Muslims on the Gospel

[Peter]

Muslims in this forum often turn to blasphemy against the Word of God, once they come to understand that Mohammed's 7th century religion, teaches the direct opposite of the Gospel.

Charges such as modern Bible version corruption and similar claims abound, even though in the 7th century after the Gospel had been copied tens of thousands of times and was being read in every popular language all over the known world, Mohammed quipped that people of the Gospel should judge by what is revealed therein.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1704.0

Muslims having to believe that the Gospel had somehow become so "corrupted", that the lengthy accounts that the witnesses of Jesus Christ - indeed it's whole primary subject - is somehow supposed to have become so "corrupted" that it became the very opposite of what it had been, simply because the Gospel is the opposite, of the unhistorical and unsupported claims made in Mohammed's 7th century recitations.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1912.0
Here's a thread regarding the history and textual integrity of Scripture
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=97.0
You Tube
http://www.leestrobel.com/videoserver/video.php?clip=strobelT1075

1Cr 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.   Christ crucified

The problem with this line of argument is, of course, that no versions of the Gospel, in any language, from any period throughout the Christian era, have ever contradicted Jesus' sacrifice on the cross to save mankind from sin. That's what the Gospel - the Messiah and the new covenant He ushered in - have been, and will always be about.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=1175.0
And the whole reason they reject the Gospel, as recounted by the witnesses of Jesus Christ, is because they follow the words of a single, 7th century, illiterate southeast Arabian desert dweller.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=148.0
Mohammed's 23 year record is to the Gospel, as the negative is to a photograph. Mohammed's followers filled with complete resolve as to what to DISbelieve, without a clue offered to them as to who did die on the cross.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=628.0

Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. 10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

At the same time, Muslims are unable to produce any evidence whatsoever, from before Mohammed and the 7th and 8th century Islamic "tradition" creators, that suggests that Mohammed's religion ever existed before Mohammed.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=56.0

So then we would appreciate it, if rather than carrying on with these tired, empty, hollow, and unsubstantiated claims regarding the Gospel, you instead produce for us a single version of the New Testament, from any point in history, in any language whatsoever, that tells a different story other than Jesus was crucified, died and was resurrected, to save all mankind who have faith in His shed blood, from sin.

2Cr 11:3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. 4 For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or [if] ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with [him].

Heaping on more blasphemy against the Word of God, will never magically create thousands of years of history of Mecca prior to the 4th century, so we can understand the lashing out in frustration.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?board=56.0

1John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

In summary, a frustration that is born out of Mohammed's followers standing empty handed, whether in regard to the absence of a pre-Mohammed record that suggests that Mohammed's religion ever existed before Mohammed, or the equally empty and absurd contention, that the whole main subject of the Gospel was once somehow, something other than it has been for the last nearly 2,000 years.
http://islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=97.0

[relaxboy]

For a start, you may want to first indicate the definition of Injeel or Gospel in Islam.

Also, you are good at doing copy and paste work and I worried that you may not actually understand what you paste.

[PeteWaldo]

Hello relaxboy, and welcome to the forum. We may be able to help in your quest for truth.

For a start, you may want to first indicate the definition of Injeel or Gospel in Islam.

Generally translated into English as, and used synonymously with the term "Gospel", usually referring to one or more of the 4 books of the Gospel.
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/47/default.htm

Interestingly, even though Muhammad claimed the Quran is pure Arabic, that is of course false, because it has many non-Arabic words in it like "Injil" for example.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=3091.0

Though there's no shortage of Muhammad's followers that have been fooled into proclaiming a 16th century Muhammadan forgery, who have obviously never read that forgery.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/gospel_of_barnabas.htm

But we won't be well served by wasting time over the etymology of a word, as long as you must disbelieve the whole subject of the Gospel, deny the Son of God and reject His blood that was shed to save us all from sin, as articles of your faith in Muhammad alone.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/the_lamb_slain.htm

It's also pointless to argue an Arabic word since there is no evidence that the Arabic language even existed prior to about the 3rd century AD:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2561.0

Also, you are good at doing copy and paste work and I worried that you may not actually understand what you paste.

Since scripture is all that I copy and pasted in the post you are replying to, which of those scriptures do you think I "may not actually understand"?

Let's start with this one:

1John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

Do you believe the 1600 year record of YHWH to mankind or not? Is there something you believe I don't understand about that verse that isn't reinforced by so many other scriptures such as:
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/jesus_the_son_of_god.htm

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

1 John 2:22 ..... He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.....
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/islam_is_antichrist.htm

[relaxboy]

That is the problem I indicated earlier.

You have the habit of copying and pasting articles without answering the question yourself. It makes me think that you do not know what Muslims actually believe.

So, back to the easy question: In your own words and understanding, what do you think is the Muslims' view of the Injeel. What does the Quran speaks of the Injeel?

Not a tough question right?

[PeteWaldo]

That is the problem I indicated earlier.

You have the habit of copying and pasting articles without answering the question yourself.

And as I patiently explained, the verses were all that I copy and pasted. I wrote the article myself. But then we are to expect false accusers in these last days:

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3  Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good...

It makes me think that you do not know what Muslims actually believe.

Let's start the discussion about what Muhammad's followers believe with this. In part they believe that by prostrating themselves toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca 5 times a day, while praying in the "vain repetitions of the heathen" (as scripture refers to Salat), they will somehow be able to enter paradise while still carrying all of their sins. That they can carry their sins right up there and stand before a Holy and Just God.
http://www.petewaldo.com/sabians_islam.htm#sabian_rituals

But just who is it that every follower of Muhammad will stand before in judgment?

Jhn 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

Judged by the very Son of God that the false prophet Muhammad and his followers deny and blaspheme.

Didn't you ever even investigate the origins of the pagan rituals Muhammad's followers engage in?
http://www.petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm#index
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/origin_of_ramadan.htm

But what is far more important is not what the father of lies trained his followers to believe, but how he fills his followers through his stand-alone "messenger" to DISbelieve the one true God of the inspired scriptures of Jews and Christians. And for what? To follow THE false prophet Muhammad alone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lEro81ygXQ

So, back to the easy question: In your own words and understanding, what do you think is the Muslims' view of the Injeel. What does the Quran speaks of the Injeel?

Not a tough question right?

Not tough at all. That's why I answered it:

For a start, you may want to first indicate the definition of Injeel or Gospel in Islam.

Generally translated into English as, and is synonymous with the term "Gospel", usually referring to one or more of the 4 books of the Gospel.
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/47/default.htm

[relaxboy]

Generally translated into English as, and is synonymous with the term "Gospel", usually referring to one or more of the 4 books of the Gospel.

That is not what Muslims believe of the Gospel.

You see, you have been writing a lot of stuff about the Injeel and thinking this is what Muslims believe, when much of what you think is not what Muslims believe.

That is quite disturbing.... I believe.

[PeteWaldo]

Generally translated into English as, and is synonymous with the term "Gospel", usually referring to one or more of the 4 books of the Gospel.

That is not what Muslims believe of the Gospel.

You see, you have been writing a lot of stuff about the Injeel and thinking this is what Muslims believe, when much of what you think is not what Muslims believe.

That is quite disturbing.... I believe.

I even left you a link to many translations of the Quran that demonstrates the terms "Gospel" and "Injeel" are used interchangeably:
http://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/47/default.htm

And by Muhammad's 7th century, the Gospel had been translated into every popular language, copied tens of thousands of times, and had been read all over the known world for centuries.

Do you possess the cognitive function and critical thinking skills to understand what I just wrote? Those thousands of copies of the Gospel (or Injeel) in all those languages, would necessarily have been the same in Muhammad's 7th century, as it is today. The whole subject of that Gospel is the crucifixion, death and resurrection of the Messiah, the Lamb of God, who saves all from sin who have faith in His shed blood.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/the_lamb_slain.htm

[relaxboy]

Of course, we all know Injeel and Gospel are the same. I have not disputed that.

When I asked if you understand what Muslims believe as the Injeel, you sent a barrage of writings about what you think MUslims believe about the Injeel... many of which are not we Muslims believe.

For example, you think we Muslims believe the Injeel is the 4 Gospels in your bible and then claimed Muslims are wrong because you think we Muslims believe the Injeel is corrupted.

Well, that is NOT what we believe.

Surprise?

[PeteWaldo]

You are wasting forum space by uniform use of large font. It makes the threads contain more pages, to later sort through, than they otherwise would have. If you want to use a little large font here and there for emphasis that's all right, but to use it for all your words also leaves the impression that you believe all of your words are more important than others here, which all of your posts - particularly like this one - demonstrate they are not. Same with your uniform use of obnoxious all bright blue font. Please use black font unless you are using color to emphasize or segregate portions of what you write.

[PeteWaldo]

Of course, we all know Injeel and Gospel are the same. I have not disputed that.

When I asked if you understand what Muslims believe as the Injeel, you sent a barrage of writings about what you think MUslims believe about the Injeel... many of which are not we Muslims believe.

For example, you think we Muslims believe the Injeel is the 4 Gospels in your bible and then claimed Muslims are wrong because you think we Muslims believe the Injeel is corrupted.

I already answered that and even tried to make you slow down and take a closer look, by asking if you possessed the critical thinking skills to understand it, which it would seem you went on to demonstrate you do not.
And just look at who's copy and pasting nonsense, that he obviously never gave any thought to, now! The one who falsely accused the same. Muslims sometimes seem to think that simply because they are willing to parrot a lie, that their willingness to simply parrot it, will somehow magically make it come true.

Please THINK about it this time. Perhaps if I make it bigger. I wrote: "And by Muhammad's 7th century, the Gospel had been translated into every popular language, copied tens of thousands of times, and had been read all over the known world for centuries."

We even have 3500 partial or complete manuscripts of the Gospel that were penned prior to 300 AD. Since there were tens of thousands of copies by Muhammad's day, that means that in order for you to make the ridiculous claim of corruption after Muhammad's day, each and every one of those tens of thousands of copies of the Gospel, penned in Latin, Syriac, Aramaic, Hebrew, and several other lesser-known languages, would have all had to have been changed in all those various countries and languages uniformly, to such an extent, that the whole subject of the Gospel (the shed blood of the Lamb of God) somehow became the exact opposite of what it was supposed to be. Can't even you see how ridiculous such an idea is?
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/bible_manuscript_errors_.htm

Yet in that same 7th century, in regard to the tens of thousands of copies of the Gospel that were spread all over the "known world", Muhammad's "Allah" is supposed to have proclaimed:

Sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein.

And of course in order for you to make a claim of corruption before Muhammad's day, you would be pointing out that his "Allah" was foolish for having made such a bad recommendation.
You are stuck between a rock and a hard place my friend.

So as a follower of Muhammad alone, what does that tell you about Muhammad's alter-ego "Allah"? By your calling the Gospel corrupt, you are actually calling your "Allah" "corrupt".

Even if those tens of thousands of copies in all those languages could have been changed uniformly after Muhammad's day, to where the whole subject became the exact opposite of what it was supposed to be, you would be highlighting the deficiency of your "Allah" in his inability to know in advance that the Gospel would become corrupted, after he advised Christians to go by what is revealed in those tens of thousands of copies that existed in Muhammad's day, thereby providing bad advice regarding the Gospel that he was too ignorant to know would eventually become corrupted.

Sura 5:68 Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord."
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/

Well, that is NOT what we believe.

That's right. Again, you are filled by the father of lies as to what to DISbelieve, with no other "Injeel" to direct us to since no direct opposite Gospel exists, except in the imaginations of Muhammad's modern day followers.

Surprise?[/size]

My only surprise is that you didn't take a moment to think about it, before parroting such an unsupportable, ridiculous, and tired old lie like that.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/#bible_corruption
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/bible_manuscript_errors_.htm

1John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

In another post at the following link you claimed "At this point, I have not provided you with any lies." but as we can readily see, the scriptures offer a very different opinion than your own on the matter.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5120.msg19526#msg19526

[relaxboy]

Please THINK about it this time. Perhaps if I make it bigger. I wrote: "And by Muhammad's 7th century, the Gospel had been translated into every popular language, copied tens of thousands of times, and had been read all over the known world for centuries."

We even have 3500 partial or complete manuscripts of the Gospel that were penned prior to 300 AD. Since there were tens of thousands of copies by Muhammad's day, that means that in order for you to make the ridiculous claim of corruption after Muhammad's day, each and every one of those tens of thousands of copies of the Gospel, penned in Latin, Syriac, Aramaic, Hebrew, and several other lesser-known languages, would have all had to have been changed in all those various countries and languages uniformly, to such an extent, that the whole subject of the Gospel (the shed blood of the Lamb of God) somehow became the exact opposite of what it was supposed to be. Can't even you see how ridiculous such an idea is?
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/bible_manuscript_errors_.htm

Yet in that same 7th century, in regard to the tens of thousands of copies of the Gospel that were spread all over the "known world", Muhammad's "Allah" is supposed to have proclaimed:

Sura 5:47 Let the people of the Gospel judge by what Allah hath revealed therein.

And of course in order for you to make a claim of corruption before Muhammad's day, you would be pointing out that his "Allah" was foolish for having made such a bad recommendation.
You are stuck between a rock and a hard place my friend.

So as a follower of Muhammad alone, what does that tell you about Muhammad's alter-ego "Allah"? By your calling the Gospel corrupt, you are actually calling your "Allah" "corrupt".

Even if those tens of thousands of copies in all those languages could have been changed uniformly after Muhammad's day, to where the whole subject became the exact opposite of what it was supposed to be, you would be highlighting the deficiency of your "Allah" in his inability to know in advance that the Gospel would become corrupted, after he advised Christians to go by what is revealed in those tens of thousands of copies that existed in Muhammad's day, thereby providing bad advice regarding the Gospel that he was too ignorant to know would eventually become corrupted.

Sura 5:68 Say: "O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord."
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/

I wonder why you keep saying that I believe the Injeel/Gospel was corrupted. It was NOT.

I state here again, you have the wrong definition of Injeel.... or rather what you think we MUslims define the Injeel is NOT what you define.

Oh, sorry for the big font. I have difficulty reading small print but will lower the font anyway.

[PeteWaldo]

I wonder why you keep saying that I believe the Injeel/Gospel was corrupted. It was NOT.

I state here again, you have the wrong definition of Injeel.... or rather what you think we MUslims define the Injeel is NOT what you define.

Oh, sorry for the big font. I have difficulty reading small print but will lower the font anyway.

If you have trouble reading the small font you are welcome to use larger font. But I don't see why you can't adjust the font on your screen. On an I-phone you can make the font larger by spreading your fingers apart on the screen, can't you (I don 't own one)?
On a desktop or laptop computer you can hold the Ctrl button down and push the + key repeatedly until the size is good for you to read. To reverse it, hold ctrl button down and push the - key to shrink the font back down.
Also I set my screen to a very low resolution (1024 x 768), which makes the icons on my desktop over an inch square, yet everything I access still seems sharp and clear. (That resolution will include the browser side scroller bar more frequently, but not the bottom scroller bar (at least on my computer). Please let me know if you need help with any of that.

Please excuse my error and please accept my apology. So many Muslims make the claim the Gospel was corrupted (since it is the opposite of the Quran) I thought you were simply repeating it. That's why I presumed when you said "Well, that is NOT what we believe." it was in reference to the Gospel being the 4 gospels of the scriptures, not the reference to corruption. Do an internet or youtube search like "bible is corrupted quran" and you will see what I mean.

I guess it was the "we" in "NOT what we believe." since you wouldn't seem to be speaking for all those Muslims that make the claim of corruption of the Gospel.
So now you have my interest peaked as to what I will presume will be your fairly unique view.

What is it that you do you do believe about the Injeel/Gospel?
Where is it?
Could you please provide a description, or even better a link, to an online Injeel/Gospel that you are referring to?

[relaxboy]

The Quran says about the Injeel/Gospel:

"It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it; and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong)," (3:3).


Also, "And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah," (5:46).

The Gospel (singular) is the revelation given to Jesus (pbuh) for hin to preach to Jews at his time. It is the same as the Quran given to Muhammad (pbuh).

The Quran does not say that the Gospel is a collection of books from phantom writers (Mark, Matthew, Luke or John).

The Gospel is NOT lost. It is included in your scripture. You may delete or add anything in your scripture, but the message of the Injeel will always be in scripture. Your Gospels, your bible might be corrupted, but the true Gospel will never be touched with corruption.

That is why we find the true message of Islam in your scripture.

For example, the Quran says Jesus NEVER claim to be God. If you do your reading, without any bias, you will find the Jesus never claimed to be God in the scripture.

That is the miracle of the Quran, too.

[PeteWaldo]

Did you try altering the size of the font on your computer, so you wouldn't have to do it in each post?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2023.msg19533#msg19533

The Quran says about the Injeel/Gospel:

"It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it;........

This highlights the folly of parroting a mass-murdering, thieving, 7th century SW Arabian desert dwelling illiterate. The 1600 year record of the one true God as revealed through all of His prophets and witnesses, isn't "confirmed" by a stand-alone guy who comes along 500 years later and denies its whole subject! Something can't be "confirmed" by its exact opposite.
The New Testament (new covenant) was fulfillment of the old covenant. The very fulfillment that Muhammad and you deny. Denying the whole subject of the Gospel - of the whole Bible.

....... and He sent down the Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the criterion (of judgment between right and wrong)," (3:3).


Also, "And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah," (5:46).[/i]

The Gospel (singular) is the revelation given to Jesus (pbuh) for hin to preach to Jews at his time. It is the same as the Quran given to Muhammad (pbuh).

The Quran does not say that the Gospel is a collection of books from phantom writers (Mark, Matthew, Luke or John).

The Gospel is NOT lost. It is included in your scripture. You may delete or add anything in your scripture, but the message of the Injeel will always be in scripture. Your Gospels, your bible might be corrupted, but the true Gospel will never be touched with corruption.

See how casually you parrot such ridiculous tripe? You failed to explain to us how people could go back and "delete or add" to the whole subject of a book, after it had been translated into every popular language, copied tens of thousands of times, and had been read all over the known world by Muhammad's day. Yet as many times as that undeniable truth has been shown to you, your rebellious spirit of antichrist won't allow you to admit to the truth.

You claim the Gospel was not corrupted - while your following words demonstrate there is no way for you to believe otherwise - unlike your antichrist brethren who are at least honest enough with themselves to know, that either the Gospel had to have been corrupted, or Muhammad was a lying antichrist false prophet. But you seem smart enough to recognize the impossibility of corruption.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2023.msg19522#msg19522

You can only believe the Bible was corrupted, since the whole subject of the gospel that Muhammad told Christians to go by, was the same in his 7th century as it is today.

Your gospel is a unique fiction of your imagination, even as your post indicated you were speaking for "we Muslims". Your "gospel" does not exist.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2023.msg19522#msg19522

All you are really trying to do is excuse away Muhammad's earlier Mecca drivel, when he was wandering around Mecca dithering on by plagiarizing his buddy Jabr;s stuff, that were later annulled by Muhammad's pure consummate evil Medina surahs:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=452.0
While the Meccans made fun of his endless stream self-contradiction.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=116.0

That's why he had to turn Islam into the imperialistic, political, murder machine, as it remains today, in order to silence voices of truth and reason on pain of death.
http://www.petewaldo.com/banu_qurayza_massacre.htm#jews_torah
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/blasphemy_laws.htm#death_penalty_blasphemy

That is why we find the true message of Islam in your scripture.

For example, the Quran says Jesus NEVER claim to be God.

God gave you the free will to reject the prophets and witnesses of the one true God of the scriptures, to follow a 7th century SW Arabian desert dwelling illiterate. Your choice, your fate:

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

John 5:22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

If you do your reading, without any bias, you will find the Jesus never claimed to be God in the scripture.

We have shown you over and over how He did, but Jesus wouldn't need to personally claim anything, that was written about Him by others. Let's look at just what Jesus did claim, since that seems to be your mental limitation, which is the subject of Old Testament prophecy and the whole subject of New Testament fulfillment of it:

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These [are] the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and [in] the prophets, and [in] the psalms, concerning me. 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And ye are witnesses of these things.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/the_lamb_slain.htm

Why not actually reply to it this time (on the other thread at the link) rather than continuing to dither on with secondary subjects, in efforts to run and hide from the truth of the Gospel?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=5120.msg19536#msg19536

That is the miracle of the Quran, too.[/size]

But I have shown you how ridiculous such a notion is. A whopping 71 out of 114 suras are subject to abrogation, that were recited over the short span of just 23-years. Some "miracle"! Talk about a confused alter-ego:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=116.0

The Quran is as much the opposite to the Gospel, as Muhammad was the opposite of Jesus Christ.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm

Let alone that all of the various versions of your "miracle" were all collected up and burned, on two separate occasions, except for the preferred version that went through edit.
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/textual_history_of_the_koran.htm

[relaxboy]

I have showed you the Quran's definition of the Injeel/Gospel and there you start whining about how we Muslims are wrong.

The topic of this post is on Muslims' view of the Gospel. Christians have the wrong thinking of what Muslims believe, and when we showed them the truth, they start closing their ears and keep throwing insults of their own folly. 

What can I say.

[PeteWaldo]

I have showed you the Quran's definition of the Injeel/Gospel and there you start whining about how we Muslims are wrong.

There you go with the disingenuous "we Muslims" again. You don't speak for all Muslims because Muslims are in a state of mass confusion, during this information age. Gee, the Muhammadan wonders, was Muhammad really a mass murderer or not?
http://www.petewaldo.com/banu_qurayza_massacre.htm#jews_torah
Was Muhammad a thief or not?
http://www.petewaldo.com/banu_qurayza_massacre.htm#abraham_on_booty
Was Muhammad a prisoner rapist or not?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4981.msg19179#msg19179
Was Muhammad a terrorist or not?
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4981.msg19223#msg19223

Sane and rational people with a capacity for critical thought, can easily conclude what the truth is regarding those questions, based entirely on the evidence from Islam's own books.

Indeed when asked who did die on the cross, Muslims will just about offer as many different answers, as the number of Muslims that are asked. As prosecutors would agree, that's the difficulty folks face, when a number of people are all caught trying to tell the same lie.
http://www.petewaldo.com/simon_magnus_gnostics_ebionites_islam.htm

Your brethren claim the Gospel was corrupted - an impossibility post-7th century, that you seem to recognize. While you claim to believe something like:  the Gospel would be OK, if it's whole subject were removed.
The equivalent would be for an Arabian pagan to come up to you and say "gee, I believe the Quran and Islam are true, except for that part about there being only one God"
It's simply amazing that you can't seem to understand how preposterous your view is. "Gee, the gospel wasn't corrupted, it's just that its whole subject is the exact opposite of what Muhammad denied".

The topic of this post is on Muslims' view of the Gospel.

Which was a poor title since it should have been "Muslim's viewS of the Gospel". Consisting of one lie after the next.

Christians have the wrong thinking of what Muslims believe, and when we showed them the truth, they start closing their ears and keep throwing insults of their own folly. 

What can I say.[/size]

All you can say you have been running and hiding from the whole subject of the Gospel since you arrived.
And the reason I spend time like this is not so much that I believe a person such as yourself will come to see the truth, but so that those that come after you that are genuinely seeking out the truth, will see the example of an antichrist that you provide.

[relaxboy]

Your brethren claim the Gospel was corrupted - an impossibility post-7th century, that you seem to recognize. While you claim to believe something like:  the Gospel would be OK, if it's whole subject were removed.
The equivalent would be for an Arabian pagan to come up to you and say "gee, I believe the Quran and Islam are true, except for that part about there being only one God"
It's simply amazing that you can't seem to understand how preposterous your view is. "Gee, the gospel wasn't corrupted, it's just that its whole subject is the exact opposite of what Muhammad denied".

Funny. You seemed to have lost the idea of rebutting the Quranic point about the definition and sanctity of the Injeel, and start using what you think what Muslims believe about the Injeel, and say I am wrong. I think this is called argument from fallacy.

Nevertheless, my Muslims brethen, if that is what yiou like to define them is not wrong to say the bible(not the gospel and Torah)  is corrupted, as your book contains the writings of men and constant changes to suit each sectarian views.

The topic of this post is on Muslims' view of the Gospel.

All you can say you have been running and hiding from the whole subject of the Gospel since you arrived.
And the reason I spend time like this is not so much that I believe a person such as yourself will come to see the truth, but so that those that come after you that are genuinely seeking out the truth, will see the example of an antichrist that you provide.

Again funny. I have been open to all comments and criticism, and I look forward to more inputs from you.

[PeteWaldo]

Your brethren claim the Gospel was corrupted - an impossibility post-7th century, that you seem to recognize. While you claim to believe something like:  the Gospel would be OK, if it's whole subject were removed.
The equivalent would be for an Arabian pagan to come up to you and say "gee, I believe the Quran and Islam are true, except for that part about there being only one God"
It's simply amazing that you can't seem to understand how preposterous your view is. "Gee, the gospel wasn't corrupted, it's just that its whole subject is the exact opposite of what Muhammad denied".

Funny. You seemed to have lost the idea of rebutting the Quranic point about the definition and sanctity of the Injeel,  .......

You repeat the same falsehood, so I again show you how it is a falsehood. It's no different than the other contradictions, like when Muhammad claimed the Quran was pure Arabic, when in fact it is not. Or the doublespeak when he claimed that no verses are abrogated, but only annulled and substituted for by newer ones, and of course annulment of the earlier verse is abrogation.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=116.0

No need to keep using an archaic Syriac word for the Gospel. Just like so much of the rest of Muhammad's self-contradictory drivel (nullifying through substitution, so much of even the more final edited versions of the Quran), one can't have it both ways.

The whole subject of the Gospel - that Jesus was crucified, died and resurrected from the dead to save all mankind from sin through His shed blood - is the same today as it was in the tens of thousands of copies of the Gospel in all those languages spread all over the known world, during Muhammad's day.

..... and start using what you think what Muslims believe about the Injeel, ........

Muslims claim the Gospel was corrupted, even though it is a physical impossibility to go back and uniformly change tens of thousands of copies in so many languages, that were spread all over the known world. Let alone for its whole subject to be added.
https://youtu.be/sJ9X6MQS8LM

....... and say I am wrong. I think this is called argument from fallacy.

No it is your empty argument, that is necessarily a fallacy.

Nevertheless, my Muslims brethen, if that is what yiou like to define them ........

Christians have called each other brothers and sisters ever since the first century.

I guess I mistakenly projected that onto Muslims, and indeed should have known better, since Sunnis slaughter Shiites over differences in beliefs.
Rather than brothers and sisters Muslims are arch enemies of each other, as displayed all around the Muslim world today.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
Let alone actual brothers killing their sisters, parents killing their children, and other such senseless slaughter in the name of "honor".
Islam is pure consummate evil, as exactly opposed to brotherly love - always the exact opposite of the Gospel.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/the_love_of_god.htm

........ is not wrong to say the bible(not the gospel and Torah)  is corrupted, ........

The whole subject of the Bible, of the Gospel, remains unchanged. Because you follow the father of lies through his "messenger" Muhammad you must deny it. Period.

Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh [is] in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it [is] the blood [that] maketh an atonement for the soul.
http://www.islamandthetruth.com/the_lamb_slain.htm

....... as your book contains the writings of men and constant changes to suit each sectarian views.[/size]

It contains the same subject it did in the first century and Muhammad's seventh century.

The topic of this post is on Muslims' view of the Gospel.

All you can say you have been running and hiding from the whole subject of the Gospel since you arrived.
And the reason I spend time like this is not so much that I believe a person such as yourself will come to see the truth, but so that those that come after you that are genuinely seeking out the truth, will see the example of an antichrist that you provide.

Again funny. I have been open to all comments and criticism, and I look forward to more inputs from you.

Another lie. You have avoided the whole subject of the Gospel, like the plague.
So tell us, do you believe what Muslims teach about the first drop of blood shed by an average sinful Muslim so-called "martyr", not only absolves himself of his own sins through his own shed blood but qualifies him to intercede for seventy of his family members?

[relaxboy]

Muslims claim the Gospel was corrupted, even though it is a physical impossibility to go back and uniformly change tens of thousands of copies in so many languages, that were spread all over the known world. Let alone for its whole subject to be added.
https://youtu.be/sJ9X6MQS8LM

Unlike you, I prefer to keep to the topic of discussion.

Once again, I say here. Muslims do not believe that the Injeel and Taurah, which came from God, are corrupted. However, we do believe that the bible, which also contains the word of men, and have been changed.

Bible scholars, for example, have written that the writings of Mark, Matthew and Luke, came from one or two sources. They are not the originals. They are corrupted with writings and inputs from other men.

Tell me why and how I am wrong here.

[ExMilitary]

Muslims claim the Gospel was corrupted, even though it is a physical impossibility to go back and uniformly change tens of thousands of copies in so many languages, that were spread all over the known world. Let alone for its whole subject to be added.
https://youtu.be/sJ9X6MQS8LM

Unlike you, I prefer to keep to the topic of discussion.

Once again, I say here. Muslims do not believe that the Injeel and Taurah, which came from God, are corrupted. However, we do believe that the bible, which also contains the word of men, and have been changed.

We know this is what you believe.  But how can you actually believe it?  With the Internet, you can actually LOOK at a REAL 7th century translation and compare it to today's translations.  Because the 'Bible' circulated in the 7th century says the same thing as the Bible circulated today.  That 7th century Bible is the one Muhammad said we should search.  Here, I'll quote from it (it is from about the 4th century and was the "official" translation of the Roman Empire... that is the Empire that had control of Medina:

7th century Latin 'Bible':

ego sum Alpha et Omega principium et finis dicit Dominus Deus qui est et qui erat et qui venturus est Omnipotens... et cum vidissem eum cecidi ad pedes eius tamquam mortuus et posuit dexteram suam super me dicens noli timere ego sum primus et novissimus et vivus et fui mortuus et ecce sum vivens in saecula saeculorum

Now the English translation of THAT 7th century Latin:

I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty... And when I had seen him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying: Fear not. I am the First and the Last, And alive, and was dead. And behold I am living for ever and ever

See, nothing has changed since Muhammad's time with regard to this passage in Revelation where Yeshua = Alpha and Omega

[PeteWaldo]

Muslims claim the Gospel was corrupted, even though it is a physical impossibility to go back and uniformly change tens of thousands of copies in so many languages, that were spread all over the known world. Let alone for its whole subject to be added.
https://youtu.be/sJ9X6MQS8LM

Unlike you, I prefer to keep to the topic of discussion.

Once again, I say here. Muslims do not believe that the Injeel and Taurah, which came from God, are corrupted.

So where are the Gospel and Torah that you are referring to?

However, we do believe that the bible, which also contains the word of men, and have been changed.

And "once again" the Gospel and Torah you are referring to do not exist. While the tens of thousands of copies of the Gospel that existed in Muhammad's day that he was referring to, that had been read all over the known world for centuries, is the same Gospel that Muhammad's "Allah" told Christians to go by which obviously contains the same whole subject as the one we have today.
So your are tacitly accusing your "Allah" of being foolish for not knowing what was in the Gospel, since he recommended we go by the very same Gospel, of which he denied its whole subject!



You reject the one true God of the scriptures Yahweh, as revealed through all of His prophets and witnesses, whose people have followed Him through two covenants for 3500 years. To instead follow the Arabian pagan's "Allah", through adopted, adapted and thinly veneered pagan Arabian moon, sun, star and jinn-devil worship rituals:
http://www.petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm#index

To instead follow A SINGLE, STAND-ALONE, 7th century, illiterate, pillaging, plundering, mass murdering, child doing, female prisoner abusing, stepson's only wife taking, sex slave prostituting, concubine fornicating, vow and oath breaking, blood drenched, imperialistic, conquering, terrorist, thief that burned people alive. 
A real piece of work! A man that was THE EXACT OPPOSITE of Jesus Christ.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm
No Muslim has yet succeeded in correcting even a single one of those characterizations of Muhammad. Here's the latest feeble attempt regarding Muhammad as a prisoner rapist:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4981.msg19175#msg19175

Here's a guy that offers a $50,000 reward to anyone who can correct him on an even longer description:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/sinas-challenge/

Your choice, your fate.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jesus_or_muhammad.htm

While you ignore almost all that I reply to you, because you can see it is the truth, but to follow that truth you know you would have to leave Islam. Then your friends and family would abandon you, your parents would disinherit or perhaps even kill you, and if you live in an Islamic country the State likely has statutes that provide the death penalty for you. Didn't you ever wonder why all of that is supposed to seem OK to you? Don't even you find that even a little weird?

In your own Malaysia Islam has not gotten a complete grip, so leaving Islam is only illegal in five of 13 states, and punishable by a fine, imprisonment, and flogging. Of course it's only a matter of time before it's the death penalty.
So why not be a man for once, and explain to us what is just and holy, about Islamic countries providing the death penalty for citizens that leave Islam.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/death_penalty_apostasy.htm

Bible scholars, for example, have written that the writings of Mark, Matthew and Luke, came from one or two sources. They are not the originals.

They are not the originals any more than the Quran is, however the various versions of the Quran were collected up and burned on two separate occasions, in favor of the most preferred version edited on both occasions.
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/textual_history_of_the_koran.htm
One out of five verses in the oldest Quran don't even make sense.
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=2576.0
Nor do the oldest Qurans agree with each other:
http://www.islamchristianforum.com/index.php?topic=4707.0
Your Hadith are the result of being such a mess that individuals have gone through it over the last 1400 years with a "gee I don't like that part so it must be wrong" and "hey this looks good so let's include this" then later "nah that part isn't so hot after all", continuing even today.

Or as ibn Hisham who died in 833 admitted when he was doing his editing of Ishaq's earlier work: Ishaq: 691 "I am omitting things which Ishaq recorded in this book. I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss and matters which would distress certain people."
http://www.petewaldo.com/banu_qurayza_massacre.htm

While we have over 5300 partial or complete manuscripts of the Gospel that were penned before 300 AD. You are arguing textual criticism against the 3500 year record of revelation of all of the prophets and witnesses of the one true God, to follow the exact opposite through the 23-year record of a single false prophet as accurately portrayed in my description above. Doesn't that seem even a little odd to you?

The last thing you will find fruitful is textual criticism of a book that a reprobate false prophet causes you to deny the whole subject of. Which of course is why you have been running and hiding from the whole subject of the Gospel ever since you arrived.

They are corrupted with writings and inputs from other men.

So they're not corrupted, they are just corrupted.

Tell me why and how I am wrong here.[/size]

You are an antichrist that rejects Jesus Christ to follow the stunningly reprobate false prophet Muhammad alone.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/islam_is_antichrist.htm

Let alone that your belief in your false prophet, make you even more polytheistic, than you mistakenly believe Christians to be.

[ps49]

Muslims claim the Gospel was corrupted, even though it is a physical impossibility to go back and uniformly change tens of thousands of copies in so many languages, that were spread all over the known world. Let alone for its whole subject to be added.
https://youtu.be/sJ9X6MQS8LM

Unlike you, I prefer to keep to the topic of discussion.

Once again, I say here. Muslims do not believe that the Injeel and Taurah, which came from God, are corrupted. However, we do believe that the bible, which also contains the word of men, and have been changed.

Bible scholars, for example, have written that the writings of Mark, Matthew and Luke, came from one or two sources. They are not the originals. They are corrupted with writings and inputs from other men.

Tell me why and how I am wrong here.

Hi relaxboy. If I get you correctly, you are suggesting that the very earliest extant Christian manuscripts (upon which our modern biblical translations like the KJV depend) are themselves corrupted by men and therefore not trustworthy. Is that correct?

If so, then my question is this: What Gospel/Injeel did Muhammed instruct the "People of the Book" to judge by? What commonly understood text or message of the time was he referring to as the Gospel? Surely not the man-made corrupted ones (as you believe) dubbed Matthew, Mark, Luke and John?

[ps49]

The Gospel is NOT lost. It is included in your scripture.

Ah, ok, so this scripture which Muhammed calls "Gospel" back in AD 632 is the same as is today. Ie, the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark Luke and John (MMLJ).

Now considering the way in which Muhammed both endorses and yet contradicts the Gospel of the Christians, there is only one valid interpretation as far as I can see: The People of the Book (Christians) are expected to know the Gospels of MMLJ but throw out the parts which Muhammed rejects and also to add parts which Muhammed recommends. Now, why would any Christian do so on the command of a blood thirsty conquering tyrant who lived some 600 years after the events described in a foreign land and who was not even of Jewish descent? What makes Muhammed a better witness to the events of Jesus's life - and the meaning of His teachings -  than the Gospel writers? Perhaps sitting in a lonely cave for weeks on end communing with and being scared witless by unidentified spirits?

[ps49]

Reading the Quran, it is obvious to me that Muhammed was entirely consumed with the things we would expect from a tyrant of this natural world. Namely personal power, control, pride, obsession with material wealth and sex, domination, conquest and the destruction of all who oppose his will.

In contrast, Christianity is about the things which are not of this world. In particular, the things mentioned above which really have no place in the presence of God. If you start by realising this, you might begin to see through Islam and other doctrines claiming to be from God. Jesus said "My Kingdom is not of this world" or words to this effect. The natural world is full of evils of all kind which can ultimately be described as that which opposes the will and nature of God. As far as I can see, Muhammed was entirely that and oblivious to the fact. He never understood the Gospel or the nature of God's message through Christ. A natural man for sure.

It is for this reason you do not understand Jesus's identity and message. You will continue to be baffled by The Trinity so long as you are happy to be consumed by the concerns of this natural world. Jesus said "seek and you shall find" for a reason.

[PeteWaldo]

Reading the Quran, it is obvious to me that Muhammed was entirely consumed with the things we would expect from a tyrant of this natural world. Namely personal power, control, pride, obsession with material wealth and sex, domination, conquest and the destruction of all who oppose his will.

In contrast, Christianity is about the things which are not of this world. In particular, the things mentioned above which really have no place in the presence of God. If you start by realising this, you might begin to see through Islam and other doctrines claiming to be from God.

Like prostrating oneself toward the Quraish pagan's black stone idol in Mecca 5 times a day, while praying in the "vain repetitions of the heathen", in the names of the Arabian pagan's deity "Allah" and his "messenger" Muhammad. Even squandering money (that could otherwise help the poor) to travel to and kiss the Quraish pagan's black stone idol.
http://www.petewaldo.com/hajj_umrah.htm#index

As far as I can see, Muhammed was entirely that and oblivious to the fact. He never understood the Gospel or the nature of God's message through Christ. A natural man for sure.

1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Romans 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. 8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

Galatians 4:22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. 23 But he [who was] of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman [was] by promise. 24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. 25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. 26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.
http://www.petewaldo.com/children_flesh.htm

Genesis 16:11 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, [Hagar] Behold, thou [art] with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction. 12 And he will be a wild man; his hand [will be] against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.

Whether it's Muslims terrorizing and slaughtering non-Muslims, or Sunni's terrorizing and slaughtering Shiites or both of those groups terrorizing and slaughtering the poor Ahmadiyya, the seed of Ishmael and those who join them spiritually are just as was prophesied.
http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm