CRUCIFIXION OR CRUCI-FICTION

[punisher]

"MOST INFLUENTIAL MEN"

 an American historical researcher and mathematician, Michael H. Hart, published a book : "THE 100, THE TOP HUNDRED OR THE GREATEST HUNDRED IN HISTORY." In his book he gives the names of the 100 "Most Influential Men in History" and his reasons for their positions in his list. Amazingly, he (most probably a Christian) puts Muhummed (peace be upon him) FIRST1 in his hundred, and with good reasons too. And with equally good reasons he places Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), the man accepted as "Lord" and "Saviour" by nearly all his fellow Americans, number THREE.

1. You can read this chapter here - Muhammed (pbuh) No.1, A Chapter by Michael H. Hart. I have also placed the chapter on Jesus Christ along side it

REAL FOUNDER OF CHRISTIANITY

Though there are at the moment 200 million more nominal Christians in the world than the 1000 million Muslims, Mr. Hart divides the credit for founding Christianity between Paul and Jesus, and he gives the greater portion to Paul. Hence the 3rd position for Jesus. Every knowledgeable Christian concedes that the real founder of Christianity is St. Paul and not Jesus Christ (peace be upon him).

REASON FOR DIFFERENCE

In any event, if there is any division between a Muslim and a Christian on the grounds of dogma, belief, ethics or morality, then the cause of such conflict could be traced to an utterance of Paul found in his books of Corinthians, Phillipians, Galatians, Thessolanians, etc., in the Bible.

As against the teaching of the Master (Jesus) that salvation only comes through keeping of the commandments (Mathew 19:16-17), Paul nails the law and the commandments to the cross Paul nails the law and the commandments to the cross (Colossians 2:14) 1 and claims that salvation can only be obtained through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ:-

"If Christ be not risen from the dead, then our preaching is vain, and your faith is also vain."

(1 Corinthians 15:14)

1. One of the multifarious letters/correspondence of Paul among the 27 Books of the New Testament.

THE KING-PIN OF CHRISTIANITY

According to St. Paul, there is nothing that Christianity can offer mankind, other than the blood and gore of Jesus. If Jesus did NOT die, and he was NOT resurrected from the dead, then there can be NO salvation in Christianity! "For all your good deeds", says the Christian dogmatist, "are like filthy rags" � (Isaiah 64:6).

NO CRUCI-FICTION � NO CHRISTIANITY

"THE DEATH OF JESUS ON THE CROSS IS THE CENTRE OF ALL CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY. . . ALL CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS ABOUT GOD, ABOUT CREATION, ABOUT SIN AND DEATH HAVE THEIR FOCAL POINT IN THE CRUCIFIED CHRIST. ALL CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS ABOUT HISTORY, ABOUT THE CHURCH, ABOUT FAITH AND SANCTIFICATION, ABOUT THE FUTURE AND ABOUT HOPE STEM FROM THE CRUCIFIED CHRIST", says Professor Jurgen Moltmann in his � "The Crucified God".1

1. "GOD": The bulk of Christendom accept Jesus Christ as God incarnate � God in human flesh. According to the Christian dogma, Jesus must die as God, for a million human sacrifices cannot redeem mankind from their sin.

BLOOD FOR SALVATION

"Yes! Yes!" says the Christian missionary, "but you do not have salvation." Because salvation comes "only through the blood of the lord Jesus". "All your good works are like filthy rags", he says. "If only you Muslims would accept the redeeming blood of Jesus, and take Jesus as your 'Personal Saviour', you Muslims, then would be like angels walking the earth."


In a nutshell. No CrucifixionI � No Christianity! This is the experience of us Muslims, in this ocean of Christianity, which is South Africa. A thousand sects and denominations of Christianity are vying with one another to redeem the "heathen" (as they say) from hell-fire. However, in this battle no Christian priest, parson or predikant, or hot-gospeller, local or imported, will ever endeavour to teach the Muslim something about hygiene; for we Muslims can claim to be the most hygienic people (I am talking about personal hygiene). Nor do they endeavour to teach us about hospitality; for we are the most hospitable of people. Nor about ethics or morality; for we are the most moral people � (as a whole) i.e. we don't drink, we don't gamble, we don�t date, court or dance; we pray 5 times a day, we fast for one whole month during the Muslim Holy month of Ramadaan; and we take pleasure in being a charitable people. Despite any of our shortcomings, we venture to suggest that there is not another group of people that can "show a candle" to us in brotherhood, in piety or in sobriety.

AN ANSWER SUPREME

What are we Muslims to say to this Christian claim? Nothing better than Allah's shattering reply to the Jewish boast!.



(SURA NISAA) Holy Qur�an 4:157

1. Allah: Allah is the name of God Almighty in the Semitic languages, i.e. in the language of Moses, Jesus and Muhummed (May the peace of God be upon them all). Read � "What is His Name?" for elaboration.

2. "Full of Doubts!" � In a state of confusion.

3. "Without Knowledge!" � In ignorance.

4. "Only follow Conjecture!" � Guess work�Fiction!

Could anyone have been more EXPLICIT, more EMPHATIC, more DOGMATIC, more UN-COMPROMISING in rejecting the dogma of a faith than this? "IMPOSSIBLE!" is the answer. The only One Who could, would be the All-Knowing, the Omniscient, the Omnipotent Lord of the Universe � GOD ALMIGHTY Himself!

The Muslim believes this categorical Quranic statement to be from God. Hence he asks no questions and seeks for no proof.


Had the Christians accepted the Holy Quran as the Word of God, the problem of the crucifixion would never have arisen. They vehemently oppose the Quranic teaching and attack everything Islamic. In the words of Thomas Carlyle � "THEY (the Christians) HAVE BEEN TRAINED TO HATE THE MAN MOHAMED AND HIS RELIGION.

[Peter]

"MOST INFLUENTIAL MEN"

 an American historical researcher and mathematician, Michael H. Hart, published a book : "THE 100, THE TOP HUNDRED OR THE GREATEST HUNDRED IN HISTORY." In his book he gives the names of the 100 "Most Influential Men in History" and his reasons for their positions in his list.

Nobody can deny that Mohammed was one of the most influential men in history. Even today, 1.5 billion Muslims - 1/4 of mankind - follow Satan, through the false prophet Mohammed, who WAS and taught the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=148.0

1John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? HE IS ANTICHRIST, THAT DENIETH the Father and THE SON. 23 WHOSOEVER DENIETH THE SON, THE SAME HATH NOT THE FATHER:

Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for WIDE [IS] THE GATE, AND BROAD [IS THE WAY, THAT LEADETH TO DESTRUCTION, and many there be which go in thereat:

Why else would so many reject ALL of the prophets and apostles as revealed through the 1600 year record of God to mankind, that God's people have followed through two covenants for 3500 years, to follow the STAND-ALONE 23 year record of recitations of A SINGLE, 7th century, illiterate, pillaging, plundering, murdering, child doing, prisoner raping, stepson's only wife stealing, sex slave prostituting, concubine fornicating, lying, cheating, blood drenched, imperialistic, conquering, terrorist, thief. A man, and book that are THE EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ and the His Gospel.

If someone wishes to deny the truth, of a single characterization of Mohammed, as detailed above through Islam's own books, please click on the associated link and do so on the related thread. You won't get much mileage out of ignoring specifics, but instead hurling cowardly "insulting our prophet" accusations - made even after "insulting" the God of the Scriptures with impunity through Mohammedan blasphemy - when it is Mohammed's own behavior that insults him, as revealed through your own books.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1268.0

That's why poor lost souls like punisher depend on blinding themselves to scripture, history, archaeology and geography, http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=56.0 by tickling their ears with words of men that further brainwash them, such as the consummate Greek sophist styled proven liar and antichrist, Ahmed Deedat, from whom so much of punisher's copy and paste springs, that further their indoctrination into Mohammed's 7th century repackaged star and jinn/devil worship.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=335.0

Mohammedanism is nothing more than 7th and 8th century fiction, that has absolutely no scriptural, historical, archaeological or geographical support, as punisher further demonstrated through his epic failure at this thread link.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1483.0

Who was more influential than Mohammed? Perhaps only Jesus Christ.
Even atheists should be able to begin to see in this light.

The most influential man in history - Jesus Christ, who even Mohammedans believe is sinless.

The next most influential man in history - the antichrist false prophet Mohammed - is revealed as shown in the links to his attributes above, through the Mohammedan's own books. A man whose true followers have perpetrated murder, mayhem and misery - against innocent men, women and children - all around the world, to this very day.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=52.0

In short,

Good vs Evil
Jesus Christ vs Mohammed
ONE MUST CHOOSE

Rev 19:20 And THE BEAST was taken, and with him THE FALSE PROPHET that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1308.0

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where THE BEAST and THE FALSE PROPHET [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=12.0

[resistingrexmundi]

To keep from having to spend ALL day refuting these claims one by one I will simply ask a question punisher.

Do you understand all of what you have copied and pasted here? Do you understand the implications it has even on Islam?

Many of the above theories depict Jesus as having survived the crucifixion when Islam maintains that Jesus was never subjected to it. Some of them cast Jesus as a failed Messiah. Which again would put a dent in Islam. I will ask that in the future BEFORE you post anything you read it carefully and make sure you understand its' implications before posting it, and try to refrain from heeping over a page worth of posts at one time so that a fair and balanced exchange can occur.

[Peter]

As per the rules of the forum
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=35.0

"Those that find it too difficult to participate in an EXCHANGE will be subject to having posts and/or threads moved to the spam section, and/or removed, and/or being banned, depending on how egregious the display.

Copy and pasted posts as a conspicuous spam campaign will be removed.
Copy and pasted articles by others are subject to copyright and should generally not be included without the author's permission.
Please be intelligent and creative enough to instead select partial quotes, to help in making points of your own."

I will move all but the first panel to spam storage, http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1493.0 until such time as he has finished defending each point, in this first panel.

[Peter]

Amazingly, he (most probably a Christian) .....

We can certainly see your adoration and praise of Michael H. Hart exuded in your post!
Sure, "most probably a Christian" because Christians always blaspheme the shed blood of Jesus Christ that saves all that believe in His gift from dying in sin. The shed blood that is the main subject of the Gospel, as well as so much Old Testament prophecy.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1007.0

Isn't it interesting how Mohammedans spew the worst kind of venom against Jews, atheists and communists - until of course it's time to quote them, and join in their chorus of blasphemy against Jesus Christ, and even praise of Mohammed!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_H._Hart
Doesn't it tell you something punisher, when Muslims have to turn to atheists and communists to quote non-Muslim men that compliment Mohammed?

Luke 21:17 And ye shall be hated  of all [men] for my name's sake.
John 15:18 If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before [it hated] you. 19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.

[Peter]

... he (most probably a Christian) puts Muhummed (peace be upon him) FIRST1 in his hundred, and with good reasons too. And with equally good reasons he places Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), the man accepted as "Lord" and "Saviour" by nearly all his fellow Americans, number THREE.

Is it any surprise that a Jew would put Jesus Christ as number three?
Is it any surprise that a Mohammedan like you would gleefully accept and parrot his denigration of Jesus Christ - the anointed one - the Messiah?
Of course it's not a surprise because you are filled with the spirit of antichrist.

1John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? HE IS ANTICHRIST, THAT DENIETH the Father and THE SON. 23 WHOSOEVER DENIETH THE SON, THE SAME HATH NOT THE FATHER:

[Peter]

REASON FOR DIFFERENCE

In any event, if there is any division between a Muslim and a Christian on the grounds of dogma, belief, ethics or morality, then the cause of such conflict could be traced to an utterance of Paul found in his books of Corinthians, Phillipians, Galatians, Thessolanians, etc., in the Bible.

As against the teaching of the Master (Jesus) that salvation only comes through keeping of the commandments (Mathew 19:16-17), Paul nails the law and the commandments to the cross Paul nails the law and the commandments to the cross (Colossians 2:14) 1 and claims that salvation can only be obtained through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ:-

"If Christ be not risen from the dead, then our preaching is vain, and your faith is also vain."

(1 Corinthians 15:14)

1. One of the multifarious letters/correspondence of Paul among the 27 Books of the New Testament.

THE KING-PIN OF CHRISTIANITY

According to St. Paul, there is nothing that Christianity can offer mankind, other than the blood and gore of Jesus. If Jesus did NOT die, and he was NOT resurrected from the dead, then there can be NO salvation in Christianity! "For all your good deeds", says the Christian dogmatist, "are like filthy rags" - (Isaiah 64:6).

You apparently don't even know that the verse that you reject at your own peril, while accusing Christians, is from the Old Testament.
Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

This Paul "king pin" tripe could only be said by a liar, the mentally challenged, or someone ignorant to the Gospel and whose sole understanding of it springs from Greek sophist styled antichrist liars like Ahmed Deedat, or their Imams.
Mohammedans must REJECT ALL of the prophets, apostles and witnesses of Jesus Christ as revealed through the Gospel, to follow the 23 year 7th century record of Mohammed and his repackaged star and jinn devil worship.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=59.0

Matthew 27:35 And they crucified him, and parted his garments, casting lots: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast lots.

Mark 15:24 And when they had crucified him, they parted his garments, casting lots upon them, what every man should take.

Luke 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

John 19:23 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also [his] coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout.

Just as it was prophesied many hundreds of years in advance.

Psalms 22:16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. 17 I may tell all my bones: they look [and] stare upon me. 18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.

Do you see the sheer stupidity in any suggestion that the Gospel is somehow driven by Paul?
Perhaps as if a Muslim rejects and blasphemes Paul then the rest of the Gospel will somehow jibe with Mohammed's recycled pagan star family and jinn demon worship?
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1282.0

[Peter]

NO CRUCI-FICTION - NO CHRISTIANITY

"THE DEATH OF JESUS ON THE CROSS IS THE CENTRE OF ALL CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY. . . ALL CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS ABOUT GOD, ABOUT CREATION, ABOUT SIN AND DEATH HAVE THEIR FOCAL POINT IN THE CRUCIFIED CHRIST. ALL CHRISTIAN STATEMENTS ABOUT HISTORY, ABOUT THE CHURCH, ABOUT FAITH AND SANCTIFICATION, ABOUT THE FUTURE AND ABOUT HOPE STEM FROM THE CRUCIFIED CHRIST", says Professor Jurgen Moltmann in his - "The Crucified God".1

1. "GOD": The bulk of Christendom accept Jesus Christ as God incarnate - God in human flesh. According to the Christian dogma, Jesus must die as God, for a million human sacrifices cannot redeem mankind from their sin.

There hasn't been a Christian throughout the Christian era that did not believe in the shed blood of Jesus Christ, because if someone didn't, they wouldn't be a Christian!
There is not a single thing that Christians are more certain of than that Jesus Christ offered Himself as a sacrifice for us, so that we don't have to die to sin.

Atonement for sin through shed blood is how God has revealed Himself to His people for the last 3500 years.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=54.0
http://www.blueletterbible.org/search/translationResults.cfm?Criteria=atonement+sin&t=KJV&sf=5

BLOOD FOR SALVATION

"Yes! Yes!" says the Christian missionary, "but you do not have salvation." Because salvation comes "only through the blood of the lord Jesus". "All your good works are like filthy rags", he says.

It is what Isaiah said in the Old Testament. Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

"If only you Muslims would accept the redeeming blood of Jesus, and take Jesus as your 'Personal Saviour', you Muslims, then would be like angels walking the earth."

Muslims would be in the kingdom of God and no longer OF this world.

In a nutshell. No CrucifixionI - No Christianity!

That's exactly right. That's what the new covenant, that was prophesied in the old covenant, is all about.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=537.0
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=519.0

[Peter]

This is the experience of us Muslims, in this ocean of Christianity, which is South Africa. A thousand sects and denominations of Christianity are vying with one another to redeem the "heathen" (as they say) from hell-fire.

That's how you know they love you. Risking their lives in this world, to help save you from joining Mohammed in the lake of fire. No surprise that Ahmed Deedat praised the Cape Town Muslims for being "the most militant Muslims in Africa".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sN-_20sjHVI

Rev 20:10 And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where THE BEAST and THE FALSE PROPHET [are], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=12.0

However, in this battle no Christian priest, parson or predikant, or hot-gospeller, local or imported, will ever endeavour to teach the Muslim something about hygiene; for we Muslims can claim to be the most hygienic people (I am talking about personal hygiene). Nor do they endeavour to teach us about hospitality; for we are the most hospitable of people. Nor about ethics or morality; for we are the most moral people - (as a whole) i.e. we don't drink, we don't gamble, we don't date, court or dance; .......

Your delusions of self-righteousness won't let you talk your way into salvation.

........ we pray 5 times a day, .......

The question is, what kind of prayer?

Mat 6:7 But when ye pray, use not vain  repetitions, as the heathen [do]: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.

The same kind of heathen pagans that Mohammed stole Islamic rituals from. Though the praying 5 times a day and performing ablution he got from the 2nd century occult cult of the Sabians.
Not from his fanciful ride on a flying animal to Jerusalem, heaven and back, by morning.

[Peter]

...... we fast for one whole month during the Muslim Holy month of Ramadaan; .....

Muslims spend more money on food during Ramadan than any other time of the year.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1269.0

....... and we take pleasure in being a charitable people.

You mean, to Muslims.

Despite any of our shortcomings, we venture to suggest that there is not another group of people that can "show a candle" to us in brotherhood, in piety or in sobriety.

Sure! So that's why Muslims are responsible for murder, mayhem and misery all around the world, with over 2 million killed in the Sudan alone, let alone the Sunni TARGETING FOR MURDER of innocent Shiite men, women and children. It's all about brotherhood!

[Peter]

AN ANSWER SUPREME

An answer from Satan through the false prophet Mohammed.

What are we Muslims to say to this Christian claim? Nothing better than Allah's shattering reply to the Jewish boast!.

(SURA NISAA) Holy Qur'an 4:157

Surah 4:157 That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus ......

Mohammed's confusion becomes immediately apparent. He quotes the Jews as recognizing Jesus as the Christ - as the Messiah. So if the Jews recognized Jesus as the Messiah, why did would they have crucified Him.

1. Allah: Allah is the name of God Almighty in the Semitic languages, i.e. in the language of Moses, Jesus and Muhummed (May the peace of God be upon them all). Read - "What is His Name?" for elaboration.

"Allah" is the name of the pagan moon god idol. It is not God's name because it does not mean "I AM" in any language on earth.

Exd 3:13...and they shall say to me, What [is] his name?...14 And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.

Here's what scripture tells us of Mohammed's Islamic kingdom "beast" as you so aptly demonstrate in here.

Rev 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

[Peter]

2. "Full of Doubts!" - In a state of confusion.

....... 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:-

There is nothing in Christianity about which Christians are more certain than Jesus' crucifixion, death and resurrection from the dead. Otherwise the person wouldn't be a Christian!

But look at Mohammedans. They are exactly as Mohammed ignorantly described Christians!
Just look at their confusion in this thread.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=628.0

[punisher]

Nobody can deny that Mohammed was one of the most influential men in history. Even today, 1.5 billion Muslims - 1/4 of mankind - follow Satan, through the false prophet Mohammed, who WAS and taught the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.

So u think By putting Jesus third what does he meant??.

To the Muslim belief that Jesus Christ was "neither killed nor crucified", the Christian objects, "how can a man (Muhummed pbuh) a thousand miles away from the scene of a happening, and 600 years after an event, pronounce as to what had transpired?" The Muslim says that the words Muhummed (pbuh) uttered were not his own, but that the Words were "put into his mouth" by the All-Knowing, All-Seeing God. The Christian retorts that he is not prepared to accept the metaphysical aspect of Muhummed's revelation; moreso, in view of the written records by "eye-witnesses" (?) and "ear-witnesses" (?) as regards the happenings on that Easter week-end some two thousand years ago.

The Christian plea is valid. Their logic is good. To entertain their plea we will call up their witnesses and cross examine them to discover the truth or falsity of the matter from their own authorities. Admittedly, the key witnesses in the case are Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - the alleged authors of the Canonical Gospels. But they have all died and are in their graves. "Yes, that is true, but we have in our possession their sworn affidavits!" says the Christian.
When confronted by the extravagant and conflicting claims of the Jews and the Christians to their exclusive rights to salvation, Allah subha nahu wa-ta aala1 commands us to demand for proof. He says:


(SURA BAQARA)Holy Quran 2:111

And they have produced the only proof they have; in over fifteen hundred different languages! Eleven different dialects of the Bible for the Arabs alone! Are we going to swallow them hook, line and sinker? No! It is presupposed that when Allah commands us to demand for proof, that we would be in a position to analyse the proof, once it is produced. Otherwise, it makes no sense to demand for proof; it would be nonsense!

SO Where is your Proof

1John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? HE IS ANTICHRIST, THAT DENIETH the Father and THE SON. 23 WHOSOEVER DENIETH THE SON, THE SAME HATH NOT THE FATHER:

Matthew 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for WIDE [IS] THE GATE, AND BROAD [IS THE WAY, THAT LEADETH TO DESTRUCTION, and many there be which go in thereat:

We don't deny Jesus Christ (Peace Be Upon Him). We Believe he is the mightiest messenger of Allah???


Chapter Psalm 91 clearly and indisputably confirms that Jesus never got crucified!

1 He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty.  [a]

2 I will say of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in whom I trust."

3 Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare and from the deadly pestilence.

4 He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

5 You will not fear the terror of night, nor the arrow that flies by day,

6 nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness, nor the plague that destroys at midday.

7 A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it will not come near you.

8 You will only observe with your eyes and see the punishment of the wicked.  

9 If you make the Most High your dwelling- even the LORD, who is my refuge-

10 then no harm will befall you, no disaster will come near your tent.

11 For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all your ways;

12 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.  (If Jesus died on the cross and got buried, then his feet would've struck the ground and the stones on it from bringing him down, throwing him on the floor and burying him).

13 You will tread upon the lion and the cobra; you will trample the great lion and the serpent.

14 "Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.

15 He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honor him.

16 With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation."

Footnotes:

   1. Psalm 91:1 Hebrew Shaddai
   2. Psalm 91:2 Or He says
There is no question!

There is no question that the emphasized parts above, especially in Psalm 91:11-12, 15 and the others, clearly and indisputably agree with the Noble Quran's and Isaiah 52:13 Verses that are shown below.  Jesus was neither crucified nor resurrected, and he was protected and lifted by GOD Almighty.  Also, the New Testament, again, confirms that Psalm 91 is referring to Jesus Christ.
# GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
 
# GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).
 
# Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5).
 
# Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:.
 
# No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up before crucifixion).
 
# GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13).  Not even his foot will strike the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.
 
# Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and honored [/b][/s][/s](Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13).  No way would these verses be valid if Christ got crucified.
 
# His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus never got married and had children.  In Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children).


# His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12).
 
# "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several English translations, and it never meant a literal death.
 
# Important Note:  Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies that WILL take place.  Notice how the verses are speak of future events that WILL TAKE PLACE.  Never once throughout the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot against a rock.  This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and corrupt.


Again, I clearly see the Noble Quran's Claim  about Jesus being saved from crucifixion being  confirmed in Psalm 34:20!

[Peter]

Nobody can deny that Mohammed was one of the most influential men in history. Even today, 1.5 billion Muslims - 1/4 of mankind - follow Satan, through the false prophet Mohammed, who WAS and taught the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.

So u think By putting Jesus third what does he meant??.

In his case it is because he is Jewish, and does not accept that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, let alone that He was conceived by a virgin, by the will of God.

Is it possible for you to even understand that much?

[punisher]

Nobody can deny that Mohammed was one of the most influential men in history. Even today, 1.5 billion Muslims - 1/4 of mankind - follow Satan, through the false prophet Mohammed, who WAS and taught the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.

So u think By putting Jesus third what does he meant??.

In his case it is because he is Jewish, and does not accept that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, let alone that He was conceived by a virgin, by the will of God.

Is it possible for you to even understand that much?

Ok what is this third party evidence According to

and Jewish, and Jesus is only for Jews than what is this Christianity?

Can u please explain.


THIRD-PARTY EVIDENCE — "ACCORDING TO . . ."

The amazing thing about the Christians' sworn affidavits (writings attributed to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) is that not a single one of them is duly attested. Not a single one bears the signature, mark or thumb-print of its author in the so-called originals. They now boast of being in possession of over 5000 "originals" of which no two "originals" are identical. Amazing! Little-wonder the Christians themselves label their Gospels as — "The Gospel according to St. Matthew", "The Gospel according to St. Mark", "The Gospel according to St. Luke" and "The Gospel according to St. John".

When Christian scholars are asked why the words "according to" 1 are repeated at the beginning of every Gospel, the obvious implication is that they are not autographed. It is only assumed that they are authored by the names the Gospels carry today. The translators of the "New International Version" have unceremoniously expunged the "According to’s" from the four Gospels in their latest translation. Of the alleged Gospel writers, viz., Matthew, Mark, Luke and John it can be categorically stated that 50% were not even the elected Twelve Disciples of Jesus (pbuh).

[Peter]

Nobody can deny that Mohammed was one of the most influential men in history. Even today, 1.5 billion Muslims - 1/4 of mankind - follow Satan, through the false prophet Mohammed, who WAS and taught the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.

So u think By putting Jesus third what does he meant??.

In his case it is because he is Jewish, and does not accept that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, let alone that He was conceived by a virgin, by the will of God.

Is it possible for you to even understand that much?

Ok what is this third party evidence According to

and Jewish, and Jesus is only for Jews .....

1John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole  world.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=54.0

...... than what is this Christianity?

CHRISTianity is composed of those that Jesus has "called out". Those who follow Jesus CHRIST - the Messiah.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Muslims4Jesus
Just as MOHAMMEDanism is composed of those that follow MOHAMMED - the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6157#msg6157

[punisher]

Nobody can deny that Mohammed was one of the most influential men in history. Even today, 1.5 billion Muslims - 1/4 of mankind - follow Satan, through the false prophet Mohammed, who WAS and taught the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.

So u think By putting Jesus third what does he meant??.

In his case it is because he is Jewish, and does not accept that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, let alone that He was conceived by a virgin, by the will of God.

Is it possible for you to even understand that much?

Ok what is this third party evidence According to

and Jewish, and Jesus is only for Jews .....

1John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole  world.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=54.0

...... than what is this Christianity?

CHRISTianity is composed of those that Jesus has "called out". Those who follow Jesus CHRIST - the Messiah.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Muslims4Jesus
Just as MOHAMMEDanism is composed of those that follow MOHAMMED - the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6157#msg6157

I find it very funny, that you a Christian missionary can actually be able to objectively contrast the lives of Jesus and Muhamad. I find it funny that many other Christians also attempt to do so. The fact is just like your brethren, you are biased when it comes to comparing both of them, and the main goal for you is to simply attack the prophet, I have read many comparisen and contrasts between Muhamamd and Jesus by Christians and was often amazed by the huge biasness in the articles.


Now Jesus is indeed the Messiah, but that doesnt make him God, not at all, it is a title of honor given to Jesus.

Jesus was indeed born of a virgin birth, this was God showing his power and what he is capable of, these are his signs that he gives to us to believe in him.

Jesus is just a word of God, not THE word of God, it is different than your concept of the word of God.

Jesus is not sinless according to those passages. He is a righteous person, a holy birth, but in no way does that make him sinless. Now before venturing off into Shamouns article, I will give the Islamic conception of Jesus for all to see, I will be posting verses from the Quran which talk about Jesus, and which show that according to Islam, Jesus is no more than a prophet of God.

From Surah Al-Imran:

003.045
YUSUFALI: Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah;

003.046
YUSUFALI: "He shall speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. And he shall be (of the company) of the righteous."

003.047
YUSUFALI: She said: "O my Lord! How shall I have a son when no man hath touched me?" He said: "Even so: Allah createth what He willeth: When He hath decreed a plan, He but saith to it, 'Be,' and it is!

003.048
YUSUFALI: "And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Law and the Gospel,

003.049
YUSUFALI: "And (appoint him) a messenger to the Children of Israel, (with this message): "'I have come to you, with a Sign from your Lord, in that I make for you out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, and breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by Allah's leave: And I heal those born blind, and the lepers, and I quicken the dead, by Allah's leave; and I declare to you what ye eat, and what ye store in your houses. Surely therein is a Sign for you if ye did believe;

003.050
YUSUFALI: "'(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me.

003.051
YUSUFALI: "'It is Allah Who is my Lord and your Lord; then worship Him. This is a Way that is straight.'"

003.052
YUSUFALI: When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: "Who will be My helpers to (the work of) Allah?" Said the disciples: "We are Allah's helpers: We believe in Allah, and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims.

003.053
YUSUFALI: "Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Messenger; then write us down among those who bear witness."

003.054
YUSUFALI: And (the unbelievers) plotted and planned, and Allah too planned, and the best of planners is Allah.

03.055
YUSUFALI: Behold! Allah said: "O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee superior to those who reject faith, to the Day of Resurrection: Then shall ye all return unto me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.

003.056
YUSUFALI: "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."

003.057
YUSUFALI: "As to those who believe and work righteousness, Allah will pay them (in full) their reward; but Allah loveth not those who do wrong."

003.058
YUSUFALI: "This is what we rehearse unto thee of the Signs and the Message of Wisdom."

003.059
YUSUFALI: The similitude of Jesus before Allah is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was.

003.060
YUSUFALI: The Truth (comes) from Allah alone; so be not of those who doubt.

003.061
YUSUFALI: If any one disputes in this matter with thee, now after (full) knowledge Hath come to thee, say: "Come! let us gather together,- our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves: Then let us earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie!"

003.062
YUSUFALI: This is the true account: There is no god except Allah; and Allah-He is indeed the Exalted in Power, the Wise.

003.063
YUSUFALI: But if they turn back, Allah hath full knowledge of those who do mischief.

That is what Surah 3 of the Quran says about Jesus. From those passages we see that Jesus was born by a miraculous birth. God will teach him the Torah and the Gospel, and that Jesus would talk to people in his childhood and when he reached his manhood, the event of him talking to people in his childhood is another great miracle. His mission was to bring people to God, NOT to bring people to come and worship him. God gave him great miracles, the ability to breath into an object and give it life, this was by the PERMISSION of God.

[resistingrexmundi]

I find it very funny, that you a Christian missionary can actually be able to objectively contrast the lives of Jesus and Muhamad. I find it funny that many other Christians also attempt to do so. The fact is just like your brethren, you are biased when it comes to comparing both of them, and the main goal for you is to simply attack the prophet, I have read many comparisen and contrasts between Muhamamd and Jesus by Christians and was often amazed by the huge biasness in the articles.

I find it very, very funny that you make such a statement without acknowledging your own biases. All biases aside though do you not realize that the koran depicts Muhammad as a murderer, thief, liar, adultarer, fornicator, covetor, and a bigot? How about pedophile? None of these are characteristics of a man of God. You can try to justify Muhammad's actions all you want but you are still left with a liar for a prophet. It isn't an attack against him it is simply the truth. Muhammad admitted to lying. 

Now Jesus is indeed the Messiah, but that doesnt make him God, not at all, it is a title of honor given to Jesus.

Even though the Old Testament said that He would be. In fact that was the main reason the Jews rejected Him. They, like you, had been so led astray by the words of man that they forgot the Word of God which stated that He would personally intercede for us.

Jesus was indeed born of a virgin birth, this was God showing his power and what he is capable of, these are his signs that he gives to us to believe in him.

If God was simply displaying His power would He have not chosen a more visible way to do so? This was a sign to Mary that she was chosen of God. That sign benefits noone else experentially because there was no way for her to prove to them the veracity of the miracle. Also it was meant to keep the physical body of Jesus free from the taint of sin. What is funny is you believe in the virgin birth because a proven liar told you it was so, as opposed to a reputable source, but if Muhammad had said Jesus sprouted from Mary's head fully grown you would be spouting that here. Ignoring the OT prophecy that spoke of the virgin birth.

Jesus is just a word of God, not THE word of God, it is different than your concept of the word of God.

According to you. But not to God.

Jesus is not sinless according to those passages. He is a righteous person, a holy birth, but in no way does that make him sinless. Now before venturing off into Shamouns article, I will give the Islamic conception of Jesus for all to see, I will be posting verses from the Quran which talk about Jesus, and which show that according to Islam, Jesus is no more than a prophet of God.

There is no need to give the report of a man who lived 600 years after Jesus. We have 4 different accounts, from eyewitnesses or close confidants, who lived with, ate with, and walked with Jesus. Those 4 accounts agree in all theological points and center their testimony on a different aspect of Jesus' ministry. Which gives us a complete picture. Muhammad simply borrowed materieal from second and third century gnostic gospels (ie, clay birds and the speaking from the cradle). Unfortunately the only contact Muhammad had with "christians" was nestorians and another heretical group. So I ask why on earth would any sane Christian elevate material 600 years after the fact over that of material from within a generation of Jesus? Especially when said material borrowed from disreputable sources nearly 100+ years after the events and many much more than that.

That is what Surah 3 of the Quran says about Jesus. From those passages we see that Jesus was born by a miraculous birth. God will teach him the Torah and the Gospel, and that Jesus would talk to people in his childhood and when he reached his manhood, the event of him talking to people in his childhood is another great miracle. His mission was to bring people to God, NOT to bring people to come and worship him. God gave him great miracles, the ability to breath into an object and give it life, this was by the PERMISSION of God.

Wrong. If you read the Gospels, written by people from Jesus' generation, they show Jesus teaching and performing miracles on His own authority. No other prophet ever did this. That is what caused such an upheavel in Israel. You are deluded into following a man who had vested interests in his religion catching on. Do you ever wonder why Muhammad was so favored by Allah but he never gave him the ability to prove his prophethood with a miracle, prophecy, or even saving him from death as, according to Muhammad, he did Jesus?

Think about it.

[punisher]

Wrong. If you read the Gospels, written by people from Jesus' generation, they show Jesus teaching and performing miracles on His own authority. No other prophet ever did this. That is what caused such an upheavel in Israel. You are deluded into following a man who had vested interests in his religion catching on. Do you ever wonder why Muhammad was so favored by Allah but he never gave him the ability to prove his prophethood with a miracle, prophecy, or even saving him from death as, according to Muhammad, he did Jesus?

Think about it.

Ok Brother Lets Read the Gospels


 We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted and unreliable and is mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption! "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:"


The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it (i.e., the bible) into a LIE.   (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:"


In either translation, we clearly see that the Jews had so much corrupted the Bible with their man-made cultural laws, that they had turned the Bible into a lie!

See Also Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.

The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted.  The Book of Jeremiah which came approximately 826 years after did indeed confirm this corruption.


Exposing the Bible's books' and gospels' corruptions:


"The unknown author, whom we shall continue to call Matthew for the sake of convenience, drew no only up the Gospel according to Mark but upon a large body of material (principally, sayings of Jesus) not found in Mk that corresponds, sometimes exactly, to material found also in the Gospel according to Luke. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1008)"

"As for the place where the gospel was composed, a plausible suggestion is that it was Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1009)"

So we clearly see, both the author or authors and the place of composition of the "Gospel of Matthew" are unknown.

The Gospel of Mark:

This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!

"Although the book is anonymous, apart from the ancient heading "According to Mark" in manuscripts, it has traditionally been assigned to John Mark, in whose  mother's house (at Jerusalem) Christians assembled.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"

"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship,  it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1488)"

#  We certainly do not know whether Mark was the author or not!  The quote clearly states "no direct internal evidence of authorship".  Also, the so-called unanimous testimony of the early church:
 
-  Does not prove that the author was Mark.
   
-  Nor does it prove that other people did not alter and modify the book, especially when the book was written at least 40-50 years after Christ.  We don't even know if Mark even wrote the book.

"Traditionally, the gospel is said to have been written shortly before A.D. 70 in Rome, at a time of impending persecution and when destruction loomed over Jerusalem.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"


"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 [1], page 1528)"

"This verse, which reads, "But if you do not forgive, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your transgressions," is omitted in the best manuscripts.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1081)"

"This passage, termed the Longer Ending to the Marcan gospel by comparison with a much briefer conclusion found in some less important manuscripts, has traditionally been accepted as a canonical part of the gospel and was defined as such by the Council of Trent.  Early citations of it by the Fathers indicate that it was composed by the second century, although vocabulary and style indicate that it was written by someone other than Mark.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1088)"

So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not, nor do we know when and where the "gospel" was even written.  And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?



(http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2016:9-20;&version=31;)


The above text reads: "The most reliable early manuscript and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20."

Now my concern to this corruption and 'answer-the-problem-away' statement is that what are those so-called "reliable early manuscript(s)" and who are the "ancient witnesses"?

According to the early Christians' manuscripts, Jesus never got crucified, and trinity is a lie.  The so-called "gospel of Mark", along with all of the "gospels" of the NT, were written by third-party narration, as clearly demonstrated and shown in the sections below.   People wrote on the tongue of Jesus' Disciples those books.  They are neither original nor are the Pure Word of GOD Almighty.

If the "gospel of Mark" was indeed Divine and from GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't have this corruption, that they're admitting above, in it.

I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!

Further regarding this Gospel, we read the following 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 [1], page 1528)"

This quote raises a very serious issue here.  First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel".  Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it.  The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying. 

Removing Mark 16:9-20 is quite appreciated by me personally (to be quite honest with you), because it prevents people from dying from snake bites.  But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains.

We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful.  The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc...  It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man.  Let alone considering it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.

If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16:9-20, then who did? And how can you prove the ownership of the other person? Let alone proving that it was GOD Almighty's Revelation.  And as we saw in the first quote above, we don't even know that John Mark was indeed the one who wrote the so called "Gospel of Mark".

To say the least in our case here, we now have enough evidence to discard the entire Gospel of Mark from the Bible, because you can't take bits and pieces of it and say some of it belongs to him and some of it doesn't!  Let alone considering the entire corrupted Gospel as the True Living Word of GOD Almighty, which is a complete blasphemy.

[resistingrexmundi]

Ok Brother Lets Read the Gospels


 We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted and unreliable and is mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption! "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:"

That is an absurd claim and once again you have shown your ignorance of what is being said in the Bible to start with. Jeremiah was pointing out the same hypocrisy that Jesus did during His ministry. The pen of the scribes is in reference to the Talmud, midrash etc. that the scribes elevated to the level of scripture in their life. This is not an indictment against scripture. Otherwise I'm pretty sure those "cunning Jews" would have left it out.

In either translation, we clearly see that the Jews had so much corrupted the Bible with their man-made cultural laws, that they had turned the Bible into a lie!

You can stop with the over-generalizations. That was an indictment against the scribes for manmade tradition. NOT and indictment against Scripture.

See Also Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.

Perhaps you should actually read these verses sometime.

Deu 31:25   That Moses commanded the Levites, which bare the ark of the covenant of the LORD, saying, 

Deu 31:26   Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. 

Deu 31:27   For I know thy rebellion, and thy stiff neck: behold, while I am yet alive with you this day, ye have been rebellious against the LORD; and how much more after my death? 

Deu 31:28   Gather unto me all the elders of your tribes, and your officers, that I may speak these words in their ears, and call heaven and earth to record against them. 

Deu 31:29   For I know that after my death ye will utterly corrupt [yourselves], and turn aside from the way which I have commanded you; and evil will befall you in the latter days; because ye will do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger through the work of your hands. 

Deu 31:30 ¶ And Moses spake in the ears of all the congregation of Israel the words of this song, until they were ended. 
 
Moses in none of these verses claims that the Jews would corrupt the text of the Bible. In fact he gave it as a witness against their rebellion. What Moses said was that Israel would disobey what had been given to them in the Law. You need to get your facts straight.

The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted.  The Book of Jeremiah which came approximately 826 years after did indeed confirm this corruption.

That is a false allegation as I demonstrated above. You are setting up strawman arguments.

Exposing the Bible's books' and gospels' corruptions:


"The unknown author, whom we shall continue to call Matthew for the sake of convenience, drew no only up the Gospel according to Mark but upon a large body of material (principally, sayings of Jesus) not found in Mk that corresponds, sometimes exactly, to material found also in the Gospel according to Luke. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1008)"

That is not fact. That is someone's theory. They continuously talk about an original source material for all of the Gospels but cannot seem to find one. Yet people, such as yourself, continue to throw out this debunked theory as some kind of fact when it is not. The reasone there are corresponding stories in the Gospels is because they were written about Jesus and His ministry. DUH.

[/color]"As for the place where the gospel was composed, a plausible suggestion is that it was Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1009)"

Even if that were fact, which noone can prove, that wouldn't change WHO wrote it.

So we clearly see, both the author or authors and the place of composition of the "Gospel of Matthew" are unknown.

Only to those who have an unreasonable level of scrutiny. ALL of the early church fathers attested to these Gospels belonging to the men that they are attributed to. To say there is no evidence is false.

The Gospel of Mark:

This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!

According to some. But there is great evidence for Matthew being the earliest. Especially given how early it spread to other countries ahead of the others.

"Although the book is anonymous, apart from the ancient heading "According to Mark" in manuscripts, it has traditionally been assigned to John Mark, in whose  mother's house (at Jerusalem) Christians assembled.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"

Well if we disregard the ancient heading and the ancient attestation by men who lived at the time I can see where things begin to get shady.

"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship,  it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1488)"

Do you not understand what that means?

#  We certainly do not know whether Mark was the author or not!  The quote clearly states "no direct internal evidence of authorship".  Also, the so-called unanimous testimony of the early church:
 
-  Does not prove that the author was Mark.
   
-  Nor does it prove that other people did not alter and modify the book, especially when the book was written at least 40-50 years after Christ.  We don't even know if Mark even wrote the book.

Once you disregard testimony and already have a bias in place then yes it is easy to make this case. However the earliest koran still in existence was written 150 years after Muhammad's death. So if we apply the same scrutiny to the koran it fails miserably. Not to mention the hadith that mention the omission of verses, destruction of alternate versions compiled by more reputable muslims, and Uthman's vested interest in his own version.

"Traditionally, the gospel is said to have been written shortly before A.D. 70 in Rome, at a time of impending persecution and when destruction loomed over Jerusalem.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)"


"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 [1], page 1528)"

Even if it did end early or whether the original ending was lost it doesn't change the testimony by one bit. It still agrees to all theological points of the others and does not disrupt a single theological stance of Christianity today. Not to mention noone can prove that this is indeed the case. This is all speculation.

"This verse, which reads, "But if you do not forgive, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your transgressions," is omitted in the best manuscripts.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1081)"

Doesn't matter. That theological point is addressed in the Lord's prayer. "...forgive us our tresspasses, as we forgive those that tresspass against us..."

"This passage, termed the Longer Ending to the Marcan gospel by comparison with a much briefer conclusion found in some less important manuscripts, has traditionally been accepted as a canonical part of the gospel and was defined as such by the Council of Trent.  Early citations of it by the Fathers indicate that it was composed by the second century, although vocabulary and style indicate that it was written by someone other than Mark.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1088)"

Again, speculation. This cannot be proven and even if it could it doesn't change that those theological points in the Marcan ending are addressed throughout the other Gospels and beyond.

So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not, nor do we know when and where the "gospel" was even written.  And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?

That is just not true. The New Testament was finished by 105 AD at the latest. The epistles of the apostles contain quotes from the Gospels and help date many manuscripts within a generation of Jesus' death.

The above text reads: "The most reliable early manuscript and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20."

According to some. But again this is speculation not proof. And again this still poses no problem to Christianity because that ending in Mark is not what makes or breaks the Gospels or the NT.

[/glow][/u][/b][/size]Now my concern to this corruption and 'answer-the-problem-away' statement is that what are those so-called "reliable early manuscript(s)" and who are the "ancient witnesses"?

According to the early Christians' manuscripts, Jesus never got crucified, and trinity is a lie.  The so-called "gospel of Mark", along with all of the "gospels" of the NT, were written by third-party narration, as clearly demonstrated and shown in the sections below.   People wrote on the tongue of Jesus' Disciples those books.  They are neither original nor are the Pure Word of GOD Almighty.

Now you are just blatantly lying. The earliest documents still have Jesus' crucifixion and the presence of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and it is affirmed in the epistles. Many of which were written within a few years of the crucifixion, as the body of Christ grew larger. You have demonstrated nothing above but your own borrowed theories and speculation. You aren't willing to actually dedicate yourself to understanding the Gospel and so are pre-disposed to hating it.

If the "gospel of Mark" was indeed Divine and from GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't have this corruption, that they're admitting above, in it.

The problem is such corruption is not proven and as I said, IF it were an addition then it still doesn't contradict anything in the rest of the document or any other document of the NT.

I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!

I believe God inspired Mark to write it. I will go to the grave believing it and I will be resurrected in glory, with FULL assurance of my salvation. Can you rest in FULL assurance of yours?

Further regarding this Gospel, we read the following 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 [1], page 1528)"

This quote raises a very serious issue here.  First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel".  Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it.  The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying. 

Removing Mark 16:9-20 is quite appreciated by me personally (to be quite honest with you), because it prevents people from dying from snake bites.  But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains.

We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful.  The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc...  It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man.  Let alone considering it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.

If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16:9-20, then who did? And how can you prove the ownership of the other person? Let alone proving that it was GOD Almighty's Revelation.  And as we saw in the first quote above, we don't even know that John Mark was indeed the one who wrote the so called "Gospel of Mark".

To say the least in our case here, we now have enough evidence to discard the entire Gospel of Mark from the Bible, because you can't take bits and pieces of it and say some of it belongs to him and some of it doesn't!  Let alone considering the entire corrupted Gospel as the True Living Word of GOD Almighty, which is a complete blasphemy.

This is just a repeat of the non-sense you offered above. You did not prove that Mark was not the author. You just don't believe it. You did not prove that it has been tampered with. You just believe it. You did not prove that any "addition" contradicts the rest of the Bible, if any such addition does exist. So when it is all said and done you have proved nothing beyond your ignorance of the Bible.

Now would you try and do something novel for a change and actually answer questions posed to you rather than obfuscate? Try this one.

Do you ever wonder why Muhammad was so favored by Allah but he never gave him the ability to prove his prophethood with a miracle, prophecy, or even saving him from death as, according to Muhammad, he did Jesus?

[Peter]

Nobody can deny that Mohammed was one of the most influential men in history. Even today, 1.5 billion Muslims - 1/4 of mankind - follow Satan, through the false prophet Mohammed, who WAS and taught the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.

So u think By putting Jesus third what does he meant??.

In his case it is because he is Jewish, and does not accept that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, let alone that He was conceived by a virgin, by the will of God.

Is it possible for you to even understand that much?

Ok what is this third party evidence According to

and Jewish, and Jesus is only for Jews .....

1John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for [the sins of] the whole  world.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=54.0

...... than what is this Christianity?

CHRISTianity is composed of those that Jesus has "called out". Those who follow Jesus CHRIST - the Messiah.
http://www.youtube.com/user/Muslims4Jesus
Just as MOHAMMEDanism is composed of those that follow MOHAMMED - the EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6157#msg6157

I find it very funny, that you a Christian missionary can actually be able to objectively contrast the lives of Jesus and Muhamad.

How could a true Christian not be biased against the very embodiment of the spirit of antichrist?

1 John 2:22  Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also].

I find it funny that many other Christians also attempt to do so. The fact is just like your brethren, you are biased when it comes to comparing both of them, and the main goal for you is to simply attack the prophet, I have read many comparisen and contrasts between Muhamamd and Jesus by Christians and was often amazed by the huge biasness in the articles.

Then why don't you stop all the bloviating and let's compare them. Mohammed was an illiterate, pillaging, plundering, murdering, child doing, prisoner raping, stepson's only wife stealing, sex slave prostituting, concubine fornicating, lying, cheating, blood drenched, imperialistic, conquering, terrorist, thief.

Which of the above, that come from your own books, is Jesus guilty of?
What was Jesus guilty of that is not included in the above attributes of Mohammed?
Of course your Jewish friend that you quoted would say blasphemy, just like the Pharasees accused Jesus of. But what DO YOU accuse Jesus of?
 
If you don't start answering questions with your own words and thoughts rather than a bunch of copy and pasted trash, I am going to stuff those posts into your spam.

[punisher]

That is an absurd claim and once again you have shown your ignorance of what is being said in the Bible to start with. Jeremiah was pointing out the same hypocrisy that Jesus did during His ministry. The pen of the scribes is in reference to the Talmud, midrash etc. that the scribes elevated to the level of scripture in their life. This is not an indictment against scripture. Otherwise I'm pretty sure those "cunning Jews" would have left it out.

Do you think that i have made that claim, Man it's you Bible, I am quoting from Bible,

and you are saying that its and absurd claim,

Ok let see More

The Book of 1 and 2 Peter:

"Some modern scholars on the basis of a number of features that they consider incompatible with Petrine authenticity, regard the letter as the work of a later Christian writer.  Such features include the cultivated Greek in which it is written, difficult to attribute to a Galilean fisherman, together with its use of the Greek Septuagint translation when citing the Old Testament; the similarity in both thought and expression to the Pauline literature; and the allusions to widespread persecution of Christians, which did not occur until at least the reign of Domitian (A.D. 81-96).  In this view the letter would date from the end of the first century or even the beginning of the second, when there is evidence for persecution of Christians in Asia Minor. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1348)"

"Nevertheless, acceptance of 2 Peter into the New Testament canon met with great resistance in the early church.  The oldest certain reference to it comes from Origen in the early third century. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"

"Among modern scholars there is wide agreement that 2 Peter is a pseudonymous work, i.e., one written by a later author who attributed it to Peter.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"


So like the rest of the books and gospels of the Bible, we don't even know regarding 1 Peter:

   1. Who wrote it.
   2. How many people wrote it.
   3. When it was written.
   4. Where it was written.

You can stop with the over-generalizations. That was an indictment against the scribes for manmade tradition. NOT and indictment against Scripture.

So i see that the truth is turning into generalization or you don't have answer, or you don't know how to defend?

Moses in none of these verses claims that the Jews would corrupt the text of the Bible. In fact he gave it as a witness against their rebellion. What Moses said was that Israel would disobey what had been given to them in the Law. You need to get your facts straight.

It means you are picking the text from Bible to prove yourself as true, what do u want to say that i should leave

This Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.


So you mean that i leave the prediction of Moses, a great Messenger of Allah and start believing on you what u pasted?

The Book of Acts:

"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1643)"

So based on some conclusion, you're willing to die for defending the idea that the Bible was the True Word of GOD Almighty? If the book was inspired by GOD Almighty, then how come it wasn't mentioned in the book itself to help us filter it out from the many other "Satanic false books"? Are we sure that this book too is not a man-made Satanic book?

After all, its just a conclusion, isn't it?
Beside, what evidence are they talking about?!  The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus.  So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering it as the True Living Word of GOD.

That is a false allegation as I demonstrated above. You are setting up strawman arguments

You so are denying the prediction of Moses and your own Book Bible

This Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.

That is not fact. That is someone's theory. They continuously talk about an original source material for all of the Gospels but cannot seem to find one. Yet people, such as yourself, continue to throw out this debunked theory as some kind of fact when it is not. The reasone there are corresponding stories in the Gospels is because they were written about Jesus and His ministry. DUH.

Let Talk about the Facts

Paul's blasphemous statement:

Let us read what Paul said in the corrupted Bible:

"For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.  (From the NIV Bible, 1 Corinthians 1:25)"

Here are the countless English translations of this verse.  Literally, almost 100% of all of the English translations agree:

   1. Corinthians 1:25 (New International Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
       
   2. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New American Standard Bible)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   3. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Amplified Bible)
      25[This is] because the foolish thing [that has its source in] God is wiser than men, and the weak thing [that springs] from God is stronger than men.

      Because the stupid thing in GOD???
       
   4. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New Living Translation)
      25 This foolish plan of God is wiser than the wisest of human plans, and God’s weakness is stronger than the greatest of human strength.
       
   5. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (King James Version)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   6. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (English Standard Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   7. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Contemporary English Version)
      25 Even when God is foolish, he is wiser than everyone else, and even when God is weak, he is stronger than everyone else.

      Even when GOD is stupid???
       
   8. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New King James Version)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   9. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (21st Century King James Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
  10. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (American Standard Version)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
  11. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Young's Literal Translation)
      25 because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men;
       
  12. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Darby Translation)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
  13. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
      25 because God's foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God's weakness is stronger than human strength.
       
  14. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New International Reader's Version)
      25 The foolish things of God are wiser than human wisdom. The weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

      The stupid things of GOD???
       
  15. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Wycliffe New Testament)
      25 For that that is folly thing of God, is wiser than men; and that that is the feeble thing of God [and that that is the
      sick thing, or frail, of God], is stronger than men.

      The folly things of GOD???
       
  16. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New International Version - UK)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
       
  17. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Today's New International Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

 

Let us analyze this foolish and blasphemous verse from Paul:

1-  Regardless of how smart and stupid GOD and us humans are, our intelligence will never reach even the stupidity of GOD!

2-  GOD is a fool.

3-  GOD is weak.

4-  Man is more foolish and weaker than GOD.

5-  The comparison itself is very insulting and degrading to GOD Almighty.  It is also limiting to Him since our finite and limited intelligence and strength were compared to His infinite Attributes.

Only to those who have an unreasonable level of scrutiny. ALL of the early church fathers attested to these Gospels belonging to the men that they are attributed to. To say there is no evidence is false.

What a statement for living in the age of mythology, we don't know who are those father, what they write and why they write???

[resistingrexmundi]

Do you think that i have made that claim, Man it's you Bible, I am quoting from Bible,

and you are saying that its and absurd claim,

What I am saying is your claim about it is absurd. What it says and what you say it says are two different things. Which you would know if you had actually read what I wrote.

Ok let see More

The Book of 1 and 2 Peter:

"Some modern scholars on the basis of a number of features that they consider incompatible with Petrine authenticity, regard the letter as the work of a later Christian writer.  Such features include the cultivated Greek in which it is written, difficult to attribute to a Galilean fisherman, together with its use of the Greek Septuagint translation when citing the Old Testament; the similarity in both thought and expression to the Pauline literature; and the allusions to widespread persecution of Christians, which did not occur until at least the reign of Domitian (A.D. 81-96).  In this view the letter would date from the end of the first century or even the beginning of the second, when there is evidence for persecution of Christians in Asia Minor. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1348)"

There are a number of problems with the above premise. First, again this is speculation about a single book of the Bible. Second, people of that time were known to dictate to others what they wish to be written and it totally dismisses the gift of tongues that Peter had at the time. Third the part about widespread persecution not happening until Domitian is just historically false. Nero showed particular contempt for Christians and even tried to blame them for the burning of Rome and tortured them to get there confession. So you can stop wasting your time pasting these excerpts from people's theories. They are played out and do not hold up under scrutiny.

"Nevertheless, acceptance of 2 Peter into the New Testament canon met with great resistance in the early church.  The oldest certain reference to it comes from Origen in the early third century. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"

"Among modern scholars there is wide agreement that 2 Peter is a pseudonymous work, i.e., one written by a later author who attributed it to Peter.  (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1354)"

Again this is speculation and nothing can be proven. Secondly as with your treatment of Mark it still doesn't pose any theological problems with what is written in the earliest known texts of the NT or with the OT.

So like the rest of the books and gospels of the Bible, we don't even know regarding 1 Peter:

   1. Who wrote it.
   2. How many people wrote it.
   3. When it was written.
   4. Where it was written.

This is just the vain utterings of someone avoiding a direct question.

So i see that the truth is turning into generalization or you don't have answer, or you don't know how to defend?

No. I told you that you were making over generalizations and attributing things to those passages of scripture that were not there.

Moses in none of these verses claims that the Jews would corrupt the text of the Bible. In fact he gave it as a witness against their rebellion. What Moses said was that Israel would disobey what had been given to them in the Law. You need to get your facts straight.

It means you are picking the text from Bible to prove yourself as true, what do u want to say that i should leave

No it means just what it says. If you read the verses you cited nowhere in there does Moses claim that the Scriptures would become distorted. I pointed that out and asked you simply to read them before you post on them. And you can stay or leave. It is of little consequence to me. You have shown you are incapable of answering simple and direct questions and would rather obfuscate than actually make points relevant to the topic at hand.

This Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.


So you mean that i leave the prediction of Moses, a great Messenger of Allah and start believing on you what u pasted?

What I have shown you already is that Moses did not make any such prediction. He said that the children of Israel would rebel and the Law was preserved as a witness against them. Why don't you try to do something Muhammad couldn't and read once in a while instead of responding without understanding what you are responding to?

The Book of Acts:

"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke.  (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1643)"

So based on some conclusion, you're willing to die for defending the idea that the Bible was the True Word of GOD Almighty? If the book was inspired by GOD Almighty, then how come it wasn't mentioned in the book itself to help us filter it out from the many other "Satanic false books"? Are we sure that this book too is not a man-made Satanic book?

Because unlike the koran the Bible can stand up under the light of scrutiny. Archaelogy, science and history vindicate the books of the Bible. And one could easily ask a similiar question about the koran. Muhammad didn't write it. The earliest surviving copy of the koran we have is 150 years after his death and there is evidence from the hadith it was altered. So are you willing to die for a book that can be proven by early muslim sources to be altered. And I mean proven not speculated upon.

After all, its just a conclusion, isn't it?
Beside, what evidence are they talking about?!  The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus.  So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering it as the True Living Word of GOD.

Again your date is wrong. There are manuscripts dated within the first century. Some at 50 Ad many others between 65 and 72 Ad. And as I asked before if the you use the same level of scrutiny on the koran it fails miserably. The one's Muhammad said were the best at remembering the koran disputed the Uthman version which became the official version we have now. So how can you trust it?

That is a false allegation as I demonstrated above. You are setting up strawman arguments

You so are denying the prediction of Moses and your own Book Bible

No. I am denying what you say it says. I pointed out to you numerous times now that Moses predicted that the Israelites would be rebellious and that the Law was preserved as a witness against them. You are purposely misrepresenting the scriptures.

This Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.

I have already shown you that you are falsly attributing what you wish to be there to Scripture. I will not address this again.

That is not fact. That is someone's theory. They continuously talk about an original source material for all of the Gospels but cannot seem to find one. Yet people, such as yourself, continue to throw out this debunked theory as some kind of fact when it is not. The reasone there are corresponding stories in the Gospels is because they were written about Jesus and His ministry. DUH.

Let Talk about the Facts

Paul's blasphemous statement:

Let us read what Paul said in the corrupted Bible:

"For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.  (From the NIV Bible, 1 Corinthians 1:25)"

Here are the countless English translations of this verse.  Literally, almost 100% of all of the English translations agree:

   1. Corinthians 1:25 (New International Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
       
   2. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New American Standard Bible)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   3. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Amplified Bible)
      25[This is] because the foolish thing [that has its source in] God is wiser than men, and the weak thing [that springs] from God is stronger than men.

      Because the stupid thing in GOD???
       
   4. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New Living Translation)
      25 This foolish plan of God is wiser than the wisest of human plans, and God’s weakness is stronger than the greatest of human strength.
       
   5. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (King James Version)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   6. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (English Standard Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   7. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Contemporary English Version)
      25 Even when God is foolish, he is wiser than everyone else, and even when God is weak, he is stronger than everyone else.

      Even when GOD is stupid???
       
   8. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New King James Version)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
   9. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (21st Century King James Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
  10. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (American Standard Version)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
  11. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Young's Literal Translation)
      25 because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men;
       
  12. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Darby Translation)
      25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
       
  13. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
      25 because God's foolishness is wiser than human wisdom, and God's weakness is stronger than human strength.
       
  14. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New International Reader's Version)
      25 The foolish things of God are wiser than human wisdom. The weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

      The stupid things of GOD???
       
  15. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Wycliffe New Testament)
      25 For that that is folly thing of God, is wiser than men; and that that is the feeble thing of God [and that that is the
      sick thing, or frail, of God], is stronger than men.

      The folly things of GOD???
       
  16. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (New International Version - UK)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
       
  17. 1 Corinthians 1:25 (Today's New International Version)
      25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

 

Let us analyze this foolish and blasphemous verse from Paul:

1-  Regardless of how smart and stupid GOD and us humans are, our intelligence will never reach even the stupidity of GOD!

Let me stop you right there. You have once again shown a serious lack of knowledge of Jewish idioms or the overall theme of the letter to the Corinthians. What Paul was saying is that God specifically chose something men considered foolish and feeble to proclaim His message so that when the message transformed people noone could take credit for having brought anyone to salvation. Salvation is of the Lord alone and noone comes unless He calls them. He chose a method where that fact would be made manifest.

[/b][/glow][/size]2-  GOD is a fool.

3-  GOD is weak.

4-  Man is more foolish and weaker than GOD.

5-  The comparison itself is very insulting and degrading to GOD Almighty.  It is also limiting to Him since our finite and limited intelligence and strength were compared to His infinite Attributes.

Most of this is irrelevant as I addressed your concern above but that last statement is just hilarious because the Scriptures are plain that we are made in His image. As we are sanctified we are made more and more like Him. You may think it is insulting but it is God's desire that you conform to His image.

Only to those who have an unreasonable level of scrutiny. ALL of the early church fathers attested to these Gospels belonging to the men that they are attributed to. To say there is no evidence is false.

What a statement for living in the age of mythology, we don't know who are those father, what they write and why they write???

Yes we do. Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement, etc. They all attest to their veracity. Polycarp was a disciple of John the beloved. Again get your facts straight.

Now try to answer a simple straight forward question without obfuscating. I will ask again...

Do you ever wonder why Muhammad was so favored by Allah but he never gave him the ability to prove his prophethood with a miracle, prophecy, or even saving him from death as, according to Muhammad, he did Jesus? Oh yes and are you FULLY sure of your salvation?

[Peter]

You quote men's commentaries from the pop-modern Roman Catholic "New American Bible" and Rupert Murdoch's NIV. You rail against modern bibles even as you quote them. You rail against Jews, even as you quote them. Is it any wonder why you relish in the annotations of these men's words? Of course not. That you follow the words of men is all you have demonstrated since you arrived. That's why you like your ears tickled with them instead of simply reading and putting the same effort into understanding the scriptures.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/gospel_of_john.htm

As you have proven, to follow Mohammed you have to ignore scripture, history, archaeology and geography, until your mind achieves the level of a 7th century desert dwelling illiterate.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1483.0
You have to venerate the black stone, just as the pagans did, before Mohammed pretended that their pagan rituals were actually his.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1050.15

In other words it is pointless for you to eagerly advance your self-deception, with details that you mistakenly believe support your blasphemy against the God of the Scriptures, until you can find and offer some EVIDENCE that suggests that Mecca ever existed before the 4th century AD or it's Kaaba before pagan immigrants from Yemen built it in the early 5th century. In the continuing absence of any historical or archaeological evidence to the contrary, Mohammed's ridiculous STAND-ALONE 7th century invention will remain exposed as being exactly that. And the false prophet Mohammed is the only reason that you blaspheme God.
Do you understand?
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=56.0
Until you can bring us the evidence that Mecca existed before the Christian era, we have to go by the actual historical record and recognize Mohammed's religion as nothing more than repackaged Arabian Star Family and jinn demon worship.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=59.0

But you posted your post, after this earlier post, that you must have missed, wherein I inquired....
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6203#msg6203

Then why don't you stop all the bloviating and let's compare them. Mohammed was an illiterate, pillaging, plundering, murdering, child doing, prisoner raping, stepson's only wife stealing, sex slave prostituting, concubine fornicating, lying, cheating, blood drenched, imperialistic, conquering, terrorist, thief.

Please reply on the specific links if you take issue with any of those characterizations that come from your own books.
Which of those attributes of Mohammed does Jesus share?

[Peter]

I am going to move all your posts to spam storage this morning, until you quit ignoring the post at the following link that you have repeatedly ignored in several threads.
Please see forum decorum. You are required to engage in an exchange.
Now please answer to this post link.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1482.msg6247#msg6247
You will not be allowed to ignore posts any more. You will be required to revisit all of the points you missed in answer to your first post, beginning here.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6157#msg6157
As requested before.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6162#msg6162


[edit addition 7-28 after moving thread] you must also answer this post with an answer rather than unrelated spam
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6182#msg6182
And then a point by point of our original replies that you ignored.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1491.msg6157#msg6157 [end edit]