Muslim gladiator wrote:
5- Quran assures that Isa (Jesus) (Peace of Allah be upon him and his pure Mother) glad tidings to messenger will come after him called Ahmed [61]. Which we will assure it with very clear evidences in my next article InshaAllah. Christians refuse this idea.
Kai replies:
You will have to bring evidences for this bro! I have debated this issue for a long time, and so far Muslim have simply shown them selves to dabble with speculation.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
6- Quran assures that Isa (Jesus) (Peace of Allah be upon him and his pure Mother) is a messenger of God and denies the Christian thought about him of being killed on the cross [4].
Kai replies:
Well, not only Christians but most historians would agree that Jesus died on the cross and resurrected; this can even be prove from history and from logic.
Since you assert the opposite, could you please prove that Jesus never died?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
7- Quran states that Christians forget some parts of their real Holy Book [5].
Kai replies:
Forgetting is one thing, but where does it say corruption; yet then again, prove that the Christians actually forgot parts of the Holy Book.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
So, for all of these differences between the Quran the Bible in the basic belief, it makes unimpossibility for Imam like Al-Layth to say something against his main belief. Otherwise how does it come for a Muslim believe in the Quran after reading and understanding all of the verses in the Quran can imagine the Bible have not been corrupted.
Kai replies:
Well that is a problem you Muslim still need to figure out; I virtually am amazed that anyone can believe in Islam after such a down fall.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Indeed The Bible is still being corrupted until now 2006? And Ibn layth was not an ordinary man, he was a good Muslim scholar InshaAllah.
Kai replies:
Well, you are simply kicking yourself; if the Bible is corrupt, so is the Koran, since the Koran verifies its credibility.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Second, do you think anyone can believe the Bible is not corrupted after reading something like that?
Mark 1:9-13 (New International Version)
{9At that time Jesus came from Nazareth in Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan. 10As Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11And a voice came from heaven: "You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased."
12At once the Spirit sent him out into the desert, 13and he was in the desert forty days, being tempted by Satan. He was with the wild animals, and angels attended him.}
Compare that to
John 1 (New International Version)
{32Then John gave this testimony: "I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. 33I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, 'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.' 34I have seen and I testify that this is the Son of God."
35The next day John was there again with two of his disciples. 36When he saw Jesus passing by, he said, "Look, the Lamb of God!"}
Which one should we believe? How does it come? Did the Spirit send him out into the desert for forty days? Or John met him in the next day?
Kai replies:
This is one of the more easy ones!
I donโt really see any contradiction here; why donโt you go back and look at the context.
Mark (1: 1-12) simply reveals that Jesus is baptized and then sent out into the wilderness
John (1: 32-35) simply gives a testimony that he had seen the Spirit come down on Jesus, and baptized him. Obviously that could have occurred even after the wilderness experience.
In other words, Mark reveals what happens while John describes what has happened in the past.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Do you want one of many more?
Kai replies:
GO AHEAD
Muslim gladiator wrote:
John 3:13-15 (New International Version)
{13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heavenโthe Son of Man.[d] 14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.}
Compare this to
Genesis 5:24 (New International Version)
{24 Enoch walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away.}
2 Kings 2:11 (New International Version)
{11 As they were walking along and talking together, suddenly a chariot of fire and horses of fire appeared and separated the two of them, and Elijah went up to heaven in a whirlwind.}
Kai replies:
Depends what you mean by heaven?
And then again I am not so sure whether it means that these guys were taken up there alive; we simply donโt know
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Although I think I talked enough about this subject. I found an important person your writer E. J. Brill Leiden 1996 (Brill Academic Publishers 1997) have stated him in the list, Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (838-923)? Have you ever tried to read his tafsir (Explanations) for the verses of the Quean before citing his tafsir (Explanations)?
Here is a small lesson I hope you really learn from it. Never repeat others words like a parrot? Do not be immature.
Kai replies:
Well, I am just referring to scholars in the same way you refer to scholars
Muslim gladiator wrote:
I am just going to give you a simple evidence to assure for you and everyone here how much your author avoided the truth or she might not read Tafsir Al-Tabari like how it should be.
Quote:
Al-Tabari
... A study of his explanation of the verses in which the accusation of tahrif occurs, as well as those in which similar allegations are leveled at the Jews, allows us to summarize his views on the issue as follows:
That is the main context for the explanation for the verse of the Quran by Al-Tabari for [5] to assure for you and all the people who cares here that they studying of you writer was not right.
Kai replies:
I am virtually lost here; YOUR WORDS MAKE NO SENSE; PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO SAY
Muslim gladiator wrote:
ูููู ุนุฒู ุฐูุฑู: ูุฃุฎุฐูุง ู
ู ุงููุตุงุฑู ุงููู
ูุซุงู ุนููู ุทุงุนุชูู ูุฃุฏุงุก ูุฑุงุฆุถู ูุงุชุจูุงุน ุฑุณููู ูุงูุชุตุฏูู ุจูู
ุ ูุณูููุง ููู ู
ูุซุงููู ุงูุฐู ุฃุฎุฐุชู ุนููููู
ู
ููุงุฌ ุงูุฃู
ุฉ ุงูุถุงูุฉ ู
ู ุงูููููุฏุ ูุจุฏูููุง ูุฐูู ุฏูููู
ูููุถูุง ููุถูู
ูุชุฑููุง ุญุธูู
ู
ู ู
ูุซุงููู ุงูุฐู ุฃุฎุฐุชู ุนููููู
ุจูุงููููุงุก ุจุนูุฏู ูุถูุนูุง ุฃู
ุฑู. ูู
ุง:
ุญุฏุซูุง ุจุดุฑุ ูุงู: ุซูุง ูุฒูุฏุ ูุงู: ุซูุง ุณุนูุฏุ ุนู ูุชุงุฏุฉ: { ููู
ููู ุงูููุฐูููู ูุงูููุง ุฅูููุง ููุตูุงุฑูู ุฃุฎูุฐููุง ู
ููุซุงููููู
ู ููููุณููุง ุญูุธููุง ู
ููู
ููุง ุฐููููุฑููุง ุจููู }: ูุณูุง ูุชุงุจ ุงููู ุจููู ุฃุธูุฑูู
ุ ูุนูุฏ ุงููู ุงูุฐู ุนูุฏู ุฅููููุ ูุฃู
ุฑ ุงููู ุงูุฐู ุฃู
ุฑูู
ุจู.
ุญุฏุซูุง ู
ูุญู
ุฏ ุจู ุงููุญุณููุ ูุงู: ุซูุง ุฃุญู
ุฏ ุจู ู
ูุถูุ ูุงู: ุซูุง ุฃุณุจูุงุทุ ุนู ุงูุณุฏููุ ูุงู: ูุงูุช ุงููุตุงุฑู ู
ุซู ู
ุง ูุงูุช ุงูููููุฏุ ููุณูุง ุญุธููุง ู
ูู
ุง ุฐูููุฑูุง ุจูโฆโฆโฆ..
So as you see here Al-Tabari stated that Christians took the same way of Jews who are astray. Also they CHANGE THEIR RELIGION and they broke their promises.
And that is the Al-Tabari himself described Christians with losing the straight way and ignorance. That is the main context for the explanation for the verse of the Quran by Al-Tabari for [5]
ูุฐุง ุฐู
ู ู
ู ุงููู ุนุฒู ุฐูุฑู ูููุตุงุฑู ูุงููุตุฑุงูููุฉ ุงูุฐูู ุถููุง ุนู ุณุจู ุงูุณูุงู
ุ ูุงุญุชูุฌุงุฌ ู
ูู ููุจููู ู
ูุญู
ุฏ ุตูู ุงููู ุนููู ูุณูู
ููู ูุฑูุชูู
ุนูููู ุจูุงุฏุนุงุฆูู
ูู ููุฏุงูุ ูููู ุฌูู ุซูุงุคู: ุฃูุณู
ููุฏ ููุฑ ุงูุฐูู ูุงููุง: ุฅู ุงููู ูู ุงููู
ุณูุญ ุจู ู
ุฑููู
ุ ูููุฑูู
ููู ุฐูู ุชุบุทูุชูู
ุงููุญูู ููู ุชุฑููู
ูููู ุงูููุฏ ุนู ุงููู ุฌูู ูุนุฒูุ ูุงุฏูุนุงุฆูู
ุฃู ุงููู
ุณูุญ ูู ุงููู ูุฑูุฉ ููุฐุจูุงู ุนูููู. ููุฏ ุจูููุง ู
ุนูู ุงููู
ุณูุญ ููููู
ุง ู
ุถู ุจูู
ุง ุฃุบูู ุนู ุฅุนุงุฏุชู ููู ูุฐุง ุงููู
ูุถุน.
ุงูููู ููู ุชุฃูููู ูููู ุชุนุงููู: { ูููู ููู
ููู ูููู
ููููู ู
ููู ุงููููู ุดููุฆูุงู ุฅูู ุฃุฑูุงุฏู ุฃูู ูููููููู ุงููู
ูุณููุญู ุงุจููู ู
ูุฑููููู
ู ูุฃูู
ูููู ููู
ููู ูููู ุงูุฃุฑูุถู ุฌูู
ููุนุงู }.
ูููู ุฌูู ุซูุงุคู ููุจููู ู
ูุญู
ุฏ ุตูู ุงููู ุนููู ูุณูู
: ูู ูุง ู
ูุญู
ุฏ ูููุตุงุฑู ุงูุฐูู ุงูุชุฑูุง ุนููููุ ูุถููุง ุนู ุณูุงุก ุงูุณุจููููุ ุจููููููู
: ุฅู ุงููู ูู ุงููู
ุณูุญ ุงุจู ู
ุฑููู
{ ู
ููู ูููู
ููููู ู
ููู ุงููููู ุดูููุฆุงู } ูููู: ู
ู ุงูุฐู ูุทูู ุฃู ูุฏูุน ู
ู ุฃู
ุฑ ุงููู ุฌูู ูุนุฒู ุดูุฆุงูุ ูููุฑุฏูู ุฅุฐุง ูุถุงู ู
ู ููู ุงููุงุฆู: ู
ููุช ุนููู ููุงู ุฃู
ุฑู: ุฅุฐุง ุตุงุฑ ูุง ููุฏุฑุฃู ูููุฐ ุฃู
ุฑุงู ุฅูุง ุจู. ููููู: { ุฅูู ุฃุฑุงุฏู ุฃูู ูููููููู ุงููู
ูุณููุญู ุงุจููู ู
ูุฑููููู
ู ูุฃูู
ูููู ููู
ููู ููู ุงูุฃุฑูุถู ุฌูู
ููุนุงู } ูููู: ู
ู ุฐุง ุงูุฐู ููุฏุฑ ุฃู ูุฑุฏู ู
ู ุฃู
ุฑ ุงููู ุดูุฆุงู ุฅู ุดุงุก ุฃู ูููู ุงููู
ุณูุญ ุงุจูู ู
ุฑููู
ุจุฅุนุฏุงู
ู ู
ู ุงูุฃุฑุถ ูุฅุนุฏุงู
ุฃู
ู ู
ุฑููู
ุ ูุฅุนุฏุงู
ุฌู
ูุน ู
ู ููู ุงูุฃุฑุถ ู
ู ุงููุฎููู ุฌู
ูุนุงู. ูููู ุฌูู ุซูุงุคู ููุจููู ู
ูุญู
ุฏ ุตูู ุงููู ุนููู ูุณูู
: ูู ููุคูุงุก ุงููุฌููุฉ ู
ู ุงููุตุงุฑู ูู ูุงู ุงููู
ุณูุญ ูู
ุง ูุฒุนู
ูู ุฃูู ูู ุงูููุ ููููุณ ูุฐูู ููุฏูุฑ ุฃู ูุฑุฏู ุฃู
ุฑ ุงููู ุฅุฐุง ุฌุงุกู ุจูุงููุงูู ูุฅููุงู ุฃู
ูุ ููุฏ ุฃููู ุฃู
ู ูููู
ููุฏุฑ ุนููู ุฏูุน ุฃู
ุฑู ููููุง ุฅุฐ ูุฒู ุฐููุ ูููู ุฐูู ููู
ู
ุนุชุจุฑ ุฅู ุงุนุชุจุฑุชูู
ุ ูุญุฌุฉ ุนููููู
ุฅู ุนููุชูู
ููู ุฃู ุงููู
ุณูุญ ุจุดุฑ ูุณุงุฆุฑ ุจููู ุขุฏู
ุ ูุฃู ุงููู ุนุฒู ูุฌูู ูู ุงูุฐู ูุง ูุบูุจ ููุง ูููุฑ ููุง ูุฑุฏู ูู ุฃู
ุฑุ ุจู ูู ุงููุญูู ุงูุฏุงุฆู
ุงูููููู
ุงูุฐู ููุญูู ูููู
ูุชุ ูููุดูุก ููููููุ ููู ุญูู ูุง ููู
ูุช.
So do you still think someone like Al-Tabari just thought Jews corrupted their books?
Kai replies:
Well, you were the one who so emphatically stated that religion is of no use unless it is understandable; now will you been so kind to translate the text.
I have a Arabic speaking Christian co-worker here with me; he is absent at the moment, but if you would translate the text I will ask him to compare your translation to the actual Arabic text.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Kai replies:
Quote:
Ibn Rabban
... The accusation of deliberate distortion of the Torah, which we find for example in the works of Ibn Hazm, is nowhere voiced in Kitab al-din aโl-dawla ... he refers to a distortion of the interpretation of the scriptures and not of the text itself
We do not need a proof more what? Ibn Hazm has his own books Friend Kai. Have you read any one it before you write? When you talk about God and His words, it is not just copy and paste? It is tracing and long years of searching.
Kai replies:
So you do realise that talking about God and his word is not just copying and pasting; would mind then apologizing for some of your previous posts which we have debunked so effectively, because they were based upon copying and not research.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
In the scientific discussion, you should state the source. It is the same problem of the Bible itself, just translation without a source.
Kai replies:
See this what I mean!
What translation?
Which source?
The apostles conveyed the message in Greek particularly to make the message and word understandable to the receivers.
Now do I need to point out that earlier you strongly pointed out that a religion should be understandable to its hearers! Yet when it comes to Christianity you reject this idea.
If the actual source, which we are to read and refer to is in Greek, then there is no translation, and then the source is the actual Greek.
And what source do you refer to, when you claim the reliability of the Koran. Can you present to me a Koran which was written down in its full form, word by word, WITHIN THE TIME OF MUHAMMAD, AND WHICH IS EXACTLY COMPARABLE TO THE KORAN OF TODAY? If you fail to present that I CAN SAY BASED UPON YOUR OWN CRITERIA THAT YOU MUSLIMS HAVE NO SOURCES.
AND IN WHAT SENSE IS TABARI OR BUKHARI A SOURCE, THESE ARE WRITTEN 100-200 YEARS AFTER THE COMPILATION OF THE KORAN; AND THE COMPILATION AND WHAT IT WAS COMPILED FROM IS ALREADY DOUBFUL.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
When I started my first article here I said โMr. Bart Ehram confesses..." then I gave you the source. You gave me an idea of a person who is not Muslim
Kai replies:
In what sense is Ehram a Christian
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Let us just give some lights about your smart points,
Quote:
It will be our aim here to specifically focus on the views of the first 7 Muslims. We do this to demonstrate that the first Muslims did not hold to the position that the previous books, specifically the books of the Hebrew Bible, were corrupted to such an extent that its message was unreliable, no longer accurately reflecting the original message of the OT prophets.
Really, do you think people the oldest one of them from the 3rd century can be considerate like the first Muslims? What is about the Muslim from first and second Islamic centuries?
Kai replies:
Please clarify this sentence, sorry it makes no sense
Muslim gladiator wrote:
What is about Abo Bakr, Omar Ibn El-Khatab,... and others of our prophet's friends? The people who lived during our prophet (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) themselves?
Kai replies:
Well, can you point out to me that these believe in Bible corruption
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Do you believe yourself brother?
Kai replies:
I believe in consistence, and the Koran lacks that, such as: if you do not believe the previous revelations, you cannot be a Muslim, but if you believe them you cannot be a Muslim either.
Muslim gladiator wrote:
What is really interesting in this article what you have said,
Quote:
The obvious reason why some Muslims of the past such as Ibn Hazm (and many today) argued that the Scriptures have been corrupted is that the message of the Holy Bible is directly opposed to the claims of the Quran
You stated three Islamic scientists do not affect the Muslimsโ minds at all. The people who said the Bible is corrupted and affected the Muslimsโ minds, whose are the people that still affect the Muslim's minds until now. The four Imams,
1-An-Nรบmฤn ibn Thฤbit (699 - 765)
2-Malik ibn Anas ibn Malik ibn 'Amr al-Asbahi (715 - 796)
3-Abu 'Abd Allah ash-Shafi'i (767 - 820)
4- Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal (780 - 855)
And as you see, all of them were in the second Islamic century
More than 98% percent around the world of Sunni Muslims follows their teaching until now.
Plus al-Bukhari (810 - 870 AD)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bukhari
and Muslim (810-870)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_b._al-Hajjaj
Kai replies:
The main point is, do these claim that the Bible is changed, particularly the writings of the Christians
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Every Muslim even if who is converted knows who are those people. You stated seven scicents really does not effect us plus you did not state the name of their books for example,
Kai replies:
Well:
1. Do the four state that the Bible is corrupted
2. did the names I mentioned not prove that Muslim scholars up to year 900 AD did not believe that the Bible was changed; CERTAINLY THIS WILL EFFECT YOU AND YOUR BELIEF!
Muslim gladiator wrote:
What is really funny that not many people in the entire Islamic world, especially in Arabic world know someone called, "Ibn Hazm". Very few people around the world and I am one of them who are zahary mathab and follows his Mathab.
By the way, in his Book, "El- Mohala bel Athar" he stated everything in details about the earlier Muslims opinions about the Bible. "El-Mohala bel Athar"threen parts. Go and read.
Note: Even if Al-Azhar in Egypt does not study Ibn-Hazm Mathab for their students.
Kai replies:
But I thought you just said that these scholars including Ibn-Hazm are not significant anyway; what matters were the four imams! WHY DO YOU NOW CONTRADICT YOURSELF?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Quote:
Ibn Qutayba
... Ibn Qutayba used the Torah not only as a book in which the advent of the Prophet is foretold, but also as a historical source ...
... It is clear that what is meant by tahrif is giving a wrong interpretation to an otherwise genuine text. Ibn Qutayba does not question the authenticity or validity of the Jewish scriptures, and nowhere does he accuse the Jews of having distorted them.
Admittedly, he states in his Maโarif that the Torah was burned at one point, but he immediately adds that Ezra reinstated it after the Jews had returned to Syria ...
The statement about the restoration of the Lost Torah probably goes back indirectly to the apocryphal IV Ezra with which, as we have seen in Chapter Four, Ibn Qutayba was acquainted in one form or another. We see the motif of Ezra as the inspired restorer of the holy scriptures recurring in the works of other historians, among them al-Tabari. (pp. 225-226; underlined emphasis ours)
I think you mean ibn Qutayba (828-889),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Qutayba
And as you see he is from the 3 century of Islam, not from the first Muslims. And as you see "Ibn Qutayba used the Torah not only as a book in which the advent of the Prophet is foretold but also as a historical source ". Ahamed Deddat used the Bible to assure that Jesus was just a messenger of God and he always believed the Bible is corrupted. And many Unbelievers use the Bible as historical document in some cases. But that does not mean they believe in it or they believe in everything it contains.
Kai replies:
Why would you use a corrupted source to predict prophecy or to point out history
In what sense do you compare Ahmed Deedat and Ibn Qutayba; could you please elaborate on this
Does Ibn Qutaybe ever state that the Bible is corrupted?
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Some Christians believed that our Prophet Mohamed (Peace and Mercy of Allah be upon him) is the greatest man in the history, although they never believe in him as a Messenger.
Go and read The 100, Michael H. Hart, Carol Publishing Group, July 1992.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_100
Kai replies:
I donโt see how it is related to the matter
If a Christian states that Muhammad was the greatest man in history, he is not a Christian
And even though he was, it would not prove the slightest thing
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Moreover that, I will assure to you how is your book corrupted and it is still until now, 2005 in further blow of this article InshaAllah.
The last thing about this issue, we do not need any opinion about the corrupted of the Bible from anyone, we have the Quran judgment about this issue? And it is so enough for us?
Quote:
It is a fact that the Qurโan refers to certain corruption and the Old Testament text, but never the Injeel! What does that reveal? Basically, that even though the Torah according to the Koran could be corrupted, this in no way applies to the New Testament.
Really?!
First of all, which Torah (Old Testament) and Injeel (New Testament) do you refer to it brother? Protestant Bible (Old and New Testament) (with 66 Books) or Catholic Bible (with 73 Books)! I wish to know which Bible do you want me to use to argue with you but? It seems to me you are Protestant with 66 Books in the Holy Book.
Kai replies:
You can refer to any of them, as long as you exclude the apocrypha
Muslim gladiator wrote:
Note: Argument with Catholics differs from argument with Protestants. That is not
Our subject right now.
Let us take into our consideration a real facts about the First Christians you might not understand it. And when I say here First Christians, I mean Jesusโ disciples (Peace of Allah be upon him and his pure mother), not 3rd century like how you cite before?
Kai replies:
WHY DONโT YOU READ MY POSTS AGAIN, THE NAMES I REFERED TO ARE FIRST AND SECOND CENTURY SOURCES AND CHRISTIANS NOT THIRD CENTURY!