Jesus Claimed To Be God

It’s a well known Christian doctrine that Jesus was God, and part of the Trinity. However, dissidents from both Islam and Atheism have come to claim that the historical Jesus did not actually claim to be the Son of God, God in the flesh. Rather, they propose — He merely claimed to be an apocalyptic prophet and the Messiah. As decades passed by, His theology evolved over time much like how Hercules (a once real historical figure) was deified after his death into a God. Therefore, the Christian doctrine bears no historical validity on who Jesus was! Unfortunately for these sappy conspiracy theorists, it is simply false that Jesus did not claim to be God.

We will start with the Gospel of John. The evidence for the divinity of Jesus in the Gospel of John is, on its face, irrefutable and undeniable.

[John 1:1] In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

So, it is simply not debatable that the Word mentioned in John 1:1 is in fact God. A few verses later, it is made abundantly clear who the Word is.

[John 1:14] The Word became flesh and took up residence among us. We observed His glory, the glory as the One and Only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.

There you have it, the Word is Jesus Christ, and Jesus is God. There are a few other verses in John’s Gospel which simply eliminate any possibility of Jesus somehow not claiming to be God, and this being the clear view of Jesus’ followers. Such would include the following claims made by Jesus:

 [John 20:30-31] Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of His disciples that are not written in this book. But these are written so that you may believe Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and by believing you may have life in His name.

[John 14:6-7] Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. “If you know Me, you will also know My Father. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.”

[John 10:25-33]“I did tell you and you don’t believe,” Jesus answered them. “The works that I do in My Father’s name testify about Me. But you don’t believe because you are not My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish—ever! No one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all. No one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.“The Father and I are one.” Again the Jews picked up rocks to stone Him. Jesus replied, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. Which of these works are you stoning Me for?” “We aren’t stoning You for a good work,” the Jews answered, “but for blasphemy, because You—being a man—make Yourself God.”

[John 14:8-9] Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us.” Jesus replied, “Philip, I have been with you all this time, and still you do not know Me? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

[John 8:58-59] Jesus said to them, “I assure you: Before Abraham was, I am.” At that, they picked up stones to throw at Him. But Jesus was hidden and went out of the temple complex.

In case you are not entirely sure where Jesus claims to be God in John 8:58-59, it’s when He says “I am”, which was how God identified Himself in Exodus 3:14 in the Old Testament. That’s also why the Jews tried to stone Him for saying it — because He made Himself equal with God. In fact, the Jews are outright said to be trying to kill Jesus, our Lord, for making Himself equal with God in John 5:16-18.

So really, John makes it indescribably clear that Jesus was God. However, this is where critics like Bart Ehrman jump in, and claim that John is the latest of the four Gospels, and thus obviously evolved from the other Gospels, and then Bart Ehrman claims that the other Gospels are the ones that do not identify Jesus as being God. Now despite this being irrelevant because of the extensive historical documentation that shows the author of John was indeed the historical John the Elder, meaning that the author of this Gospel was not writing of a developed theology, rather a first-hand experience and following of Jesus, let us play along with the claims of these deniers.

So, do the other Gospels make it explicitly clear that Jesus is the Son of God? Yes. Let us see some examples of Jesus clearly saying and being clearly said to be God or equal to God in the rest of the four Gospels.

[Matthew 11:27] All things have been entrusted to Me by My Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son desires to reveal Him.

[Matthew 28:19] Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,

[Matthew 16:13-17] When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist; others, Elijah; still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” “But you,” He asked them, “who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God!” And Jesus responded, “Simon son of Jonah, you are blessed because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father in heaven.

[Mark 1:1] The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.

 [Mark 14:60-64] Then the high priest stood up before them all and questioned Jesus, “Don’t You have an answer to what these men are testifying against You?” But He kept silent and did not answer anything. Again the high priest questioned Him, “Are You the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?” “I am,” said Jesus, “and all of you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.” Then the high priest tore his robes and said, “Why do we still need witnesses? You have heard the blasphemy! What is your decision?” And they all condemned Him to be deserving of death.

In fact, all the Gospels, aside from John, even record God the Father in heaven declaring that Jesus is His Son.

[Matthew 3:17] And there came a voice from heaven: This is My beloved Son. I take delight in Him!

[Luke 9:35] A voice came from the cloud, saying, “This is My Son, whom I have chosen: Listen to Him!”

[Mark 1:11] And a voice came from heaven: “You are My beloved Son; in You I am well pleased.”

It is thus extraordinarily evident that all the Gospels record Jesus as God. Wait a minute! What about the rest of the New Testament? The Gospels are just four books of the New Testament, in which there are twenty-seven! Surely, if Jesus was God, all these other books would also record Jesus is God, correct?! Correct.

[Hebrews 1:7-8] And about the angels He says: He makes His angels winds, and His servants a fiery flame but to the Son: Your throne, God, is forever and ever, and the scepter of Your kingdom is a scepter of justice.

[Titus 2:13] while we wait for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.

[Romans 9:5] The ancestors are theirs, and from them, by physical descent, came the Messiah, who is God over all, praised forever. Amen.

 [2 Peter 1:1-2] Simeon Peter, a slave and an apostle of Jesus Christ: To those who have obtained a faith of equal privilege with ours through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ. May grace and peace be multiplied to you through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.

[Colossians 2:9] For the entire fullness of God’s nature dwells bodily in Christ,

[Phillipians 2:5-6] Make your own attitude that of Christ Jesus, who, existing in the form of God, did not consider equality with God as something to be used for His own advantage.

[James 1:1] James, a slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ: To the 12 tribes in the Dispersion.

[Revelation 22:12-13]“Look! I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me to repay each person according to what he has done.  I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.

[Revelation 17:14] “These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful.”

[Phillipians 2:10-11] so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow—of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth— and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

(these verses are written by Peter, James, the author of Hebrews, Paul, and John)

So, outside of the Gospels, Jesus is declaring Himself as Alpha and the Omega (which is a title that was used to describe God the Father), and Jesus was being declared as the King of kings and Lord of lords (which was another title used to describe God the Father).

Hold on! Surely, if Jesus, the prophesied Messiah was God, it would be attested to in the Old Testament as well? For if the coming Messiah, redeemer of all men was God, this MUST be something told to us in the Old Testament! Is this not true?

The question now is, does the Old Testament make it clear Jesus is God? Yes. For one, the Old Testament says the following about the coming Messiah:

[Isaiah 9:6-7] For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us, And the government will rest on his shoulders; And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. The dominion will be vast,
and its prosperity will never end. He will reign on the throne of David
and over his kingdom, to establish and sustain it with justice and righteousness from now on and forever. The zeal of the Lord of Hosts will accomplish this.

Furthermore, it is a well known fact that Jesus references Himself as the Son of Man, at least 80 times in the New Testament (despite conspiracy theorists on this issue like Bart Ehrman). Now, it may seem as if the title ‘Son of Man’ shows Jesus is not God, however we should not rest on our own understanding of the concept of the Son of Man, instead we must go to the Old Testament to understand who the Son of Man actually is.

[Daniel 7:13-14] I continued watching in the night visions, and I saw One like a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was escorted before Him. He was given authority to rule, and glory, and a kingdom; so that those of every people, nation, and language should serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed.

So, according to the Old Testament, the son of man is clearly a God-like figure, who approaches the Ancient of Days (the Father), and is given authority to rule a divine kingdom, eternally. This figure is clearly God! And Jesus CONSTANTLY references Himself as the Son of Man, over 80 time in the Bible, meaning Jesus is claiming to be in all four Gospels the figure of the Old Testament who will be given authority and dominion over all peoples of all nations of all languages, for all eternity. This is a clear case of Old Testament confirmation of the divinity of Jesus. Furthermore, the Old Testament possesses the full theology of the Trinity, so there’s that too. Continuing, we are told in the Old Testament that only God has the ability to forgive sins, as well as this being reiterated in the New Testament.

[Isaiah 43:25] “It is I who sweep away your transgressions for My own sake and remember your sins no more.

[Mark 2:7] “Why does He speak like this? He’s blaspheming! Who can forgive sins but God alone?”

Although this, Jesus moves on to claim that He has the power to forgive sins as well, meaning He is God as Jesus is claiming a task of God upon Himself.

[Mark 2:10] But so you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins,” He told the paralytic,

The Old Testament obviously says Jesus is God. It is true that Jesus is the divine Son of God. The evidence for this continues piling up. Dissenters of this irrefutable Biblical concept also claim Jesus did not say to be worshiped, however Jesus accepted and received worship all the time.

[Matthew 2:11] Entering the house, they saw the child with Mary His mother, and falling to their knees, they worshiped Him. Then they opened their treasures and presented Him with gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

[Matthew 28:9] Suddenly Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” They came to Him, grasped His feet, and worshiped Him.

This shows Jesus is God, as when an angel was worshiped, the angel stopped the person from worshiping him and said only God is to be worshiped.

[Revelation 22:8-9] I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. When I heard and saw them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had shown them to me. But he said to me, “Don’t do that! I am a fellow slave with you, your brothers the prophets, and those who keep the words of this book. Worship God.”

However, Jesus accepted all worship. This would mean in accordance with the Book of Revelation (the final book of the New Testament) that Jesus is God. Now, I can cite many other verses in the Gospels and New Testament to continue proving that Jesus is God, such as Matthew 14:33, John 20:28, and 1 Timothy 3:16, but the point has been made obvious, Jesus is and claimed to be God. Now, we will look at the historical evidence for this claim and see that the earliest Christian writers outside of the authors of the New Testament, all thought Jesus was clearly God.

Clement of Rome, whom according to the historical evidence wrote as early as 70 AD, says this:

[1 Clement: Prologue 1] The Church of God which sojourns at Rome, to the Church of God sojourning at Corinth, to them that are called and sanctified by the will of God, through our Lord Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, from Almighty God through Jesus Christ, be multiplied.

As early as 70 AD, historical Christians have quickly recognized Jesus as God. This was likely before John even wrote his Gospel. Let us see some other writers. Polycarp, writing in 130 AD, says this in the Martyrdom of Polycarp, Chapter 14, Verse 1:

So they did not nail him, but tied him. Then he, placing his hands behind him and being bound to the stake, like a noble ram out of a great flock for an offering, a burnt sacrifice made ready and acceptable to God, looking up to heaven said: “O Lord God Almighty, the Father of Your beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ, through whom we have received the knowledge of You, the God of angels and powers and of all creation and of the whole race of the righteous, who live in Your presence;

Justin Martyr, writing from anywhere between 100-165 AD, in First Apology writes:

For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water.

Ignatius of Antioch, writing in 96 AD, says this:

We have also as a Physician the Lord our God Jesus the Christ the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin.  For ‘the Word was made flesh.’ Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passable body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.

Irenaeus, writing in 180 AD, says in his book, Against Heresies, Book 1, Chapter 10:

The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: . . . one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father ‘to gather all things in one,’ and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Savior, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, ‘every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess; to him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all

Other early Christian writers like Tertullian in 200 AD and Origen in 180-250 AD, Mathetes in 160 AD, the Shepard of Hermas as early as 80 AD, Tatian in 170 AD, Athenagoras in 177 AD, Theophilus of Antioch in 180 AD, amongst many others all record Jesus as being God.

So, as we have seen, the New Testament without doubt makes Jesus as God, the Old Testament says Jesus is God, and all the earliest Christians in the historical record think  Jesus is in fact God. It’s a common myth that Jesus’ divinity was made up in the Council of Nicaea, in 325 AD. In reality, people who claim this have no idea what actually happened at the Council of Nicaea — every single one of the hundreds of people that were present at the Council, except three Arians (whom were heretics) accepted the divinity of Jesus. If you want to know what really happened at the Council of Nicaea, click here. To be fair, there was indeed one early Christian who didn’t think Jesus was God — that would be Marcion. Although to be even more fair, Marcion was declared a heretic by almost the entire early Church. Some heathen also try to spuriously use some verses in the New Testament to try to claim Jesus says He was not God. One such example is:

[Luke 18:18-19] A ruler asked Him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” “Why do you call Me good?” Jesus asked him. “No one is good but One—God.

Contrary to the claims of the heathen, Jesus in no way denies His being God here. Rather, Jesus is simply instructing this man that if he were to call anyone good, it would be the same as calling them God. That is all Jesus was saying. In fact, this proves Jesus is God, because Jesus IS GOOD! Indeed, Jesus is entirely sinless (1 Peter 2:22, 2 Corinthians 5:21, Hebrews 4:15, 1 John 3:5), and thus Jesus is good. In fact, Jesus even called Himself good, which decimates this argument and shows Jesus is God.

[John 10:11] I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

Some other heathen try to claim Jesus is not God, because of instances like when Jesus said only the Father knows the day and the hour and not Himself, when Jesus said that the Father was greater than Him, or when he had to eat and sleep (in which God doesn’t need to do), or that when He died for our sins (and God cannot die). However, all these people forget that according to the Bible, Jesus was temporarily lowered from Godhood to manhood when He came to Earth (Hebrews 2:91 Timothy 3:16), He became flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:14), and while temporarily lowered, He was temporarily below God, and thus did things like pray to the Father. However, after He rose from the dead, He ascended back into Heaven, at the right hand of the Father as God (Mark 16:19), and at the Ascension, once He ascended back into heaven, He was then again fully God and ceased doing all these things. In fact, Jesus even told us to pray to Him in His name, and we see people praying to Jesus in the Holy Bible.

[John 14:14] If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.

[1 Corinthians 1:2] To God’s church at Corinth, to those who are sanctified in Christ Jesus and called as saints, with all those in every place who call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord—both their Lord and ours.

Also remember you can also pray to the Father (Psalms 116:41 John 5:142 Chronicles 6:24Jeremiah 29:12). Anyways, this argument against Jesus being God entirely ignores that these things only applied to Jesus while He was temporarily man, but no longer any more from now and forever on. Some claim that Jesus becoming man shows He is not God, because God does not change (Malachi 3:6), however Christians have already solved this problem for centuries with the knowledge of Hypostatic Union, which is to say, Jesus was both fully God and fully man at the same time whilst on Earth. However, the heathen are not done here — they then claim the idea that Jesus was fully God and fully man at the same time is a self-contradiction! Saying Jesus is God and man is like saying a square circle can exist,  right? No. Remember, according to the Trinity, God is one being, three persons. Jesus is fully God in being, fully man in person, so there is no contradiction.

In conclusion, Jesus is God. The New Testament says so, the Old Testament says so, all the early Christians say so, Jesus says so, and we’ve seen all the arguments against this fail. Next time you hear someone claim that Jesus is not God, remember the following verse from the Holy Bible.

[1 John 2:22] Who is the liar, if it is not the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, who denies the Father and the Son.

______________________

READ MORE:

Historical Evidence for the Exodus

84931192288904666f7e3e4cbc8d0196

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – Authors of the Gospels?

5431649-the-gospel-according-to-john-grungy-background-stock-photo-bible

Advertisements

49 thoughts on “Jesus Claimed To Be God

  1. To Scientific Christian: I have admired your apologetic commitment as you carefully analyzed the Scriptures for the edification of Mango Juice. I believe you worked very earnestly and bravely for His Glory (Yehoshuah). In the final analysis, He is Love and all of our words, arguments, and intellectualizations do not add or detract one iota from this Truth. In Him (only) is salvation and, again, nothing we say (or do) add or detract one iota from this Truth of the Thought of Creation. He freely offers His Love and Salvation to us (including Mango Juice) and all of us must choose whether we wish to accept them or not. We do not need to argue beyond the testament and witness of His Resurrection to credit Him as our Creator. As far as I know, no one in the history of humanity died (of their own will) and then rose from the dead (of their own will) to save us from eternal perdition. If this testament is not enough for any of us (Mango Juice included), not even someone we know coming back from the dead to proclaim it to us will change our heart. Our heart will either accept or deny who Yehoshuah is and what He offers. There is no middle ground. His Spirit has moved me to write what you read because nothing in life makes sense without Him. He is the Truth and the Life and I love Him far more than anything else in life. Amen.

    Like

  2. Look brother, the videos I posted when Mr Wood was being shut-up are not out of context. In fact, it exposes how he quotes the Quran out of context. He was challenging Dr Zakir Naik for a debate? I’m asking you what is there to debate about? The guy is clearly misquoting Muslim sources and fooling the public.

    Coming to the Muslim belief of the Christian Bible. My friend, you are trying to understand the Quran by cherry picking specific verses that suit your cause. These commentators have knowledge of the Quran and hadith that is why they are qualified to give their comments and explain the verses to us. I have quoted other verses that you never responded to. The Muslim belief is that the current Bible is a fabricated book, it may contain the word of God but it is undoubtedly fabricated. The verses and hadith confirm it. If you insist on believing David Wood or whatever then you are free to do what you like. It doesn’t change the truth.

    You said : “You quote a Hadith — which basically admits the Bible is preserved! It says don’t believe what the Christians say, only believe everything that is revealed by Allah — and as we’ve seen according to Qur’an 3:3 and 5:47 and various other verses in the Qur’an, this simply includes the Gospel and Torah (and Psalms). So this basically admits that you must follow all the revelations. Where Muslims got the idea that the Bible is corrupt even though the Qur’an says that it’s preserved and the manuscripts show the Bible is preserved is ridiculous.”

    How does that hadith admit that the Bible is preserved? it says ” “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’” I’ve already told you that the Bible is not the taurat or the injeel. This verse explains the Muslim belief of the Christian Bible perfectly. You should read it then read its commentary.

    “Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.”(Quran 2:79)

    Also, read :

    Narrated Ubaidullah: “Ibn ‘Abbas said, ‘Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah’s Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, ‘It is from Allah,’ to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!’ (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur’an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)”

    Need anything more?

    You don’t accept the KJV? I thought you were a protestant. About the RCV not being the oldest, you’re missing the point here. Adding or deleting verses from the Bible is NOT allowed as per (Revelation 22:18-19). What gave the protestants the right to consider the apocrypha a fabrication? That is my question.

    You never responded to the argument about the RSV 1952 version. And there is only one Qur’an.

    “Even hostile critics of Islam have grudgingly vouched for the purity of the Holy Qur’ân: “THERE IS PROBABLY IN THE WORLD NO OTHER BOOK WHICH HAS REMAINED TWELVE CENTURIES (now fourteen) WITH SO PURE A TEXT.” — (Sir William Muir)”(IsTheBibleGodsWord Pg.5)

    With that done, I want to show you some of the fabrications which have entered the Bible. And since you believe it to be from God, I take it you can explain them to me. There are :

    1) Contradictions :

    WHAT DID THE LORD DECREE 3 YEARS FAMINE OR 7 YEARS FAMINE?

    II SAMUEL 24:13

    13.So Gad came to David, and told him, and said unto him, Shall seven years of famine come unto thee in thy land? Or wilt thou flee three months before thine enemies, while they pursue, thee?

    I CHRONICLES 21:11

    11. So Gad came to David, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD, Choose thee
    12. Either three years’ famine; or three months to be destroyed before thy foes, while that the sword of thine enemies overtaketh thee;

    If God is the Author of every single word, comma and full-stop in the Bible, as the Christians claim, then is He the Author of the above arithmetical discrepancy as well?

    THREE OR SEVEN?

    Note the reproduction of above. Compare both the quotations. 2 Samuel 24:13 tells us — “So Gad came to David, AND TOLD HIM, and said unto him . . .” These words are repeated word for word in 1 Chronicles 21:11, except the redundant “AND TOLD HIM” is removed! But while trimming the useless phrase, the author also pruned the time factor from “SEVEN” years to
    “THREE” years. What did God say to Gad — Three or Seven years plague — “on both your houses?”

    EIGHT OR EIGHTEEN?

    See below. Compare the two quotations. 2 Chronicles 36:9 tells us that JEHOIACHIN was “eight” years old when he began to reign, while 2 Kings 24:8 says that he was “eighteen” when he began to reign. The “unknown” author of KINGS must have reasoned that what possible “evil” could a child of eight do to deserve his abdication, so he generously added ten years to make JEHOIACHIN mature enough to become liable to God’s wrath. However, he had to balance his tampering, so he cut short his reign by 10 days! Add TEN years to age and deduct TEN days from rule? Could God Almighty say two widely differing things on the same subject?

    HOW OLD WAS JEHOIACHIN? 8 OR 18?

    Between Eight and Eighteen years, there is a gap or difference at a full 10 years. Can we say (God forbid!) that the all-knowing Almighty could not count, and thus did not know the difference between 8 and 18? If we are to believe in the Bible as the Word of God, then the Dignity and Status of the Lord Almighty will hit an all-time low!

    II CHRONICLES 36

    9. Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem: and he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD.

    II KINGS 24

    8. Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mothers name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

    CAVALRY OR INFANTRY?

    Compare the two quotations on page 40. How many chariot riders did David slay? Seven hundred or seven thousand? And further, did he slay 40000 “HORSEMEN” or 40000 “FOOTMEN?” The implication in the conflicting records between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18 is not only that God could not discern the difference between hundreds and
    thousands, but that He could not even distinguish “CAVALRY” from “INFANTRY!” It is obvious that blasphemy masquerades in the Christian dictionary as “inspiration!”

    700 or 7 000?

    It is certainly naught for Bible-lovers’ comfort that a whole nought (0) was either added to 700, or subtracted from 7 000, thus making the confused Biblical Mathematics even more confounded!*

    II SAMUEL 10

    18. And the Syrians fled before Israel; and David slew the men of seven hundred chariots of the Syrians, and forty thousand horsemen, and smote Shobach the captain of their host, who died there.

    I CHRONICLES 19

    18. But the Syrians fled before Israel: and David slew of the Syrians seven thousand men which fought in chariots, and forty thousand footmen, and killed Shophach the captain of the host.

    * The remarks on the Zero will be discussed soon.

    GOD CONFUSED BETWEEN “CAVALRY” AND “INFANTRY” ?

    As for the “inspired writers” of the Bible not knowing the difference between “footmen” and “horsemen,” is all the more serious because God himself here stands accused, as a source of that “inspiration” for not knowing the difference between cavalry and infantry. Or is it possible that the Syrians who fled before Israel were centaurs (i.e. a race of creatures with the body and
    legs of a horse and the torso, head and arms of a man), is it possible that these “creatures” had suddenly stepped out of Classical Mythology to bemuse the all too gullible authors.

    Source book : IsTheBibleGodsWord
    Author : Ahmed Deedat

    2) Pornographic material :

    DAUGHTERS SEDUCE THEIR FATHER

    Read Genesis 19, verses 30 to the end and mark again in “red” the words and phrases deserving this honour. Do not hesitate and procrastinate. Your “coloured” Bible will become a priceless heirloom for your children. I agree with Shaw, to keep the Bible “under lock and key,” but we need this weapon to meet the Christian challenge. The Prophet of Islam said that “WAR IS STRATEGY,” and strategy demands that we use the weapons of our enemy. It is not what we like and what we do not like. It is what we are forced to use against the “ONE BOOK” (Bible) professors, who are knocking at our doors with “the Bible says this” and “the Bible says that.” They want us to exchange our Holy Qur’an for their “Holy Bible.” Show them the holes in the “holiness” which they have not yet seen. At times these zombies pretend to see the filth for the first time. They have been programmed with selected verses for their propagation.

    To continue: the “history” has it that, night after night, the daughters of Lot seduce their drunken father with the noble (?) motive of preserving their father’s “seed.” “Seed” figures very prominently in this “Holy Book”: forty seven times in the little booklet of Genesis alone! Out of this another incestuous relationship come the “Ammonites” and the “Moabites,” for whom the God of Israel was supposed to have had a special compassion. Later on in the Bible we learn that the Jews are ordered by the same compassionate God to slaughter the Philistines mercilessly — men, women and children. Even trees and animals are not to be spared, but the Amonites and the Moabites are not to be “distressed” or “meddled” with because they are the seed of Lot! (Deuteronomy 2:19)

    No decent reader can read the seduction of Lot to his mother, sister or daughter, not even to his fiancee if she is a chaste and moral woman. Yet you will come across perverted people who will gorge this filth. Tastes can be cultivated! Read again and mark Ezekiel 23. You will know what colour to choose. The “whoredoms” of the two sisters, Aholah and Aholibah. The sexual details here puts to shame even the unexpurgated edition of many banned books. Ask your “born again” Christian visitors, under what category will they classify all this lewdness? Such filth certainly has no place in any “Book of God.” Al-Haj A.D. Ajijola in his book — “The Myth of the Cross” gives a masterly expose of the fallacy of the Bible as well as of the crucifixion, in short, of the whole of Christianity. No student of comparative religion can afford to be without this publication and “THE BIBLE: Word of God or Word of Man?” mentioned earlier on.

    Source book : IsTheBibleGodsWord
    Author : Ahmed Deedat

    This is only a glimpse of the filth that is present in what you call a book of God.

    3) Mocking God :

    God is portrayed as a “barber” God (?) ISAIAH 7:20

    There are a lot more shocking things in the “Book of Books”…Do you still believe the Bible to be the word of God?

    Talking about the prophecy of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) in the Bible. I took my time and wrote that explanation and I expect you to read it, analyse it and respond to it. Don’t just post videos as I can do the same thing. But then there will be no point in this discussion.
    I did not get this explanation from Dr Zakir Naik, I got it from Ahmed Deedat’s lecture. That aside, I don’t think Dr Zakir would support AISIS. Look at what he has to say about them {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gnh7WnbAZOs}

    Like

    • “Look brother, the videos I posted when Mr Wood was being shut-up are not out of context. In fact, it exposes how he quotes the Quran out of context. He was challenging Dr Zakir Naik for a debate? I’m asking you what is there to debate about? The guy is clearly misquoting Muslim sources and fooling the public. ”

      He is absolutely not doing such. What is there to debate about? Regarding Islam, there are all sorts of topics to discuss, such as Muhammad’s non-prophecies in the Bible, the science of the Qur’an, etc. Wood has debated Shabir Ally some 6 times, all on different topics but still regarding Christianity-Islam, so there’s definitely much to discuss.

      “How does that hadith admit that the Bible is preserved? it says ” “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’” I’ve already told you that the Bible is not the taurat or the injeel. ”

      I have just explained this. The people of the Book are Christians and Jews — it says “do not believe Christians or Jews, or disbelieve them, just believe whatever is revealed by Allah” — it is specifically saying not to trust what any man says, rather only and everything that is revealed by Allah, which includes the Gospel and Torah according to the Qur’an (3:3, 5:47). It says nowhere at all that any of these books are corrupt. Regarding that commentary — again, it is clearly ignoring exactly what the Qur’an says. The Qur’an says that it is a very clear book many times (16:89), and thus there is absolutely no room for pseudointerpretation, we must accept exactly what it clearly says and massive reinterpretation where you pull meaning that is found nowhere in the text is clearly impossible. The Qur’an plainly says “None can change Allah’s words” — and because the Qur’an is clear, that’s exactly what it must mean. All the early Muslims trusted the Gospel, Torah, and guys like Paul — the denial of this nowadays is very recent and is a view that was not shared by Muhammad. It seems only Ibn Abbas shares your view. Think about this, the Qur’an says that the Gospel and Torah are the “Reminder”, and subsequently says that the “Reminder” will be protected from corruption (15:9)!

      “You don’t accept the KJV? I thought you were a protestant. ”

      What on Earth are you talking about? There is… No connection between Protestantism and the KJV. Protestantism predates the KJV by over a century.

      “What gave the protestants the right to consider the apocrypha a fabrication? That is my question.”

      Remember, the Jews were the ones who originally had the Old Testament revealed to them — and there was NO APOCRYPHA in their Old Testament. Then, these apocrypha get written hundreds of years after the Old Testament is finished, still not accepted by the Jews, but then some other people start proclaiming it to be authentic.

      “You never responded to the argument about the RSV 1952 version.”

      What argument? If there’s anything wrong with the RSV (which I’ve never heard of this translation before you came along), then that’s the RSV’s problem and we should all forget about the RSV.

      Regarding the ‘contradictions’, let’s address them 1 by 1. For the first, the Septuagint says “three” for 2 Samuel 24:13, so we find that when we use this, which is likely the original from our ancient manuscripts, it is fine and works together with 2 Chronicles 21:12 and that there is no contradiction.

      “Note the reproduction of above. Compare both the quotations. 2 Samuel 24:13 tells us — “So Gad came to David, AND TOLD HIM, and said unto him . . .” These words are repeated word for word in 1 Chronicles 21:11, except the redundant “AND TOLD HIM” is removed!”

      2 Chronicles 21:11 is not quoting 2 Samuel 24:13, you know. It’s not reproducing the exact same text, it just so happens to be referencing the same event. Furthermore, even if it was a quote, there is no necessity for 2 Chronicles to quote the entire thing word by word, as long as God inspires 2 Chronicles it’s fine. There is no contradiction with the omitting of these words.

      “Compare the two quotations. 2 Chronicles 36:9 tells us that JEHOIACHIN was “eight” years old when he began to reign, while 2 Kings 24:8 says that he was “eighteen” when he began to reign.”

      Looks like I’m not finding this contradiction. When I searched up 2 Chronicles 36:9, it clearly says “eighteen”:

      Jehoiachin was 18 years old when he became king and reigned three months and 10 days in Jerusalem. He did what was evil in the LORD’s sight.
      http://biblehub.com/hcsb/2_chronicles/36.htm#ftn

      I checked it out, and it turns out that only a few manuscripts read “8”, whilst the others read “18” — it’s clear that the ones that read 8 were subjected to copyist errors, but again, we still have manuscripts that say 18 and thus the original from God is retained and there is no contradiction. You’ll notice that most of the contradictions you try to bring up are simply copyist errors that have surviving accurate manuscripts that resolve them and show there is no contradiction.

      “Compare the two quotations on page 40. How many chariot riders did David slay? Seven hundred or seven thousand? And further, did he slay 40000 “HORSEMEN” or 40000 “FOOTMEN?” The implication in the conflicting records between 2 Samuel 10:18 and 1 Chronicles 19:18”

      Thanks for the quotation, but this once again falls down to a copyist error that has accurate surviving manuscripts that solve it. Horsemen or footmen? Both verses when I searched them up say foot soldiers, and the manuscripts say foot soldiers (while septuagint ones say horsemen, but we can see that foot soldiers is the correct manuscript by cross-referencing these verses). As for the 700 v 7000, this link explains it properly: http://www.studytoanswer.net/consref/chariots.html

      As for the nonsense of “pornographic material”, this is obviously ridiculous because the Bible isn’t meant to be read by babies who get emotional when they read about what some people have committed. The funny thing is, the Qur’an itself has this “pornographic material”, such as when it talks about the virgins Muslims have in heaven, and describes them as with having “swelling breasts” — is that not pornographic itself? LOL! Qur’an 78:31-34.

      “Talking about the prophecy of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) in the Bible. I took my time and wrote that explanation and I expect you to read it, analyse it and respond to it. Don’t just post videos as I can do the same thing. But then there will be no point in this discussion.”

      It’s much easier to post a video than to make this comment a ton longer. The fact is, John 16:7 and John 14 is NOT talking about Muhammad — it’s talking about the Holy Spirit, these chapters EVEN SAY they are talking about the Holy Spirit. According to these passages, the ‘comforter’ is someone who “cannot be seen and lives inside us”, how the heck does this apply to Muhammad? Not only that, but Jesus is the one who sends the comforter — so if Muhammad is the comforter, and Allah sends Muhammad, then Jesus becomes Allah! So if John 14 and 16 actually are talking about Muhammad, then Jesus becomes God and this entire debate should be wrapped up.

      By the way, this comment is getting very lengthy — I was looking to post contradictions in the Qur’an here, but I will have to postpone it to my next response.

      Like

  3. Incredible. You do not respond to a SINGLE ONE of the overwhelming evidences I cited to show Jesus claimed to be God, but just come up with your own objections? I expect you, in your response, to address the evidence given.

    The first thing to point out is that in Matthew 12:28 and Luke 11:10, the quotation has nothing to do with Jesus being God or not. You quote Matthew 19:16-17, where Jesus says the “why do you call me good?” thing — which is literally addressed in this article.

    The explanation of the other few is also given in this blog — Jesus was, according to the Bible, temorarily lowered from Godhood to manhood (Hebrews 2:9), and so the Father at this point was “greater” than Him. This could also mean ‘greater’ in an authoritative sense as well.

    Like

    • Ok, so I’ve gone through most of your article and I’ve come to realise that I do have the response to a good amount of the “overwhelming evidences” that you quoted. Which InshaAllah I will post below.

      Firstly, you made a mistake in your response. It’s not “Luke 11:10” we’re talking about is “Luke 11:20”. You just said that “the quotation has nothing to do with Jesus being God or not.” But that is not true. Why did he say :

      (iv) “…I with the finger of God cast out devils….”
      [The Bible, Luke 11:20]

      Of course it’s a metaphorical statement. Not literally the finger of God as God has no image. But why didn’t he say “my finger”? He (Jesus peace be upon him) is telling us that he cannot cast out devils without the “finger of God” i.e. help of God, he’s telling us that he is not God.

      Now coming to your response regarding [The Bible, Mathew 19:16-17] or [The Bible, Luke 18:18-19], you said :

      “Contrary to the claims of the heathen, Jesus in no way denies His being God here. Rather, Jesus is simply instructing this man that if he were to call anyone good, it would be the same as calling them God. That is all Jesus was saying. In fact, this proves Jesus is God, because Jesus IS GOOD!”

      And then you quote some verses were you prove that Jesus (peace be upon him) is sinless, which I totally agree with. We Muslims believe that all prophets of God were sinless. And to finalize it all you quote :

      “I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.”
      [The Bible, John 10:11]

      Which opens up another discussion about the alleged crucifixion of Christ, but let’s focus on the divinity of Jesus for now. So you say that the argument that I gave is worthless because Jesus (peace be upon him) calls himself good. Which is very strange.
      I agree, that Jesus (peace be upon him) is good. But there’s a difference between being “Good” and being “God”.

      You said : “Jesus is simply instructing this man that if he were to call anyone good, it would be the same as calling them God.”

      Howcome!? Are you implying that Jesus (peace be upon him) does not know the difference between “Good” and “God”? Calling a man “good” is NOT the same as calling him “God” and God is good. Sorry, but your explanation makes absolutely no sense.

      In conclusion, if that verse showed anything, it showed the humility of Jesus (peace be upon him) not wanting to be called “good”. Even if he calls himself good at some other place. I’m talking about his reaction. It can only mean one thing. Don’t go around in circles, was Jesus (peace be upon him) trying to puzzle us when he said that? I don’t think so. The meaning is simple and clear.

      Finally, you said : “Jesus was, according to the Bible, temorarily lowered from Godhood to manhood (Hebrews 2:9), and so the Father at this point was “greater” than Him. This could also mean ‘greater’ in an authoritative sense as well.”

      God is the greatest. If he is not the greatest, then he is not God. If what you say is true, then you have no right to worship Jesus as God when he was on earth. You believe that God had to come down to earth to understand the pain and suffering of man, because God is too holy. Right? Well that concept is also not very logical. As the guy who makes something knows what he has made. The guy who makes a table knows what are its weak points and all of that. So you’re saying that the creator of all things, could NOT (your limiting God) understand the pain of man without coming down to earth as one. Which is illogical.

      Don’t worry, I’ll try my level best to respond to everything I know here. But I like to go one subject at a time, because to every argument I will raise you will probably have a counter argument that I must respond to. So let’s finish the above verses first, if you have anything else to say. Then, I will InshaAllah entertain your “OVERWHELMING EVIDENCES”.

      Like

      • I am happy that you are willing to respectfully engage with the argument.

        First, you mention that Jesus somehow cannot cast out devils without God (the Father in specific you’re referring to), and so Jesus cannot be God. However Jesus has cast out MANY devils without the ‘finger of God’ in the Bible.

        Luke 4:35: But Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be quiet and come out of him!” And when the demon had thrown him down in the midst of the people, he came out of him without doing him any harm.
        Mark 5:8: For He had been saying to him, “Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!”

        In fact, Jesus even tells us you can cast out spirits in His name.

        Mark 16:17: And these signs will accompany those who believe: In My name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;

        So, according to you, you can only cast out spirits with God’s name.. And Jesus says you can cast out spirits in His name… Therefore according to you, Jesus is God?

        “Howcome!? Are you implying that Jesus (peace be upon him) does not know the difference between “Good” and “God”? Calling a man “good” is NOT the same as calling him “God” and God is good. Sorry, but your explanation makes absolutely no sense.”

        Actually, yes it is. Only God is good, so if you call someone good, you are calling them God. This is because, according to the Bible, ALL MEN HAVE SINNED.

        Romans 3:23: For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

        No man is good — but God is good, because not only does God not sin, God CAN’T sin.

        “God is the greatest. If he is not the greatest, then he is not God. If what you say is true, then you have no right to worship Jesus as God when he was on earth. You believe that God had to come down to earth to understand the pain and suffering of man, because God is too holy. ”

        God came down to Earth to free us from our sins, not to “understand our suffering.” Also, how can you say one cannot worship Jesus — where in this blog, I have shown many verses where Jesus Himself accepts worship? Lastly — John 5:30. It’s the same explanation as above — Jesus was temporarily lowered, and thus relied on the Father for this time. The Bible clearly says through Jesus, all things were made (Colossians 1:16).

        Liked by 1 person

    • Oh, and you said nothing about [The Bible, John 5:30]. When Jesus peace be upon him says that HE CANNOT DO ANYTHING by himself. Please give me your thoughts regarding this.

      Like

    • I’m also happy to see that you’re willing to argue respectfully, I hope that it will continue this way and that our discussion will be fruitful.
      NOTE : I am posting the response here because I could not find a “reply” button on the other response you made. If you can fix it, please do. It will help everyone understand what’s happening here. Thank you.

      Now, you quoted me verses proving to me that Jesus (peace be upon him) was able to cast out devils by himself and your argument makes full sense in the sight of a Christian. As Christians believe all the Bible to be from God, but we Muslims believe that the current Bible is not the original Injeel, “gospel” or “good news” that prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) preached to his people at his time. We believe that it is the corrupted form of the Injeel, it does contain some verses that we agree with 100%. But it also contains verses that I believe even you, as a decent human being cannot accept. So I can conveniently say that the verses I quoted about Jesus (peace be upon him) casting out devils by the power of God are true, while the rest which are saying that he did it himself are fabrications. But that’s not how we do things, I’m trying to prove things to the Christian here, not the Muslim.

      The Muslim reads (Quran 5:72) and says “I hear and I affirm”.

      “They do blaspheme who say: “Allah is Christ the son of Mary.” But said Christ: “O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.” Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.”(Quran 5:72)

      However, the Christian does not believe Quran to be the words of God. That’s why we’re using the Bible, his book of authority to prove it to him.

      Ok, you said that Jesus was “temporarily lowered” in the time that he came to earth as a man.

      You said : “Jesus was, according to the Bible, temorarily lowered from Godhood to manhood (Hebrews 2:9), and so the Father at this point was “greater” than Him. This could also mean ‘greater’ in an authoritative sense as well.”

      And Jesus (peace be upon him) said in (John 5:30) that he can’t do anything alone. But as you quoted, at the same time he says in (Luke 4:35) and (Mark 5:8) that he can cast out devils alone.

      Is this not a contradiction? Would you care to explain to me how it goes? Can Jesus (peace be upon him), 1. Do nothing (John 5:30) or 2. Cast out devils by his own power (Luke 4:35) and (Mark 5:8)? It can’t be both at the same time. Please enlighten me about this.

      You also brought up (Mark 16:17) where it says that those who believe in Jesus (peace be upon him) can cast out devils and speak new languages.

      “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;”(Mark 16:17 KJV)

      The verses continue and say that they will also be able to do some other miracles which include drinking deadly poison.

      “They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.”(Mark 16:18 KJV)

      But the funny thing is that I have never seen anyone do these miracles. When on the contrary you find them backing away the second you bring these verses up.

      Watch how Pastor Stanley evades the poison drinking in this public debate. {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TrEMSpL1SoY}

      Same thing happens with Dr William Campbell, he couldn’t speak new tongues or drink the poison. {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-xmGuClhxg}

      And guess what? Even if someone somehow managed to do any of these miracles. It proves nothing, as (Matthew 24:24) states.

      “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.”(Matthew 24:24 KJV)

      Talking about [The Bible, Mathew 19:16-17] or [The Bible, Luke 18:18-19], you said :

      “Actually, yes it is. Only God is good, so if you call someone good, you are calling them God. This is because, according to the Bible, ALL MEN HAVE SINNED.

      Romans 3:23: For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

      No man is good — but God is good, because not only does God not sin, God CAN’T sin”

      Let me agree with you that all men are sinners. That means that no man is good. Are you following me? Only God is good. Agree? Then why doesn’t Jesus (peace be upon him) agree that he is good? If he is God then he should agree that he is good. Believe me, it’s that simple.

      Lastly, you said :

      “God came down to Earth to free us from our sins”

      Please consider this case carefully, if you are a judge, and you have to judge every criminal in this world. Killers, thiefs, rapists..etc. And you have one son who is pure, never sinned. Would it be logical or fair for you to kill you’re only sinless son and say to the criminals “Go, you have achieved salvation by believing that my son died for your sins”? What kind of nonsense is that? Is this justice? Are you prepared to get killed for someone else’s murder?

      And on what basis are you speaking? Did you know that the Bible disagrees with the crucifixion, though this is not our discussion now. Maybe after we’re done with this topic?

      Major Yeats-Brown, in his “Life of a Bengal Lancer”, summarises the Christian Doctrine of the Atonement in just a single sentence:
      “NO HEATHEN TRIBE HAS CONCEIVED SO GROTESQUE AN IDEA, INVOLVING AS IT DOES THE ASSUMPTION, THAT MAN WAS BORN WITH A HEREDITARY STAIN UPON HIM: AND THAT THIS STAIN (FOR WHICH HE WAS NOT PERSONALLY RESPONSIBLE) WAS TO BE ATONED FOR: AND THAT THE CREATOR OF ALL THINGS HAD TO SACRIFICE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON TO NEUTRALISE THIS MYSTERIOUS CURSE.”

      If you still insist that your works cannot save you, only your faith can. Then you should read (James 2:26) and tell me who the leir is. You or James? And if you consider James to be inspired by God, then You or God? Who is the leir?

      “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.”(James 2:26)

      Read the following verses of the Bible carefully, as a Muslim I totally agree with them.

      “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”(Ezekiel 18:20)

      “But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.”(Ezekiel 18:21)

      Therefore, anybody who commits sin. He’s responsible for it. Sin is not inherited and if a sinful person repents and does what’s lawful and right, he will be forgiven.

      And Allah Knows Best.

      Like

      • Sorry man, I don’t know what’s going on with your reply button. It’s working just fine with me — the reply button is not something I can customize on a WordPress blog in the first place.

        “As Christians believe all the Bible to be from God, but we Muslims believe that the current Bible is not the original Injeel, “gospel” or “good news” that prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) preached to his people at his time. We believe that it is the corrupted form of the Injeel, it does contain some verses that we agree with 100%”

        Why do you say this? If anything, the Qur’an completely confirms that the Bible is 100% preserved.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KjoeFkK7xA&t=18s

        Not only that, but overwhelming manuscript evidence shows the Bible has been entirely preserved since the beginning of time.

        “And Jesus (peace be upon him) said in (John 5:30) that he can’t do anything alone. But as you quoted, at the same time he says in (Luke 4:35) and (Mark 5:8) that he can cast out devils alone.
        Is this not a contradiction? ”

        That’s a good catch you made — but I don’t think it’s a contradiction. I don’t think Jesus was being absolutely serious in 100% form in John 5:30, because as we would both agree, Jesus CAN do things of His own. He can walk, talk, eat, breathe oxygen, etc. Surely He can do that — so of course He does not mean EVERYTHING. I think the explanation for John 5:30 is that we typically give the Father credit for everything we do, so Jesus said that in that moment.

        “That means that no man is good. Are you following me? Only God is good. Agree? Then why doesn’t Jesus (peace be upon him) agree that he is good? If he is God then he should agree that he is good. Believe me, it’s that simple.”

        I don’t understand what you’re saying here. We’ve both already agreed Jesus is entirely sinless, and I’ve even quoted a passage where Jesus calls Himself the “good shepard”. I think it’s clear Jesus did affirm He is good — and by your logic (as well as my own), that necessarily makes Jesus God.

        You go on to question the morality of the sacrifice of Jesus. But what we have here is not one man sacrificing himself for another, this is the Son of God Himself, of His own will and volition deciding to pay for the sins of us all, because He and the Father loves us so much.

        There is no way that works can save you.

        Ephesians 2:8: For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God’s gift—

        We are saved through our faith and our faith alone. You quote James 2:16 or something — but you don’t understand. The fact is, if we truly have faith, we will of our own will go do works of God, because we love God and will decide to serve Him with our lives.

        Like

    • Note: I have realized as I was writing my response that we have drifted far away from the subject that we were supposed to be discussing (“Jesus claimed to be God”). But what can we do? Many questions arise that demand answers. And it’s all connected. We’re actually discussing the two religions, Christianity and Islam. So I think It’s ok. Do you?

      Guess it was my mistake, nevermind and thanks.

      My friend, I advise you not to watch this guy (David Wood) or try to learn Islam from him. I have seen some of his videos, he’s simply a trouble maker that is trying to start war between the Muslims and the Christians. Putting forth your claim respectfully even if it’s a lie is acceptable, but he is clearly mocking and insulting Islam. He uses dirty ways to trick the Christians into hating Islam and provokes the Muslims. Initially, his video’s used to have an impact on me. But after I saw how he was continuously being shut-up, and that he is probably getting sadistic pleasure from the pain of the Muslims. I “tossed him aside” and I’m inviting you to do the same. Not for me, but for world peace. Feel free to bring forth his arguments though, I’ll answer what I can. InshaAllah.

      That aside, In the link you posted he quotes specific verses of the Quran and interprets them according to what he wants you to believe. But some verses still remain that will shut-him-up once again.

      “Can ye (o ye men of Faith) entertain the hope that they will believe in you?- Seeing that a party of them heard the Word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it.”(Quran 2:75)

      “Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.”(Quran 2:79)

      “O Messenger! let not those grieve thee, who race each other into unbelief: (whether it be) among those who say “We believe” with their lips but whose hearts have no faith; or it be among the Jews,- men who will listen to any lie,- will listen even to others who have never so much as come to thee. They change the words from their (right) times and places: they say, “If ye are given this, take it, but if not, beware!” If any one’s trial is intended by Allah, thou hast no authority in the least for him against Allah. For such – it is not Allah’s will to purify their hearts. For them there is disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a heavy punishment.”(Quran 5:41)

      “But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them- barring a few – ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind.”(Quran 5:13)

      I request you to go and look for the verses that he quotes in the video, verses before it and after it. Do the same for the verses I quoted above, in order to get the full context. Seeing the commentary may also help.

      Finally, read :

      “That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-“(Quran 4:157)

      Notice how Allah Almighty says that “they only follow conjecture” and since Christians follow the current Bible. We can say that the conjecture described above includes the current “Holy Bible”. And conjecture is forbidden in the Holy Qur’an. I know that this may seem hurting to you, but I will InshaAllah soon show you why is it that we don’t accept the current Bible to be from God.

      This subject is quite lengthy, but I’ll try to cover as much as possible. The references are Ahmed Deedat’s lectures and debates regarding the subject “Is The Bible God’s Word?” He also has a book by the same title. If you are interested. I’ll use some references from that book in my response.

      Is the Bible God’s word?

      1) Different versions of the Bible.

      May I ask. Which Bible is really from God? There are many different versions of the Bible, please don’t tell me they are different “translations”. There is a big difference between a version and a translation. A translation is a difference in the choice of words, while in a version the text is changed (words omitted or added). So which Bible is really from God? the “Douay” Roman Catholic Version with its “apocrypha”? Or the King James Version which has thrown out the “apocrypha” ? If you don’t know what the “apocrypha” is they are seven whole books. So tell me, which Bible is really from God? (“apocrypha” i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY)

      “The Roman Catholic Bible was published at Rheims in 1582, from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate and reproduced at Douay in 1609. As such the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) is the oldest Version
      that one can still buy today. Despite its antiquity, the whole of the Protestant world, including the “cults”* condemn the RCV because it contains seven extra “books” which they contemptuously
      refer to as the “apocrypha” i.e. of DOUBTFUL AUTHORITY. Notwithstanding the dire warning contained in the Apocalypse, which is the last book in the RCV (renamed as “Revelation” by the Protestants), it is “revealed”:

      “. . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues
      written in this Book.” (Revelation 22:18-19)

      But who cares! They do not really believe! The Protestants have bravely expunged seven whole books from their Book of God! The outcasts are:

      The Book of Judith
      The Book of Tobias
      The Book of Baruch
      The Buck of Esther, etc.”(IsTheBibleGod’sWord Pg.6)

      Do you still think it is from God?

      2) The RSV 1952 version.

      ” GLOWING TRIBUTES

      First published, as Sir Winston says, in 1611, and then revised in 1881 (RV), and now re-revised and brought up to date as the Revised Standard Version (RSV) 1952, and now again re-re-revised in 1971 (still RSV for short). Let us see what opinion Christendom has of this most
      revised Bible, the RSV:-

      1. “THE FINEST VERSION WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED IN THE PRESENT CENTURY.” — (Church of England Newspaper)

      2. “A COMPLETELY FRESH TRANSLATION BY SCHOLARS OF THE HIGHEST EMINENCE.” — (Times literary Supplement)

      3. “THE WELL-LOVED CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUTHORISED VERSION
      COMBINED WITH A NEW ACCURACY OF TRANSLATION.” — (Life and Work)

      4. “THE MOST ACCURATE AND CLOSE RENDERING OF THE ORIGINAL” —(TheTimes)

      The publishers (Collins) themselves, in their notes on the Bible at the end of their production, say on page 10: “THIS BIBLE (RSV), IS THE PRODUCT OF THIRTY-TWO SCHOLARS, ASSISTED BY AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPRESENTING FIFTY CO-OPERATING DENOMINATIONS.” Why all this boasting? To make the gullible public buy their product? All these testimonies convince the purchaser that he is backing the right horse, with the purchaser little suspecting that he is being taken for a ride.

      “THE WORLD’S BEST SELLER”
      But what about the Authorised Version of the Bible (AV), the “World’s Best Seller?” These Revisers, all good salesmen, have some very pretty things to say about it. However, their page iii, paragraph six of the PREFACE of the RSV reads;

      “THE KING JAMES VERSION (alternative description of AV) HAS WITH GOOD REASON BEEN TERMED ‘THE NOBLEST MONUMENT OF ENGLISH PROSE.’ ITS REVISERS IN 1881 EXPRESSED ADMIRATION FOR ‘ITS SIMPLICITY, ITS DIGNITY, ITS POWER, ITS HAPPY TURNS OF EXPRESSION … THE MUSIC OF ITS CADENCES, AND THE FELICITIES OF ITS RHYTHM.’ IT ENTERED, AS NO OTHER BOOK HAS, INTO THE MAKING OF THE PERSONAL CHARACTER AND THE PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES. WE OWE TO IT AN INCALCULABLE DEBT.”

      Can you, dear reader, imagine a more magnificent tribute being paid to the “Book of Books” than the above? I, for one, cannot. Let the believing Christian, now steel himself for the un-kindest blow of all from his own beloved Lawyers of Religion; for in the very same breath they say:

      “YET THE KING JAMES VERSION HAS GRAVE DEFECTS.” And, “THAT THESE DEFECTS ARE SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS AS TO CALL FOR REVISION . . .” This is straight from the horse’s mouth, i.e. the orthodox Christian scholars of “the highest eminence.” Another galaxy of Doctors of Divinity are now required to produce an encyclopedia explaining the cause of those GRAVE AND SERIOUS DEFECTS in their Holy Writ and their reasons for eliminating them. ” “(IsTheBibleGod’sWord Pg.7 & 8)

      Well, basically what happens is that the fundamental teachings of Christianity (the trinity for example) are removed by the 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations from the RSV 1952 version. But then, some people got mad because they can’t preach what they wanted to preach and forced the publishers to restore them back to the Bible, in a newer version.

      In the words of Ahmed Deedat :

      “NOT FOR LONG!
      The hot-gospellers and the Bible-thumpers were too slow in catching the Joke. By the time they realised that the corner-stone of their preaching — THE ASCENSION OF JESUS — had been undermined as a result of Christian Biblical erudition, the publishers of the RSV had
      already raked in a net profit of 15 000 000 dollars! (Fifteen Million). The propagandists made a big hue and cry, and with the backing of two denominational committees out of the fifty, forced the Publishers to re-incorporate the interpolations into the “INSPIRED” Word of God in every
      new publication of the RSV after 1952, the expunged portion was “RESTORED TO THE TEXT.”

      It is an old, old game. The Jews and the Christians have been editing their “Book of God” from its very inception. The difference between them and the ancient forgerers is that the ancient forgers did not know the art of writing “prefaces” and “footnotes”, otherwise they too would
      have told us as clearly as our modern heroes have about their tampering, and their glib excuses for transmuting forged currency into glittering gold.

      “MANY PROPOSALS FOR MODIFICATION WERE SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE BY INDIVIDUALS AND BY TWO DENOMINATIONAL COMMITTEES ALL OF THESE WERE GIVEN CAREFUL ATTENTION BY THE COMMITTEE.

      “TWO PASSAGES, THE I LONGER ENDING OF MARK (16:9-20) . . . AND LUKE 24:51 ARE RESTORED TO THE TEXT.” (Preface — Collins’ pages vi and vii)

      “Why ‘restored'”? Because they had been previously expunged! Why had the references to the Ascension expunged in the first place? The MOST Ancient manuscripts had no references to the Ascension at all. They were interpolations similar to 1 John 5:7 about the Trinity. (Refer to the
      earlier example 3). Why eliminate one and re-instate the other? Do not be surprised! By the time you lay your hands on a RSV, the “Committee” might also have decided to expunge the whole of their invaluable Preface. The Jehovah’s Witnesses have already eliminated 27 revealing pages of their FOREWORD to their “New World Translation of the CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES,” (this is their way of saying — New Testament). “(IsTheBibleGod’sWord Pg.16)

      Do you still believe the Bible to be the word of God? There is a lot more to say. But then it would be too much if I list everything in one go, I’m waiting for your response.

      Take care.

      Like

      • “Note: I have realized as I was writing my response that we have drifted far away from the subject that we were supposed to be discussing (“Jesus claimed to be God”). But what can we do? Many questions arise that demand answers. And it’s all connected. We’re actually discussing the two religions, Christianity and Islam. So I think It’s ok. Do you?”

        I think for now, we’re discussing and solving important issues. Let’s try to clear up these questions that pop up for now.

        Regarding David Wood — he is definitely a pretty mocking dude (as are many from both the Christian and Muslim sides), I find his arguments are very good and he has access to many great resources and has uploaded some very good videos (not the nicest guy though). From the video I linked you to, he clearly shows the Qur’an claims the Gospel is revealed by God (Qur’an 3:3-4, 5:47), and the Qur’an says that Allah’s Words cannot be changed (Qur’an 6:114-115), meaning the Gospel simply could not have been changed according to the Qur’an itself. In fact, it outright says that the Gospel was still with us during the time of Muhammad in Qur’an 7:157. The truth is, all the earliest Muslims believed the Bible was preserved and trusted Paul, it’s only in the last 100-200 years where Muslims started denying this for whatever reason, but the Qur’an clearly says otherwise. It’s obviously logical to assume God would have preserved anything He revealed.

        As for Qur’an 2:75 and 2:79 (which are a few verses apart), this does not at all refer to textual corruption, rather linguistic corruption — as in they never actually changed the documents, they corrupted it with their “mouths”, they were misinterpreting it and changing the meaning of the text. Also notice how these verses only say that it was a party of the Jews that did this, and the fact is a single party of the Jews, even if they textually corrupted the document, would have had no effect on the overall accurate transmission of the Gospel/Torah either way.

        As for the apocrypha, the apocrypha are NOT authentic. These apocrypha exist in only VERY FEW of the translations, and they are obvious fraud that have been recognized as fraud for an extraordinarily long time. The Jews never have it as part of the Old Testament, neither did any other Christian, and then these random Catholics come in trying to claim they are authentically part of the Old Testament. But the truth is, they are obviously not and the Jews don’t have these extra books. These extra old testament books were NOT even written in Hebrew! They were written not even until the 1st century BC and are not part of the Dead Sea Scrolls. They are obviously fraud and very few people give authority to them. With a good amount of studying, you will quickly know that these apocryphal writings are not part of the Bible. You are correct that the Catholic – Protestant/Jew difference is more than just translation — but this has been solved and we know which books are the Word of God.

        As for your point 2), THIS POINT, unlike your last one, simply falls down to translation. Scholarship is getting better and better translations all the time, and the original language is completely available anyways to those who don’t trust the translations on Biblehub. There is no editing when it comes to translation, as the original language stays the same and there is a mere word-order-difference, as you put it, in the non-original language. There are many English translations that differ for the Qur’an as well — does this make you think the original language is corrupted? Of course not.

        As for 1 John 5:7 — the addition ONLY EXISTS in two translations of the Bible in the world (king james and new king james), all others reject it because again, it’s not in the original language. We need to look at the original language to see if there is corruption, and in fact when we do look at the original language, we find the Bible is completely preserved, and in fact we have completely determined the original New Testament, letter by letter, to 99.8% of the entire document, and that is increasing. On the other hand, the same cannot be said for the Qur’an, as Muslims have put 0 effort into reconstructing the Qur’an based on early manuscripts (which contradict each other) unlike the Christians. The fact is, there is a lot more evidence and material to reconstruct the Bible, because the Bible is much more abundantly attested to in ancient times than the Qur’an is. You should watch this video:

        Like

    • Firstly, you said that David Wood has good arguments and that he has good resources. Well, his quotations may be accurate. But his arguments, the ones I’ve seen are all lies. You only believe it because you have poor knowledge of Islam. Here, if you want you can have a look at what I meant when I said that he was being shut-up. You should listen to the case from both sides, then judge.

      1-{https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uA3caJJeDo}
      2-{https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxwwxXltiKA}

      Coming back to the Muslim belief of the Christian Bible. You have to read the verses in context with the entire Muslim belief. In Islam we follow both the Glorious Quran and the authentic sayings of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him).

      Watch {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRhHX2NS1uk}.

      The “Torah and Gospel” which are mentioned in (Quran 3:3) are not the current “Holy Bible”. And in (Quran 5:47) there is nothing wrong. Allah is saying that the “People of the Gospel” should judge by what he has revealed to them. But he never says that he has revealed the current “Holy Bible”.

      Now talking about (Quran 6:115) reading the commentary would help, you can read it here {http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/refuting_the_argument_regarding_allah_s_words_do_not_change}.

      Read (Quran 5:13) and (5:41) again with the commentary. Finally, this authentic hadith below should finalize this subject.

      Narrated Abu Huraira:
      The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said (to the Muslims). “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’ “(Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 7362
      In-book reference : Book 96, Hadith 89
      USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 9, Book 92, Hadith 460
      (deprecated numbering scheme))

      Now this question arises. Why did Allah not preserve the Taurat or the Injeel, couldn’t he have done it? The answer is that every prophet that came before the final prophet which is prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) was sent to a particular group of people and for a particular time period. Allah obviously could have preserved all previous revelations but he is doer of what he pleases. As he describes himself in the Glorious Qur’an.

      “Doer (without let) of all that He intends.”(Quran 85:16 YUSUF ALI)
      “Effecter of what He intends.”(Quran 85:16 SAHIH INTERNATIONAL)
      “Doer of what He will.”(Quran 85:16 PICKTHALL)
      “He does what He intends (or wills).”(Quran 85:16 MUHSIN KHAN)

      The Bible agrees that prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) was only sent to the Jews.

      “But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”(Matthew 15:24 KJV)

      “These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:”(Matthew 10:5 KJV)
      “But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”(Matthew 10:6 KJV)

      Now talking about (Quran 7:157) :

      “”Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures),- in the law and the Gospel;- for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil; he allows them as lawful what is good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure); He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honour him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him,- it is they who will prosper.””(Quran 7:157)

      This itself is another subject “Prophecy of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) in the Bible”, I have the explanation ready if you want (I’ve been discussing it with other Christians). I’ll post it after I respond to you.

      You said : “The truth is, all the earliest Muslims believed the Bible was preserved and trusted Paul, it’s only in the last 100-200 years where Muslims started denying this for whatever reason, but the Qur’an clearly says otherwise. It’s obviously logical to assume God would have preserved anything He revealed.”

      I have responded to this above with verses and that hadith.

      You also said : “As for Qur’an 2:75 and 2:79 (which are a few verses apart), this does not at all refer to textual corruption, rather linguistic corruption — as in they never actually changed the documents, they corrupted it with their “mouths”, they were misinterpreting it and changing the meaning of the text. Also notice how these verses only say that it was a party of the Jews that did this, and the fact is a single party of the Jews, even if they textually corrupted the document, would have had no effect on the overall accurate transmission of the Gospel/Torah either way.”

      And when did you become a scholar of the Quran? this is your personal view. It does refer to the textual corruption. As it does say “write” in (Quran 2:79). You are misunderstanding the verse because you have poor knowledge of the Quran. We are taught that one of its miracles is that it is suitable for all times and places. You can’t just say “this it what it means”.

      Talking about the apocrypha, I have no idea on what basis you are saying that the apocrypha is not the word of God. The Catholic Christian would disagree with you. But if the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) of the Bible really is the oldest. Then as a believer of the Bible you should take the warning given in the following verse into consideration.

      “. . . If any man shall add to these things (or delete) God shall add unto him the plagues written in this Book.” (Revelation 22:18-19)

      So you accept the KJV of the Bible as the word of God. I’m glad you’re admitting the difference, not many I talked to have admitted it. When I ask them which Bible you believe is really from God, they never respond.

      Moving on, I think you have misunderstood me when I was talking about the RSV 1952 version. Let’s start with the Quran, I have posted a bunch of different translations above if you remember (Quran 85:16). From different translators. It is a difference in the choice of words, this may be the case in the difference between some Bibles but not the RSV 1952 version. Regarding the argument of the presence of different Quran’s. I have been asked this question many times and the best answer I can give you is in this link. {http://www.islam101.com/quran/preservedQ.htm}

      Talking about the Bible, in the video you posted, the guy speaks about minor differences like “and” or “for”. But that is not the case in the RSV 1952 version. The verse of the trinity has been thrown out completely (1 John 5:7). The word “begotten” in (John 3:16) has been thrown out. The verses about The Ascension…Why did they do that? 32 Bible scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations are calling these verses fabrications. Does this not prove that there is something wrong? And they forced them to bring it back to newer versions of the Bible…

      Like

      • I’m sorry my friend, but David Wood has never debated Ahmed Deedat or Zakir Naik — the man who made that video clearly took Wood’s arguments out of context and then slabbed on a ridiculous response by Deedat/Naik. David Wood has been challenging Zakir Naik to debate for years and Naik is too afraid to debate him… If you want to see Wood take Naik apart, watch these videos:

        “The “Torah and Gospel” which are mentioned in (Quran 3:3) are not the current “Holy Bible”. And in (Quran 5:47) there is nothing wrong. ”

        The point was when quoting this part of the Qur’an of course, is to show that the Qur’an clearly says that the Bible was inspired by God. These are not the verses of the Qur’an quoted to show that the Bible is preserved, they are just the ones quoted to show the Qur’an clearly concedes that the Bible is clearly from God. The verses to do that are 6:115. I read your commentary, and it is obviously changing what the Qur’an is obviously saying. The Qur’an says “None can change his words”, and this man interprets it as “you can change it on earth but God will still know about the originals”. By this logic of course, you’d also have to apply that to the Qur’an — and then everything becomes a mess. But of course, the Qur’an is clearly saying “None can change his words”, and the clear meaning of this passage can not be rebuked. Listen, you are a Muslim — do you feel comfortable with changing the meaning of such a clear verse? This is clearly lying about what the Qur’an says that this man in that commentary has done.

        “The Bible agrees that prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) was only sent to the Jews.”

        The Bible says Jesus was sent to the Jews, but His message to the entire world.
        Matthew 28:19: Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit,

        You quote a Hadith — which basically admits the Bible is preserved! It says don’t believe what the Christians say, only believe everything that is revealed by Allah — and as we’ve seen according to Qur’an 3:3 and 5:47 and various other verses in the Qur’an, this simply includes the Gospel and Torah (and Psalms). So this basically admits that you must follow all the revelations. Where Muslims got the idea that the Bible is corrupt even though the Qur’an says that it’s preserved and the manuscripts show the Bible is preserved is ridiculous.

        “And when did you become a scholar of the Quran? this is your personal view. It does refer to the textual corruption. ”

        No, I got this interpretation by;
        1) Reading what the verse clearly says
        2) Consulting both Christian and Muslim Scholars
        3) Considering what would happen even if I am wrong

        The truth is, the verse only says that they were twisting the words with their mouths, and even if it meant more then that, it was only a “party of the Jews” according to the Qur’an, meaning only a few Jews who were doing it. So even if this meant textual corruption (it means linguistic corruption), it would not have affected the preservation of the Torah at all because all the other Jews would not be doing any corruption. The word Qur’an means ‘recitation’, because it is to be recited, but the actual process of reciting scripture to memorize it originated from the Jews and when they memorized the Torah by reciting it — Muhammad simply adopted this Jewish practice and applied it to the Qur’an, and that is how it received its name. Jews have been reciting the Torah since the time of Moses.

        You go on to say I accept the KJV — LOL no I don’t, I’ve stayed away from the KJV for a long time now although I USED to use it a long time ago.

        “Talking about the apocrypha, I have no idea on what basis you are saying that the apocrypha is not the word of God. The Catholic Christian would disagree with you. But if the RCV (Roman Catholic Version) of the Bible really is the oldest. Then as a believer of the Bible you should take the warning given in the following verse into consideration.”

        The RCV is not the oldest translation by a long shot, we can trace translations of the Bible to the 2nd century. More recent translations of the HCSB or NIV are usually better translations (but I stay away from the NIV as well).

        “The word “begotten” in (John 3:16) has been thrown out.”

        It depends on the original language. You see, the word translated as begotten in ‘monogenes’, this can mean perhaps begotten, or it can mean ‘only one’ or ‘one and only’, as ‘mono’ means one or only one and ‘genos’ means ‘of its kind/nature’. So John 3:16 would be saying, based on the ‘one and only’ translation, ‘For God so loved the world He gave His one and only Son, so that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life”.

        ” Regarding the argument of the presence of different Quran’s. I have been asked this question many times and the best answer I can give you is in this link. {http://www.islam101.com/quran/preservedQ.htm}”

        No… Even today, there are 26 different Qur’ans in the Arabic. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msY5IHtXxS8

        2 of these are widely used in the Muslim world, the rest are used little or not much at all.

        Like

    • Prophecy of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) in the Bible :

      (John 16:7 KJV) :
      “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.”

      Point Number 1) Christians say that the comforter in the above verse is referring to the Holy Ghost but if that is true then why does Jesus (peace be upon him) say that he has to go away or the comforter will not come? According to the Bible the Holy Ghost was there before the time of Jesus, in the womb of Elizabeth (Luke 1:15), and even in the time of Jesus (peace be upon him), the spirit mentioned in (Matthew 12:28) is the Holy Ghost. Please correct me if I’m wrong. So it makes no sense him making the condition that he must go away for someone who is already there to come.

      Point Number 2) Jesus (peace be upon him) says in the Gospel of John Chapter 16 Verse 12-14 (KJV) :

      “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you unto all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me…”.

      You ask is Mohammed (peace be upon him) a spirit? I say yes. You see, every time the word spirit is used in the Bible it doesn’t stand for the Holy Ghost because in the book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible. We are told that seven spirits of God have went out into the world (Revelation 1:4). Do you believe in seven Holy Ghosts? No. So as we can see spirit doesn’t stand for Holy Ghost everytime. Also, in (1 John 4:1) the word spirit is used synonymously with the word prophet. In the following verse (1 John 4:2) we read that the spirit that confesseth that Jesus is the Christ is of God. Means that the prophet that confesses that Jesus is the Christ is from Allah (God). So now lets find out whether this spirit/prophet is from God. Does prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) say that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the Christ? Open Surah Al-Imran Chapter 3 : Verse 42-45. The word “Messiah” is translated Christ. So I’m asking you why don’t you apply this verse to prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him)?

      The question arises. What new thing did the Holy Ghost teach Christendom in the last 2000 years? Many Christians claim to have the Holy Ghost guiding them but if that is true, then where are the things that Jesus (peace be upon him) said that he couldn’t tell his people, because they couldn’t bear it “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now”. Where are these many things? Can you tell me one thing that was inspired by the Holy Ghost from the time of Jesus (peace be upon him) till today? not many just one. And if the Christians really are being guided by the Holy Ghost then why do different churches/denominations go in different directions? Are they being guided by the same Holy Spirit? From God? No. Can you tell me something that Jesus Christ (peace be upon him) did not tell you in so many different words and that was given through the Holy Spirit. Not many just one. Any church, any denomination. Bring me one thing that the Holy Ghost inspired you. Jesus Christ says “but ye cannot bear them now” the reason why he didn’t give it to them wasn’t because he didn’t have it. He had the solutions to the problems of mankind, God gave it to him. But the people we’re not fit to receive them. That’s what he’s saying.

      Like

      • None of these verses prophesy of Muhammad at all, LOL. John 16:7 is talking of the Holy Spirit, and even says that Jesus is the one who sends the comforter — in Islam, Allah sends Muhammad/comforter, so if Muhammad is the guy in John 16:7, then Jesus becomes Allah LOL.

        You cannot trust Zakir Naik when he makes these lies. Zakir Naik is the same man who pays people to become radicalized in ISIS and has been banned from Bangladesh… Nabeel Qureshi completely obliterates Muhammad on these ‘prophecies of Muhammad’, which don’t exist.

        Like

    • You said : “He is absolutely not doing such.” Talking about David Wood when I said he was misquoting Muslim sources and fooling the public. Well, I showed you the videos where he does it and they are very clear. You’re just siding with him because he’s a Christian like you or so he claims. Does Christianity teach to insult other faiths? Do you agree with what David Wood is doing? Can you answer these question with verses from the Bible? Thank you.

      Well, I’d love to see him debating Dr Zakir Naik. But I don’t think that’s possible. Probably nobody can stand talking to him after the type of insults that he makes to Islam on youtube. Let’s be realistic, if he really wanted a debate then he should’ve done it properly not just acting tough and confident behind the camera. Look at Ahmed Deedat for example (May Allah’s mercy be on him). Did he hide behind cameras and insult Christians? No, he went and challenged knowledgeable Christians to debates. Look at the number of debates he had, in all of them he talked respectfully so there was no trouble. I don’t think the same is possible with David Wood.

      Regarding the Muslim belief of the Christian Bible. You really are persistent. I quoted you verses and you never replied to them. Yes, the Quran is a very clear book, and you have to understand it as a whole. Not just a verse from here and a verse from there.

      You said : “All the early Muslims trusted the Gospel, Torah, and guys like Paul — the denial of this nowadays is very recent and is a view that was not shared by Muhammad. It seems only Ibn Abbas shares your view. Think about this, the Qur’an says that the Gospel and Torah are the “Reminder”, and subsequently says that the “Reminder” will be protected from corruption (15:9)!”

      Well, the verses I quoted and the hadiths prove the contrary. Respond to them if you are truthful.

      “Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.”(Quran 15:9 SAHIH INTERNATIONAL)

      You said : “What on Earth are you talking about? There is… No connection between Protestantism and the KJV. Protestantism predates the KJV by over a century.”

      Ok, would you care to tell me which version of the Bible to you use and why?

      You said : “Remember, the Jews were the ones who originally had the Old Testament revealed to them — and there was NO APOCRYPHA in their Old Testament. Then, these apocrypha get written hundreds of years after the Old Testament is finished, still not accepted by the Jews, but then some other people start proclaiming it to be authentic.”

      How on earth did that happen? Does it sound logical to you? People just wrote something and decided to put it in the book of God? There is a missing link.

      You said : “What argument? If there’s anything wrong with the RSV (which I’ve never heard of this translation before you came along), then that’s the RSV’s problem and we should all forget about the RSV.”

      What arguement? Are you kidding me? And what have I been talking about the past 3 responses? I’ve also reproduced pages from Ahmed Deedat’s book to make it easier to understand. You should read my responses…

      The RSV is the revised standard version of the Bible. And no we should not just forget about it. We should learn from what happened in the past. Here, I’ll post the pages again.

      The RSV 1952 version.

      ” GLOWING TRIBUTES

      First published, as Sir Winston says, in 1611, and then revised in 1881 (RV), and now re-revised and brought up to date as the Revised Standard Version (RSV) 1952, and now again re-re-revised in 1971 (still RSV for short). Let us see what opinion Christendom has of this most
      revised Bible, the RSV:-

      1. “THE FINEST VERSION WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED IN THE PRESENT CENTURY.” — (Church of England Newspaper)

      2. “A COMPLETELY FRESH TRANSLATION BY SCHOLARS OF THE HIGHEST EMINENCE.” — (Times literary Supplement)

      3. “THE WELL-LOVED CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUTHORISED VERSION
      COMBINED WITH A NEW ACCURACY OF TRANSLATION.” — (Life and Work)

      4. “THE MOST ACCURATE AND CLOSE RENDERING OF THE ORIGINAL” —(TheTimes)

      The publishers (Collins) themselves, in their notes on the Bible at the end of their production, say on page 10: “THIS BIBLE (RSV), IS THE PRODUCT OF THIRTY-TWO SCHOLARS, ASSISTED BY AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPRESENTING FIFTY CO-OPERATING DENOMINATIONS.” Why all this boasting? To make the gullible public buy their product? All these testimonies convince the purchaser that he is backing the right horse, with the purchaser little suspecting that he is being taken for a ride.

      “THE WORLD’S BEST SELLER”
      But what about the Authorised Version of the Bible (AV), the “World’s Best Seller?” These Revisers, all good salesmen, have some very pretty things to say about it. However, their page iii, paragraph six of the PREFACE of the RSV reads;

      “THE KING JAMES VERSION (alternative description of AV) HAS WITH GOOD REASON BEEN TERMED ‘THE NOBLEST MONUMENT OF ENGLISH PROSE.’ ITS REVISERS IN 1881 EXPRESSED ADMIRATION FOR ‘ITS SIMPLICITY, ITS DIGNITY, ITS POWER, ITS HAPPY TURNS OF EXPRESSION … THE MUSIC OF ITS CADENCES, AND THE FELICITIES OF ITS RHYTHM.’ IT ENTERED, AS NO OTHER BOOK HAS, INTO THE MAKING OF THE PERSONAL CHARACTER AND THE PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OF THE ENGLISH-SPEAKING PEOPLES. WE OWE TO IT AN INCALCULABLE DEBT.”

      Can you, dear reader, imagine a more magnificent tribute being paid to the “Book of Books” than the above? I, for one, cannot. Let the believing Christian, now steel himself for the un-kindest blow of all from his own beloved Lawyers of Religion; for in the very same breath they say:

      “YET THE KING JAMES VERSION HAS GRAVE DEFECTS.” And, “THAT THESE DEFECTS ARE SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS AS TO CALL FOR REVISION . . .” This is straight from the horse’s mouth, i.e. the orthodox Christian scholars of “the highest eminence.” Another galaxy of Doctors of Divinity are now required to produce an encyclopedia explaining the cause of those GRAVE AND SERIOUS DEFECTS in their Holy Writ and their reasons for eliminating them. ” “(IsTheBibleGod’sWord Pg.7 & 8)

      Well, basically what happens is that the fundamental teachings of Christianity (the trinity for example and the ascention, the word begotten in John 3:16) are removed by the 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations from the RSV 1952 version. But then, some people got mad because they can’t preach what they wanted to preach and forced the publishers to restore them back to the Bible, in a newer version.

      In the words of Ahmed Deedat :

      “NOT FOR LONG!
      The hot-gospellers and the Bible-thumpers were too slow in catching the Joke. By the time they realised that the corner-stone of their preaching — THE ASCENSION OF JESUS — had been undermined as a result of Christian Biblical erudition, the publishers of the RSV had
      already raked in a net profit of 15 000 000 dollars! (Fifteen Million). The propagandists made a big hue and cry, and with the backing of two denominational committees out of the fifty, forced the Publishers to re-incorporate the interpolations into the “INSPIRED” Word of God in every
      new publication of the RSV after 1952, the expunged portion was “RESTORED TO THE TEXT.”

      It is an old, old game. The Jews and the Christians have been editing their “Book of God” from its very inception. The difference between them and the ancient forgerers is that the ancient forgers did not know the art of writing “prefaces” and “footnotes”, otherwise they too would
      have told us as clearly as our modern heroes have about their tampering, and their glib excuses for transmuting forged currency into glittering gold.

      “MANY PROPOSALS FOR MODIFICATION WERE SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE BY INDIVIDUALS AND BY TWO DENOMINATIONAL COMMITTEES ALL OF THESE WERE GIVEN CAREFUL ATTENTION BY THE COMMITTEE.

      “TWO PASSAGES, THE I LONGER ENDING OF MARK (16:9-20) . . . AND LUKE 24:51 ARE RESTORED TO THE TEXT.” (Preface — Collins’ pages vi and vii)

      “Why ‘restored’”? Because they had been previously expunged! Why had the references to the Ascension expunged in the first place? The MOST Ancient manuscripts had no references to the Ascension at all. They were interpolations similar to 1 John 5:7 about the Trinity. (Refer to the
      earlier example 3). Why eliminate one and re-instate the other? Do not be surprised! By the time you lay your hands on a RSV, the “Committee” might also have decided to expunge the whole of their invaluable Preface. The Jehovah’s Witnesses have already eliminated 27 revealing pages of their FOREWORD to their “New World Translation of the CHRISTIAN GREEK SCRIPTURES,” (this is their way of saying — New Testament). “(IsTheBibleGod’sWord Pg.16)

      What do you think? If you still find it hard to understand you can get the book. It’s available for free in PDF format in the net.

      Now coming to the contradictions. I’m going to respond to your response.

      You said : “2 Chronicles 21:11 is not quoting 2 Samuel 24:13, you know. It’s not reproducing the exact same text, it just so happens to be referencing the same event. Furthermore, even if it was a quote, there is no necessity for 2 Chronicles to quote the entire thing word by word, as long as God inspires 2 Chronicles it’s fine. There is no contradiction with the omitting of these words.”

      You’re missing the point. It says :

      The “Lord” tempted David . . .
      2 SAMUEL 24:1

      or “Satan” provoked David . . .
      1 CHRONICLES 21:1

      Was it “The Lord” (God) or was it “Satan” (The Devil). Who provoked David?

      You said : “Looks like I’m not finding this contradiction. When I searched up 2 Chronicles 36:9, it clearly says “eighteen”

      Tell me, which Bible do you use? Because the KJV says “eight”. Do you still think it’s a difference between “and” or “for”?

      You said : “it’s clear that the ones that read 8 were subjected to copyist errors, but again, we still have manuscripts that say 18 and thus the original from God is retained and there is no contradiction. ”

      Tell me who made this “copyist error”. Was it Chronicles? Wasn’t he inspired by God? Remember this verse.

      “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.”(Isaiah 40:8 KJV)

      Do you still believe the Bible to be the word of God? If so, Tell me why does the Bible portray God as a barber?

      “In the same day shall the Lord shave with a razor that is hired, namely, by them beyond the river, by the king of Assyria, the head, and the hair of the feet: and it shall also consume the beard.”(Isaiah 7:20 KJV)

      A “hissing” God (?) ISAIAH 5:26, 7:18, ZECHARIAH 10:8

      A “roaring” God (?) ISAIAH 42:13, JEREMIAH 25:30

      A God “riding” a cherub (?) 2 SAMUEL 22:11

      Did Saul enquire of the Lord or didn’t he? 1 SAMUEL 28:6 vs 1
      CHRONICLES 10:13-14

      Does this make any sense to you? Can you not see that it is a fabrication? I can keep listing but I think you should have understood by now.

      You said “As for the nonsense of “pornographic material”, this is obviously ridiculous because the Bible isn’t meant to be read by babies who get emotional when they read about what some people have committed. The funny thing is, the Qur’an itself has this “pornographic material”, such as when it talks about the virgins Muslims have in heaven, and describes them as with having “swelling breasts” — is that not pornographic itself? LOL! Qur’an 78:31-34.”

      I want you to imagine this scenario. You have a younger 7 year old sister, she was reading the Bible and have accidently come across some of this pornographic material. Yes, it is pornographic material. If it was outside the Bible you wouldn’t have defended it. She goes and ask her friends at school what does it mean? And the older girls will explain to her…What are you doing to your children? Or is it that you keep the Bible away from them, tell them it’s 18+? Don’t defend evil.

      These stories are changing the mindset of people. You say that it isn’t meant for “babies who get emotional”. But that is a bad way to reason yourself out of it. It isn’t meant for children as well as grown ups. Think about it. Does God not understand the psychology of his creation (us humans)? By reading these stories he’s giving us ideas, he’s stimulating us to do what he forbids us to do. Why would he do that? Is this the works of God or the works of the Devil?

      “‘CHRISTIAN PARENTAL DILEMMAS’
      Dr. Vernon Jones, an American psychologist of repute, carried out experiments on groups of school children to whom certain stories had been told. The heroes of the stories were the same in the case of the different groups of children, but the heroes behaved contradictorily to each group. To one group “St. George,” slaving the dragon emerged a very brave figure, but to another group, fleeing in terror and seeking shelter in his mother’s lap. “THESE STORIES MADE
      CERTAIN SLIGHT BUT PERMANENT CHANGES IN CHARACTER, EVEN IN THE NARROW CLASSROOM SITUATION,” concluded Dr. Jones.

      How much more permanent damage the rapes and murders, incests and beastialities of the “Holy Bible” has done to the children of Christendom, can be measured from reports in our daily newspapers. If such is the source of Western morality, it is no little wonder, then, that Methodists and Roman Catholics have already solemnized marriages between HOMOSEXUALS in their “Houses of God.” And 8000 “gays” (an euphemistic term for sodomites) parade their “wares” in London’s Hyde Park in July 1979, to the acclaim of the news and TV media.

      You must get that “Holy Bible” and read the whole chapter 38 of Genesis. Mark in “red” the words and phrases deserving this adornment. We had reached verse 18 in our moral (?) lesson —
      “AND SHE CONCEIVED BY HIM.” “(IsTheBibleGodsWord Pg. 35)

      BAN THE BOOK!
      George Bernard Shaw said that “THE MOST DANGEROUS BOOK (the Bible) ON EARTH, KEEP IT UNDER LOCK AND KEY.” Keep the Bible out of your children’s reach.

      “Reading Bible stories to children can also open up all sorts of
      opportunities to discuss the morality of sex. An unexpurgated
      Bible might get an X-rating from some censors,”
      The PLAIN TRUTH October 1977

      And if you insist and go on to reason that God is “just showing us sins so that we won’t commit them” then I can show you verses where people do these sins and there is absolutely no punishment given to them.

      Coming to the verse of the Quran that you quoted. The arabic language is a very vast language. A word may have multiple meanings ,we need to keep that in mind. Some of the translators are not so explicit with the language, on that level there is nothing wrong with it.

      “And voluptuous women of equal age;”(Quran 78:33 YUSUF ALI)
      “And voluptuous women of equal age;”(Quran 78:33 SHAKIR)

      Of course, your gonna go with the other translators just to have a point against the Qur’an. But we’re gonna have to agree that it’s nothing like what’s in the Bible.

      You said : “It’s much easier to post a video than to make this comment a ton longer. The fact is, John 16:7 and John 14 is NOT talking about Muhammad — it’s talking about the Holy Spirit, these chapters EVEN SAY they are talking about the Holy Spirit. According to these passages, the ‘comforter’ is someone who “cannot be seen and lives inside us”, how the heck does this apply to Muhammad? Not only that, but Jesus is the one who sends the comforter — so if Muhammad is the comforter, and Allah sends Muhammad, then Jesus becomes Allah! So if John 14 and 16 actually are talking about Muhammad, then Jesus becomes God and this entire debate should be wrapped up.”

      I’ve already proven that it cannot be the “Holy Spirit” in my response. I’ve also quoted other verses that are specific to only prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him). So you say that Jesus (peace be upon him) has to send him. Well, according to the verse, if you take it literally you are right. But there are other prophecies. InshaAllah if you are willing we will discuss them soon. Let’s for now, focus on what’s at hand.

      You said : “By the way, this comment is getting very lengthy — I was looking to post contradictions in the Qur’an here, but I will have to postpone it to my next response.”

      I don’t know why I’m getting the feeling that you’re taking this as if it’s a fight between me and you. If you’re thinking like that then I’d rather not have this discussion to begin with. If you want to post anything feel free to do it. I’ll answer what I can. Even the arguments that Mr Wood raises against Islam, what he wants to say debate Dr Zakir about. Post it here, and I’ll answer what I can with my limited knowledge.

      “Do they not consider the Qur’an (with care)? Had it been from other Than Allah, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.”(Quran 4:82 YUSUF ALI)

      “Then do they not reflect upon the Qur’an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah , they would have found within it much contradiction.”(Quran 4:82 SAHIH INTERNATIONAL)

      If you think you found some contradictions, then I would be delighted to entertain them.

      Like

      • “You’re just siding with him because he’s a Christian like you or so he claims. Does Christianity teach to insult other faiths? Do you agree with what David Wood is doing?”

        I never said Wood’s attacks were right — I said his general arguments are accurate and well-defended. David Wood has a PhD in Philosophy, he is not some joker. As for Naik not debating Wood because Wood is ‘mean’, why would Naik keep the truth from the thousands of viewers because someone is mean? Also, why doesn’t he debate Nabeel Qureshi? Nabeel Qureshi has never insulted Naik, but is a top Christian Scholar, as well as a doctor and former-Muslim as well as the author of the best-selling ‘Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus’ — and has been challenging Naik for just as long as Wood has! The truth is, as Wood points out, Naik has NEVER debated an experienced Christian debater in his life. He simply does not have the arguments to do so.

        “You really are persistent. I quoted you verses and you never replied to them. ”

        Ah yes, you reminded me — you quoted that Sahil Bukhari verse that I didn’t respond to. If you want to take the Sahil Bukhari view of Ibn Abbas over what the Qur’an says about the preservation of the Bible, you might as well go the full way with the Hadiths and accept the Qur’an is corrupted:
        Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. vol. 6. p. 269: The verse of the stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the messenger of Allah expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper

        The truth is, the Qur’an explicitly decrees the guarding of the ‘Reminder’, and the Qur’an also calls the Bible the ‘Reminder’. The Qur’an says the Bible is revealed by Allah (3:3, 5:47) as well as all the things revealed by Allah are preserved (6:115, 18:27). In fact, the Qur’an outright says the Christians and Jews still had the Gospel and Torah during the time of Muhammad!

        Qur’an 7:157: Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they who have believed in him, honored him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him – it is those who will be the successful.

        ““Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.”(Quran 15:9 SAHIH INTERNATIONAL)”

        Read Qur’an 15:9 in the original Arabic — in fact, I think quran.com even gives you the original Arabic. You can point your mouse over the Arabic words to see what they mean. The word ‘Qur’an’ never appears in this verse, the translation is lying — if you read it in the original Arabic, or put the mouse over the Arabic words that the site quran.com gives you, the word is clearly the ‘Reminder’ or ‘Remembrance’, the word Qur’an appears nowhere in the Arabic.

        “Ok, would you care to tell me which version of the Bible to you use and why?”

        I generally use the HCSB, but even I recognize that the HCSB is not perfect in its translation, but it’s one of the better ones I could find when it comes to translating from the original language. For example, the word ‘slave’ appears in the Bible HUNDREDS of times, yet the HCSB is one of the only two to translate it as ‘slave’, even though there is no other meaning for the Hebrew word. The fact is, the translations for the Bible are MOSTLY accurate, but you should make sure to cross-check the Hebrew and Greek just in case if a supposed problem arises. You go on to cite decades old reviews of the RSV which are long out-dated, as any Scholar today in 2016 which translations are the best, and you’ll usually get something like NIV 2011 or maybe even the HCSB in a few cases. I’m also highly skeptical of the RSV or AV being the “worlds best seller”, as the KJV has been selling way more than any other translation for a long while now, followed by the NIV. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone use the RSV in my life. In fact, I searched up the 9 most popular Bible translations in America, and not a single one of them was the RSV — this is obviously one that no longer exists. Remember, Ahmed Deedat has been dead for decades now, and for the last 8 or so years of his life was entirely paralyzed.

        “The MOST Ancient manuscripts had no references to the Ascension at all.”

        Citation absolutely 100% needed. As for the New World Translation, that’s obvious garbage that is a laughing stock in the Christian community — I heard it has 50,000 errors.

        “You’re missing the point. It says :
        The “Lord” tempted David . . .
        2 SAMUEL 24:1
        or “Satan” provoked David . . .
        1 CHRONICLES 21:1”

        https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=6&article=784

        “You said : “Looks like I’m not finding this contradiction. When I searched up 2 Chronicles 36:9, it clearly says “eighteen”
        Tell me, which Bible do you use? Because the KJV says “eight”.”

        That’s obviously either a mistranslation or the KJV was based on a false manuscript. The correct manuscript clearly solves it — its eighteen. Who the heck would let an 8 year old rule a country?

        “Tell me who made this “copyist error”. Was it Chronicles? Wasn’t he inspired by God?”

        I don’t think you understand what a copyist is. Remember, the guy who wrote Chronicles — that original copy of Chronicles written by that inspired guy is obviously no longer here, just like with the Qur’an — there isn’t the original Qur’anic manuscripts anymore. Do you know how we still have Chronicles? Because there were people who copied the original manuscript of Chronicles, and others copied that copy, and others copied that copy of the copy. Somewhere in this copying spree, which was done by men, one of the copies had an error and someone switched 8 with 18. However, we still have manuscripts that say 18 which means God make sure His original Word came down with us still. That is what a copyist error is.

        “A “hissing” God (?) ISAIAH 5:26, 7:18, ZECHARIAH 10:8
        A “roaring” God (?) ISAIAH 42:13, JEREMIAH 25:30”

        God is mighty, God will roar and will shake the Earth. Whatever the Bible says like that is meant to proclaim the glory of God.

        “I want you to imagine this scenario. You have a younger 7 year old sister, she was reading the Bible and have accidently come across some of this pornographic material. Yes, it is pornographic material. If it was outside the Bible you wouldn’t have defended it. She goes and ask her friends at school what does it mean? And the older girls will explain to her…”

        Again, let us NOT forget the “swelling breasts” remarked of in Qur’an 78:31-34, written towards the lustful followers of Muhammad who wanted as much sex as they can get. Secondly, as I explained, the Bible is the book of TRUTH, the Bible will proclaim Noah’s flood when God destroyed the entire world, it will proclaim God condemning the sinners and what they do and recording specific histories. A 7 year old, if it is one who believes and trusts in God, will not gain a defiled mindset if she reads such a thing. Anyone who gains a defiled mindset by reading that was defiled from the start!

        “I’ve already proven that it cannot be the “Holy Spirit” in my response. I’ve also quoted other verses that are specific to only prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him). So you say that Jesus (peace be upon him) has to send him. Well, according to the verse, if you take it literally you are right. But there are other prophecies. InshaAllah if you are willing we will discuss them soon. Let’s for now, focus on what’s at hand.”

        Ugh, I don’t remember any such thing being proved! This is clearly talking about the Holy Spirit and every verse talks SPECIFICALLY about the Holy Spirit.

        John 14:17: the Spirit of truth. The world cannot receive Him, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him. But you do know Him, for He abides with you and He will be in you.

        The world DID see Muhammad, lots of Muslims DO accept Muhammad, and Muhammad definitely is not “in you” or anyone else, that’s ridiculous. It’s clear Muhammad could not possibly fulfill this, this is obviously the Holy Spirit by any stretch of the imagination.

        Just to note — the West is the LAST REPRESENTATIVE of Christianity in the world, obviously. The West is NOT CHRISTIAN, it is mostly all heathens. It’s pathetic, really. What Christianity does is make people prosper. If you look at the rates of STD’s, teen pregnancies, crime, etc, you’ll realize all of them EXPLODED after 1963 in America. 1963 was the same year when Bible reading was taken out of American schools.

        “I don’t know why I’m getting the feeling that you’re taking this as if it’s a fight between me and you.”

        Sorry, I didn’t mean to make it seem that way.

        Like

    • You said : “I never said Wood’s attacks were right — I said his general arguments are accurate and well-defended. David Wood has a PhD in Philosophy, he is not some joker. ”

      “His general arguments are accurate and well-defended”…great. Believe what you want. So what if he has PhD or whatever? if he lacks basic manners then it’s all useless. Can’t you give me some verses from the Bible that prove that what he’s doing is wrong? They would be useful if I ever have to respond to Christians that lack basic manners. If there is a Muslim that lacks manners, feel free quote him this and shut him up on the spot.

      Treatment of other religions. We are told to treat people of other faiths respectfully and fairly.

      “Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.”(Qur’an 60:8)

      We are told not to insult them or their faith.

      “Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance. Thus have We made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord, and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did.”(Qur’an 6:108)

      When we discuss religion we are supposed to do it respectfully and logically.

      “Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance.”(Qur’an 16:125)

      We don’t force our religion on anyone.

      “It is true thou wilt not be able to guide every one, whom thou lovest; but Allah guides those whom He will and He knows best those who receive guidance.”(Qur’an 28:56)

      “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.”(Qur’an 2:256)

      You said : “As for Naik not debating Wood because Wood is ‘mean’, why would Naik keep the truth from the thousands of viewers because someone is mean?”

      Who said that he is ‘mean’? I’ll tell you something. If someone insults your mother in public, would you not punch him in the face? He’s literally insulting Islam my religion and prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him). My prophet whom I love and respect more than anyone else. He’s trying to start war between the Muslims and the Christians. And you are supporting him instead of stopping him. There is nothing to debate about (in the sense that the information is already available from both sides), for example these videos I posted. However, if somehow they ever had a debate, I don’t think it would end well. Why doesn’t Dr Zakir debate these people? I have no idea. You can go ask him. He must be having trouble, since they shut down the Islamic Research Foundation website recently. If you really are interested in learning the Muslim perspective of the topics you mentioned last time, then his lectures are available on youtube. Ahmed Deedat’s lectures and debates are also there. Listen to the case from both sides then you be the judge.

      You said : “Ah yes, you reminded me — you quoted that Sahil Bukhari verse that I didn’t respond to. If you want to take the Sahil Bukhari view of Ibn Abbas over what the Qur’an says about the preservation of the Bible, you might as well go the full way with the Hadiths and accept the Qur’an is corrupted:
      Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. vol. 6. p. 269: The verse of the stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the messenger of Allah expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper”

      Firstly, Sahih Al-Bukhari is not a verse. Sahih al-Bukhari is a collection of hadith compiled by Imam Muhammad al-Bukhari (d. 256 AH/870 AD) (rahimahullah). You can read more about it here {https://www.sunnah.com/bukhari}. Hadith means sayings of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him).

      This hadith you’re mentioning is unauthentic. You can read more about it here {https://islamqa.info/en/175355}

      You said : “The truth is, the Qur’an explicitly decrees the guarding of the ‘Reminder’, and the Qur’an also calls the Bible the ‘Reminder’. The Qur’an says the Bible is revealed by Allah (3:3, 5:47) as well as all the things revealed by Allah are preserved (6:115, 18:27). In fact, the Qur’an outright says the Christians and Jews still had the Gospel and Torah during the time of Muhammad!

      Qur’an 7:157: Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they who have believed in him, honored him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him – it is those who will be the successful.”

      Regarding the Muslim belief of the Christian Bible. I have responded to this before. You can go back and read my response again if you forgot. I’ve also quotes some verses that I expect you to respond to them if you really want to prove your statement. Though that is not possible as the verses are very clear. They are :

      “But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them- barring a few – ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind.”(Quran 5:13)

      “Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.”(Quran 2:79)

      “That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-“(Quran 4:157)

      Notice how Allah Almighty says that “they only follow conjecture” and since Christians follow the current Bible. We can say that the conjecture described above includes the current “Holy Bible”. And conjecture is forbidden in the Holy Qur’an.

      Since you are quoting (Quran 7:157), does that mean that you accept the prophecy of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) in the Bible?

      Look,

      “And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.”(Isaiah 29:1)

      Go and read about the first revelation given to prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) and how he responds. He responds with the exact same words “I am not learned”. Now tell me is the Holy Ghost not learned?

      Watch this {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YObiDoEIsW4} for clarification. Starting from 4:57.

      You said : “Read Qur’an 15:9 in the original Arabic — in fact, I think quran.com even gives you the original Arabic. You can point your mouse over the Arabic words to see what they mean. The word ‘Qur’an’ never appears in this verse, the translation is lying — if you read it in the original Arabic, or put the mouse over the Arabic words that the site quran.com gives you, the word is clearly the ‘Reminder’ or ‘Remembrance’, the word Qur’an appears nowhere in the Arabic.”

      I know, the translators probably thought it fit to clarify the verse.

      “We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).”(Quran 15:9 YUSUF ALI)

      I already told you, the Arabic language is a very vast language. A word may have multiple meanings. It is obvious to anyone who has knowledge of the Quran that the words “The Remainder” or “The Message” is referring to the true uncorrupted message of God. Which the Glorious Quran. You went on and said a lie last time, that there are different versions of the Quran. There is only one Quran, it is the Arabic text. Different translators may differ in the choice of words, but there is only one Arabic text. That is the Glorious Quran.

      You said : “You go on to cite decades old reviews of the RSV which are long out-dated, as any Scholar today in 2016 which translations are the best, and you’ll usually get something like NIV 2011 or maybe even the HCSB in a few cases. I’m also highly skeptical of the RSV or AV being the “worlds best seller”, as the KJV has been selling way more than any other translation for a long while now, followed by the NIV. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone use the RSV in my life. In fact, I searched up the 9 most popular Bible translations in America, and not a single one of them was the RSV — this is obviously one that no longer exists. Remember, Ahmed Deedat has been dead for decades now, and for the last 8 or so years of his life was entirely paralyzed.”

      What happened in the past proves that there is something wrong. Why did 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations throw these verses out as a fabrication? And in the next translation they were forced to bring back the fabrications into the word of God. The Authorised Version (AV) is another name given to the King James Version (KJV). The problem here is not whether people use the RSV nowadays or not, it is why did the Christian scholars threw out the verses to begin with? And they were forced to bring them back in. Read the quotations from the preface again.

      Check this out, the contradiction is still there in the Bible that you use.

      {http://www.biblestudytools.com/csb/1-chronicles/21.html}
      {http://www.biblestudytools.com/csb/2-samuel/24.html}

      I know that Ahmed Deedat is dead now (May Allah have mercy on him) and that he was sick before his death. But his books and debates are available on the net for free, if you want.

      You said : “That’s obviously either a mistranslation or the KJV was based on a false manuscript. The correct manuscript clearly solves it — its eighteen. Who the heck would let an 8 year old rule a country?”

      You tell me it is in your “old book of God”. Isn’t it? Many people use the KJV to this day, right?

      Jesus lost “None” of his disciples JOHN 18:9
      Contradicted by:
      He lost only “One” JOHN 17:12

      This contradiction is also present in the HCSB Bible.

      You said : “I don’t think you understand what a copyist is. Remember, the guy who wrote Chronicles — that original copy of Chronicles written by that inspired guy is obviously no longer here, just like with the Qur’an — there isn’t the original Qur’anic manuscripts anymore. Do you know how we still have Chronicles? Because there were people who copied the original manuscript of Chronicles, and others copied that copy, and others copied that copy of the copy. Somewhere in this copying spree, which was done by men, one of the copies had an error and someone switched 8 with 18. However, we still have manuscripts that say 18 which means God make sure His original Word came down with us still. That is what a copyist error is.”

      This verse that is from the Bible proves that it cannot be the word of God. God can protect his book from fabrications and copyist errors if he wants. You keep finding these errors and fixing them, but what about the people of the past who believed in what you have realised to be a fabrication today. They believed that the words of man was the words of God.

      “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.”(Isaiah 40:8 KJV)

      The word of god will stand forever and no copyist error can ever change it. I have responded to your argument against the Quran. There is only one Quran which is the Arabic text, different translators may differ in the choice of words. But the Arabic text is always the same. That link explains the misconception properly.

      You said : “God is mighty, God will roar and will shake the Earth. Whatever the Bible says like that is meant to proclaim the glory of God.”

      I see, but you didn’t say anything about God being a barber or riding a cherub. You know what a cherub is? look it up. Here, if you believe the Bible to be the word of God then you’re gonna have to believe all this.

      GOD :
      Qualities ill-befitting God

      (a)
      A “hissing” God (?) ISAIAH 5:26, 7:18, ZECHARIAH 10:8
      (b)
      A “roaring” God (?)
      ISAIAH 42:13, JEREMIAH 25:30
      (c)
      A “barber” God (?) ISAIAH 7:20
      (d)
      A “penitent” God (?)
      JEREMIAH 15:6, GENESIS 6:6
      (e)
      A God “riding” a cherub (?) 2 SAMUEL 22:11
      (f)
      A God murders 50,070 for looking into a box (?)
      1 SAMUEL 6:19

      GOD : His contradictory attributes

      (a)”No man hath seen God at any time” JOHN 1:18
      (b)”(God) whom no man hath seen, nor can see …”
      1 TIMOTHY 6:16
      (c)”And he (God) said, Thou canst see my face: for there shall
      no man see me, and live.” EXODUS 33:20

      Contradicted by:
      (a)”And the Lord spake unto Moses face to face, as a man
      speaketh unto his friend.”
      EXODUS 33:11
      (b)”And they (Moses, Aaron and seventy others) saw the God of
      Israel . . .”
      EXODUS 24:10
      (c)”And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have
      seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.” GENESIS 32:30

      And as a special favour God shows his back parts to Moses:

      “And I (God) will take away my hand and thou shalt see my
      back parts . . .” EXODUS 33:23

      GOD : Further contradictory qualities

      (a) GOD AS AN OMNIPOTENT BEING:
      “And Jesus saith . . . for with God ALL THINGS are possible.”
      MARK 10:27, also MATTHEW 19:26

      Contradicted by:

      “And the Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the
      inhabitants of the mountain; but COULD NOT drive out the
      inhabitants of the valley, because they had CHARIOTS OF
      IRON.” JUDGES 1:19

      I can post more, but I think you have got what I’m trying to say here. Are these not fabrications in your eyes? speak the truth and the truth shall free you.

      You said : “Again, let us NOT forget the “swelling breasts” remarked of in Qur’an 78:31-34, written towards the lustful followers of Muhammad who wanted as much sex as they can get. Secondly, as I explained, the Bible is the book of TRUTH, the Bible will proclaim Noah’s flood when God destroyed the entire world, it will proclaim God condemning the sinners and what they do and recording specific histories. A 7 year old, if it is one who believes and trusts in God, will not gain a defiled mindset if she reads such a thing. Anyone who gains a defiled mindset by reading that was defiled from the start”

      I have already responded to that verse from the Quran in my last comment. What you say is illogical. God created us and he understand our psychology. When we see/read something we get influenced by it. Are you prepared to show what I will post below to any of your family members? You can’t say “I’m just gonna read it, I won’t do it” I’m gonna leave it to you to decide what morality and what a fabrication is.

      16. INCEST : “Sexual intercourse between two persons who are too closely related.” (New Collins Dictionary). For example, between father and daughter, son and mother, father-in-law and daughter-in-law, brother and sister, etc.

      INCEST IN GOD’S BOOK (?) BETWEEN A FATHER AND HIS DAUGHTERS:
      (a) “That night they (both the daughters of Lot) gave him (their father Lot) wine to drink, and the older daughter had INTERCOURSE with him …

      “The next day the older daughter said to her sister, l slept with him last night: now let’s get him drunk again tonight, and you sleep with him. Then each of us will have a child by our father.

      “So that night they got him drunk, and the younger daughter had INTERCOURSE with him …
      “In this way both of Lot’s daughters became PREGNANT by their father.” GENESIS 19:33-35 (From the “Good News Bible in Today’s English”).

      In the older Versions, like the King James and the Roman Catholic Versions, “SEXUAL INTERCOURSE” is vaguely described as “COLLECTING THE SEED OF OUR FATHER.”

      INCEST BETWEEN MOTHER AND SON:
      (b) “While Jacob (Israel) was living in the land, Reuben (his firstborn, his eldest son) had SEXUAL INTERCOURSE with Bilhah, his father’s concubine. ”
      GENESIS 35:22.

      The older Versions of the Bible, use the word, “lay” for SEXUAL INTERCOURSE.

      INCEST BETWEEN FATHER-IN-LAW AND DAUGHTER-IN-LAW:
      (c) “When Judah saw her (Tamar, his daughter-in-law), he thought she was a prostitute, because she had covered her face.

      “He went over to her at the side of the road and said, “ALL RIGHT, HOW MUCH DO YOU CHARGE?” (He did not know that she was his daughter-in-law)
      “She said what will you give me?” (To have sex with me).

      “He answered, I WILL SEND YOU A YOUNG GOAT FROM MY FLOCK.

      “She said, “All right, if you will give me something to keep as a pledge until you send the goat.
      “. . . He gave them (the pledges) to her. Then had INTERCOURSE, and she became pregnant.” GENESIS 38:15-I8 (Quoted from the “Good News Bible”).

      Out of this incestuous relationship between a father-in-law and his daughter-in-law, twins were born, who were destined to become the great-grand-fathers of Jesus Christ. See MATTHEW 1:3
      “And Judas begat Phares and Zarah of Thamar . . .”

      INCEST AND RAPE BETWEEN BROTHER AND SISTER:
      (d) “. . . he took hold of her (Thamar, his sister, not to be confused with Thamar in “c” above), and said unto her, Come lie with me (have sex with me), my sister. 2 Samuel 13:11

      “And she answered him, Nay, my brother (Amnon, one of the sons of David, the man after God’s own heart), do not force me .
      . .” 2 Samuel 13:12
      “But he would not listen to her; and since he was stronger than she was, he overpowered her and RAPED her (his sister).” 2 Samuel 13:14

      WHOLESALE RAPE AND INCEST BETWEEN SON AND HIS MOTHERS!
      (e) “So they set up a tent for Absalom (another son of King David) on the palace roof, and in the sight of everyone, Absalom went in and had INTERCOURSE with his father’s concubines .” 2
      SAMUEL 16:22

      (f) For other various types of incest see LEVITICUS 18:8-18, 20:11-
      14 and 17-21.

      Do you still think that the Bible is Gods word?

      You said : “Ugh, I don’t remember any such thing being proved! This is clearly talking about the Holy Spirit and every verse talks SPECIFICALLY about the Holy Spirit.

      John 14:17: the Spirit of truth. The world cannot receive Him, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him. But you do know Him, for He abides with you and He will be in you.

      The world DID see Muhammad, lots of Muslims DO accept Muhammad, and Muhammad definitely is not “in you” or anyone else, that’s ridiculous. It’s clear Muhammad could not possibly fulfill this, this is obviously the Holy Spirit by any stretch of the imagination.”

      I have proved that it cannot be the Holy Spirit in my explanation. You can read it again. Don’t worry, I’m not relying on only one verse from the Bible to prove my case. This comment is getting too long…I think its tough for both of us to be discussing more than one topic at the same time. There are other verses. I”ll post them in my next response, InshaAllah.

      You said : “Just to note — the West is the LAST REPRESENTATIVE of Christianity in the world, obviously. The West is NOT CHRISTIAN, it is mostly all heathens. It’s pathetic, really. What Christianity does is make people prosper. If you look at the rates of STD’s, teen pregnancies, crime, etc, you’ll realize all of them EXPLODED after 1963 in America. 1963 was the same year when Bible reading was taken out of American schools.”

      This is a debatable topic that I am not interested in. For now, I want you to tell me how does reading filth make you a better person?

      I want to end with this verse that is from the Glorious Quran

      “Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.”(Quran 2:256)

      Like

      • “if he lacks basic manners then it’s all useless. Can’t you give me some verses from the Bible that prove that what he’s doing is wrong?”

        His arguments aren’t useless if he is a rude person — but yes, I will give you some verses.
        Titus 2:7: in everything. Make yourself an example of good works with integrity and dignity in your teaching.
        1 Thessalonians 5:12-13: We ask you, brothers, to respect those who labor among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Be at peace among yourselves.

        “He’s trying to start war between the Muslims and the Christians. ”

        Listen my friend — David has received many death threats from many Muslims. You obviously cannot put all the blame on him.

        You go on to claim that the Hadith I quoted is “inauthentic”. OK, if any Hadith is authentic, it’s Sahil Bukhari and Sahih Muslim — so if I quote one of these two, no doubt it can’t be called inauthentic. So, let’s look at Sahih Muslim, Book 12 number 39:
        “You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara’at. I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it:” If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust.” And we used so recite a surah which resembled one of the surahs of Musabbihat, and I have forgotten it, but remember (this much) out of it:” Oh people who believe, why do you say that which you do not practise” (lxi 2.) and” that is recorded in your necks as a witness (against you) and you would be asked about it on the Day of Resurrection” (xvii. 13).”
        https://sunnah.com/muslim/12/156

        They forgot a surah equal to Bara’at. That’s more than 100 verses. And the part where Abu Harb remembered, with Adam… Which verse of the Qur’an is that today? So the authentic Hadiths clearly report on the corruption and losing of the Qur’an. More than 100+ verses.

        As for Qur’an 5:13 supposedly claiming the Bible is corrupt (which it doesn’t do), or more in general Qur’an 5:12-15, the translator of the Qur’an explains this passage:

        The term tahrif finds its origin in the Quran. In its verbal form it indicates an accusation hurled four times (4:46; 5:13; 5:41; 2:75) against Jewish leaders and carries On this basis a distinction was made early in the polemical tradition between tahrif al-lafz and tahrif al-ma‘na, the first referring to actual textual distortion and corruption, the second referring to the false and distorted interpretation of basically sound texts.

        This is just like Qur’an 2:75, it refers to linguistic corruption, not textual corruption.

        As for the Reminder, that’s simply not true, as the Qur’an calls Christians and Jews as ‘Followers of the Reminder’ (16:43, 21:7). The Reminder does NOT at all refer to the Qur’an, it means all the inspired texts, including the Bible — and thus, according to the Qur’an, the Bible is preserved as the Reminder is preserved.

        “You went on and said a lie last time, that there are different versions of the Quran. There is only one Quran, it is the Arabic text. Different translators may differ in the choice of words, but there is only one Arabic text. That is the Glorious Quran.”

        No, there are about 26 different Arabic Qur’ans, two of them widely used in the Muslim world. The two generally used is the Warsh and the Hafs versions. You probably use the Hafs — the Hafs itself was only made in 1923 in Egypt. Before 1923, the Hafs didn’t exist, the state of the Qur’an was still a mess and some random people put together a Qur’an and it became the Qur’an of the general Muslim world (as well as Warsh).

        “Since you are quoting (Quran 7:157), does that mean that you accept the prophecy of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) in the Bible?
        Look,
        “And the book is delivered to him that is not learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I am not learned.”(Isaiah 29:1)”

        This seems evasive. You talk about Qur’an 7:157 confirming the Bible preservation, but then you quote Isaiah 29:1 and don’t address Qur’an 7:157? Why? It clearly confirms preservation of the Bible. As for Isaiah 29:1… LOL, this verse is not even a prophecy. Read the full context please. Well, before I post the full context — I need to point out you misquoted this verse. That verse is Isaiah 29:12, not Isaiah 29:1. As for the context:

        Isaiah 29:11-12: For you the entire vision will be like the words of a sealed document. If it is given to one who can read and he is asked to read it, he will say, “I can’t read it, because it is sealed.” And if the document is given to one who cannot read and he is asked to read it, he will say, “I can’t read.”

        So it’s clear this has nothing to do with Muhammad, it talks about people both who can read and who can’t read, and it’s talking about pre-existing scripture. Furthermore, this is not even a prophecy. And over all that, the final point is that the meaning of Isaiah 29:11-12, once you remove the nonsense of this being a Muhammad prophecy, the actual meaning of the verse is to show people making excuses to ignore the Word of God — the person who can read will say “I can’t read this because it is sealed”, and the person who can’t read it will simply say “I can’t read, therefore I cannot know what this Word says”. And if you seriously still think this refers to Muhammad, God goes on in this chapter to speak against the people in Isaiah 29:11-12, saying their belief in God is only in their lips.

        “What happened in the past proves that there is something wrong. Why did 32 scholars of the highest eminence backed by 50 cooperating denominations throw these verses out as a fabrication? And in the next translation they were forced to bring back the fabrications into the word of God. The Authorised Version (AV) is another name given to the King James Version (KJV). The problem here is not whether people use the RSV nowadays or not, it is why did the Christian scholars threw out the verses to begin with? ”

        What “verses” are you talking about? If you’re talking about the extension of 1 John 5:17, I’ve already explained it — only two translations in the world use it and its nowhere in the original language. Scholarship is far higher than it was regarding the original words of the Bible then it was decades ago, as textual criticism has greatly advanced — however, the Muslims have not even begun textual criticism on their Qur’an to figure out what the original said and see if it is the same as the Qur’an today.

        “A “hissing” God (?) ISAIAH 5:26, 7:18, ZECHARIAH 10:8”

        HISSING? I searched up one of these verses (Isaiah 5:26), and it says He whistled. As for ‘roaring’, there’s no problem with God declaring His power over the world. God does not literally roar as a lion does, this is obviously symbolic speech. As for God “riding” a cherubim, this verse is entirely symbolic, and not only that, no one really knows what a cherubim is in the first place. There are ideas and such, but no one really knows.

        “God murders 50,070 for looking into a box? 1 Samuel 6:19”

        LOL. Let’s read the verse first.

        1 Samuel 6:19-20 God struck down the men of Beth-shemesh because they looked inside the ark of the Lord. He struck down 70 men out of 50,000 men. The people mourned because the Lord struck them with a great slaughter. The men of Beth-shemesh asked, “Who is able to stand in the presence of this holy Lord God? Who should the ark go to from here?”

        So God didn’t kill 50,070, He killed 70 out of 50,000. Second of all, it’s not a “box”, it’s the Ark of the Covenant (?) or Ark of the Lord, which is a holy place declared by God that only certain people can enter/look at when God allows. You would know a lot more about it if you decided to read the Bible, as I am doing.

        “I have already responded to that verse from the Quran in my last comment. What you say is illogical.”

        Ugh, nope. Your last comment contains no explanation of Qur’an 78:31-34. The fact is, this is just as “pornographic” (ridiculous) as any Biblical text can go.

        You go on to quote Genesis 19 and what Lot’s daughters did, but of course the Bible NEVER condones what the daughters did, so this is a non-argument. As for Genesis 35, the Bible CLEARLY condemns prostitution, so this is an even worse argument by you.

        Proverbs 23:27-28: For a prostitute is a deep pit;
        an adulteress is a narrow well.
        She lies in wait like a robber
        and increases the traitors among mankind.

        Where do you get these arguments from?????? You’ll obviously never find any fault with the perfect Bible. How many more objections do you have left? Actually, I have two more from you to still address:

        “And as a special favour God shows his back parts to Moses:
        “And I (God) will take away my hand and thou shalt see my
        back parts . . .” EXODUS 33:23”

        Ugh, the verse says ‘backside’, not ‘back parts’, and as for this verse, read this: Then Moses said, “Please, let me see Your glory.”

        19 He said, “I will cause all My goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim the name Yahweh before you. I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” 20 But He answered, “You cannot see My face, for no one can see Me and live.” 21 The Lord said, “Here is a place near Me. You are to stand on the rock, 22 and when My glory passes by, I will put you in the crevice of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by. 23 Then I will take My hand away, and you will see My back, but My face will not be seen.”

        ““And the Lord was with Judah; and he drove out the
        inhabitants of the mountain; but COULD NOT drive out the
        inhabitants of the valley, because they had CHARIOTS OF
        IRON.” JUDGES 1:19”

        This is a mistranslation, it says “THEY could not” — as in the army of Judah could not defeat the inhabitants of the mountain, God could do it effortlessly and instantly on the other hand.

        Like

    • Firstly, thanks for the verses.

      You said : “Listen my friend — David has received many death threats from many Muslims. You obviously cannot put all the blame on him.”

      But who started it? Don’t try to defend this person, he doesn’t deserve it. If someone insults your mother, will people blame you if you give him one punch in the face? I don’t think so. This is a similar case, but rather world wide. Let him do what he wants to do, he’ll get what he deserves sooner or later.

      You said : “You go on to claim that the Hadith I quoted is “inauthentic”. OK, if any Hadith is authentic, it’s Sahil Bukhari and Sahih Muslim — so if I quote one of these two, no doubt it can’t be called inauthentic.”

      Look my friend, the hadiths of Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) are not all authentic. They are classified to Sahih (sound), Hasan (good), Da`if (weak) and other things based on the chain of narrators, and other stuff. That itself is another subject. But if the hadith is Sahih then it’s authentic. Concerning the hadith you quoted. It says that some people forgot part of the Quran. So what? they did forget it. But that doesn’t mean that all of the Muslims at that time forgot it. I’ll have you know, many of us Muslims memorise the Quran by heart. No joke, from cover to cover without a mistake in even the “harakat” meaning the Arabic vowels, I think. So even if all of the Qurans in the world suddenly disappeared, we could bring all the “hafiz’s”(people who memorized the Quran by heart) together and we can reproduce it once again! The question of the Quran being lost doesn’t exist!

      You said : “They forgot a surah equal to Bara’at. That’s more than 100 verses. And the part where Abu Harb remembered, with Adam… Which verse of the Qur’an is that today?”

      Check {http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/the_variant_on_the_valley_of_riches}

      Regarding the Muslim belief of the Christian Bible…you are not responding to the verses I quoted. Here go through this site {http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/evidence_that_islam_teaches_that_there_was_textual_corruption_of_the_christian_and_jewish_scriptures}. You can go through all of it but I’m referring to the part where they explain the Quranic verses. I’ll have you know, I think you already realised this by now though. All of these arguments are old. That’s why we are able to find such explanations in the internet. Look at what both sides have to say, then judge. That’s the only advice I can give to myself and you.

      You said : “No, there are about 26 different Arabic Qur’ans, two of them widely used in the Muslim world. The two generally used is the Warsh and the Hafs versions. You probably use the Hafs — the Hafs itself was only made in 1923 in Egypt. Before 1923, the Hafs didn’t exist, the state of the Qur’an was still a mess and some random people put together a Qur’an and it became the Qur’an of the general Muslim world (as well as Warsh).”

      Hah, that’s a new one. My friend, there is only one Quran. You are being fooled by the people who gave you this false information. Tell them, “Produce your proof if you are truthful!”

      Even hostile critics of Islam have grudgingly vouched for the purity of the Holy Qur’ân: “THERE IS
      PROBABLY IN THE WORLD NO OTHER BOOK WHICH HAS REMAINED TWELVE
      CENTURIES (now fourteen) WITH SO PURE A TEXT.” — (Sir William Muir)

      You said : “This seems evasive. You talk about Qur’an 7:157 confirming the Bible preservation, but then you quote Isaiah 29:1 and don’t address Qur’an 7:157? Why? It clearly confirms preservation of the Bible. As for Isaiah 29:1… LOL, this verse is not even a prophecy. Read the full context please. Well, before I post the full context — I need to point out you misquoted this verse. That verse is Isaiah 29:12, not Isaiah 29:1. As for the context:”

      Oh I misquoted, thanks for correcting me. If you read (Quran 7:157) in context with the whole Quran (the link I posted earlier) it doesn’t prove that the Bible is preserved. The verse just states that prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) is prophesied in the Taurat and the Injeel, not the Bible. The Bible may contain the remnants of the original Taurat and Injeel, which may include the prophecy. But it is as per the Quran a fabricated book that contains the words of man too. As I have proved. Regarding the prophecy in Isaiah, ok I have some other verses. I’d like to see you refute all of them.

      This 15 page booklet deals with the subject {https://ia802603.us.archive.org/17/items/WhatTheBibleSaysAboutMuhammaddeedat.pdf/WhatTheBibleSaysAboutMuhammaddeedat.pdf}.

      I can go on posting, but for better understanding I think you should read the book. I should too, I watched some lectures on the subject, InshaAllah I will read the book too.

      You said : “What “verses” are you talking about? If you’re talking about the extension of 1 John 5:17, I’ve already explained it — only two translations in the world use it and its nowhere in the original language. Scholarship is far higher than it was regarding the original words of the Bible then it was decades ago, as textual criticism has greatly advanced — however, the Muslims have not even begun textual criticism on their Qur’an to figure out what the original said and see if it is the same as the Qur’an today.”

      I’m talking about the only places where the Ascenssion is mentioned in the 4 gospels; (Mark 16:19) and (Luke 24:51). The word “Begotten” in (John 3:16). Nevertheless, the verse about the trinity (1 John 5:7).

      Also, You misquoted, it’s 1 John 5:7. I guess we’re even now. Wait, so you don’t believe in the trinity? If you read the book “IsTheBibleGodsWord By Ahmed Deedat” many things would be clear to you. I might be bad at explaining so get the book, it’s where I got this argument from.

      You’re talking about the Quran as if it’s the same as the Bible and that is wrong. As I stated above, many of us Muslims memorize the Quran by heart and this has been our way of preserving the Quran since way back. I don’t think Christians memorize the Bible. You have over 2000 manuscripts I think, which no two are identical. The video you posted last time says that the difference between them is irrelevant, like synonyms and words like “for”. But you proved the contrary when you showed that there were 70 people killed, and the whistle…

      You said : “HISSING? I searched up one of these verses (Isaiah 5:26), and it says He whistled. As for ‘roaring’, there’s no problem with God declaring His power over the world. God does not literally roar as a lion does, this is obviously symbolic speech. As for God “riding” a cherubim, this verse is entirely symbolic, and not only that, no one really knows what a cherubim is in the first place. There are ideas and such, but no one really knows.”

      The KJV says “and will hiss unto them from the end of the earth” and there is a difference between the words “hiss” and “whistle”. Firstly, these are not the qualities of God. Will he hiss like a snake? or whistle? either way it doesn’t fit God. There is no problem in roaring? My friend, you can obviously see that there is something wrong here. Let’s say it’s just symbolic speech like what you said. But I want to know what is symbolic about God ‘riding’ a cherub. Yes, we do know what a cherub is. Check it up in oxforddictionaries. Cherubims are basically naked young girls with wings. You have some statues of them in some churches, check on google. I would like to know your opinion in this? Is it a fabrication or not?

      You said : “So God didn’t kill 50,070, He killed 70 out of 50,000. Second of all, it’s not a “box”, it’s the Ark of the Covenant (?) or Ark of the Lord, which is a holy place declared by God that only certain people can enter/look at when God allows. You would know a lot more about it if you decided to read the Bible, as I am doing.”

      The KJV says “even he smote of the people fifty thousand and threescore and ten men:” Whether it’s a box or an Arc, you’re missing the point here. God is killing people who did nothing wrong. Firstly “he smote the men of Bethshemesh”, because they had looked into the “ark of the LORD”, let’s say these people did something wrong by looking inside there and they got what they deserved. But what about the 50000 people? Why did he kill all of them? these 50000 included men, women, children even babies. Firstly, all of them did not look into the arc, it’s not possible. But let’s say they somehow did. What about the babies? And why did God not forgive them? Some people made a mistake, they did something wrong. But God is merciful, he could’ve given them one last warning instead of taking out 70 in one go. More evidence to prove the fabrications :

      GOD’S MERCY ENDURETH FOR EVER:
      “For the Lord is good; and his mercy is EVERLASTING.” PSALMS 100:5

      Contradicted by:

      “I (God) remember that which Amalek did to Israel (four
      hundred years before). . . Now go and smite Amalek, and
      UTTERLY DESTROY ALL they have, and spare them not;
      but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, and
      sheep, camel and ass (the donkey).” 1 SAMUEL 15:3

      I want to know what the the camel and donkeys do. What did the infants and sucklings do to deserve this? There is something wrong here, can you see it now?

      You said : “Ugh, nope. Your last comment contains no explanation of Qur’an 78:31-34. The fact is, this is just as “pornographic” (ridiculous) as any Biblical text can go.”

      I posted this “Coming to the verse of the Quran that you quoted. The arabic language is a very vast language. A word may have multiple meanings ,we need to keep that in mind. Some of the translators are not so explicit with the language, on that level there is nothing wrong with it.

      “And voluptuous women of equal age;”(Quran 78:33 YUSUF ALI)
      “And voluptuous women of equal age;”(Quran 78:33 SHAKIR)

      Of course, your gonna go with the other translators just to have a point against the Qur’an. But we’re gonna have to agree that it’s nothing like what’s in the Bible.”

      And I still stand by that. It is nothing like what’s in the Bible. I think you should agree by now.

      You said : “You go on to quote Genesis 19 and what Lot’s daughters did, but of course the Bible NEVER condones what the daughters did, so this is a non-argument. As for Genesis 35, the Bible CLEARLY condemns prostitution, so this is an even worse argument by you.

      Proverbs 23:27-28: For a prostitute is a deep pit;
      an adulteress is a narrow well.
      She lies in wait like a robber
      and increases the traitors among mankind.”

      I agree, the Bible may not be completely corrupted. But it is corrupted. You don’t say anything regarding the psychology of humans and how does reading this help us become better people. Naturally, you can’t say anything because you can see with your own eyes what it is.

      “EVERY INSPIRED SCRIPTURE HAS ITS USE FOR TEACHING THE TRUTH AND
      REFUTING ERROR, OR FOR REFORMATION OF MANNERS AND DISCIPLINE IN
      RIGHT LIVING.” (2 Timothy 3:16)

      Muslims and Christians are agreed that whatever emanates from God, whether through in inspiration or by revelation, must serve one of four purposes:-

      1. It must either teach us DOCTRINE;
      2. REPROVE us for our error;
      3. Offer us CORRECTION;
      4. Guide us into RIGHTEOUSNESS.

      Tell me, are the daughters of lot punished for what they did in the Bible?

      Is Samson punished for “going in unto” a prostitute?

      “Then went Samson to Gaza, and saw there an harlot, and went in unto her.”(Judges 16:1 KJV)

      How does any of the pornographic material I mentioned fit into (2 Timothy 3:16)?

      You said : “Where do you get these arguments from?????? You’ll obviously never find any fault with the perfect Bible. How many more objections do you have left? Actually, I have two more from you to still address:”

      The arguments are from Ahmed Deedat’s booklets mostly, as I have mentioned before. I watched many lectures and debates regarding these topics, you should too. Get his booklets and read for yourself. Whether you think the Bible is perfect or not, that is something that only you can decide. I have many more arguments…you haven’t addressed the contradictions.

      You said : “Ugh, the verse says ‘backside’, not ‘back parts’, and as for this verse, read this: Then Moses said, “Please, let me see Your glory.””

      The KJV says “back parts”.

      “And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen.”(Exodus 33:23 KJV)

      You’re still not answering the contradiction.

      You said : “This is a mistranslation, it says “THEY could not” — as in the army of Judah could not defeat the inhabitants of the mountain, God could do it effortlessly and instantly on the other hand.”

      The KJV and HCSB both disagree with you.

      Read more about this, I will too InshaAllah.

      May Allah guide us.

      Like

      • “You said : “Listen my friend — David has received many death threats from many Muslims. You obviously cannot put all the blame on him.”
        But who started it?”

        Seriously dude? There is no justification in giving someone a death threat because they were mean.

        “It says that some people forgot part of the Quran. So what? they did forget it. But that doesn’t mean that all of the Muslims at that time forgot it. I’ll have you know, many of us Muslims memorise the Quran by heart. No joke, from cover to cover without a mistake in even the “harakat” meaning the Arabic vowels, I think. So even if all of the Qurans in the world suddenly disappeared, we could bring all the “hafiz’s”(people who memorized the Quran by heart) together and we can reproduce it once again!”

        This ‘hafiz’ thing certainly didn’t help those Muslims out at all, as there didn’t seem to be any back-up Muslims to restore those 100 forgotten verses. Also, most of the hafiz of that time were killed in the Battle of Yamama (apparently, Muhammad or another of the early Muslims thought that if you bring all the hafiz together and send them to war, they will be an invincible army because Allah would protect them… and then all the hafiz got immediately slaughtered in their first battle).

        Again, I have already responded to your verses that attempt to show distortion in the Bible, but I’ve explained that Qur’an 2:75-79 and the other verses merely regard linguistic corruption, as is established when the Qur’an says it only happened upon a party of the Jews and not all of them of course. The fact is, understanding all the Qur’anic verses that establish preservation, such as calling the Gospel and Torah as the Reminder/Remembrance, and then saying the Reminder/Remembrance will be guarded, such as when the Qur’an says none can change the words of Allah, such as when Muhammad affirmed that the current Gospel and Torah in his time was preserved, etc, etc, etc. The Qur’an is very clear on this. The problem with this of course, is that if Muslims accept this, they must reject their own religion, as the Qur’an contradicts the Gospel and Torah on manners such as the crucifixion — so it is inconceivable that the Qur’an affirms the Gospel and Torah and then contradicts it. This shows the Islamic religion in error, and thus the Muslims cannot have it!

        “Hah, that’s a new one. My friend, there is only one Quran. You are being fooled by the people who gave you this false information. Tell them, “Produce your proof if you are truthful!”
        Even hostile critics of Islam have grudgingly vouched for the purity of the Holy Qur’ân”

        One Qur’an… Go to Algeria, by yourself a Qur’an (which will be the Warsh version, as that is the Qur’an in Algeria and many other countries), and then compare it to the Hafs one you use now. You will see differences. In fact, even the earliest Muslims, the very students of Muhammad had different versions of the Qur’an. Some of them had 111 chapters in their Qur’an, and others had 116 chapters. Now, the Qur’an has 114! What happened?

        “Oh I misquoted, thanks for correcting me. If you read (Quran 7:157) in context with the whole Quran (the link I posted earlier) it doesn’t prove that the Bible is preserved. The verse just states that prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) is prophesied in the Taurat and the Injeel, not the Bible. ”

        Taurat? I think you mean Torah. The Torah is made up of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, whereas the word Injeel also means ‘Gospel’, referring to the four Gospels: Gospel of Matthew, Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Luke, Gospel of John. In other words, the Torah and Gospel consist of 9 books, all of which are in the Bible. The Bible has overall 66 books by many other prophets. The Qur’an also affirms the Psalms written by David, which are also in the Bible. So the Qur’an confirms the first five books in the Old Testament and first four in the New Testament, as well as some Psalms, and these together are believed by Christians.

        “Regarding the prophecy in Isaiah, ok I have some other verses. I’d like to see you refute all of them.
        This 15 page booklet deals with the subject {https://ia802603.us.archive.org/17/items/WhatTheBibleSaysAboutMuhammaddeedat.pdf/WhatTheBibleSaysAboutMuhammaddeedat.pdf}.”

        I don’t know why you encase your links with {}, because links work just fine when posted on WordPress. Anyways, I went to your link and was disappointed to see this nonsense:

        “Muhummed is mentioned by name in the Song of Solomon 5:16. The Hebrew word used there is Muhammuddim. The end letters IM is plural of respect majesty and grandeur. Minus “im” the name would be Muhamud translated as “altogether lovely” in the Authorised Version of the Bible or ‘The Praised One’ ‘the one worthy of Praise’ i.e. MUHUMMED”

        This is obvious nonsense, as Muhammad’s name appears nowhere in Song of Solomon 5:16. This is what the words of the verse actually say:

        “His mouth is full of sweetness. And he is wholly desirable. This is my beloved and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.”

        What we have here, is that these Muslims like Zakir Naik are trying to re-translate the Hebrew word mahamadim to Muhammad, because they sound similar. Now, this word ‘mahamadim’ derives from machmad, which means a ‘desirable thing’. If you read the context of the verse just quoted, you will be quite embarrassed… The verse is narrated by a women describing the features of her husband, LOL. Not only that, but let’s see what happens in the verse if you substitute ‘desirable’ with ‘Muhammad’:

        “His mouth is full of sweetness. And he is wholly Muhammad. This is my beloved and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.”

        It immediately makes no sense. One also must ask, why does Muhammad’s name appear in the middle of a romantic narrative of a women describing the physical features of her husband? LOL. It makes less and less sense as you start reading it. David Wood has a video that is so funny in response to Zakir Naik claiming this that it will make you burst in laughter in the end:

        “You have over 2000 manuscripts I think, which no two are identical. The video you posted last time says that the difference between them is irrelevant, like synonyms and words like “for”. But you proved the contrary when you showed that there were 70 people killed, and the whistle…”

        Not really, there are very few ‘differences’ in which are actually debated by Scholars. The point is, we know one of them is the original and thus we know we have the original Bible, we just need to figure out which manuscript is the original one. But we know we have the original anyways. I did a bit of research, and you actually may be right regarding the number of over 50,000+. Anyways, these people DID do something wrong, and it was about the Ark of the Covenant, read it again!

        ” these 50000 included men, women, children even babies”

        No… There were no babies. There were just men. The verse even says “men”.

        “The KJV says ”

        Please do not quote the KJV as a general verse. Sometimes it is correct in translation, very few times, but there is good reason to believe the KJV is not the correct translation to be using today. For one, the KJV is hundreds of years old, and thus uses English that is hundreds of years old. Languages evolve over time, and thus the way we speak English is much different then how the KJV translators spoke English before, and thus meaning is lost over time (this is why sometimes translations are updated, because languages change).

        “You’re still not answering the contradiction.”

        What contradiction?

        Like

    • You said : “Seriously dude? There is no justification in giving someone a death threat because they were mean.”

      My friend, who said that the one who insults a RELIGION is “mean”? Such a person cannot be described with such a soft words, calling him “trash” may not be accurate enough, but I’m not here to insult anyone. You know what a religion is? I don’t know about you, but we Muslims are prepared to live and die for our religion. We do NOT accept people mocking it in any manner, if someone wants to practice his “freedom of speech” in insulting our faith. Then, he must be killed. I am not so knowledgeable to give this fatwa(statement), but with reasoning that he’s doing similar things that Salman Rushdie did and according to (Quran 5:33). That is probably the case. You see, we believe in justice, and justice demands that if a person does something wrong, he must stopped, and he must get the punishment that he deserves. You call us barbaric for defending human rights. But tell me, how would you react if someone goes on insulting prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) in public? He won’t be a Muslim as we also believe in him and respect him. But what if someone who doesn’t care, starts insulting prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) (God according to you) or any of the disciples. How would you react? What should be done to him? You wouldn’t call him “mean” if someone did that, would you? According to the authentic Christian doctrine, do you know what should be done to him?

      You said : “This ‘hafiz’ thing certainly didn’t help those Muslims out at all, as there didn’t seem to be any back-up Muslims to restore those 100 forgotten verses. Also, most of the hafiz of that time were killed in the Battle of Yamama (apparently, Muhammad or another of the early Muslims thought that if you bring all the hafiz together and send them to war, they will be an invincible army because Allah would protect them… and then all the hafiz got immediately slaughtered in their first battle).”

      Hahahha man, this is actually getting funny. “To what extent will you keep getting fooled like this?”, I wonder. The link I posted last time deals with the misconception in detail, go through it. Also, if you want me to believe things like what you’re posting above then I expect you to have evidence from the Quran or the authentic hadith of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) to back up your statements with. But you won’t be able to do that, because such evidence does not exist.

      You said : “Again, I have already responded to your verses that attempt to show distortion in the Bible, but I’ve explained that Qur’an 2:75-79 and the other verses merely regard linguistic corruption, as is established when the Qur’an says it only happened upon a party of the Jews and not all of them of course. ”

      You are clearly not going through the links that I’m posting, because if you did go through it then you would see this :

      Talking about (Quran 2:79) :

      “Here we clearly see that Allah is warning those (Jews) who wrote the scripture from their own selves and then claimed that it was from God. A clear charge of TEXTUAL corruption. The verse is clear is clearly stating that whatever the Jews wrote, they claimed it was from God.

      Some Christians say that the Qur’an is only talking about a specific group of people…”

      “The Qur’an is not stating that there was a Torah corrupted textually and a Torah not corrupted textually. Nor does it say that the righteous people of the People of the Book ever participated in the corruption of the Torah. It does not require that ALL of the People of the Book come to corrupt it. A few people with great authority and power (we will see this later under the Ibn Abbaas’s section) can achieve this task. ”

      As I told you before, these are old misconceptions. You should see what both sides have to say, then judge. But you are refusing to look at the Muslim evidence.

      You said : “The fact is, understanding all the Qur’anic verses that establish preservation, such as calling the Gospel and Torah as the Reminder/Remembrance, and then saying the Reminder/Remembrance will be guarded, such as when the Qur’an says none can change the words of Allah, such as when Muhammad affirmed that the current Gospel and Torah in his time was preserved, etc, etc, etc. The Qur’an is very clear on this. ”

      I have already responded to all of this, go back and read my responses. I don’t know why you keep repeating.

      You said : “The problem with this of course, is that if Muslims accept this, they must reject their own religion, as the Qur’an contradicts the Gospel and Torah on manners such as the crucifixion — so it is inconceivable that the Qur’an affirms the Gospel and Torah and then contradicts it. This shows the Islamic religion in error, and thus the Muslims cannot have it!”

      This is the lie that you got from watching liers. There is no contradiction in the Glorious Qur’an. If you read it as a whole with an open mind and learn the life of prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) then you will understand. Otherwise, you are showing me that you want to be misguided. You want to believe lies. No one can reason with you in that state. I’ll have you know, not only does the Quran disagree with the crucifixion. A detailed study will reveal that the Bible too disagrees with it! Get Ahmed Deedat’s book titled “Crucifixion or Cruci-fiction”. Watch his debates and lectures on the topic. Try to refute his arguments, and I’ve seen some debates. Good luck.

      You said : “One Qur’an… Go to Algeria, by yourself a Qur’an (which will be the Warsh version, as that is the Qur’an in Algeria and many other countries), and then compare it to the Hafs one you use now. You will see differences. In fact, even the earliest Muslims, the very students of Muhammad had different versions of the Qur’an. Some of them had 111 chapters in their Qur’an, and others had 116 chapters. Now, the Qur’an has 114! What happened?”

      Here, these two links should explain the topic.

      http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Qiraat/hafs.html
      http://www.answering-christianity.com/quran/quran_textual-reply.html

      You really are wasting too much time browsing Anti-Islamic sites like answering Islam. Let me give you an idea, after you’re done browsing answering Islam, write the misconception on google and look for the Muslim response. You should find a satisfying answer to all these problems.

      You said : “Taurat? I think you mean Torah. The Torah is made up of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, whereas the word Injeel also means ‘Gospel’, referring to the four Gospels: Gospel of Matthew, Gospel of Mark, Gospel of Luke, Gospel of John. In other words, the Torah and Gospel consist of 9 books, all of which are in the Bible. The Bible has overall 66 books by many other prophets. The Qur’an also affirms the Psalms written by David, which are also in the Bible. So the Qur’an confirms the first five books in the Old Testament and first four in the New Testament, as well as some Psalms, and these together are believed by Christians.”

      Thanks for the explanation. I will reproduce below some pages from Ahmed Deedat’s book to answer this misconception.

      “SEPARATING THE WHEAT FROM THE CHAFF
      Before we scrutinize the various versions, let us clarify our own belief regarding the Books of God. When we say that we believe in the Tauraat, the Zaboor, the Injeel and the Qur’an, what do we really mean? We already know that the Holy Qur’an is the infallible Word of God, revealed to our Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhummed Mustapha (Peace be upon him) word for word, through the agency of the Archangel Jibraeel, (known as Gabriel in English), and perfectly preserved and protected from human tampering for the past fourteen hundred years! 1 Even hostile critics of Islam have grudgingly vouched for the purity of the Holy Qur’ân: “THERE IS PROBABLY IN THE WORLD NO OTHER BOOK WHICH HAS REMAINED TWELVE CENTURIES (now fourteen) WITH SO PURE A TEXT.” — (Sir William Muir)

      The Tauraat we Muslims believe in is not the “Torah” of the Jews and the Christians, though the words — one Arabic, the other Hebrew — are the same. We believe that whatever the Holy Prophet Moses (Peace be upon him) preached to his people, was the revelation from God Almighty, but that Moses was not the author of those “books” attributed to him by the Jews and the Christians. 2

      Likewise, we believe that the Zaboor was the revelation of God granted to Hazrat Dawood (David) (Peace be upon him), but that the present Psalms associated with his name are not that revelation. The Christians themselves do not insist that David is the sole author of “his” Psalms.3″(Is The Bible God’s Word Pg.5)

      “What about the Injeel? INJEEL means the “Gospel” or “good news” which Jesus Christ preached during his short ministry. The “Gospel” writers often mention that Jesus going about and preaching the Gospel (the Injeel):

      1. “And Jesus went . . . preaching the gospel . . . and healing every disease among the people.”
      (Matthew 9:35)

      2. “… but whosoever shall lose his fife for my sake and the gospel’s, the same shall save it.”
      (Mark 8:35)

      3. “… preached the gospel. . .” (Luke 20:1)

      The “gospel” is a frequently-used word, but what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus. The Christians boast about the Gospels according to St. Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke and according to St. John, but there is not a single Gospel “according” to (St.) Jesus himself! We sincerely believe that everything Christ (May the peace and blessings of God be upon him) preached was from God. That was the Injeel, the good news and the guidance of God for the
      Children of Israel. In his life-time Jesus never wrote a single word, nor did he instruct anyone to do so. What passes off as the “GOSPELS” today are the works of anonymous hands!”(Is The Bible God’s Word Pg.5 & 6)

      And he went on to prove that throughout his book. You should get it.

      You said : “I don’t know why you encase your links with {}, because links work just fine when posted on WordPress. Anyways, I went to your link and was disappointed to see this nonsense:”
      &
      “What we have here, is that these Muslims like Zakir Naik are trying to re-translate the Hebrew word mahamadim to Muhammad, because they sound similar. Now, this word ‘mahamadim’ derives from machmad, which means a ‘desirable thing’. If you read the context of the verse just quoted, you will be quite embarrassed… The verse is narrated by a women describing the features of her husband, LOL. Not only that, but let’s see what happens in the verse if you substitute ‘desirable’ with ‘Muhammad’:”

      I close the links with {} because if my memory serves me right this is how it should be. {} is for links and () for words. I don’t know about []. But whatever.

      I won’t argue much on this verse, as I take it both of us don’t know hebrew. Nevertheless, I’ve had this argument with another Christian a couple of months ago. It concluded with me saying that “I can conveniently say that the verse is referring to prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him), and the context is corrupted. But that is not how we do things, I am proving it to you not to myself; so I’m letting it slide.”(something like that)

      Let me agree with your explanation. But what do you have to say regarding the “Eight Irrefutable Arguments” present in the book. The verse you explained is only a “jot” from what that book contains! The rest, I’d say is IRREFUTABLE.

      You said : “The point is, we know one of them is the original and thus we know we have the original Bible, we just need to figure out which manuscript is the original one. But we know we have the original anyways. I did a bit of research, and you actually may be right regarding the number of over 50,000+. ”

      I want to ask you a simple question. Is a fabricated book the same as the words of God in your language? You are literally telling me that the current Bible is NOT the words of God. You still did NOT find the original. You are STILL CORRECTING the Bible AND SEARCHING for the original. What you believe to be the words of GOD today may actually be the words of MAN. The differences are NOT MINOR, EVIDENCE : They changed 50000 to 70! How would the old people know? they thought that there were 50000 people killed. You might say “The number is irrelevant”. But, the “Hiss” is not the same as the “Whistle”. The old people thought that GOD HISSES when he actually WHISTLES (I still don’t agree with that) according to your Bible.

      You said : “Anyways, these people DID do something wrong, and it was about the Ark of the Covenant, read it again!

      ” these 50000 included men, women, children even babies”

      No… There were no babies. There were just men. The verse even says “men”.”

      Well, that is illogical. How would men live by themselves? But since the verse says “men”, let us agree on that!

      What about the sucklings and the donkeys? In my last response? There is something wrong and you’re starting to see it! That is why you’re not responding.

      You said : “Please do not quote the KJV as a general verse. Sometimes it is correct in translation, very few times, but there is good reason to believe the KJV is not the correct translation to be using today. For one, the KJV is hundreds of years old, and thus uses English that is hundreds of years old. Languages evolve over time, and thus the way we speak English is much different then how the KJV translators spoke English before, and thus meaning is lost over time (this is why sometimes translations are updated, because languages change).

      “You’re still not answering the contradiction.”

      What contradiction?”

      Many people still use the KJV world wide, I think since it’s probably the most popular. But as you like! no more KJV. The contradictions are the ones I’ve posted in my last response and the one before that. Don’t give me the “innocent lamb” act now! I know you cannot respond to it, obviously as no one can when it’s SO CLEAR!

      You still did not tell me “How does any of the pornographic material I mentioned fit into (2 Timothy 3:16)?” and “how does reading filth make you a better person? What is symbolic about “God being a barber or riding a cherub”? How does the Bible fit into this verse when the original is LOST?

      “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.”(Isaiah 40:8 KJV)

      The argument about the RSV 1952 version. What else did I mention?
      Anyway, there are many more arguments proving that the Bible cannot be God’s word, from the Quran and the Bible, both books agree on that. Maybe I should start entertaining the “overwhelming evidences” you mentioned in your first comment. That was the original topic.

      And Allah Knows Best.

      Like

      • “My friend, who said that the one who insults a RELIGION is “mean”? Such a person cannot be described with such a soft words, calling him “trash” may not be accurate enough, but I’m not here to insult anyone. ”

        TRASH? No matter how your somewhat extremist views hold to calling these people, DEATH THREATS are still not a permissible response to someone insulting religion like Christianity or your own being Islam.

        “We do NOT accept people mocking it in any manner, if someone wants to practice his “freedom of speech” in insulting our faith. Then, he must be killed.”

        You’re obviously insane — you called the Bible “trash” in one of your earlier posts. Does this mean I am to kill you? This marks the distinction between Christianity and Islam — the true Jesus brought respect to this world and ultimate peace, Jesus tells us in the Gospels that you pray for those who persecute you — whilst Muhammad wishes the heads of those who even question his extremism.

        “You see, we believe in justice, and justice demands that if a person does something wrong, he must stopped, and he must get the punishment that he deserves. You call us barbaric for defending human rights. ”

        There are no such defenses of human rights when one kills another for expressing a human right (freedom of speech). There’s a reason why almost all Muslim countries are third-world, and the Christian ones have advanced to first-world. Look at Israel — Israel is the only first-world country in the entire Middle East. It is also the only non-Muslim country in the Middle East. Coincidence?

        “I’m posting, because if you did go through it then you would see this :
        Talking about (Quran 2:79) :
        “Here we clearly see that Allah is warning those (Jews) who wrote the scripture from their own selves and then claimed that it was from God. A clear charge of TEXTUAL corruption. The verse is clear is clearly stating that whatever the Jews wrote, they claimed it was from God.”

        A random guys opinion doesn’t mean much — Qur’an 2:75-79, as I explained is in reference to linguistic corruption (it literally says so), and also says that it is only happening amongst a party of the Jews — meaning that only one party of the Jews is doing this corruption, meaning that EVEN if it were textual, it would not affect the preservation of the Torah in the slightest.

        “I have already responded to all of this, go back and read my responses. I don’t know why you keep repeating.”

        The problem with all your responses is that they are in error. The Qur’an says that no one can change Allah’s words — you take this to mean that Allah’s words were changed. The Qur’an says that the Remembrance (Bible, Torah, Qur’an, Psalms of David) are going to be guarded — you take this to mean that almost all the Remembrances were corrupted. Muhammad explicitly told the Christians and Jews that they still had the Gospel and Torah (7:157) — however, you are trying to massively reinterpret all of them, even though the Qur’an claims to be very clear.

        “The “gospel” is a frequently-used word, but what Gospel did Jesus preach? Of the 27 books of the New Testament, only a small fraction can be accepted as the words of Jesus. The Christians boast about the Gospels according to St. Matthew, according to St. Mark, according to St. Luke and according to St. John, but there is not a single Gospel “according” to (St.) Jesus himself!”

        This is a rather strange attempt to claim that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are not the Gospel talked about in the Qur’an, which is indeed incredibly strange — especially considering that in Qur’an 7:157, Muhammad says “Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel,” — the Gospel and Torah were available to the Christians and Jews in the time of Muhammad. What was the only gospel available to said Christians and Jews? The ones according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. There can be no conceptual doubt that these Gospels are the actual Gospels.

        The last point to make regarding the preservation of the Bible is… Where is the evidence that it isn’t preserved? If you look at the evidence, and the tens of thousands of manuscripts we have, you’ll realize it’s literally preserved in its entirety. I mean, the Scholars (even atheist ones) ADMIT that we are CERTAIN about 99.8% of the original Bible, letter by letter — and that is up from 99.5% many years ago. In reality, the Bible is entirely preserved and we have the originals — what do you think you can exactly make up of the remaining 0.2% before it’s also solved? Not only do we know for certain the original Bible, letter by letter to a 99.8% degree, but the textual critics also agree that every major doctrine of the Bible, every single major one, is entirely preserved — the only thing that could be possibly debated by the remaining 0.2% is minor doctrines that come and go as the verses fly.

        “I won’t argue much on this verse, as I take it both of us don’t know hebrew. Nevertheless, I’ve had this argument with another Christian a couple of months ago. It concluded with me saying that “I can conveniently say that the verse is referring to prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him), and the context is corrupted. But that is not how we do things, I am proving it to you not to myself; so I’m letting it slide.””

        Ugh, are you serious? You’re obviously just picking and choosing which part you think is “corrupted”. And again, you say “none of us know Hebrew”… But what about the Hebrew Scholars? ALL OF THEM unanimously agree that the word machmid does NOT = Muhammad. It’s not even a noun. I mean, machmid is just a regular Hebrew word. It sounds like you’re trying to make a connection because the word “machmid” sounds like “Muhammad”. In that case, does the Hebrew word for “akbar”, which means mouse, apply to a Muslim when he says “Allahu Ackbar” in Arabic? Is a Muslim calling Allah a mouse when he says that because the Hebrew word for mouse is “akbar”? Seriously dude, once you look at this argument here it is VERY QUICKLY making 0 sense whatsoever. Anyways, you tell me the book has more — so I opened it again and it apparently tries to quote Deuteronomy 18:18 as well, which says:

        “I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”

        This verse is talking about Jesus. This should be self-evident, considering it was being directed towards the Israelite’s — Jesus was an Israelite, Muhammad wasn’t. It says from “among your brethren” — which is a term the Bible uses to reference the twelve tribes of Israel originating from Jacob. Muhammad wasn’t a Jew and Muhammad wasn’t from Israel. Muhammad was a Saudi Arabian or something who was not a Jew and wasn’t an Israelite. Read this http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/deut1818.htm

        “You still did not tell me “How does any of the pornographic material I mentioned fit into (2 Timothy 3:16)?” and “how does reading filth make you a better person? What is symbolic about “God being a barber or riding a cherub”? How does the Bible fit into this verse when the original is LOST?”

        Reading filth doesn’t make you a better person — but reading the Word of God, the Bible, makes you a great person. That’s why teenage pregnancies go DOWN if you read the Bible, as well as STD’s and many other things. What is “symbolic” about God riding a cherubim? The point is that it is symbolic — although I don’t know what it represents. I see some Scholars interpret the cherubim as angelic and extraordinarily powerful beings — which God “rides upon” or something, to establish His throne as the most powerful. And again, you continue talking about “pornogaphic material” — ignoring the same type of material I posted from the Qur’an. I think you tried to re-translate it as “voluptuous women” or something, which is nowhere to be found in the Arabic of Qur’an 78:33. As we have probably seen by now, there are no arguments against the Bible, it is entirely revealed by God and God alone, and it has been preserved as all the manuscript evidence shows. I do not need to have faith that it was preserved alone, like Muslims have for the Qur’an — but I have unequivocal evidence.

        Like

    • You said : “TRASH? No matter how your somewhat extremist views hold to calling these people, DEATH THREATS are still not a permissible response to someone insulting religion like Christianity or your own being Islam.”

      Yes, trash. Why are you getting oversensitive? This is the softest word I could use. I mean look at your Bible, words which are FAR WORSE than “trash” are being used so casually.

      BASTARD : This word occurs in the Bible THREE times.

      (a) “The BASTARD shall not enter the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation . . .”(DEUTERONOMY 23:2 KJV)
      (b) “And the BASTARD shall dwell in Ashdod . . .”(ZECHARIAH 9:6 KJV)
      (c) “But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then ye are BASTARDS and not sons.”(HEBREWS 12:8 KJV)

      In the HCSB Bible the translators seem to have seen it fit to change the word “BASTARD” to “one of illegitimate birth”; they are trying to soften the word. But the explicit KJV still remains.

      “No one of illegitimate birth may enter the Lord’s assembly; none of his descendants, even to the tenth generation, may enter the Lord’s assembly.”(Deutronomy 23:2 HCSB)

      I see, so according to you there is absolutely no problem in anyone insulting the one you are supposed to be LOVING MOST. So if someone comes and insults YOUR MOTHER now you’re supposed to “turn the other cheek”. Tell me, don’t you ever feel that there is, I don’t know maybe, SOMETHING WRONG WITH THAT TEACHING? SOMEONE HURTS YOU AND YOU CAN’T EVEN DEFEND YOURSELF, IS THIS JUSTICE?

      You said : “You’re obviously insane — you called the Bible “trash” in one of your earlier posts. Does this mean I am to kill you? This marks the distinction between Christianity and Islam — the true Jesus brought respect to this world and ultimate peace, Jesus tells us in the Gospels that you pray for those who persecute you — whilst Muhammad wishes the heads of those who even question his extremism.”

      “INSANE”? ARE YOU INSULTING ME? Tell me, which is worse “TRASH” or “INSANE”? I don’t remember calling the Bible trash ANYWHERE. Show me where I did it, and if I did do it. Then, I’M SORRY; I MADE A MISTAKE. You are not quoting what I said completely.

      I said : “Then, he must be killed. I am not so knowledgeable to give this fatwa(statement), but with reasoning that he’s doing similar things that Salman Rushdie did and according to (Quran 5:33). That is probably the case.”

      I said “PROBABLY” as I am not knowledgeable enough to give this statement that the must be killed according to Islamic law. You are so quick to judge Islam negatively, “Muhammad wishes the heads of those who even question his extremism.”. Well, that is natural as you have been TRAINED to HATE the man Muhammed (peace be upon him) and his religion. . How aptly did Thomas Carlyle say about his Christian brethren over a hundred and fifty years ago – “THE LIES WHICH WELL MEANING ZEAL HAS HEAPED ROUND THIS MAN (Muhummed) ARE DISGRACEFUL TO OURSELVES ONLY.”

      But that’s what I’m here for. Talking is very easy. I challenge you to backup your statement with some evidence. Where is this extremism? Show me ONE commandment the prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) gave that is against humanity, in ANYWAY? You obviously have been PROGRAMMED by all the anti-Islamic content that you have been exposed to. However, that is why I’m here. To DEPROGRAM you back to normal, InshaAllah!

      Tell me, how do you deal with people like Salman Rushdie using your “peaceful” way. When he goes around calling people with these terms in his Satanic Verses :

      on page 461 “NIGGER EAT WHITE MAN’S SHIT”

      “BLACK SHIT IS BAD,” on page 529

      “WHITE WOMEN – NEVER MIND FAT, JEWISH, NON-DEFERENTIAL12
      WHITE WOMEN – WERE FOR FUCKING AND THROWING OVER. “(PAGE 261
      TVS)

      AND MUCH MORE!…Tell me if not by chopping off their heads, how do you deal with people like this? You are allowing them to spread their “SHIT” across the world! IS THIS JUSTICE? IS THIS WHAT GOD WANTS? Think about it.

      The point to be noted here is that I don’t know, neither do I care if David Wood should be killed according to Islamic law. You should go ask the professionals, I am NOT a professional. But one thing is for sure, killing people who spread corruption is better for the world than “turning the other cheek” and allowing them to rot the world.

      P.S if you want to see who this Rushdie is then get this book “CAN YOU STOMACH THE BEST OF RUSHDIE? “The Satanic Verses” unexpurgated ” By Ahmed Deedat. Free PDF is available on the net.

      You said : “There are no such defenses of human rights when one kills another for expressing a human right (freedom of speech). There’s a reason why almost all Muslim countries are third-world, and the Christian ones have advanced to first-world. Look at Israel — Israel is the only first-world country in the entire Middle East. It is also the only non-Muslim country in the Middle East. Coincidence?”

      Does any of these Muslim countries rule by Islamic Law? You have no right to judge Islam by countries that are not applying it’s law. Instead let us analyse the Islamic law. If we do that you will see that it has the solutions to the problems humanity. For starters read about this, the problem of women being unable to get husbands, because female population is larger than male population worldwide for many reasons. Islam provides the solution in it’s ruling of polygamy while Christianity does not. I’d say that this is one of the “MANY THINGS” that prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) was talking about in (John 16:7).

      Rushdie is a result of your “freedom of speech”. Are you capable of tolerating it? Tell me, is it better to shut them up or let them run wild spreading their “SHIT” all over the world?

      I’m using the example of Rushdie because you seem to be insensitive when someone is insulting Islam. This is another type of sickness, selective sensitivity.

      You said : “A random guys opinion doesn’t mean much — Qur’an 2:75-79, as I explained is in reference to linguistic corruption (it literally says so), and also says that it is only happening amongst a party of the Jews — meaning that only one party of the Jews is doing this corruption, meaning that EVEN if it were textual, it would not affect the preservation of the Torah in the slightest.”

      You are clearly trying to either fool yourself or fool me. Where does it talk about linguistic corruption when the verse clearly says “WRITE”(Qurna 2:79)? Even the issue about “party of the jews” ,this has all been explained in the link. With references. Believe what you want.

      “It is true thou wilt not be able to guide every one, whom thou lovest; but Allah guides those whom He will and He knows best those who receive guidance.”(Qur’an 28:56)

      You said : “This is a rather strange attempt to claim that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are not the Gospel talked about in the Qur’an, which is indeed incredibly strange — especially considering that in Qur’an 7:157, Muhammad says “Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel,” — the Gospel and Torah were available to the Christians and Jews in the time of Muhammad. What was the only gospel available to said Christians and Jews? The ones according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. There can be no conceptual doubt that these Gospels are the actual Gospels.”

      How many times must I say this? The Bible is NOT the Torah or the Gospel which is talked about in the Quran. The Bible is the book described in (Quran 2:79). You are missing the point here, I’ll reproduce some pages to make it clear what the issue is.

      CHAPTER SIX

      THE BOOK CHRISTENED “THE NEW TESTAMENT”

      WHY “ACCORDING TO?”

      What about the so-called New Testament? 1 Why does every Gospel begin with the introduction
      — ACCORDING TO … ACCORDING TO … (See below). Why “according to?” Because not a single one of the vaunted four thousand copies extant carries its author’s autograph! Hence the supposition “according to!” Even the internal evidence proves that Matthew was not the author of the first Gospel which bears his name.

      “And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (JESUS) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (JESUS) saith unto HIM (MATTHEW), follow ME (JESUS) And HE (MATTHEW) arose, and followed HIM (JESUS).” (Matthew 9:9)

      1. The “so-called,” because nowhere does the “New Testament” calls itself the New Testament, and nowhere the Old Testament calls itself the Old Testament. And also the word “Bible” is unknown within the pages of the Bible. God forgot to give a title to “HIS” books!

      Without any stretch of the imagination, one can see that the “He’s” and the “Him’s” of the above narration do not refer to Jesus or Matthew as its author, but some third person writing what he saw and heard — a hearsay account. If we cannot even attribute this “book of dreams” (as the first Gospel is also described) to the disciple Matthew, how can we accept it as the Word of God?

      ST. MATHEW 9

      Mathew Called 9.

      And as Jesus passed forth from thence, he saw a man named Mathew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he saith unto him, follow me. And he arose, and followed him. “HE” AND “HIM” NOT MATHEW!

      “HE” AND “HIM” NOT JOHN!

      ST. JOHN 19

      35. And he that saw it bare record, and his record is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye might believe.
      24. This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

      The Conclusion

      25. And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written. Amen.

      We are not alone in this discovery that Matthew did not write the “Gospel according to St. Matthew” and that it was written by some anonymous hand. J. B. Phillips concurs with us in our findings. He is the paid servant of the Anglican Church, a prebendary of the Chichester Cathedral, England. He would have no reason to lie or betray to the detriment of the official view of his Church! Refer to his introduction to the “Gospel of St. Matthew” (reproduced here below). Phillips has this to say about its authorship.

      “EARLY TRADITION ASCRIBED THIS GOSPEL TO THE APOSTLE MATTHEW, BUT SCHOLARS NOWADAYS ALMOST ALL REJECT THIS VIEW.” In other words, St. Matthew did not write the Gospel which bears his name. This is the finding of Christian scholars of the highest eminence — not of Hindus, Muslims and Jews who may be accused of bias. Let our Anglican friend continue: “THE AUTHOR, WHOM WE STILL CAN CONVENIENTLY CALL MATTHEW” “Conveniently” because otherwise everytime we made a reference to “Matthew” we would have to say — “THE FIRST BOOK OF THE NEW TESTAMENT” Chapter so and so, verse so and so. And again and again “The first book . . .” etc. Therefore, according to J. B. Phillips it is convenient that we give the book some name. So why not “Matthew?” Suppose its as good a name as any other! Phillips continues: “THE AUTHOR HAS PLAINLY DRAWN ON THE MYSTERIOUS ‘Q’ WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN A COLLECTION OF ORAL TRADITIONS.” What is this “mysterious ‘Q’?” “Q” is short for the German word “quella” which means “sources.” There is supposed to be another document — a common source — to which our present Matthew, Mark and Luke had access. All these three authors, whoever they were, had a common eye on the material at hand. They were writing as if looking through “one” eye. And because they saw eye to eye, the first three “Gospels” came to be known as the Synoptic Gospels.

      WHOLESALE CRIBBING

      But what about that “inspiration” business? The Anglican prebendary has hit the nail on the head. He is, more than anyone else, entitled to do so. A paid servant of the Church, an orthodox evangelical Christian, a Bible scholar of repute, having direct access to the “original” Greek manuscripts, let HIM spell it out for us. (Notice how gently he lets the cat out of the bag): “HE (Matthew) HAS USED MARK’S GOSPEL FREELY” which in the language of the school- teacher — “has been copying WHOLESALE from Mark!” Yet the Christians call this wholesale plagiarism the Word of God?

      Does it not make you wonder that an eye-witness and an ear-witness to the ministry of Jesus, which the disciple Matthew was supposed to be, instead of writing his own first hand impressions of the ministry of “his Lord” would go and steal from the writings of a youth (Mark), who was a ten year old lad when Jesus upbraided his nation? Why would an eye-witness and ear-witness copy from a fellow who himself was writing from hearsay? The disciple
      Matthew would not do any such silly thing. For an anonymous document has been imposed on the fair name of Matthew.

      Source Book : “Is The Bible God’s Word By Ahmed Deedat Pgs. 20-23 ”

      You said : ““I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.”

      This verse is talking about Jesus. This should be self-evident, considering it was being directed towards the Israelite’s — Jesus was an Israelite, Muhammad wasn’t. It says from “among your brethren” — which is a term the Bible uses to reference the twelve tribes of Israel originating from Jacob. Muhammad wasn’t a Jew and Muhammad wasn’t from Israel. Muhammad was a Saudi Arabian or something who was not a Jew and wasn’t an Israelite. ”

      The Arabs are the brethren of the Jews. The verse can also be understood in that manner too. If that is the only argument you have, then obviously the verse is referring to prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him).

      As you are not answering the “Eight Irrefutable Arguments”, that is natural as they indeed are irrefutable.

      1-Father and Mother
      2- Miraculous Birth
      3-Marriage Ties
      4-Jesus Rejected by his People
      5-“Other-Wordly” Kingdom
      6- No New Laws
      7-How they Departed
      8-Heavenly Abode

      There is also the “Further Proofs”…It looks to me like you just don’t want to accept it.

      You said : “Reading filth doesn’t make you a better person — but reading the Word of God, the Bible, makes you a great person. That’s why teenage pregnancies go DOWN if you read the Bible, as well as STD’s and many other things. What is “symbolic” about God riding a cherubim? The point is that it is symbolic — although I don’t know what it represents. I see some Scholars interpret the cherubim as angelic and extraordinarily powerful beings — which God “rides upon” or something, to establish His throne as the most powerful. And again, you continue talking about “pornogaphic material” — ignoring the same type of material I posted from the Qur’an. I think you tried to re-translate it as “voluptuous women” or something, which is nowhere to be found in the Arabic of Qur’an 78:33. As we have probably seen by now, there are no arguments against the Bible, it is entirely revealed by God and God alone, and it has been preserved as all the manuscript evidence shows. I do not need to have faith that it was preserved alone, like Muslims have for the Qur’an — but I have unequivocal evidence.”

      The Bible is simply NOT the word of God, as the word of God does NOT contain FILTH. This teenage pregnancies claim your putting forth is really illogical and you have no evidence. God does NOT ride CHRUBIMS and Is NOT a BARBER who shaves the hair of the leg. You DO know what it represents, it represents that the Bible CANNOT be the word of God. Stop comparing the Qur’an with the Bible, I think the difference is clear to everyone who reads both books. God does NOT contradict himself. The Bible is obviously NOT the word of God. Here, one last contradiction :

      GOD DOES NOT ENTICE MAN:
      “Let no man say he is tempted, I am TEMPTED of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, NEITHER TEMPTETH he any man.” (JAMES 1:13 KJV)

      Contradicted by:

      “And it came to pass after these things, that God DID TEMPT Abraham . . .” (GENESIS 22:1 KJV)

      DOES GOD TEMPT OR NOT?

      “No one undergoing a trial should say, “I am being tempted by God.” For God is not tempted by evil, and He Himself doesn’t tempt anyone.”(James 1:13 HCSB)

      Contradicted by:

      ” After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” “Here I am,” he answered.”(Genesis 22:1 HCSB)

      I think I’m gonna stick with KJV after all, as the translators of the HCSB seem to be playing with words to hide the contradictions. Changing “tempt” to “test”… But they can’t hide everything.

      “the only One who has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom none of mankind has seen or can see, to whom be honor and eternal might. Amen.”(1 Timothy 6:16 HCSB)

      Contradicted by:

      “Then Solomon said: The Lord said that He would dwell in thick darkness,”(1 Kings 8:12 HCSB)

      LIGHT OR DARKNESS?

      Sorry if I sounded offensive, it’s great that we can discuss such sensitive topics without any trouble. These are my opinions. You’re opinions may differ, and that is up to you.

      I think this is enough with the topic “Is The Bible God’s Word” time to go back to the “overwhelming evidences”. InshaAllah.

      Like

      • “Yes, trash. Why are you getting oversensitive? This is the softest word I could use. I mean look at your Bible, words which are FAR WORSE than “trash” are being used so casually.”

        LOL. I’m not getting oversensitive, you’re getting overhyped. Killing people for their opinions is obviously immoral. Of course, the Bible has no “trash” in it — unless it records some things that the heathen do. By the way, you seem to be confused (historically) regarding the word ‘bastard’. The word ‘bastard’ DID originate as a term that means one of illegitimate birth — however, over centuries and centuries, it has been turned into a swear word — but it’s original meaning is in fact one of illegitimate birth. Similarly, other “swear words” that we know of today, were not originally swear words. Did you know the word ‘gay’ originally meant ‘happy’? Now it’s used to refer to a homosexual. ‘Faggot’ originally meant ‘a bundle of sticks’, and so forth.

        Imagine the following scenario — imagine the word ‘donkey’ appears in the Qur’an (I don’t know if it does or doesn’t, but pretend it does), and imagine 1,000 years from now, the word ‘donkey’ becomes a swear word. Does that mean the Qur’an is trash? LOL. We’re using your logic here, buddy. Perhaps you should study linguistics before challenging the Holy Bible.

        “So if someone comes and insults YOUR MOTHER now you’re supposed to “turn the other cheek”. Tell me, don’t you ever feel that there is, I don’t know maybe, SOMETHING WRONG WITH THAT TEACHING? SOMEONE HURTS YOU AND YOU CAN’T EVEN DEFEND YOURSELF, IS THIS JUSTICE?”

        If someone insults my mother — I wouldn’t kill them. SELF-DEFENSE is always accepted, by the words “turn the other cheek” IS JUSTICE. The fact is, YOU DO NOT decide the fate of a person, you must conduct yourself and GOD will judge them for what they do, not you. You are trying to put their judgement in your hands for their sin. If someone slaps you in the face, turn the other cheek. Of course, if someone is trying to kill you or rape your wife, in THAT CASE you are allowed to kill them or something similar — “turn the other cheek” tells us not to engage in stupid fights that you see happen on the street. The Bible is very clear on self-defense. Read this:

        Luke 22:38: So they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” “That is enough,” He answered.

        Jesus said not one sword, but TWO SWORDS is enough to be able to defend yourself and your family. However again, “turn the other cheek” just means not to engage in stupid fights. If you do that, you will obviously become needlessly angry, you will lose your common judgement, and you will sin against God. Will you truly sin against God because some stupid person wants to get in a stupid fight with you?

        “I don’t remember calling the Bible trash ANYWHERE. Show me where I did it, and if I did do it. Then, I’M SORRY; I MADE A MISTAKE”

        Maybe I made a mistake myself, perhaps I misinterpreted your words. Let’s throw this behind us. Let us turn the other cheek.

        “Rushdie is a result of your “freedom of speech”. Are you capable of tolerating it? Tell me, is it better to shut them up or let them run wild spreading their “SHIT” all over the world?”

        Huh? If they slander Islam or Christianity on a wide basis, I would be willing to discuss if they should be able to do such things or not, and the scale they would be allowed to do it on — but of course killing them for it is out of question to me.

        “You are clearly trying to either fool yourself or fool me. Where does it talk about linguistic corruption when the verse clearly says “WRITE”(Qurna 2:79)? Even the issue about “party of the jews” ,this has all been explained in the link. With references. Believe what you want.”

        Qur’an 2:75: Do you covet [the hope, O believers], that they would believe for you while a party of them used to hear the words of Allah and then distort the Torah after they had understood it while they were knowing?

        It says they HEAR what the scripture says and they DISTORT it. The “writing” part doesn’t appear until Qur’an 2:79, and even in 2:79 it says “woe to those who wrote the scripture with their own hand” — it is CONDEMNING people for attempting to distort scriptures, it does not say they successfully distort anything or that it ever becomes a permanent distortion (which is impossible, Qur’an 6:115).

        “How many times must I say this? The Bible is NOT the Torah or the Gospel which is talked about in the Quran. The Bible is the book described in (Quran 2:79). You are missing the point here, I’ll reproduce some pages to make it clear what the issue is.”

        2:79 is obviously saying nothing about the Bible, but the GOSPEL (Injeel) means Mark, Matthew, Luke and John — even if you don’t accept all the other books of the Bible. In Islam, you have to at least accept the Gospel (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John), Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, Numbers) and David’s Psalms.

        SO, FROM NOW ON: How about this. In our discussion, when I say the word Bible, I simply mean those 9 books+David’s psalms, rather than all 66 books? That makes things much more proper and efficient in this discussion.

        “Why does every Gospel begin with the introduction
        — ACCORDING TO … ACCORDING TO”

        LOL, it doesn’t say that. That’s just what the guy printing the Gospels writes in the front so that the reader knows which one of the Gospels they are reading. You go on to deny that Matthew wrote his Gospel (I don’t know if you deny Mark, Luke or John wrote their Gospels) — which is simply false. I have already written a very long blog on the authorship of the Gospels, read it here: https://faithfulphilosophy.wordpress.com/2016/10/17/matthew-mark-luke-and-john-authors-of-the-gospels/
        The evidence is overwhelming. Needless to say, many Scholars DO concur with Matthew’s authorship and the entire ‘plagiarism’ nonsense can be solved in more then one way — for example, Matthew’s Gospel could have easily been written before Mark, as early authors like Eusebius believed. The idea that Mark is the first Gospel is a recent 18th century ideology.

        “The “so-called,” because nowhere does the “New Testament” calls itself the New Testament, and nowhere the Old Testament calls itself the Old Testament. And also the word “Bible” is unknown within the pages of the Bible. God forgot to give a title to “HIS” books!”

        Do you know what you’re saying here? There is no “forgetting”, LOL. For one, the Gospels do in fact call themselves the Gospels. But aside from that, what relevance is there in a title? The word ‘Bible’ originates from a Latin/Greek term that means ‘book of books’ — and that’s what it is, a book of books — the Bible contains 66 different books. The ‘Old Testament’ and ‘New Testament’ terms are used to make a distinction between the books delivered before Jesus came and the books delivered after Jesus came.

        “The Arabs are the brethren of the Jews. The verse can also be understood in that manner too. If that is the only argument you have, then obviously the verse is referring to prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him).”

        Arabs are brethren of the Jewish race? Ugh, citation most definitely needed. The Arab race and Jewish race are two different races — in fact, there IS NO Arab race, LOL. Modern day “Arabs” are the result of the breeding between Egyptians and Greeks (both non-Jews). Perhaps the modern day Assyrians in Arabia are still true Canaanite’s, but the Assyrian’s are Christian, not Muslim. The Jewish race descends from Jacob, and Arabs are not part of that decent. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, only 15% of modern-day Jews are true descendants from the 12 tribes of Israel, so if most supposed Jews aren’t actually part of the Jewish race, what makes you think that Muhammad, some Egyptian-Greek mix, is a Jew? He wasn’t even an Israelite either, so that makes it impossible for Muhammad to be of Deuteronomy 18:18. JESUS on the other hand was part of the line of Jacob and David, JESUS was born in Israel (Bethlehem), and JESUS preached his message to the Jews (Muhammad did for the Arabian peninsula) — JESUS clearly is the fulfiller of Deuteronomy 18:18.

        Anyways, after having all your previous Biblical contradictions shown to be false, you try to challenge me again on the Bible, Word of God:

        “GOD DOES NOT ENTICE MAN:
        “Let no man say he is tempted, I am TEMPTED of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, NEITHER TEMPTETH he any man.” (JAMES 1:13 KJV)
        Contradicted by:
        “And it came to pass after these things, that God DID TEMPT Abraham . . .” (GENESIS 22:1 KJV):

        I thought we had agreed not to use the KJV, but apparently you forgot or something. If you look at a more accurate translation of Genesis 22:1, you get this:

        Genesis 22:1: Now it came about after these things, that God tested Abraham, and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.”

        So rather than God TEMPTING Abraham, God TESTS Abraham — which is not surprising, because God tests many people. But as I read your comment — it looks like you realized that the KJV failed to translate Genesis 22:1 properly, and you conclude that the HCSB authors are tricksters, LOL. Let me teach you something — the fact is, you can check the original Hebrew of ANY VERSE in the Old Testament. Simply search up the verse and then type in “hebrew analysis” — for example, regarding Genesis 22:1, type in “Genesis 22:1 hebrew analysis”, and click on the first link. It will give you a word-by-word translation of the Hebrew language, and you can click on each individual Hebrew word to go to the Hebrew dictionary definition. For example, the Hebrew word in Genesis 22:1 is נָסָה or ‘nasah’, which means “to test, try”. As for James 1:13, the Book of James is part of the New Testament, meaning you must search up the GREEK ANALYSIS of James 1:13. The Greek word here means ‘to make proof of, to attempt, test, tempt’ — a clearly different word in a different language. Analyzing the original language of a verse will always help you understand any “contradictions”. As for 1 Timothy 6:16 and 1 Kings 8:12, if you read the context of 1 Kings 8:12, this is God dwelling in the holy temple where there is a “thick darkness”, and the darkness is only very temporary because God enters His presence into the temple in this passage. 1 Timothy 6:16 is probably talking about the natural state of God in His Kingdom.

        “As you are not answering the “Eight Irrefutable Arguments”, that is natural as they indeed are irrefutable.
        1-Father and Mother
        2- Miraculous Birth
        3-Marriage Ties
        4-Jesus Rejected by his People
        5-“Other-Wordly” Kingdom
        6- No New Laws
        7-How they Departed
        8-Heavenly Abode”

        Ugh, where are these arguments supposed to be? I can only see you list the name of words here. Is it in that booklet again? Post the link of the booklet again.

        Anyways — you seem to want to me on to Jesus claiming to be God. If you want to stop this conversation on this topic, then simply respond with “lets move on to Jesus claiming to be God” — and we’ll throw away this conversation. After that, I’ll respond to your more recent comment on Jesus claiming to be God and we’ll move on here.

        Like

    • Many Christians believe that Jesus claimed to be God because of some verses which are misunderstood or quoted out of context. I will post below the refutations to some of the verses that I have come across, I might be unable to respond to everything. But this is what I have now and would like to share it with you. If I missed something, please point it out.

      1) JESUS (PEACE BE UPON HIM) HAS SAME GLORY AS THE FATHER?

      “Jesus He claims the same Glory as His Father in John 17:5.”

      If you go back a couple of verses you will get your answer.

      “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.”(John 17:3 KJV)

      He is clearly stating that he is a prophet of God, I will emphasize on this point below.

      (John 17:5), which talks about God giving Jesus glory that Jesus had with him before the world began proves nothing. First of all God has given glory to people before…

      “But thou, O LORD, art a shield for me; my glory, and the lifter up of mine head.”(Psalm 3:3 KJV)

      “For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.”(Psalm 8:5 KJV)

      You may argue back that God gave Jesus HIS OWN GLORY, which he can give no other. So this proves Jesus is God. However, we see that Jesus gave this glory that was given to him from God to the disciples…

      “And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:”(John 17:22 KJV)

      So does that make the disciples God as well?

      2) JESUS SAID I AM ALPHA AND OMEGA

      The book of Revelations, scholars will tell you was a dream of John. Not authentic. For clarification watch {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltR9ERFqPEI} Show me a place where he claims divinity during his life, in public. You will never find it anywhere in the Bible.

      3) JESUS BEGOTTEN?

      How does Allah react to this statement in the Qur’an?

      “They say: “(Allah) Most Gracious has begotten a son!””(Quran 19:88)

      “Indeed ye have put forth a thing most monstrous!”(Quran 19:89)

      “At it the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder, and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin,”(Quran 19:90)

      “That they should invoke a son for (Allah) Most Gracious.”(Quran 19:91)

      “For it is not consonant with the majesty of (Allah) Most Gracious that He should beget a son.”(Quran 19:92)

      “Not one of the beings in the heavens and the earth but must come to (Allah) Most Gracious as a servant.”(Quran 19:93)

      “He does take an account of them (all), and hath numbered them (all) exactly.”(Quran 19:94)

      “And everyone of them will come to Him singly on the Day of Judgment.”(Quran 19:95)

      – If Jesus Christ is the begotten son of God as (John 3:16 – KJV) states. Then my I ask you. Why did the thirty two scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating denominations throw out the word “begotten” out of the Bible in the RSV 1952 version?

      SONS OF GOD IN THE BIBLE

      If you read the Bible then you would’ve realized that God has got sons by the tons. Read :

      Rabbi is the son of God (John 1:49)

      In the Bible we read that peacemakers should be called sons of God (Matthew 5:9).

      In (Luke 3:38) we read that Adam (peace be upon him) is the son of God.

      (Genesis 6:2&4) it says there “the sons of God” How many sons did he have?

      (Exodus 4:22) “Israel is my son, even my firstborn” the same God says in the book of (Jeremiah 31:9) “for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn.” How can you have two firstborns?

      (Psalms 2:7) “I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.” (God is talking to David). How many sons has he got? This is in you’re book!

      (Romans 8:14) “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.”

      So I’m asking you, what makes Jesus (peace be upon him) different from these “sons of God”? Is it because he had no father? Well, Adam (peace be upon him) had no father and no mother. Shouldn’t you be worshiping him?

      4)MIRACLES PROVE NOTHING:

      Prophets of God in the Bible have done miracles. Does that mean that they are God?

      The Bible says in (Matthew 24:24 KJV)
      “For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.”

      So according to the Bible, miracles are no way to prove that what you believe in is true.

      5) THEY “WORSHIPPED” JESUS (PEACE BE UPON HIM)

      Firstly, the word worship is not always the same in the different versions of the Bible.

      “The man BOWED in front of Jesus and said, “I believe, Lord.””(John 9:38 God’s Word Translation)

      “And he said, Lord, I believe. And he WORSHIPPED him.”(John 9:38 King James Version)

      “And he said: I believe, Lord. And falling down, he ADORED him.”(John 9:38 Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible)

      Secondly, the word “worship” does not always mean to worship someone as God. It can also mean an extreme form of love.

      “Feel great admiration or devotion for:
      ‘she adores her sons and they worship her’”(Oxforddictionaries)

      We find nowhere in the Bible all of the eleven or twelve disciples worshipping Jesus (peace be upon him). Nowhere does he ever tell the disciples to come and worship him. Nowhere does he say “I am God” or “Worship me”. In addition to that, when we read the Bible we find out that there is a unique form of worship.

      “And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying,”(Genesis 17:3 KJV)

      “And Moses and Aaron went from the presence of the assembly unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and they fell upon their faces: and the glory of the LORD appeared unto them.”(Numbers 20:6 KJV)

      “And he said, Nay; but as captain of the host of the LORD am I now come. And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto him, What saith my lord unto his servant?”(Joshua 5:14 KJV)

      “And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.” (Jesus peace be upon him is speaking here) (Matthew 26:39 KJV)

      What’s this? Why is everyone falling on their faces and praying to God? Because this is the true form of worship! Even the pope wherever he goes, he kisses the ground (I don’t know what he’s doing). Falling on his face and praying to God! Like what we Muslims do in our prayers. That is why I say that if being a Christian means following the true teachings of prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) then we Muslims are more Christian than the Christians themselves. The verses you quoted obviously are referring to the other meaning of “worship” which simply means “extremely love”. They did not fall on their faces, did they?

      Furthermore, you are completely ignoring the verses I posted where prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) says so explicitly that he can do nothing alone. “I can of mine own self do NOTHING…” (John 5:30 KJV) and when he doesn’t even want to be called “good” leave aside being called God.

      “And behold, one came and said unto him, ‘Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?’

      And he said unto him, ‘Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.’ ”
      [The Bible, Mathew 19:16-17 KJV]

      and you still have the face to say that he is God. Tell me man. Who is the leir here? You or Jesus (peace be upon him)(God according to you)?

      “And behold! Allah will say: “O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah’?” He will say: “Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden.”(Quran 5:116)

      6) I AND MY FATHER ARE ONE & I AM IN THE FATHER-THE FATHER IS IN ME

      You are quoting (John 10:30) out of context. Read from (John 10:23) to (John 10:30) for the real context.

      -(John 10:28-30 KJV)
      “And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.”
      “My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.”
      “I and my Father are one.”

      In that particular ability to see that a man remains in faith when he is guided, not in divinity.

      Look at how he responded to them.

      “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?”(John 10:34 KJV)

      Can you explain to me why he told them that? He’s quoting from the old testament.

      “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.”(Psalms 82:6 KJV)

      He’s telling them that in your book (he’s being sarcastic it’s also his book according to Matthew 5:17) you are called gods, why are you thinking that I am claiming divinity when I just said “I and my Father are one” when you are called gods in your book? He was disclaiming rather than claiming divinity.

      “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”(Matthew 5:17 KJV)

      -“But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.”(John 10:38 KJV)

      Well, (John 17:21) gives a knockout to both these verses. It shows that when Jesus (peace be upon him) is talking about being “one with God” or being “in God” what he means is that he is following the commandments of God. They “they” that are mentioned in (John 17:21) are the people who have “kept the words of Jesus” i.e. followed him. As it is mentioned in (John 17:6). So it’s either that the verse is metaphorical as I have explained or that they are all like one sausage. God, Jesus (peace be upon him) and those who follow him are like one sausage. You choose.

      “That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.”(John 17:21 KJV)

      “I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.”(John 17:6 KJV)

      7) BEFORE ABRAHAM WAS I AM

      Regarding (John 8:58) :

      “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.”(John 8:58 KJV)

      “And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM…”(Exodus 3:14 KJV)

      You claim the Jesus (peace be upon him) is claiming his divinity here, because he used the same expression God used in the old testament in (Exodus 3:14). But if you look at the Greek Bible you will find that the words “I AM” are different in the old testament and the new testament. In the old testament its “ho-on” in the new testament the word is “Ego-ami”(the words I quoted may not be exact, but you can confirm that they are not the same yourself if you have access to a greek Bible). I don’t know what they mean, but they are not the same.

      “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.”(Jeremiah 1:5 KJV)

      Furthermore, when we read the book of Jeremiah we see that God knew him and he was made a prophet of God before he was in his mother’s womb. So God knew Jesus (John 8:58) and Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5) before their existence on this earth. And guess what? He even knew me and you before we were born. That is natural as God knows everything.

      Also, Jesus (peace be upon him) doesn’t say “Before Abraham was, I was God”. When on the contrary he says that he can do NOTHING by himself (John 5:30), can God do nothing? No, God can do EVERYTHING. Jesus (peace be upon him) is very clearly telling everyone that he is NOT God. What more do you need?

      “I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me.”(John 5:30 KJV)

      8) I AM THE WAY THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE NO MAN COMETH UNTO THE FATHER BUT BY ME

      Coming to (John 14:6) :

      “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.”(John 14:6 KJV)

      Let us go back a bunch of verses and get the context of this verse.

      “In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.”(John 14:2 KJV)

      “And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also”(John 14:3 KJV)

      “And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.”(John 14:4 KJV)

      Jesus (peace be upon him) is talking about heaven here, but Thomas is misunderstanding him. He is thinking that Jesus (peace be upon) is talking about geographical location. So he replies :

      “Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way?”(John 14:5 KJV)

      So in reply to that Jesus says (John 14:6). Which is a verse that I completely agree with, in the time of prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) he was the way to God. People had to follow him to go to heaven.

      In every the time of every prophet, he was the way to God. Now all the world should follow the final prophet. Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him).

      So in conclusion, Jesus (peace be upon him) does in no way claim to be God. These are your claims. The man is saying that he can do NOTHING by himself (John 5:30) but you still are trying to find a way to make him God. So stop it, its better for you.

      9) HE WAS PROPHESIED TO BE CALLED EMMANUEL WHICH MEANS GOD WITH US

      “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.”(Matthew 1:23 KJV)

      Tell me was that prophecy ever fulfilled? Can you show me one place in the new testament where Jesus (peace be upon him) was actually called emmanuel? If he was not called then he is not God as per the verse.

      10) HE WILL BE CALLED WONDERFUL, COUNSELLOR, THE MIGHTY GOD, THE EVERLASTING FATHER, THE PRINCE OF PEACE

      “For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.”(Isaiah 9:6 KJV)

      Again was he ever called any of these names in his lifetime?

      11) HE CALLS HIMSELF LORD

      7- You said : “John 13:10-14King James Version (KJV)

      10 Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.

      11 For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.

      12 So after he had washed their feet, and had taken his garments, and was set down again, he said unto them, Know ye what I have done to you?

      13 Ye call me Master and Lord: and ye say well; for so I am.

      14 If I then, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet; ye also ought to wash one another’s feet.”

      Why don’t you read a couple more verses?

      “Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.”(John 13:16 KJV)

      He calls himself lord then he says that the lord is not greater than the servant (equates himself with humans). Then he says that the one who is sent (himself) is not greater than that who sent him (God). He Jesus (peace be upon him) was sent by God.

      12) SITTING ON THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD & GOD WILL DESTROY THE ENEMIES OF JESUS (PEACE BE UPON HIM)

      You said : “Psalm 110:1
      The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.,,,,,,,,,,SINCE YOU SAY YOU UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE MORE THAN MR PLEASE ENLIGHTEN ME HAHAHA”

      With pleasure. Firstly, sitting on the right hand of God doesn’t mean geographically on his right hand. As God has got no image.

      “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:”(Exodus 20:4 KJV)

      If we are to understand that verse metaphorically, he is sitting on the right hand of God; means that he is one of those nearest to God. On that level I have no objection in agreeing with the statement. For example, your friend or ally. You say that he is your “right hand man”. Does that mean that he is sitting in your right hand? Or that he is always standing on your right side? No. it means that he is close to you.

      Secondly, that prophecy was never fulfilled. Who were the enemies of prophet Jesus (peace be upon him) as per the Bible? The Jews, right? They are still alive.

      And Allah Knows Best!

      Like

      • Sorry it took time to respond. I’ll only respond to what you’re wrong on from what I’ve seen.

        Firstly, the Revelation is clearly authentic. Ahmed Deedat is not a Scholar of the New Testament or Greek, and the fact that it is a “dream” is irrelevant. John was a disciple of Jesus, and even the Qur’an claims the disciples of Jesus were Muslims. John was given this DREAM by God, and Jesus declares to be the Alpha and the Omega, Jesus called Himself God there forsure.

        “Why did the thirty two scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating denominations throw out the word “begotten” out of the Bible in the RSV 1952 version?”

        This RSV nonsense is irrelevant. 1952 has been gone for decades, we’ve discovered new and earlier manuscripts since then, we have better translations from decades of better works. This RSV appeal is useless. The Greek word can mean both ‘begotten’ but it can also more precisely mean ‘one and only’ in a translation. Either one works, as the original Greek work is monogenes. Mone means of the only one, and genos means of a nature, or kind. So what does this mean? I’ll explain later in this post, keep reading.

        “If you read the Bible then you would’ve realized that God has got sons by the tons. Read :
        Rabbi is the son of God (John 1:49)”

        LOL. The rabbi in John 1:49 is Jesus.

        John 1:49-50: “Rabbi,” Nathanael replied, “You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” Jesus responded to him, “Do you believe only because I told you I saw you under the fig tree? You will see greater things than this.”

        Please read context before you copy and paste from Muslim websites. Anyways, you go on to quote a bunch of Old Testament passages as well as Luke 3:38 showing there are many “sons of God”. However, Jesus is the Son of God in a MUCH DIFFERENT sense than a mere human is. Back to John 3:16 again. In John 3:16, we are told Jesus is the ONE AND ONLY Son of God.

        John 3:16: “For God loved the world in this way: He gave His One and Only Son, so that everyone who believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

        No man is the Son of God in the sense Jesus is — Jesus is Son of God in the DIVINE sense, as we can see from John 3:16, whilst humans are “sons” as in God created them, and thus technially they come from God. But John 1:2 tells us Jesus (the Word) is uncreated as God.

        John 1:2 He was with God in the beginning.

        Anyways, regarding worship — you make many blunders. First of all, no one in the Bible has ever ‘worshiped’ like a Muslim does. If you read the Bible, you see people worshiping in ALL SORTS OF WAYS.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5FolPt40aE&t=26s

        Secondly, Jesus DOES accept worship multiple times. Even in the way that you call “Muslim worship” where someone falls on their head.

        Matthew 2:11: Entering the house, they saw the child with Mary His mother, and falling to their knees, they worshiped Him. Then they opened their treasures and presented Him with gifts: gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

        Matthew 28:9: Suddenly Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” They came to Him, grasped His feet, and worshiped Him.

        In both times here, the disciples fall at the feet of Jesus, meaning their entire body is down, and ‘worship’ Him. Now, in the Greek, the word worship can be two different types of worship. One is worship towards God, and one is where you give someone much reverence. So how do we know which went to Jesus? Very easy. When someone merely ‘gives reverence’, at best they fall to their knees (Matthew 18:26), however when they worship God, their entire body falls down, and Jesus received the worship due to God in Matthew 4.

        “Look at how he responded to them.
        “Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?”(John 10:34 KJV)
        Can you explain to me why he told them that? He’s quoting from the old testament.
        “I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.”(Psalms 82:6 KJV)
        He’s telling them that in your book (he’s being sarcastic it’s also his book according to Matthew 5:17) you are called gods, why are you thinking that I am claiming divinity when I just said “I and my Father are one” when you are called gods in your book? He was disclaiming rather than claiming divinity.”

        This is wrong again. Jesus was explaining simply saying ‘I am God’ isn’t a claim to be God — however if you quote the rest of the chapter, Jesus after He KNOWS He made them think He commits blasphemy, he says “The Father is in me and I in the Father” in verse 38 — Jesus was claiming the FATHER was IN HIM. Then, the Jews tried to kill Him for claiming to be God again — because He made it much, much more obvious there. A human can claim to be “in God” (John 17:21), but you CAN’T claim GOD IS IN YOU. Therefore, Jesus CLEARLY claims to be God in John 10:38, if 10:30 wasn’t obvious enough. There is simply no doubt here, and the Jews even tried to kill Him for saying it — that establishes it. In fact, Jesus was claiming to be God ALL THE TIME, and so the Jews were trying to kill Him all the time (John 5:16-18).

        “You claim the Jesus (peace be upon him) is claiming his divinity here, because he used the same expression God used in the old testament in (Exodus 3:14). But if you look at the Greek Bible you will find that the words “I AM” are different in the old testament and the new testament. In the old testament its “ho-on” in the new testament the word is “Ego-ami”(the words I quoted may not be exact, but you can confirm that they are not the same yourself if you have access to a greek Bible). I don’t know what they mean, but they are not the same. ”

        Ugh, this is one of your weirdest objections. Exodus 3:14 is written in Hebrew, and John 8:58 is written in Greek. These are two different languages, that’s why they are different words — but both of them translate to them same thing, Jesus called Himself the ‘I Am’ of Exodus 3:14. I don’t know a single scholar in the world who denies this one. This is also why the Jews tried to kill Him for claiming to be the ‘I Am’ in the very next verse (John 8:59).

        “HE WAS PROPHESIED TO BE CALLED EMMANUEL WHICH MEANS GOD WITH US
        “Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.”(Matthew 1:23 KJV)
        Tell me was that prophecy ever fulfilled? Can you show me one place in the new testament where Jesus (peace be upon him) was actually called emmanuel? If he was not called then he is not God as per the verse.”

        This is also a weird objection, the verse clearly says Jesus is called ‘God with us’, although He was called by His regular name Jesus, or Yeshua.

        In regards to Isaiah 9:6, where it literally says that the coming Messiah is called Eternal Father and Mighty God — you make the exact same objection. He wasn’t referenced it during His ministry, LOL. But the verse VERY CLEARLY SAYS Eternal Father and Mighty God, whether or not the Gospels themselves record these specific instances. Whoever is the Messiah is God according to Isaiah 9:6, and Jesus was the Messiah.

        Anyways, many of these verses clearly have Jesus as God. Jesus also claimed to be the Son of Man, which was a figure according to Daniel 7:13-14 that receives authority over all peoples of all nations of all languages for eternity (i.e. God). In Mark 14:60-64, the High Priest asks Jesus “Are you the Messiah, Son of the Blessed one?”, and Jesus replies “I am, and you shall see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.” — after this, the High Priest literally rips his robe off and declares he must be put to death for blasphemy (and you can only commit blasphemy against God). So Jesus declared to be God pretty much everywhere all the time.

        Like

    • Sorry, it took some time for me to respond too. I’m getting busy…

      I gave my argument regarding the book of Revelations. In that video.

      What happened in the RSV 1952 version proved something. Unless you have a good explanation of what happened, you’re gonna have to agree with the explanation I gave.

      You said : “The Greek word can mean both ‘begotten’ but it can also more precisely mean ‘one and only’ in a translation. ”

      I would like to know what do you mean when you say “begotten”? I have proved in my earlier response that God has many “begotten” sons in the Bible. But let us agree that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the only “begotten” son of God. What does that mean? Do you mean that Almighty God had sex with Mary (peace be upon her) and produced Jesus (peace be upon him)? That is what you’re implying. I have posted in my last response how God Almighty responds to that claim of the Christians in the strongest of terms.

      [REASON FOR OBJECTION
      The Muslim takes exception to the word “begotten”, because begetting is an
      animal act, belonging to the lower animal functions of sex. How can we
      attribute such a lowly capacity to God? Metaphorically we are all the children of God – the good and the bad – and Jesus (pbuh) would be closer to being
      the son of God than any one of us, because he would be more faithful to God than any one of us can ever be. From that point of view he is preeminently
      the son of God.
      Although this pernicious word “begotten”
      has now unceremoniously been
      thrown out of the “MOST ACCURATE” version of the Bible – the R.S.V.
      its ghost still lingers on in the Christian mind, both black and white. Through its insidious brainwashing the
      white man is made to feel superior to his black Christian brother of the same
      Church and Denomination. And in turn, the Black
      man is given a permanent
      inferiority complex through this dogma.

      BRAIN-WASHED INFERIORITY
      The human mind can’t help reasoning that since the “begotten son” of an
      African will look like an African, and that of a Chinaman as a Chinese, and
      that of an Indian like an Indian: so the begotten son of God aught naturally
      to look like God. Billions of beautiful pictures and replicas of this “ONLY
      BEGOTTEN SON” (?) of God are put in peoples hands. He looks like a
      European with blonde hair, blue eyes and handsome features – like the one I
      saw in the “King of Kings” or “The Day of Triumph” or “Jesus of
      Nazareth”. Remember Jeffrey Hunter? The “SAVIOUR” of the Christian is
      more like a German than a Jew with his polly nose. So naturally, if the son is
      a White man, the father would also be a White man (God?). Hence the
      darker skinned races of the earth subconsciously have the feeling of
      inferiority ingrained in their souls as God’s STEP-CHILDREN. No amount of
      face-creams, skin-lighteners and hair-straighteners will erase the inferiority.

      GOD IS SPIRIT
      God is neither Black nor White. He is a spiritual Being, beyond the
      imagination of the mind of man. Break the mental shackles of a Caucasian
      (white) man-god, and you have broken the shackles of a permanent
      inferiority. But intellectual bondages are harder to shatter: the slave himself
      fights to retain them.]Desert Storm-By : Ahmed Deedat

      You said : “Anyways, regarding worship — you make many blunders. First of all, no one in the Bible has ever ‘worshiped’ like a Muslim does. If you read the Bible, you see people worshiping in ALL SORTS OF WAYS.”

      Regarding the “worshipping” I have produced passages from the Bible proving that prophets of God, even Jesus (peace be upon him) fell on their faces as they were praying. You’re gonna have to prove how that is not like Muslim prayer (?).

      In response to that video, we Muslims do not pray in the open to be seen by men. We are taught to pray for God, whether men see us or not what does it change? I think there are some ahadith that can refute this point. I’ll get them InshaAllah. Salah also has a psychological effect on us. We as humans get affected by the environment we’re in. That’s why your parents tell you to choose good company, because if they are good they will make you a better person. Otherwise, they will make you a bad person. When you enter a mosque and you see everybody praying to God, you naturally would remember God too…this will decrease the chances of you doing any wrong things. Five times every day (compulsory prayers). Also, we Muslims make ablution (wudu) before we pray and that makes us the MOST HYGIENIC PEOPLE ON EARTH! that is a fact. Five times everyday the Muslim is made to wash his body parts(unless it didn’t wear off). Also, look at the movements of our body, it is good for the joints you can read about it here http://www.islamicity.com/forum/printer_friendly_posts.asp?TID=14204 Salah also literally ERADICATES racism. You stand shoulder to shoulder with a black/white/brown any man, and you pray next to him. It is a practical way of eradication racism. Haj also serves in a similar way, but that is not the topic now. There are more advantages of Salah but I can’t mention everything here.

      Reading the Qur’an is not “meaningless repetition”. We are remembering the commandments of God. One of the miracles of the Qur’an is that the more you read it, the more you understand it. As I told you the Arabic language is a very vast language. Watching this may help :

      WHY WAS THE QUR’AN REVEALED IN ARABIC?

      Watch {https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcu-aMaSU8w} Nevertheless, look at what the Bible has to say about this.

      Jesus said “no vain repetitions” in Prayers. But how many times did Jesus pray over the same thing in such a small period of time? 3 times in Matthew 26:36-44, and endlessly in Luke 6:12. Let us again look at the following verse:

      “One of those days Jesus went out to a mountainside to pray, and spent the night praying to God. (From the NIV Bible, Luke 6:12)”

      When Jesus prayed ENDLESSLY all night long in Luke 6:12, did he not repeat his prayers? His main focus was on GOD Almighty saving him from the crucifixion. Jesus’ prayers all night long, which obviously were far more than just 3 times, were repetition after repetition after repetition, compromising his very own commands about not doing “vain repetitions.”

      Now, the main argument that David Wood gives is that Jesus (peace be upon him) called God as “Father”. But he is forgetting that there are many sons of God in the Bible, not literally sons. Not literally father, these are metaphorical statements otherwise it would make no sense. You are reading Jewish books with Greek glasses and misunderstanding the meaning. Did a Jew ever claim that Adam (peace be upon him) is the begotten son of God? He is called a son of God in the Bible in (Luke 3:38). Moses (peace be upon him) is called a God in the Bible. It is the genius of the language. Not literally.

      “And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.”(Exodus 7:1 KJV) Did a Jew ever consider Moses (peace be upon him) to be God? No, it is just that the Christians are not understanding their book which created this big confusion.

      Now, about Jesus (peace be upon him) praying in different ways like looking up to the sky and speaking to God. We Muslims make DUA it is not a prayer, we ask Allah for help, we lift up our hands, many times we look to the sky and ask Allah for mercy. Maybe Jesus (peace be upon him) was also making DUA back then.

      You said : “So how do we know which went to Jesus? Very easy. When someone merely ‘gives reverence’, at best they fall to their knees (Matthew 18:26), however when they worship God, their entire body falls down, and Jesus received the worship due to God in Matthew 4.”

      Never have I seen the expression “fell on his face” given to Jesus (peace be upon him) while it is given to God, by prophets and by Jesus (peace be upon him) himself. The explanation above is just what you think.

      You said : “This is wrong again. Jesus was explaining simply saying ‘I am God’ isn’t a claim to be God — however if you quote the rest of the chapter, Jesus after He KNOWS He made them think He commits blasphemy, he says “The Father is in me and I in the Father” in verse 38 — Jesus was claiming the FATHER was IN HIM. Then, the Jews tried to kill Him for claiming to be God again — because He made it much, much more obvious there. A human can claim to be “in God” (John 17:21), but you CAN’T claim GOD IS IN YOU. Therefore, Jesus CLEARLY claims to be God in John 10:38, if 10:30 wasn’t obvious enough. There is simply no doubt here, and the Jews even tried to kill Him for saying it — that establishes it. In fact, Jesus was claiming to be God ALL THE TIME, and so the Jews were trying to kill Him all the time (John 5:16-18).”

      Sorry, I’m not buying it. The way Jesus (peace be upon him) responds to them makes no sense if we go with your explanation. Also, if he really is God, then why beat around the bush? Is God afraid to claim his divinity? No, I don’t think so.

      You said : “Ugh, this is one of your weirdest objections. Exodus 3:14 is written in Hebrew, and John 8:58 is written in Greek.”

      Check the greek translation of (Exodus 3:14) and compare it with the greek translation of (John 8:58).

      You said : “This is also a weird objection, the verse clearly says Jesus is called ‘God with us’, although He was called by His regular name Jesus, or Yeshua.”

      The verse says “they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.” and since he was never called that, he is not God. In fact, someone else uses those words. Watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RoCH7RI3TXA for details.

      You said : “In regards to Isaiah 9:6, where it literally says that the coming Messiah is called Eternal Father and Mighty God — you make the exact same objection. He wasn’t referenced it during His ministry, LOL. But the verse VERY CLEARLY SAYS Eternal Father and Mighty God, whether or not the Gospels themselves record these specific instances. Whoever is the Messiah is God according to Isaiah 9:6, and Jesus was the Messiah.”

      “For a child will be born for us, a son will be given to us, and the government will be on His shoulders. He will be named Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.”(Isaiah 9:6 HCSB)

      Where does this verse mention any Messiah?

      You said : “Anyways, many of these verses clearly have Jesus as God. Jesus also claimed to be the Son of Man, which was a figure according to Daniel 7:13-14 that receives authority over all peoples of all nations of all languages for eternity (i.e. God). In Mark 14:60-64, the High Priest asks Jesus “Are you the Messiah, Son of the Blessed one?”, and Jesus replies “I am, and you shall see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of the Power and coming with the clouds of heaven.” — after this, the High Priest literally rips his robe off and declares he must be put to death for blasphemy (and you can only commit blasphemy against God). So Jesus declared to be God pretty much everywhere all the time.”

      In the end you failed to produce a single instance where Jesus (peace be upon him) himself says “I am God” or “Worship me”. Don’t go around in circles with the son of man or Messiah. If you say that the one who is the Messiah is God then you are not reading the Bible.

      [CHRIST NOT A NAME
      The word CHRIST is derived from the Hebrew word Messiah, Arabic –
      Masih. Root word m-a-s-a-h-a, meaning to rub, to massage, to anoint.
      Priests and kings were anointed when being consecrated to their offices. But
      in its translated, Grecian form “CHRIST”, it seems unique: befitting Jesus
      only.

      The Christian has a knack of transmuting baser metals into shining gold.
      What he is wont to do is to translate names into his own language like
      “cephas” to Peter
      , “messiah” to Christ. How does he do that? Very easily.
      MESSIAH in Hebrew means anointed. The Greek word for anointed is
      “christos”. Just lop off the ‘os’ from christos and you are left with christ.
      Now change the little ‘c’ to a capital ‘C’, and “hey, presto!” he has created a
      unique (?) name! Christos means ANOINTED, and anointed means
      APPOINTED in its religious connotation. Jesus (pbuh) was appointed
      (anointed) at his baptism by John the Baptist, as God’s Messenger. Every
      prophet of God is so anointed or appointed. The Holy Bible is replete with the
      “anointed” ones. In the original Hebrew – made a “messiah”. Let us keep to
      the English translation – “anointed.” Not only were prophets and priests and
      kings anointed (christos-ed), but horns, and cherubs and lamp-posts also.

      I am the God of Beth-el, where you ANOINTED a pillar …
      Genesis 31:13
      If the priest that is ANOINTED do sin …
      Leviticus 4:3
      And Moses…ANOINTED the tabernacle and all things that was
      therein…
      Leviticus 8:10
      …the Lord shall…exalt the horn of his ANOINTED.
      1 Samuel 2:10
      Thus saith the Lord to his ANOINTED to Cyrus…
      Isaiah 45:1
      Thou art the ANOINTED cherub…
      Ezekiel 28:14
      There are a hundred more such references in the Holy Bible. Everytime you
      come across the word ANOINTED in your English Bible, you can take it that
      that word would be christos in the Greek translations, and if you take the
      same liberty with the word that the Christians have done, you will have –
      Christ Cherub, Christ Cyrus, Christ Priest and Christ Pillar, etc. ]Desert Storm- By : Ahmed Deedat

      My friend, it is very obvious now. The man never claimed divinity and look at what he says. You have no proof that he is God and he is telling you that he is just a human, a prophet, (peace be upon him).

      IS JESUS GOD? HE NEVER CLAIMED DIVINITY & HE HAS HUMAN QUALITIES

      (JESUS’) POWER NOT HIS OWN:

      (a) “And Jesus came and spoke unto them, saying, All power is
      GIVEN unto me in heaven and in earth.” MATTHEW 28:18
      (b) I can of mine own self DO NOTHING: as I hear, I judge . . .”
      JOHN 5:30
      (c) “. . . I by the FINGER OF GOD cast out devils . . .” LUKE 11:20

      (d) “And Jesus lifted up his eyes (towards heaven), and said, Father, I thank thee that THOU HAST HEARD ME.

      “And I know that THOU HEAREST ME ALWAYS: but because of the people which stand by l said (my supplication aloud), that THEY MAY BELIEVE that thou hast sent me.

      “And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.
      “And he that was dead came forth . . .” JOHN 11:41-43

      Who then gave life back to Lazarus? The answer is “GOD!” For God
      heard the prayer of Jesus, as “always!”

      LISTEN NOW TO PETER’S TESTIMONY:

      (e) “Ye men of Israel (O Jews!) hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, A MAN approved of God (meaning a prophet) among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which GOD DID BY HIM in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know.” ACTS 2:22

      JESUS (PBUH) A “GOD”? : Powerless

      (a) I can of mine own self DO NOTHING . . .” JOHN 5:30

      HE HAD NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE HEREAFTER:

      (b) “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, NEITHER THE SON, but the Father.” MARK 13:32

      HE WAS IGNORANT OF THE SEASONS:

      (c) “And seeing a fig tree afar of having leaves, he came if happily he might find any thing there on: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves, FOR THE TIME OF FIGS WAS NOT YET.” MARK 11:13

      JESUS (PBUH) AS A THIRSTY “GOD”?
      (d) “. . . (Jesus) saith, I THIRST.” JOHN 19:28

      JESUS (PBUH) AS A WEEPING “GOD”?
      (e) “Jesus WEPT.” JOHN 11:35

      IMAGINE A “GOD” BEING TEMPTED BY THE DEVIL (?)
      (f) “Where he (Jesus) stayed forty days, being tempted by Satan.”

      And Allah Knows Best.

      Like

      • “What happened in the RSV 1952 version proved something. Unless you have a good explanation of what happened, you’re gonna have to agree with the explanation I gave.”

        I’ve already explained this 10,000,000,000x. The RSV 1952 was published in… 1952. That was over 50 years ago, and scholarship has increased since then and there is much newer information, leading to much more accurate translations especially with the discovery of newer and earlier New Testament manuscripts.

        “I would like to know what do you mean when you say “begotten”? I have proved in my earlier response that God has many “begotten” sons in the Bible. But let us agree that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the only “begotten” son of God. What does that mean? Do you mean that Almighty God had sex with Mary (peace be upon her) and produced Jesus (peace be upon him)? That is what you’re implying. I have posted in my last response how God Almighty responds to that claim of the Christians in the strongest of terms.”

        As I’ve explained with the increase of scholarship, a more accurate translation renders the word as ‘one and only son’, not ‘begotten’ son. Monogenes is the original Greek word. Mone means one, or only one, and genos means of a nature, kind. So monogenes means an only one of a certain nature — and with the context of John 3:16, it says the only one with the nature of God’s son, in other words, “one and only Son”. God of course did not have sex with Mary, as the word ‘begotten’ is a mistranslation. As we’ve seen, Jesus is the ONE AND ONLY SON OF GOD to the Father, whereas the sense that we HUMANS are ‘sons’ is much different.

        “Regarding the “worshipping” I have produced passages from the Bible proving that prophets of God, even Jesus (peace be upon him) fell on their faces as they were praying. You’re gonna have to prove how that is not like Muslim prayer (?).”

        They did not “fall on their face and pray”, they fell on their face in fear and awe of God, as a man would fall to his knees and head to the ground when his master threatens him or something, like in Matthew 18:26. This also disregards the fact that the Bible shows people praying in NUMEROUS ways, almost all of them contradicting the Muslim method of prayer — meaning that it looks like you’re picking and choosing your verses from the Bible that fit the Islamic ideology. I also never remember reading where the Bible says someone prayed 5 times in 1 day.

        “When Jesus prayed ENDLESSLY all night long in Luke 6:12, did he not repeat his prayers? ”

        Ugh… HOW SHOULD WE KNOW? LOL. Jesus’ prayer is not given to us. There are thousands of things to pray and ask for, and in prayer, there are many long moments of silence sometimes if it is a very very long prayer.

        “Sorry, I’m not buying it. The way Jesus (peace be upon him) responds to them makes no sense if we go with your explanation. Also, if he really is God, then why beat around the bush? Is God afraid to claim his divinity? No, I don’t think so.”

        How did Jesus beat around the bush? Jesus said “I and the Father are one”, making the Jews want to stone Him, and then after calming them down with his quotation of Psalms, he GOES ON TO SAY AGAIN “The FATHER IS IN ME and I in the Father”, making them want to stone Him again. The entire time He was giving important lectures to the Jews. How can a man claim the Father is in you? Do you think Allah exists inside of you, Mango Juice?

        “Check the greek translation of (Exodus 3:14) and compare it with the greek translation of (John 8:58).”

        And how do I do that? Jesus clearly said “Before Abraham was, I am” — making it unmistakable. And then the Jews try to kill Him again in the very next verse (8:59) for committing blasphemy — and according to Jewish Law, you can only commit blasphemy in this context by claiming to be God.

        “Where does this verse mention any Messiah?”

        Isaiah 9:6-7 says that a SON will be born to us, this son will be persected, will reign on the throne of David, and will place an eternal kingdom on Earth. This sounds FRIGHTENINGLY like the Messiah if I do say so myself.

        “In the end you failed to produce a single instance where Jesus (peace be upon him) himself says “I am God” or “Worship me”. Don’t go around in circles with the son of man or Messiah. If you say that the one who is the Messiah is God then you are not reading the Bible.”

        ??????????????????????????????????

        Bart Ehrman is a non-Christian historian who DOESN’T think Jesus claimed to be God in His lifetime, but fully admits that the term Son of Man references God. Bart Ehrman claims that the Gospel authors just made up over 80 references to Jesus being the Son of Man, LOL.

        It’s obvious Jesus claimed to be God a ton of times. But I think there will be one reference here that makes it undeniable for BOTH of us, truly. Look at this at what Jesus claims to do as the Son of Man:

        [Matthew 25:31–32] “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, just as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats.

        JESUS SAYS HE WILL JUDGE THE WORLD ON HIS THRONE — ONLY GOD JUDGES THE WORLD OBVIOUSLY. JESUS VERY CLEARLY CLAIMED TO BE GOD HERE.

        By the way, to make your day, I posted another post on Jesus claiming to be God yesterday, here you go:
        https://faithfulphilosophy.wordpress.com/2017/01/04/jesus-claimed-to-be-god-again/

        😀
        Jesus also wasn’t “ignorant of the seasons” LOL that was explained in the post your commenting on.

        Like

  4. You’ve made a good case here that the gospel writers believed Jesus claimed to be the messiah and the son of God. Whether Jesus actually made the claims or not depends on whether the gospels and Paul are accurate. Personally, I have little doubt that Jesus believed he was the messiah. I’m less certain that he meant “Son of God” as literally as Christians do. I think that is a matter of faith, rather than fact.

    Like

      • I agree that in every gospel, there is at least some evidence of the belief that Jesus claimed to be the messiah, Son of God. It would be difficult, I think, to argue that the claims made in John are different from the claims made in Mark. What interests me, personally, is what Jesus actually said and believed. I believe the bible was written by men. While I don’t doubt they were sincere in their efforts to try to record the truth as they knew it, men are fallible. So, for me, my search for truth does not end with what is written; rather, it starts from it.

        Like

      • The reason I asked you about reading this blog was because this blog is filled with references. For example, I cited the obvious fact that Jesus references Himself as the Son of Man over 80 times in the Gospels (Bible as a whole?), and according to the Old Testament, in Daniel 7:13-14, the Son of Man is a divine figure, whom shall receive power and glory and authority of all peoples of all nations of all languages for eternity. Jesus claims to be this person 80+ times. That is unequivocal. This is why the Jews REPEATEDLY tried to kill Jesus for claiming to be God (John 10:30-31, John 5:16-18). Mark 14:60-64 is unequivocal, and I referenced it, John 8:58 is unequivocal, and I referenced it, John 14:8-9 is unequivocal, and I referenced it. What exactly are you looking for? You wont find the direct, word by word phrase “I-AM-GOD” of Jesus in Christianity, just as you will not find “I-AM-A-PROPHET” from Muhammad in Islam.

        Liked by 2 people

    • “some” evidence? I think the countless repetition of Jesus self-referencing Himself as the Son of Man in each and every gospel makes it inexplicably clear. All the disciples thought Jesus was God, all the early Christians thought Jesus is God, the very earliest writer of the New Testament (Paul) made it undeniably clear Jesus was God, and so forth. You say that men are fallible — correct, but not when guided by the hand of God. Eventually, I’m going to write a blog on the historical reliability of the Gospels, and I’ll also write one on the New Testament and one on the Old Testament. But that’s a long time from now, I don’t see myself doing that any time soon.

      Liked by 1 person

      • The “Son of Man” is a reference to the cosmic judge described in the book of Daniel. The Son of Man is angelic, but is not the same as the “Son of God”. All of the Gospels are clear in saying that Jesus is the son of God, but they rarely claim that he himself claimed to be. Even in John, Jesus refers to himself as the Son only a handful of times. Another interesting feature of John is the equation of Jesus with the Word of God. John is the only gospel to make this claim. Paul certainly believed that Jesus was the Son of God.

        Like

      • The Son of Man is a divine figure who receives autheotiyauthority over all peoples of all nations of all languages for all eternity in an everlasting kingdom — i.e. God. Jesus is also the Son of God, and the Word of God — these are ALL different titles of Jesus, but belong to Jesus nonetheless. You yourself admit that He called Himself both Son of God and Son of Man — there is no contradiction in the concepts of these two beings at all. The Son of Man is CERTAINLY NOT an “angelic being”, unless by angelic you mean God.

        Liked by 1 person

      • In Daniel, there is no indication that the Son of Man is God. Then again, in the Christian faith, the angels are extensions of God, so in a sense, they are God. Was Daniel prophesying Jesus, the Son of God, when he spoke of the Son of Man? That is a matter of faith.

        Like

      • Your comments have seriously become the definition of delusional. The Son of Man, as explained and unquestionably quoted from Daniel 7:13-14 is a divine figure. Even Bart Ehrman had admitted this before he even admitted Jesus claimed to be God. This is a fact. Angels are NOT extensions of God in Christianity. Please educate yourself. Jesus claimed to be God. Any statement otherwise is made on the pure ignorance of the overwhelming references and evidence noted in this blog. You’ve clearly abandoned reason.

        Like

      • Sounds good. I’m now a follower. BTW, just about to post my answers to “10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer”, a video which attempts to take down Christianity using tired old arguments. You may not agree with all of my conclusions, but I hope you will agree that they hold more merit that those of this condescending atheist.

        Like

  5. I really enjoyed this piece. A very good breakdown of this subject. In fact, when I get back to publishing again, I’d like to share this, as it’s a topic I really love, obviously LOL.

    Like

    • Glad to hear you loved it! By the way, in case you didn’t realize, I have uploaded another blog since this one and since we’ve last talked on the authorship of the Gospels. You can check it out through the sideboard or by going to my Latest Posts tab at the top. I’ll also definitely get as many shares as I can get, LOL.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s