However such a claim needs first to be weighed against the manuscript evidence and secondly against the writings of early Christian theologians, for example:
Justin Martyr (writing year 133 AD) refers to the four Gospels, the Book of Acts and the epistles 330 times
Irenaeus (living late second century) refers to the Gospels 1038 times, Acts 194 times, Paulโs epistles 499 times, the other epistles 23 time and the Book of Revelation 65 times, with a total of 1819 times
Clement of Alexandria (living 150-212) refers to the Gospels 1017 times, Acts 44 times, Paul 1127 times, Revelation 11 times, the other epistles 207 times, with a total of 2406 times.
Origin (living 185-254) refers to the Gospels 9231 times, Acts 349 times, Paul 7778 times, other epistles 399 times, Revelation 165 times, with a total of 17.922 times.
If the critic is correct in concluding that the New Testament books were merely fabrications up to middle fourth century, then how come (1) Clement of Alexandria (year 150-212) cites from all New Testament writings except three books. Or to take an even earlier example, (2) that of Ignatius (year 70-110 AD) who wrote seven letters containing quotes from: Matthew, John, Acts, Romans, 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Philippians, Galatians, Colossians, James, I and II Thessalonians, I and II Timothy and I Peter. This proves (just to mention two cases) the whole of the New Testament to be in the hands of theologians based in various places in the first and second century. Secondly this gives additional evidence to the reliability of the New Testament Biblical text.
It has been estimated that the quotations of the early theologians of the New Testament text up to the fourth century covers the whole of the New Testament except eleven verses.
Funny that none of these refer to the so called Gospel which is missing out of the Muslim picture
Funny this Gospel is not to be found among any of these early manuscripts, why?
Funny that there is not even a trace of the Muslim Gospel
From this point of view, the Muslim religion is historically, totally debunked.
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF A DEBATE I HAD WITH A MUSLIM NAMED ABDULLAH CONCERNING THE GOSPEL COMPILATIONS AND THE COMPILATION OF THE KORAN:
Abdullah wrote:
UNANIMOUS testimony? It was based on an assumption it was written by Mark, and The Bible was documentated 100-150 years after Jesus went to heaven.
Kai replies:
As I have referred to above, the Gospel of Mark has been confirmed by Eusebius in a reference to Papias (110-140) in his reference to Mark dictating what the Apostle Peter was lecturing in Rome (Eusebius, Hist.Eccl.3.39.15).
The same is confirmed by Justin Martyr (100-160) in his Dialogue with Trypho where he mentions the memoirs of Peter (Dialogue 106.3 and 100.4) as one of the memoirs of the apostles:
โHe had compassion on all races of believing men, through the mystery of Him who was crucified; and that He stood in the midst of His brethren the apostles (who repented of their flight from Him when He was crucified, after He rose from the dead, and after they were persuaded by Himself that, before His passion He had mentioned to them that He must suffer these things, and that they were announced beforehand by the prophets), and when living with them sang praises to God, as is made evident in the memoirs of the apostles. The words are the following: `I will declare Thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the Church will I praise Thee. Ye that fear the Lord, praise Him; all ye, the seed of Jacob, glorify Him. Let all the seed of Israel fear Him.' And when it is said that He changed the name of one of the apostles to Peter; and when it is written in the memoirs of Him that this so happenedโฆโ
Justin in his dialogue with Trypho also stated that Jesus changed the name of Peter, and further that Jesus in the memoirs of Peter also changed the name of two others, the sons of Zebedee to Boanerges, which means โsons of thunderโ (106.6):
โYe that fear the Lord, praise Him; all ye, the seed of Jacob, glorify Him. Let all the seed of Israel fear Him.' And when it is said that He changed the name of one of the apostles to Peter; and when it is written in the memoirs of Him that this so happened, as well as that He changed the names of other two brothers, the sons of Zebedee, to Boanerges, which means sons of thunderโฆโ
This in fact (that they were known as the โsons of thunderโ) is only mentioned in the Gospel of Mark, in chapters 3: 17:
โฆJames son of Zebedee and his brother John (to them he gave the name Boanerges, which means sons of thunder).
According to Irenaeus (130-200) the Gospel of Mark was written when Peter and Paul were preaching in Rome, and after their death he delivered the writings to the church (Adv. Haer. 3.1.1; H.E. 5. 8. 2-4). We have to remember that Irenaeus new the disciples of the of the actual apostles. He was the disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of John the Apostle.
According to Eusebius, Clement of Alexandria (150-215) states: "When Peter had preached the gospel publicly in Rome...those who were present...besought Mark, since he had followed him (Peter) for a long time and remembered the things that had been spoken, to write out the things that had been said; and when he had done this he gave the gospel to those who asked him. When Peter learned of it later, he neither obstructed nor commended" (H.E. 6.14.6-7).
Again we are so close the eyewitness that this information is highly reliable, and has not been corrupted by oral tradition and mere hear saying.
Thus Abdullah, you cannot claim that we are relying upon assumption, this is virtually a better evidence than for the Koran, if we are to follow your (Abdullahโs) criteria.
Abdullah wrote:
Commentary about Mark 16:9-20:
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"
The above statement proves that the bible isnt original as it was when written.
Kai replies:
How do you know that, how does anyone know that?
Consider these points:
The writing material in these days was papyrus which lasted only for a short while, this is the very reason why so little documentation of this era exists today.
This is the reason why the earliest copies of Aristotle and Julius Caesar date 9 and 10th century
This is an era, from which we do not expect any documented evidence of any kind to any anything
As to Mark, itโs a fact that we do not possess a full manuscript of Mark from this particular era, and why is that? Well look at it from a historical point of view, many of the manuscripts did not survive, as papyrus they deteriorated. Other manuscripts we find have simply not yet been completed.
Thus, only because an ending is lacking in some of these earliest manuscripts, it simply proves nothing
And then again, if these pages were added later on, you would still have submit to the fact that rest of the Gospels are historically confirmed and date back to the earliest times, which confirms that these were indeed the writings of apostles, which knew Jesus Christ and simply followed the command to be witnesses, and these Gospels which you so boldly deny is that witness.
And further if you consider this to be a problem, then how about the fact that Koranic tradition itself reveals that significant amounts of the Koran were lost in the Battle of Yamama, before the compilation of the Koran ever took place:
Many (of the passages) of the Qur'an that were sent down were known by those who died on the day of Yamama ... but they were not known (by those who) survived them, nor were they written down, nor had Abu Bakr, Umar or Uthman (by that time) collected the Qur'an, nor were they found with even one (person) after them. (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p.23).
Thus the Koran, which you read today is not completed, it was collected in rush, to avoid further loss.
Similarly there are quite reliable claims that passages were deliberately omitted from the Koran:
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, โWe do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) IN THE HOLY BOOK,โ and consequently they may GO ASTRAY by leaving AN OBLIGATION that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816)
... In the meantime, 'Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers for the prayer had finished their call, 'Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said, "Now then, I am going to tell you something which (Allah) has written for me to say. I do not know; perhaps it portends my death, so whoever understands and remembers it, must narrate it to the others wherever his mount takes him, but if somebody is afraid that he does not understand it, then it is unlawful for him to tell lies about me. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Holy Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajam (the stoning of married person (male & female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. Allah's Apostle did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him.
I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, โBy Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah's Book,โ and thus they will go astray by leaving an obligation which Allah has revealed. And the punishment of the Rajam is to be inflicted to any married person (male & female), who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if the required evidence is available or there is conception or confession. And then we used to recite among the Verses in Allah's BOOK: โO people! Do not claim to be the offspring of other than your fathers, as it is disbelief (unthankfulness) on your part that you claim to be the offspring of other than your real fatherโ ..." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Number 817)
Even Dawud confirms 11 modification in the Uthmanic standard text of the Koran, which Muslim read today:
Altogether al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf made eleven modifications in the reading of the Uthmanic text. ... In al-Baqarah (Surah 2.259) it originally read Lam yatasanna waandhur, but it was altered to Lam yatasannah ... In al-Ma'ida (Surah 5.48) it read Shari ya'atan wa minhaajaan but it was altered to shir 'atawwa minhaajaan. (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p.117).
Well possibly, the corruption went on, on a much greater scale, perhaps it began even before the Uthmanic text. Notice that the Uthmanic text had political motives more than spiritual, notice that Abdullah had to reject what Muhammad had revealed to him.
I donโt know what signal this is giving us about the integrity and reliability in of the Koran.
As to Mark:
Nobody can confidently make a strict conclusion about the end of Mark, simply nobody was there to observe the earliest compilation.
All we know from history concerning the Gospel of Mark (at this point, we can deal with the others later on) is that Mark was written in the middle of first century by Mark, writings down the words of Peter the apostle. This would be no more unreliable than accepting the Koranic recitation of any of the earliest reciters, so I donโt see what all the fuzz is about.
As to the Gospel claimed by the Muslims which supposedly is lost or gone in all the corruption, it is not revealed by manuscripts, history, church fathers, or early commentators.
This is what I call a Muslim Down-fall.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
As you know Jews do not believe in Jesus at all, even if as a prophet and Jesus in their books just a lair man. Anyways, Jews does not believe in a Gospel at all. But we Muslims Believe in all of that as we believe it has been changed. And now there are alot of Un-Muslims scientists proves what Quran said from moreo than 1400 years.
Kai replies:
What science? If you are referring to embryology, the Big Bang, the smoky universe, etc, they are first of all unscientifically stated in the Koran and secondly they refer to science which developed prior to Islam, such as with Paramenides, Aristotle, Galen, Laucretius, just to mention a few.
If Muslims intend to follow their prophet and bow to his teachings, the fact remains that a true Muslim would never submit to modern claims of science, e.g. the common observation that the earth orbits the sun.
In Sahih Al-Bukbari, Volume 4, Book 54, Number 421: Narrated Abu Dharr Muhammad clearly stated that the sun orbits the earth:
The Prophet asked me at sunset, "Do you know where the sun goes (at the time of sunset)?" I replied, "Allah and His Apostle know better." He said, "It goes (i.e. travels) till it prostrates Itself underneath the Throne and takes the permission to rise again, and it is permitted and then (a time will come when) it will be about to prostrate itself but its prostration will not be accepted, and it will ask permission to go on its course but it will not be permitted, but it will be ordered to return whence it has come and so it will rise in the west.
And that is the interpretation of the Statement of Allah: โAnd the sun Runs its fixed course for a term (decreed). That is The Decree of (Allah) The Exalted in Might, The All-Knowing.โ" (36.38)
This is certainly a problem and simply reveals that Muhammad was highly unscientific and ignorant and merely based his belief upon the common cosmological perception of the day. The problem remains however that the Hadith text, especially those considered most reliable such as Sahih Al-Bukhari are to be perceived by the Muslims as the interpretation of the Koran. Hence the Koran or at least the teaching of the Koran on the Sun needs to be interpreted by the words of the prophet, e.g. the Bukhari text above.
I do meet Muslims who basically reject the Hadith writings, who claim to build their life and faith upon the Koran only. The problems however remain, that most of Islam and its conduct builds not upon the Koran but the Hadith; e.g. the Koran refers only to three of the daily prayers, the other two are referred to in the Hadith. Hence if we are to undermine the Hadiths we simply undermine the practice of Islam.
Yet in connection to the Sun orbiting the earth (geocentrism) there is another problem, because the geocentrism is not confined to the Hadiths only, it is a clearly a based scientific claim within the Koran.
Lets look at some of these passages:
โSeest thou not that God merges night into day and merges day into night; that He has subjected the sun and the moon (to his law), each running its course for a term appointed; and that God is well acquainted with all that ye do? (Sura 31: 29)โ
โ(God is) the one Who created the night, the day, the sun and the moon. Each one is travelling in an orbit with its own motionโ (Sura 21: 33).
By the Sun and his (glorious) splendour; By the Moon as she follows himโฆ(Sura 91: 1-2)
It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)(Sura 36: 40).
Sahih Bukhari is therefore providing a clear interpretation of the Koranic text, which states that God merges night into day as the sun and the moon orbit the earth (21: 33; 31: 29). They (the sun and the moon) run their own course (31: 29), they the follow each other (91: 1-2), but they must not catch each other up (36: 40), so day and night will not be blurred together.
Muslims today have to choose between their own holy book or this scientific observation. God is all-knowing and does not make any mistakes; hence or either the Koran is accurate and the sun orbits the earth, or modern observation is accurate and the earth orbits the sun; the Muslim cannot have it both ways.
My challenge to the Muslim is therefore: DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE SUN ORBITS THE EARTH? Because in that case you cannot be a believer in your own holy book and hence not a Muslim. However, IF YOU FAITHFULLY INTEND TO CLAIM THE ACCURACY OF THE KORAN, THEN PROVE TO ME AND THE REST OF THE WORLD THAT THE EARTH IN FACT ORBITS THE SUN.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You Kai Hagbard said
Even your whole attitude that I should leave my Book and accept your book fails on two points:
First your Koran tells ME to FOLLOW my own book and NOT the Koran:
Quote:
โSay, O people of the book! You are not founded on anything until you PERFORM the TORAH and the GOSPEL, and what was revealed to you from your Lordโ (Sura 5:68-71)
If the Bible is corrupted, why does the Koran, which according to you is the Word of God instruct me, a Christian to PERFORM my book?
Secondly, if the Bible was corrupt, based on all these passages, why should I become a Muslim (you have not stated so yet, but that is obviously your desire); in that case we should both leave our religions and find the truth; obviously if the Koran gives credit to a corrupted book, both are corrupted, right?
And I reply,
I wonder how can not you understand the verse although it is very clear,
The translation of the meanings of (Surah 5, Verse 6
{[68] Say (O Muhammad (peace be upon him)) "O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! You have nothing (as regards guidance) till you act according to the Taurรขt (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), and what has (now) been sent down to you from your Lord (the Qur'รขn)." Verily, that which has been sent down to you (Muhammad (peace be upon him)) from your Lord increases in most of them (their) obstinate rebellion and disbelief. So be not sorrowful over the people who disbelieve.}
And I think your can understand Arabic too so you can reread the verse in Arabic yourself. U could see the words of the verse
{"O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! You have nothing (as regards guidance) till you act according to the Taurรขt (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel)} But your eyes were blind to see the other words of the verse and what does it mean {and what has (now) been sent down to you from your Lord (the Qur'รขn)}.
The Verse wanted calls you Christians and Jews to enter to Islam. I think that answer one of its questions about why should you be a Muslim and u wonder if it was just my desire. The verse ask You Christians and Jews to act according to the Torah and Gospel. As the other people who converted to Islam, why did they do that? Read in the Quran and try to understand it. The verse asked u to follow the right Torah and gospel which stated there are another prophet will be come called Ahmed. You should read Greek Bible then you will understand then if our prophet has been stated in the Bible(old and new testaments or not).
Kai replies:
First and most the passages reveals nothing about Muhammad, it merely tells the Christians to conform their own book. If they are to do that, these books cannot be corrupted.
That the Koran increases more rebellion (from a Muslim point of view is obvious), as the Christians read the previous Books and saw nothing of a religion such as Islam is correct. I donโt find Islam, Muhammad or the Koran in the Bible. THE BIBLE DOES REVEAL THAT FALSE PROPHETS AND FALSE TEACHING AND RELIGION WILL APPEAR, BUT NOTHING THAT SUCCEEDS THE CHRISTIAN FAITH. SO AM I REBELLIOUS?
Imagine when a Bahai comes to you asking you to accept the teachings of his prophets which in fact succeed Islam, you would respond in rebellion, at least according to his view. Yet that would not render your book corrupted or outdated, and neither does it out date the Bible.
MY QUESTION IS STILL, WHY DOES THE KORAN NOT SIMPLY TELL THE CHRISTIANS AND THE JEWS TO FORSAKE THEIR CORRUPTED BOOKS AND EMBRACE THE KORAN???????GOOD QUESTION, I HAVE NEVER BEEN GIVEN THE ANSWER YET.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
muslim gladiator wrote:
You Kai Hagbard stated (Surah 3) (Verse 113)
And I reply,
The translation of the meanings of (Surah 3) (Verse 113)
{[113] Not all of them are alike; a party of the people of the Scripture stand for the right, they recite the Verses of Allรขh during the hours of the night, prostrating themselves in prayer.}
Ask yourself Kai Hagbard, whom recite the verses of Allah during the hours of the night?
Kai replies:
So Jews do not recite the Torah or prostrate in prayer, GO READ THE OLD TESTAMENT BRO!
Muslim gladiator wrote:
First of all we do not know if the verses if the Bible is right or not.
Kai replies:
?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Quran stated that in its verses and new Scientists assured it nowadays.
Kai replies:
I donโt believe the Koran! Does the sun orbit the earth bro?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
So, where is the verses of Allah can be found. It is smiply in the Quran.
Kai replies:
Does the sun orbit the earth? How do you expect to believe in a book making such statements?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
The verse talks about who converted to Islam.
Kai replies:
But you have not proved that yey
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Reread verse {(Surah 7, Verse 157)}
That is why Quran said , not all of them are alike. Because some of them know the truth and they see Islam like Abdel Allah ibn Salam.
In Tafseer ibn Katheer
ููุงููู
ูุดููููุฑ ุนูููุฏ ููุซููุฑ ู
ููู ุงููู
ูููุณููุฑูููู ููู
ูุง ุฐูููุฑููู ู
ูุญูู
ููุฏ ุจูู ุฅูุณูุญูู ููุบูููุฑู . ููุฑูููุงูู ุงููุนููููููู ุนููู ุงูุจูู ุนูุจููุงุณ : ุฃูููู ููุฐููู ุงููุขููุงุช ููุฒูููุชู ูููู
ููู ุขู
ูู ู
ููู ุฃูุญูุจูุงุฑ ุฃูููู ุงููููุชูุงุจ ููุนูุจูุฏู ุงููููู ุจูู ุณูููุงู
ููุฃูุณูุฏ ุจูู ุนูุจูููุฏ ููุซูุนูููุจูุฉ ุจูู ุดูุนูุจูุฉ ููุบูููุฑูู
ู . ุฃููู ููุง ููุณูุชูููู ู
ููู ุชูููุฏููู
ู ุฐูููุฑูู
ู ุจูุงูุฐููู
ูู ู
ููู ุฃูููู ุงููููุชูุงุจ ููููุคูููุงุกู ุงูููุฐูููู ุฃูุณูููู
ููุง ููููููุฐูุง ููุงูู ุชูุนูุงููู " ููููุณููุง ุณูููุงุก " ุฃููู ููููุณููุง ูููููู
ู ุนูููู ุญูุฏู ุณูููุงุก ุจููู ู
ูููููู
ู ุงููู
ูุคูู
ูู ููู
ูููููู
ู ุงููู
ูุฌูุฑูู
ููููููุฐูุง ููุงูู ุชูุนูุงููู" ู
ููู ุฃูููู ุงููููุชูุงุจ ุฃูู
ููุฉ ููุงุฆูู
ูุฉ " ุฃููู ููุงุฆูู
ูุฉ ุจูุฃูู
ูุฑู ุงููููู ู
ูุทููุนูุฉ ููุดูุฑูุนููู ู
ูุชููุจูุนูุฉ ููุจููู ุงููููู ูููููู ููุงุฆูู
ูุฉ ููุนูููู ู
ูุณูุชููููู
ูุฉ " ููุชูููููู ุขููุงุช ุงููููู ุขููุงุก ุงููููููู ููููู
ู ููุณูุฌูุฏูููู " ุฃููู ูููููู
ูููู ุงููููููู ููููููุซูุฑูููู ุงูุชููููุฌููุฏ ููููุชูููููู ุงููููุฑูุขู ููู ุตูููููุงุชูู
-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kai replies:
Again look at my replies above
Muslim gladiator wrote:
I hope that be enough for your Kai Hagbard. Because you didd not the manuscripts in Arabic well or I do not know. May be your just did not understand it well.
Kai replies:
We have just started bro! The thing is even your explanation of the Koran on this matters, left the matters unchanged, YOU PROVED NOTHING SO FAR.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
If you want to see the manuscripts of the Quran which in a Musem. That means it has been investigated from all Scientists. We have not found anyone came and say this Manuscrpit does not belong to the first Century of Hajra.
http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/ ... pkapi.html
Kai replies:
Is this manuscript not written in kufic scripture, when do you think kufic scripture was invented?
And even though it came from the first century of Islam, the fact still remains that the Koran undervent severe changes and burnings at least 30 years after Muhammadโs death. And in addition since the Koran verifies the reliability of the Gospels, the Koran proves itself WRONG?
So it is from Islamic-awareness you get your information, may I suggest that you do your own homework.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Fianlly, I really wish u reply to the Professor who said Bible is not right instead of attack Quran. I really wished if you had anything against the evidences which the professor stated. But I did not find anything.
You left the man who stated the truth about the Bible and you started to attack Islam. If you have a wrong book, try to see the light book. Many before you go through this experiment.
Kai replies:
1. You made your own staments in the post, that is why I am responding to you
2. The professor stated that the Bible is changed, that is not the Koranic view, hence, since we are dealing with Islam and Christianity here, Bible change is not a crucial matter, the crucial matter is that the Koran verifies the reliability of the Bible.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Thanks God, I am a Muslim.
Kai responds:
Well I am glad I not stuck in the same matter you are in
Unless you believe the previous books, you cannot be a Muslim, if you believe them you cannot be a Muslim either!
WHAT EXACTLY ARE YOU?