Christian/Muslim ThreadsLucifers Pride!Allah in the Quran clearly states “Aif, Laam, Meem, this is a Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, …” and if there is doubt in our mind about the Book, you don’t read this book because the very second Surah has the words of doubt in it “Alif, Laam, Meem …” before you proceed further either you will have to submit that this book has not doubt in it, or deceive your self that the three letters are doubtfull, and those hwo surrender to Allah will submit to the fact that they don’t know everything and the knowledge of the three alphabetical letters is with Allah. You come to the Book of Allah to find doubts in it, therefore there is not point in you studying the Quran because you have ignored the first thing in the Quran, the secod Surah gives you whole criteria for whom this Book is for. Before we begin to analyze the similarities between the apocryphal gosepls and the storys in the Quran we need to set a precise date to the apocryphal Gosples. The oldest papyrus fragments still in existence which contain any sizeable amount of the text of the New Testament date only to the third century AD, and the very oldest fragment in existence, which is claimed to belong to The Gospel according to John 18:31-33, dates only to about 150 AD. However, this particular fragment could very well belong to some earlier extra-canonical gospel such as The Acts of Pilate, otherwise known as The Gospel of Nicodemus. This work is quoted by Justin Martyr (110-165 AD) in his First Apology, along with another early Christian document called The Memoirs of the Apostles. Although Justin makes no mention of any of the four canonical Gospels by name or of any of the other books which now make up the New Testament, he makes extensive quotations from writings similar to these and also from a number of extra-canonical books such as The Gospel of Nicodemus, The Gospel of the Ebionites, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, The Gospel of the Hebrews, and The Protevangelium of James. Although early Christian writers appear to quote from the canonical Gospels, the earliest writer to mention all four of them by name was Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons, c.200 AD, in his treatise Against Heresies, Chapter 11. http://www.truthbeknown.com/historicaljc.htm The Catholic Encyclopidia has this information on Justin Martyr: Christian apologist born at Flavia Neapolis, about A.D. 100, converted to Christianity about A.D. 130, taught and defended the Christian Religion in Asia Minor and at Rome, where he suffered martyrdom about the year 165. Two "Apologies" bearing his name and his "Dialogue with the Jew Tryphon" have come down to us. Leo XIII had a Mass and an Office composed in his honour and set his feast for 14 April. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08580c.htm From this atleast we can assume two important discoveries that Justin Martyr when he wrote his first Apology along with The Memoirs of the Apostles he makes the extensive use of the material from the 4 conical Gosples but does not use there name, he quotes material from many apocryphal books (apocryphal to modern christians) including the Protoevangelium of James and The Gospel of Pseudo Matthew, Irenaeus being the first to mention the four conical books by there name. From the above citation we can assume two things that either Justim Martyr had access to the apocryphal books protoevangelium of James, The Gosple of Pseudo Matthew, or the material of these Gosples was in circulation. And your assumption that these books are dated from 4th to 6th century is highly likely. You might claim that if that was the case then why didn’t Justin quote the name of the apocryphal Gosples, but then again he doesn’t quote the name of the Four Conical Gospels in his works at all , none of the Scholars have totally rejected the apocryphal Gospels has totally false or baseless, they aggree that these Gospels have been re-written or even written for only one purpose to even late has 4th century to promote the Christian doctrines regrarding Jesus. They might have been written late but the source material is much earlier then you have assumed proven by the fact that apologist Justin Martyr quotes these sources. Weather these sources are genuinely narating historical facts is open to be questioned. I have been able to trace the passage in question in Pseudo Matthew but not in the Protoevangelism of James, here is the entire chapter 20: “And it came to pass on the third day of their journey, while they were walking, that the blessed Mary was fatigued by the excessive heat of the sun in the desert; and seeing a palm tree, she said to Joseph: Let me rest a little under the shade of this tree. Joseph therefore made haste, and led her to the palm, and made her come down from her beast. And as the blessed Mary was sitting there, she looked up to the foliage of the palm, and saw it full of fruit, and said to Joseph: I wish it were possible to get some of the fruit of this palm. And Joseph said to her: I wonder that thou sayest this, when thou seest how high the palm tree is; and that thou thinkest of eating of its fruit. I am thinking more of the want of water, because the skins are now empty, and we have none wherewith to refresh ourselves and our cattle. Then the child Jesus, with a joyful countenance, reposing in the bosom of His mother, said to the palm: O tree, bend thy branches, and refresh my mother with thy fruit. And immediately at these words the palm bent its top down to the very feet of the blessed Mary; and they gathered from it fruit, with which they were all refreshed. And after they had gathered all its fruit, it remained bent down, waiting the order to rise from Him who bad commanded it to stoop. Then Jesus said to it: Raise thyself, O palm tree, and be strong, and be the companion of my trees, which are in the paradise of my Father; and open from thy roots a vein of water which has been hid in the earth, and let the waters flow, so that we may be satisfied from thee. And it rose up immediately, and at its root there began to come forth a spring of water exceedingly clear and cool and sparkling. And when they saw the spring of water, they rejoiced with great joy, and were satisfied, themselves and all their cattle and their beasts. Wherefore they gave thanks to God.” http://www.gnosis.org/library/psudomat.htm In here Jesus is odering the palm tree to bend thy brancehs and refesh my mother with thy fruites and the tree immedietly obeys the command, while the Quranic narative no where mentions the Jesus odering the palm tree. Actually the Quran in surah Maryam (19) verses 22-26 states: “So she conceived him, and she retired with him to a remote place. And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm-tree: She cried (in her anguish): "Ah! would that I had died before this! would that I had been a thing forgotten and out of sight!" But (a voice) cried to her from beneath the (palm-tree): "Grieve not! for thy Lord hath provided a rivulet beneath thee; "And shake towards thyself the trunk of the palm-tree: It will let fall fresh ripe dates upon thee. So eat and drink and cool (thine) eye. And if thou dost see any man, say, 'I have vowed a fast to (God) Most Gracious, and this day will I enter into not talk with any human being'" The story mentioned in the Quran is only remotely similar with the apocryphal Gosple only in one detail mary eating dates, it does not mention the pain of child birth which Mary had experienced, it deos not mention that Mary only with Jesus secluded her self, it does not mention the reaction of Mary when she had conceived Jesus, and her reaction was truly a humanly reaction, she was upset because of a child’s birth out of marriage, excalims that she had been forgotten out of site meanning she asked for death, the apocryphal Gospel does not mention what Mary had to do to get the dates, it does not mention the voice which tried to comfort Mary, find me one similarity other then Mary eating the dates in the Quranice story. I have already explained that in the four Gosples and in many other Gosples have some element of truth about Jesus, your assumption that author of the Quran has barrowed from these apocryphal Goslples is unfounded, barrowing would imply barrowing of a whole concept not one mynute detail and while around this mynute detail tha author completely writes a different acount of what had happen, plus the story mention in the Quran, person can feel the pain of a real woman which the apochryphal gospels are hallow of, and the Four Conical Gosples also lack the crucial time of birth of Jesus, which the author of the Quran has captured geniouly, and the author has captured the detail of a event which is the most crucial point in the life of Mary, yet the author of the Gosple ignore this important event. What happens when Mary brings Jesus to his family whats the reaction of the Family? Do they simly ignore the fact that the child she has brought is without the father. Its perfectly ok for a liberated lady of the West to have a BASTARD and take him/her home, and no body would mind, but at the time of Jesus and in the semetic culture a BASTARD child was the worst thing, the filtheist act was a child out of marriage, Mary would have disgraced her whole family. The Bible doesn’t mention anything about the reaction of Mary’s family, in Quran she is asked neither was you mother unchaste and your father was a righteous man how did you bear this child without marriage, Marying knowing that no one would believe her so she points at the baby, ask him! Jesus defends his mother’s dignity, honour, pride, and his speaking in defence of his mother shuns all criticism of his mother. Who defends the Mother of Jesus against slander of the Jews, Jesus of the Gosple’s didn’t, nor did Paul, who did it the Quran but whom you convineintly call book of Muhammed (pbhu) he defends his mother. In short the stories of the Quran make more sense, then the stories in the Gosple about similar incidents. And you said that the tree spoke, which idiot told you that the tree spoke, the opinion is that either Jesus spoke from his mothers lap, or angle Jibril spoke from beneath the valley, but no commentator so far has said that the tree spoke. Here I would like to respond to you in a different way to put your reasoning into perspective, you have yet to prove that the Quranic story was barrowed from the apocryphal sources, or infact from anyother source then Allah, but here I will like to present you my findings regarding the present Bible in your hand which has chunks copied from the book of Enoch which is now considered to be a apocryphal book both by Protestants and Catholics. The Book of Enoch pre-dates the Book of Jude is considered to be a Conical book by almost all the Christians. The verse under scrutiny is Jude 14-15: 14: To these also Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the Lord came with ten thousands of his holy ones, 15: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly of all their works of ungodliness which they have done in an ungodly way, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him." Which has been copied by the author of Jude verbatim, word for word, dot for do, coma for coma, from the Apochryphal 1 Enoch 1:9: And behold! He cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones To execute judgement upon all, And to destroy all the ungodly: And to convict all flesh Of all the works of their ungodliness which they have ungodly committed, And of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him That’s not all other New Testament quotations from, or allusions to, non-Biblical works include Paul's quotations of Aratus (Acts 17:28), Menander (1 Corinthians 15:33) and Epimenides (Titus 1:12), but here only one example will suffice. Acts 17 25nor is he served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything. 28for "'In him we live and move and have our being';[1] as even some of your own poets have said, "'For we are indeed his offspring.'[2] 1) from Epimenides of Crete 2) From Aratus's poem "Phainomena" In 1 Corinthians 15:33, Paul plagirised the Greek poet Menander 'Bad company ruins good morals'. Just to make sure that you do not feel that I am just cheating my way out, I would like to funish you with plenty of external sources which confirm the very fundamental facts that the author of the Jude who so ever he was, has plagirised, gribbed, copied, stolen, from the book of Enoch. Bruce metzger in his An Introduction to the Apocrypha, Oxford University Press, 1977 pp. 171-172, writing on the book of Jude highlights the controversy among the early Christian fathers about the authenticity of the Jude, Tertullian accepted the entire book of Enoch has a authentic acount, only because he found only one statement quoted by Jude, while Jerome going to another extreme totally rejected the authenticity of the book of Jude, but finally Augustine came along who held the beleife that Judes quote only confirms the only one statement quoted by Jude, no other portion of book of Enoch. Also Professor Bar Erhman states in his The New Testament. A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, pages 420: “He [the author of Jude] quotes, for example, from a lost apocryphal account of the angelic battle over Moses’ body (v. 9), and he cites the book of 1 Enoch as Scripture (v. 14).” Thus the case has been proven from external sources also that Jude had barrowed from apocryphal source therefore the gospels authenticity is in doubt, and should be rejected. Not forggeting the barrowing of embroyonic statements of various philosophers Aristole who describes the embroy has cheese like and so does the Bible. What needs to be understood is that if the author of the Gospels under the inspiration of holy spirit, have copied various statements of pagan philosophers, than what else where they inspired to barrow from these pagans, the doctrines of Christianity. |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame