IslamiCity.org Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Religion - Islam > Interfaith Dialogue
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 1o1 Biblical Contradictions  What is Islam What is Islam  Donate Donate
  FAQ FAQ  Quran Search Quran Search  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

1o1 Biblical Contradictions
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 26>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
islamispeace View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 2187 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote islamispeace Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 June 2010 at 3:27pm
Originally posted by Larry Larry wrote:

   You continue to equate God with a regular human being, and having the limitations of being a human. You say "How is it possible for the Father to be the Only True God while at the same time the Son and Holy Spirit are God as well? If the Son and Holy Spirit are God as well, then it is false to say that the Father is the Only True God."
   No it isn't, with God all things are possible. And you continue to use human standards to judge the reality of the Holy Trinity. I'm sorry that you can't understand the nature of the Holy Trinity.






   


Larry, it is not so much that we "can't understand the nature of the Holy Trinity", it is more that the Bible does not do a good job of explaining it nor is it consistent in its approach to the issue.  Just by looking at the verse brother Mansoor mentioned (John 17:3), you can see why many people, not just Muslims, have an issue with the trinity.  Why does one verse say one thing and another say another thing?  Is it possible that the Gospel writers were also struggling with the idea?  And why is it that most, if not all, of the verses which mention the trinity have been found to be absent from the earliest manuscripts and only appear in manuscripts centuries later? 
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

Back to Top
JOUBERAR View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Avatar

Joined: 13 March 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 573 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JOUBERAR Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 June 2010 at 6:15pm
Originally posted by Mansoor_ali Mansoor_ali wrote:


 JOUBERAR

Mansoor It seems to me you are realy :ignorant" either you don't know who the "holy spirit" is, or you don't want to know who the "holy spirit" is, simply because of your tradisional back ground and your islamic education you don't want to "know better' and that is complete arrogance.

 Response

 Same thing i can say about you but anyway it is not my way to response.
 Here is further response why Paraclete is not Holy Spirit.

 

The Gospel of John identifies the Comforter (Paraclete) as the Holy Spirit. The word comforter in the Old Testament can refer to human beings or angels distinctively:

So I returned, and considered all the oppressions that are done under the sun: and behold the tears of such as were oppressed, and they had no comforter; and on the side of their oppressors there was power; but they had no comforter. (Ecclesiastes 4:1, LXX)

The Comforter is a helper, and hence the Prophets were comforters sent by God:

The Paraclete is a parallel figure to Jesus himself; and this conclusion is confirmed by the fact that the title is suitable for both. It is clear from 14:16 that the source thought there were sendings of two Paracletes, Jesus and his successor, the one following the other. (Rudolf Bultmann, Gospel of John, A Commentary, p. 567)

According to the rules of logic therefore, one is brought to see in John's Paraclete a human being like Jesus, possessing the faculties of hearing and speech formally implied in John's Greek text. Jesus therefore predicts that God will later send a human being to Earth to take up the role defined by John, i.e. to be a prophet who hears God's word and repeats his message to man. This is the logical interpretation of John's texts arrived at if one attributes to the words their proper meaning. (Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, The Quran, and Science)

 
 JOUBERAR

  Was it God who change the bible and now all of a sudden God also changed I don't care who changed the bible,

 Response

 No it was not God who changed it but people.Still today Bible have grave mistakes even i can show you.And there is no logical reply to those mistakes.

 Visit : "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind
Who Changed the Bible and Why" By Dr.Bart Ehrman

 

 JOUBERAR

 but the Quran is completly false Muhammad and his compannions made up thier own "r�sum�" which cotradict the bible in every the way. The nearest that Quan have EVER came to bible is when you put a bible next to the Quran The Quran is plagiarized with apocryphal Scriptures and pre - islamic Arabic poetry excerpts.


 Response

 There are some similarities between Quran and Bible(and i have shown you but you didnot reply) and ofcourse they are contradict with each other.

 But Quran is not plagiarizrd from any other source.

 
 JOUBERAR

The Quran was never and will never be God's word or a god's word not even and idol's word it was Muhammad who made himself a god because it was his own words and his companion's "words' so listen to what I have to say to you, that "one day" you will stand before "God" and so that you can gave whitness to him that" I" have told you that "Muhammad's Quran"  is not and was not from God, and so that you can't denie this before God that nobody gave you that information that isalm was  a false way to worship some sort of a god and lay claim that it was the "REAL GOD", "so mark my words", so that you can not turn back and say that I have not  "told" you THAT islam was false. 
 
 Response
 And on that day Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) will witness against you.
 
 And on that day Jesus and Muhammad (peace be upon them) will witness against you.
Who said that  Muhammad please be serious don't make me laugh.

The corruption lies not with the Bible, but rather with the Qur'an, the creation of Arabs in need of a religious text to substantiate their developing monotheistic religion. Large parts of the Qur'an are direct transfers from the Bible. Many more parts of the Qur'an contain stories about personalities from the Bible, but often the stories are incorrect. The Qur'an states that Mary was Aaron's sister, that the great Flood of Noah occurred during the time of Moses, and that Joseph was bought as a slave by an Egyptian named Aziz (instead of Potiphar), to name a few. The evidence seems to point to an early acquaintance with the Christian scriptures during the early years of the Arab Empire, and also to the misunderstanding of much of what they heard and saw in them. The Arabs merely cobbled together their various impressions of what they had heard, and made them a part of the Qur'an.

While the falsity of Muslim claims for the revelation of the Qur'an and its subsequent lack of change have been previously exposed, the Muslim charges concerning the corruption of the Bible ought to be addressed briefly. Islam has yet to produce any textual evidence to demonstrate the corruption of the Biblical texts as a whole. Often, Muslims will try to point to differences in readings between individual manuscripts, and use this to support their assertion. However, the science of textual criticism, as applied to the task of systematically examining the manuscript evidence, provides Christian scholars the ability to distinguish between true and spurious readings in individual manuscripts. The body of evidence, from Greek manuscripts, the manuscripts of other ancient versions (Old Latin, Syriac, Coptic, Latin Vulgate, etc.), and the quotations of early Christian writers allows us to determine the content of the original autographic texts with as yet unassailed certainty. It should be noted that, as was dealt with earlier, Islam cannot truthfully make the same claim, and in fact is logistically unable to even make the attempt because of the artificial standardisation of the Arabic Qur�an text by Uthman, and the subsequent destruction of most all contrary Quranic manuscript evidence. Thus, the Muslim assertion rests entirely on blind faith in what amounts to a tradition handed down through Islam for roughly 1500 years. Facts show, however, that the texts used to produce the Bible are the preserved, uncorrupted words of God.
 
Here is the answer to your long lasting strugle.
 
"Who is the Holy Spirit?"

Answer: There are many misconceptions about the identity of the Holy Spirit. Some view the Holy Spirit as a mystical force. Others understand the Holy Spirit as the impersonal power that God makes available to followers of Christ. What does the Bible say about the identity of the Holy Spirit? Simply put, the Bible declares that the Holy Spirit is God. The Bible also tells us that the Holy Spirit is a divine person, a being with a mind, emotions, and a will.

The fact that the Holy Spirit is God is clearly seen in many Scriptures, including Acts 5:3-4. In this verse Peter confronts Ananias as to why he lied to the Holy Spirit and tells him that he had �not lied to men but to God.� It is a clear declaration that lying to the Holy Spirit is lying to God. We can also know that the Holy Spirit is God because He possesses the characteristics of God. For example, His omnipresence is seen in Psalm 139:7-8, �Where can I go from your Spirit? Where can I flee from your presence? If I go up to the heavens, you are there; if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.� Then in 1 Corinthians 2:10-11, we see the characteristic of omniscience in the Holy Spirit. �But God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man�s spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.�

We can know that the Holy Spirit is indeed a divine person because He possesses a mind, emotions, and a will. The Holy Spirit thinks and knows (1 Corinthians 2:10). The Holy Spirit can be grieved (Ephesians 4:30). The Spirit intercedes for us (Romans 8:26-27). He makes decisions according to His will (1 Corinthians 12:7-11). The Holy Spirit is God, the third Person of the Trinity. As God, the Holy Spirit can truly function as the Comforter and Counselor that Jesus promised He would be (John 14:16, 26, 15:26).
 
The Fact as you can clearly see the holy spirit is God and lying to Holy spirit is lying to God, so keep it in mind if you say God is not thee Holy spirit spirit then you are a liar then you say God is unholy and if you wanna lay claim on something else that can be related to as the holy spirit then you are wrong cos there nothing related to God.  
 
Back to Top
Larry View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 April 2010
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 632 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Larry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 June 2010 at 11:21pm
   In John 17:20-22 Jesus says;
   "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; That they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one."
   You ask;
   And why is it that most, if not all, of the verses that mention the Trinity have been found to be absent from the earliest manuscripts and only appear in manuscripts centuries later?
   I would very much like to know what manuscripts that you are talking about, since you state that most, if not all, are absent any mention of the Trinity? Which are the "earliest" that lack any mention of the Trinity and what manuscripts from "centuries later" are you referring to?
Back to Top
I♥Jesus View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 04 December 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 100 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote I♥Jesus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 June 2010 at 5:38am
The poster is undoubtedly thinking of the Johannine comma. 
http://www.bible-researcher.com/comma.html

There are other undisputed mentions of the Trinity, including a triple theophany in Matthew.

�And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, �This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.��
(Matt 3:16�17 ESV)


Edited by I♥Jesus - 22 June 2010 at 5:51am
If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. 5:48
Back to Top
Shibboleth View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Avatar

Joined: 06 August 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 281 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Shibboleth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 June 2010 at 12:05pm

Please read this carefully, I truly understand why you would say �the Bible contradicts itself� although the FIRST Muslims believed the Holy Bible (Scriptures) to be true and reliable. That is why they and Muhammad himself appealed to biblical text for verification purposes. However, Christians do not believe that the Quran is the word of God.

 

I do believe that the Quran is the earliest record we have that details the beliefs and practices of the first Muslims, because the Torah, the Psalms and the Gospel teaches something totally otherwise.

 

But the dilemma for the Muslim is quite apparent and all non-Muslims would agree. To accept the Quran is to accept its testimony that the Holy Bible is the preserved word of God. (Muslims do) And yet to accept the Holy Bible is to reject both the Quran and Muhammad. (Muslims do)

 

However, Muhammad contradicts the message of God�s true prophets and messengers, especially the testimony of Jesus Christ, God�s beloved Son. It�s quite hilarious that Muslims accept Adam as one of God�s son but not Jesus.

 

What you don�t realize because of you trying to discredit Judaism and Christianity, as if that proves Islam true, to attack the Bible is to discredit the Quran which confirms the authority, availability and authenticity of the previous scriptures (revelation) Either way, Muslims are in a no win situation.

 

Here lies your dilemma:    

  1. The Quran, the Torah, the Psalms and the Gospel are all Allah�s word.
  2. The current Torah, Psalms and Gospel are corrupted.
  3. The final word of Allah, the Quran is preserved.

What that tells any reader whose neutral is this:

 

A. Some of Allah�s Words are corrupted
B. Some of Allah�s Words are preserved

 

Or I can say:

 

Some of Allah�s Words are preserved.

The Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel are Allah�s Words.
The Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel could be preserved.

 

Here lies your main problem:

 

  1. Allah could not protect his previous Revelations. He also gains more power and might throughout time, because he supposedly is now able to protect his last revelation, the Quran.
  2. Allah does not care about people being misled by counterfeit Revelations. And yet he will still punish individuals with hell fire because they allow a corrupted Message even though they may have not come to the realization that Allah had allowed it to be corrupted. That means Allah is unjust.

How in God�s name can we trust that the Quran is preserved if these three Revelations are corrupted? How can a person trust that Allah did not fail to protect his so-called final revelation, the Quran, when he couldn�t prevent people from tampering with his previous Messages?

Muslims, you have to make a decision and choose one of these alternatives:

  1. The Quran is preserved and the earlier Revelations are corrupted. In that case, Allah is either weak or he is unjust. That is the only explanation for his preservation of the Quran and letting people corrupt his previous Revelations.
  2. The Quran is corrupted like the other Revelations. Then you  should either not read it since you do not read other corrupted Revelations,  or maybe you should read these other corrupted Revelations just as you insist  in reading the corrupted Quran.
  3. The Quran is preserved, and the previous Revelations have also been preserved. That means then you should read these authentic revelations (the Bible) for yourself.
  4. The Quran is corrupted but the earlier Revelations are reserved. Obviously, you should then abandon the Quran and read the Bible.

BTW if you picked option number three, then you will be faced with another problem. The Muhammads Quran  contradicts these previous Revelations in many essential points. That means that the Quran is a false message which cannot be from God since God is not the author of confusion. He could not reveal a message that contradicts his previous Messages. So, it is Muhammad who have contradicted the Holy Bible and it's message not God.

Is Muhammad greater than Allah?

 

 

 



Edited by Shibboleth - 22 June 2010 at 12:16pm
�If you doubt what we have revealed to you, ask those who have read the Scriptures before you.� (Sura 10, Yunis [Jonah], verse 94) & (Surah Al �Imran: 84-85)
Back to Top
islamispeace View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 2187 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote islamispeace Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 June 2010 at 3:45pm
Originally posted by Larry Larry wrote:

   In John 17:20-22 Jesus says;
   "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; That they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one."
   You ask;
   And why is it that most, if not all, of the verses that mention the Trinity have been found to be absent from the earliest manuscripts and only appear in manuscripts centuries later?
   I would very much like to know what manuscripts that you are talking about, since you state that most, if not all, are absent any mention of the Trinity? Which are the "earliest" that lack any mention of the Trinity and what manuscripts from "centuries later" are you referring to?


Certainly, I can show you.  Let's start with what scholars agree was the first Gospel to be written, that of Mark.  Ironically, the very first verse of Mark 1 ("The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God.") has a later addition, according to the NIV:

"Some manuscripts do not have the Son of God."

Now, which manuscripts do not have this all important phrase?  The Codex Sinaiticus is one which comes to mind.  In addition, it is widely accepted that the resurrection account in Mark was also a later addition.   

Another example of verses which mention phrases which may be attributed to the concept of the trinity is 1 John 5:7-8, which IloveJesus referred to.  These verses are also not present in the earlier manuscripts.

Add to this the fact that the New Testament seems to swing back and forth between Jesus as a human and Jesus as a god.  In one place, Jesus seems like any other man but in other places he suddenly becomes a god, at least according to the authors' versions of the story.  It seems to me that the gospel writers were also struggling with the idea.  In fact, the term "trinity" did not come about until the 4th century.  It is never explicitly mentioned in the New Testament.     
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

Back to Top
islamispeace View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 2187 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote islamispeace Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 June 2010 at 3:59pm
Originally posted by I♥Jesus I♥Jesus wrote:

The poster is undoubtedly thinking of the Johannine comma. 
http://www.bible-researcher.com/comma.html

There are other undisputed mentions of the Trinity, including a triple theophany in Matthew.

�And when Jesus was baptized, immediately he went up from the water, and behold, the heavens were opened to him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and coming to rest on him; and behold, a voice from heaven said, �This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.��
(Matt 3:16�17 ESV)


Yes, but it makes no mention that the third component, the Holy Spirit, is also a part of this "triple theophany".  In fact, it is stated that the "Spirit" simply led Jesus into the desert to fast and be tempted by the Devil.  Nor is it stated that "This is my beloved Son...worship him as a part of the triune Godhead" or something to that effect. 

Furthermore, Israel was also referred to as God's "son".  An example is Hosea 11:1:

""When Israel was a child, I loved him,
       and out of Egypt I called my son."  

What should we make of this?  Does this mean that Israel is also a manifestation of God? 
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

Back to Top
Larry View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar
Male
Joined: 16 April 2010
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 632 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Larry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 June 2010 at 6:27pm
   This is what you call proof of your statements? Of course the Trinity is not mentioned in the New Testament, it is understood and described through the writings of the New Testament. In the many instances where Jesus Christ is named Son of God, the Holy Spirit is described and God the Father and Jesus Christ being one, as I quoted in my earlier reply.
   If that's the best you can do to try and discredit the New Testament you have a long way to go. I am not a Muslim who has no trouble making the most tenuous and speculative "information" to "prove" that the New Testament is corrupted and that the Qur'an is the actual word of God.
   The point that you keep missing through your lack of understanding of the New Testament of Jesus Christ is that there is only ONE GOD and Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit are all of one substance that is God.
   You can argue these points all you want, it is not going to change my thinking or beliefs. You're two-dimensional thinking will not uncover the true essence of God because you have no understanding of His true nature.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 678910 26>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.