are known as Iconoclasts. By the way why do the declarationof faith is really the declaration of Oneness of God. Why is it that when you read the Qur'an and the hadith you will see that Idol worshipping and association of anything with the Creator are stated as unacceptable. By the way you raised a very good point about the Qur'an, you finally mentioned that hadith is the collection of what muhammad said, did and did not object people from doing. Infact you have proven the statement that Qur'an is not the saying of Muhammad. Muhammad is not the author of this work, rather someone else. As you know, Muhammad said that it was from Jibril and said that Jibril got it from God. You need to read the Qur'an and see the benefit of it in your life. Since you are a Doctor you will become a better Doctor, knowing fully well that God is the real Doctor and He works through you.

Please pay attention to the fact taht even the christians agree that the Muslims states that Muhammad (AS) went to heaven and return on a single night, lifted from the earth into heavens from jerusalem, the spot is known as the Dome of the Rock. Muhammad also came back before the morning prayer, even as he arrived back to makka. This in itself is a big miracle, but the Biggest of the miracles is The Qur'an itself. You need to read it.

Just a note on the website listed, on the sacrifice ordered by God that Ibrahiim should perform on his son, the Muslims said and mentain to this day and to the future until end of time that it is Ismail, the only son at sometime in the life of Ibrahiim. The Muslims perform the rites of hajj  in part based on this. The christians and Jews believe that it is Isiaqa, but there is no truth to it, because as a none first son, there was no way that isiaqa was never an only son to Ibrahiim. From the Bible, you will see that there is no selling of birth rights.

I am not using the bible selectively to support any of my argument. I use the Bible verses that the Qur'an support, since I am writing to a christian audience. When Islam states that Bible is corrupted, it means that after each of thes prophets were no more amongst his people, sometime thereafter, there were changes in exact sentense, wording, elimination of some portions, insertion of other foreign statements and ideas, others too numerous to mention. For example, you continue to rewrite and upgrade the Words of GOD? This is unacceptable. No one has the audacity to change what comes from God, especially when the prophet it is given the authority to never doctored it. How come can later generation do this.

You see, God in His infinite wisdom did not allow the corrupters hide all the truth from mankind. God Almighty will reveal the truth to who ever He wills. For example, a liar may cover the track of lying, but there is that subtle  slipup. You can always find the truth if you search with a pure heart. Happy trail.

@ Olabowale,

I will be very pleased if you could just answer this two questions, pls no long story!

1.

From the Bible, you will see that there is no selling of birth rights.

What about Esau's selling of his birthright to Jacob in the book of Genesis?

2.

When Islam states that Bible is corrupted, it means that after each of thes prophets were no more amongst his people, sometime thereafter, there were changes in exact sentense, wording, elimination of some portions, insertion of other foreign statements and ideas, others too numerous to mention. For example, you continue to rewrite and upgrade the Words of GOD? This is unacceptable. No one has the audacity to change what comes from God, especially when the prophet it is given the authority to never doctored it. How come can later generation do this.

Pls is it possible to supply us with the ORIGINAL copy of the bible "sent down" to us and "confirmed" by Allah?
I'm sure Allah in his greatness must have ensured the preservation of his ORIGINAL bible in order to shame the christians!

@davidylan; I think you must remember that that still did not take away the fact that Essau was on earth longer than Jacob, further there is no support of this topic in the Qur'an. My brother you must never forget just because a person is poor, he does not really loose all the days, weeks or years that he/she has over that has been spent on the surface of this earth. If you are a yoruba man, you must have heard when it is stated that Olowo lagba ' the wealthy are the elders'. it does not mean they are alive longer. For sure, Ismail did not sell his right of birth to Isiaqa.

It is not the position of the Muslims to preserve or help the christians about the failure to have seen an authetic Bible. The Qur'an is a proof enough. By the way which version of the Bible is real then. Is it KJV, NKJV, the American versions. For example the one that I used in High school prior to 71, is different from the one given to the new entrants of 71.

It is very hard to deal with you. I have to restrict my tongue to deal with you. You will go far in life if you are less harsh. You will catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

olabowale:

@davidylan; I think you must remember that that still did not take away the fact that Essau was on earth longer than Jacob, further there is no support of this topic in the Qur'an. My brother you must never forget just because a person is poor, he does not really loose all the days, weeks or years that he/she has over that has been spent on the surface of this earth. If you are a yoruba man, you must have heard when it is stated that Olowo lagba ' the wealthy are the elders'. it does not mean they are alive longer. For sure, Ismail did not sell his right of birth to Isiaqa.

1. You did not answer the question! You said the bible does not mention selling of birthrights, it was clear you had not come across the story of Esau and Jacob! That singular act ensured the covenant of God originally meant for the first child Esau, passed to Jacob!
2. The quran is not a reliable "support" for bible events seeing it is simply a collection of handpicked and distorted versions of biblical events "sent down" to Mohammed by Allah.
3. Ishmeal had NO birthright, that much has been over stressed in the bible! The birthright/covenant was meant for the child born to Abraham BY SARAH HIS WIFE NOT A BONDWOMAN!

olabowale:

It is not the position of the Muslims to preserve or help the christians about the failure to have seen an authetic Bible. The Qur'an is a proof enough. By the way which version of the Bible is real then. Is it KJV, NKJV, the American versions. For example the one that I used in High school prior to 71, is different from the one given to the new entrants of 71.

Neither is it the position of muslims to keep bleating about the corruption that has happened to the bible if it is not their position to help us preserve our bible! Allah claimed in the quran to have "sent down" and "confirmed" the bible, where is it? And to who did he give that bible? Why are his people the muslims not in a position to preserve that sacred document allegedly "sent down" by Allah? Why did Allah "send down" TWO DISIMILAR HOLY BOOKS?

olabowale:

It is very hard to deal with you. I have to restrict my tongue to deal with you. You will go far in life if you are less harsh. You will catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

It is "very hard" to deal with me especially if you;
a. have no credible proof to back up your claims
b. regurgitate questionable hearsay as facts!

@davidylan; I thought one could be soffisticated, but am probably wrong so I will not dignify you with any response. Unfortunately, America is like the Old Adeola Odutola Grammar School in Ijebu Ode.

olabowale:

@davidylan; I thought one could be soffisticated, but am probably wrong so I will not dignify you with any response. Unfortunately, America is like the Old Adeola Odutola Grammar School in Ijebu Ode.

When the initial poster came with the ridiculous "christians confess" topic, christians did not run away using lame excuses such as "i will not dignify you with any response", the plain truth is you are not responding not because you feel slighted but because there is really no hiding place for your disjointed posts! You all skirted the main questions put across to you by christians on this board and cower behind "personal attacks" as reason for not being able to put up a spirited defence of your quran!

You told us our bible was corrupted, none of you is yet to answer the question:

1. where is the original bible Allah "sent down" and "confirmed"?
2. who corrupted the bible, when and where?
3. Why did Allah send down two DISIMILAR books?

The information from the Quran was not written down. It was recited by heart and memorised by certain men who ended up dead. Then a man decided to gather the information and write it down but there was so many variations of the stories, in the end what was composed was what we call the Quran today.

Today many Muslims follow Hadiths which are so called extensions of the Quran which have been written by men 'guided' by the Holy Spirit. So the Quran is in the same position as the Bible.

By the way Islam did not originate with Mohammed. it was an ancient religion that worshipped the female counterpart to Allah until Men decided to write out the female divinity out of religion. Same goes for Christianity when the female counter part of 'God' was reduced to Mother of Christ.

Quran and Bible been tampered with.

@davidylan;
In all my years alive, I have never ran away from anyone. In all my years in america I have always stood and take it like a man. Now that I am a little bit wiser, I believe that i choose my fight wisely. I am ready to discuss with a person whose mindset is not the Motorpark/garage type. Yes as earlier stated, I do not want to engage in a tit for tat with anyone.

All you said about the Qur'an is wrong. The Qur'an during the life of Prophet Muhammad (AS), was written down, every word of it, not by one scribe, but by many and it was copied by yet a good portion of the community. It was memorized and the injuctions were acted upon. The Qur'an was used and recited daily by the community in prayers and in community events, eg marriage ceremonies, naming ceremonies and even when two or more people and depart from each other/one another. Even the community members corrected one another when any reciter made mistakes. The prophet was even corrected once by a companion. This tradition remain even up to this day. During the month of Ramadan the Qur'an was recited once by Muhammad to Jibril, and Jibril recited back to Muhammad. In the last Ramadan of Muhammad, it was recited twice by each. Inshort, the Qur'an was completely written down during this period, but it was not made into a book in any form.It was during the life of the first caliphah when the pagan arab tribes in other parts of arabia were killing  a good portion of those people who memorized the Qur'an completely when they were invited amongst them under the pretension that the are now muslims and need to be taught the recitation of Qur'an.

In one ocassion, 100 of this people were lost. What the Muslims did was then collected the Qur'an in totality in a book form in order to preserve it in the way it was when the prophet was alive. After the death of the first caliphah, there was no such incident like the desasters mentioned above , even in the lifetime of the third caliphah, but the  religion of Islam had spread up to far away corners of the world where Arabic is a foreign language, hence it was essential to produce a larger numbers of Qur'an based on the first. There were 4 different styles produced at this ocassion; The Kuffa, Bagdad, Makka/Madina and Basra Qur'an. This was based on the considerations of the accents of the people. For example the Indian Subcontinent pronounces W as V. The Yorubas will recite in Yoruba accent, different from Hausa and yet both are different from the Igbo. However when you hear it you will know what is being recited. Walsh is the style common to west africa and it is the predominant style in Morocco.

About your equating Qur'an with the Bible in collection and in the purity of its present copy relative to the original, they are not comparable. You can go to many nationalmuseum in Europe you will find fragment of the original, even before it was made to the first book form. A copy is in Turkey national Museum and I think you have patchments in Britain. In the Qur'an God said that the Bible is corrupted from the original that He sent to the prophets that received it. This occurences took place after each prophet was not among his community any longer.

A proof of this corruption is the ever changing content of the Bible and the rewriting and reediting of it from time to time. A glaring example is the Catholic Bible having more books than the Protestants. Yet it is the catholic denomination that existed before the protestant. Yet they practice the same religion, but they can not read each others Bible.

My advice to you is that you should find time to read a translation of the Qur'an in English. Today, there is Qur'an inpure Igbo language. It was translated by Igbo Muslim scholars.

@ Olabowale,

Yet you skirted every question i asked by doing a merry go round issues i did not ask you! I cant remember asking you about the history of the quran! Please read the questions again!

About your equating Qur'an with the Bible in collection and in the purity of its present copy relative to the original, they are not comparable.

God forbid that i should ever make such a comparison even in my dreams. I hope you do understand what DISIMILAR means!

A proof of this corruption is the ever changing content of the Bible and the rewriting and reediting of it from time to time.

Proof? In all my centuries on this earth i have always read the very same bible! Where has the editing been from? Of course there are other versions of the bible to make it easier for those who may find it difficult to understand the 18th century english in which the original king james version was written! I have no idea about your allegation of editing!

@davidylan
Is it true that Ibraham is the father of faith? I doubt that (jugding 4m ur pst) for he to have child out of wedlock. Or what are u trying to say, pls, in clear terms?

Pls explain: Why did Allah send down two DISIMILAR books?

firdaus4us:

@davidylan
Is it true that Ibraham is the father of faith? I doubt that (jugding 4m your pst) for he to have child out of wedlock. Or what are u trying to say, please, in clear terms?

Please explain: Why did Allah send down two DISIMILAR books?

1. Abraham WAS and IS the father of faith yes he had a child out of wedlock but anyone could have done that! Imagine not having a child to inherit your wealth and having it go to your servant. David had a child out of wedlock, Solomon, Moses had his own failings too! God is a God of mercy who is willing to forgive even when we err!

BTW in the same vein, Mohammed is the "prophet of God"? With over 30 wives, marrying a 6yr old, so much murder and intolerance, countless slaves? I doubt the veracity of his prophethood too!

2. Allah sent the Quran?
Allah "sent down" and "confirmed" the Bible?
Yet the message contained in the two books and their methods of propagation are completely opposites! From the same God? Please Explain!