Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Interfaith Dialogue
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Religion - Islam : Interfaith Dialogue
Message Icon Topic: The Holy Gospel did not evolve! Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 74 Next >>
Author Message
honeto
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 March 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2431
Quote honeto Replybullet Posted: 06 June 2011 at 2:41pm
Jack,
yes, that is pretty much what I mean.
Hasan
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"
IP IP Logged
Jack Catholic
Male Christian
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 March 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 369
Quote Jack Catholic Replybullet Posted: 07 June 2011 at 11:35am

Dear Hasan,

In your post to me of June 2, you said that I like to go around in circles in our discussion. So here is the circle that you and I are on.

First, Jesus taught a great deal of things which were recorded in the New Testament by the eye whitnesses known as the Apostles (recorded by them either directly or through secretaries or close companions). These Apostles so much believed in the truth of these teachings that they would rather have died insisting on the this truth rather than agree that these these teachings were lies. The conclusion of this paragraph is that the evidence of whitness is that the New Testament is truth.

Second, when we read the written explanations of the early Church Fathers explaining the truth of the New Testament, the same fathers who also gave their lives for the truth of the Gospels, we see the explanation of the meaning of the New Testament as it meant to the audience to whom it was written.

This constitutes the first half of the circle which you claim I am going around in, but which you must admit you are also participating in. Here is the other half. Muhammad claimed in Sura 2:97 to confirm the teachings of the New Testament, which he called, “earlier revelations.” Then he turned around (and hence the circle we find ourselves in in our discussion) and claimed in Sura 16:101 that his teachings “Substituted” the earlier revelations. Does the Qur’an confirm or substitute the earlier revelations?

Your explanation for these two Sura’s is exactly the same as my explanation of the New Testament. You said, “What you are refering to from the Quran in those two verses is talking of same thing, only that one is confirming that those earlier scriptures are not false but from God, while the second verse you quoted refers to those revelations came in succession, one followed by another, all from God.”

Did you intend to say that the second verse refers to those revelations which came in succession, but which were not from God, or in other words were false?

I have been saying, and indeed every Christian posting on Islamicity Forums, has been saying the same thing, only about the New Testament. The verses of the NT that Muslims claim contradict actually do not contradict, but rather all speak of the same thing, only that if you understand what they are talking about, you will see that there is no contradiction in the New Testament.

So here in a sentence is the circle in which you and I are in: Muhamad is correct if the New Testament contradicts itself and is thus wrong, but if the New Testament does not contradict itself, then Muhamad is contradicting himself and is thus himself wrong.

The only way that Islam can continue to exist is if it can make the claim that the New Testament is too false to be believed. And hense the teachers of Islam including Muhammad himself must make you believe that the New Testament evolved with later revelations being false and contradictory. The only way to do this is to teach Muslims interpretations of the NT that Christians have never believed, and then tell Muslims that they don’t need to really study the NT or Christianity because all truth is contained in the Holy Qur’an. I have heard this belief amongst Muslims stated in multiple ways here on Islamicity Forums, the main one being by Islamispeace when he says he really is not interested in the New Testament or in Christianity accept that he wants to make us see that the NT is contradictory and thus wrong. This philosophy seems to be held by most Muslims whenever they interpret verses in the NT which to them are contradictory, and we Christians re-explain the verses in the way that the first century Christians who received the NT from the hands of the Apostles understood them to mean. The Muslims respond by claiming that we are believing false teaching by later believers, and that we will be punished by Allah for our stubborn refusal to admit the truth, which, of course, is Islam.

Hasan, not only I, but you too… we both are talking in circles. Now when it comes to speaking about the Holy Bible, though you claim to have read it numerous times, I cannot say that you are an expert on it because you seem to know more about modern scholars and their contradictory claims about it than you do about the first century authorities and their records about what actually happened with its writing and what it means. I almost seem to know more about the New Testament than you do. But about the Holy Qur’an, I’m sure that you are more knowledgable about that then I am, yet you rarely talk about it. Why is that? Perhaps if you took a risk and held up the Holy Qur’an to scrutiny, as we seem to do with the Holy Bible, we would not be talking in circles. The circle in which we speak has the evolution of the Holy Bible as a major element.

Regarding the evolution of Scriptures, no Muslim reinterpretation of Biblical scripture has yet made a convincing arguement that the New Testament has evolved and thus can’t be taken as fully fact, unless I missed something… Do you have anything to repeat that it seems I missed? Do you have any new evidence that hasn’t been presented yet?

I have already posted a list of the arguments made here on this string of posts, and how they are each wrong on page 9 of this string of posts. You also mentioned one of the major contradictions being Jesus as Son of God, yet this also is a point which has been shown not to have evolved, but to have been contained in each of the 4 Gospels as well as in the Letters of St. Paul.

So I ask again my brother, do you have any evidence of the evolution of the Holy Bible that hasn’t been presented yet?

God Bless you, Hasan,

Jack Catholic

IP IP Logged
honeto
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 20 March 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2431
Quote honeto Replybullet Posted: 07 June 2011 at 3:30pm
Jack,
You seem to get it, but you come around and waste all that effort. You need not to write things over, and please do not refer to Quran here in this matter, Quran is for the believers, and it is clearer than what you make of it.
The matter is clear. The contents of the Bible themself prove that transformation has taken place, and that is all I am saying.
Has it not been trasnformed we would not find descripencies on matters like God, Jesus, and Salvation in it. I have seen the evidence that on those three issues, beside many others, the Bible is inconsistent which makes it disqualified as the pure word of God, plain and simple.
And we have seen the evidence of those inconsistencies from my posts and from many learned people on this board.
Hasan


Edited by honeto - 07 June 2011 at 3:36pm
39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"
IP IP Logged
islamispeace
 Islam
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 01 November 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2256
Quote islamispeace Replybullet Posted: 07 June 2011 at 4:07pm
I have heard this belief amongst Muslims stated in multiple ways here on Islamicity Forums, the main one being by Islamispeace when he says he really is not interested in the New Testament or in Christianity accept that he wants to make us see that the NT is contradictory and thus wrong.


If I may interject in this scintillating conversation, the above statement is abhorrently inaccurate.  Not surprising given the person we are dealing with, but alas, that is how it is.  I never said I am not "interested in the New Testament or in Christianity..." and I would appreciate if Jack would provide an example of when and where I said this, because I sure do not remember.  If I did, then I apologize because I must have been upset at the time.    

Concerning this thread, as it is right now, the proofs of the Gospels' evolution stands unanswered and all we really have here is a lot of back and forth discussions, sometimes on completely unrelated issues, which neglect to deal with the actual topic of interest. 
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)

IP IP Logged
Jack Catholic
Male Christian
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 March 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 369
Quote Jack Catholic Replybullet Posted: 08 June 2011 at 8:53am
Dear Hasan,
 
Since you made this comment, perhaps you might explain what it means:  "please do not refer to Quran here in this matter, Quran is for the believers,..."
 
You said, "The contents of the Bible themself prove that transformation has taken place,..."  So are we talking about transformation of scripture, or about evolution of scripture?
 
The only discrepencies so far presented on the Holy Bible are those based on modern intellectual interpretations and Qur'anic interpretations of scripture.  Those of us who simply repeat the interpretations of the orriginal authors and the audiences they wrote to have shown that there truly are no discrepencies at all.  Must I continually refer to the summary post of this on page 9 of this string?  When we interpret the Holy Bible as it was written to mean, there are no discrepencies and there is no contradiction.  This has been proven again and again on this string of posts by numerous Christian posters.  But then we are now arguing over who was the winner and this is arguing in circles.  Give more evidence that the bible has evolved or admit defeat, my friend.  I'll quote the summary of all the evidence that has been presented and then disproven for you:
 
One would think that the most important issues in the New Testament, such as Jesus being the Son of God, would have been mentioned first, as in the earliest of the Gospels.

                Each Gospel had been shown to refer to Jesus as the son of God.

The New Testament was translated into other languages (from Hebrew to Greek)and the beliefs of the Christian faithful were then manipulated over time using other languages.

                The languages of Palestine were Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and had been for over 200 years since the days of the Maccabees.   Only Matthew had been orriginally written in Hebrew.  The rest were written in Greek.

 
All Gospels should have mentioned that Mary had miraculously conceived Jesus, but only the last two do, showing that the miraculous conception of Jesus was only taught and believed some decades after the death of Jesus.  This is evolution.

                Jesus’ conception was believed from the beginning, so much so that it was not necessary to write about it until Gospels were being written for non-Jewish communities outside of Palestine    where believers did not already know much about it.

Isaiah 9:5 in the Jewish Bible says one thing, but in the Christian Bible the words of Isaiah 9:5 have been changed around to mean something different that supports the Christian doctrines.

                A Jewish Bible written in Hebrew was presented with a word for word translation, and its meaning was exactly what the Christian Bible indicated with its wording of the verse.

Rewrites of the Holy Bible over time where the meaning is altered in order to return the Holy Bible to its “orriginal” text and meaning is evidence of the evolution of the scriptures.

                The Catholic Holy Bible is not altered in any way to accomodate current thought.  Therefore, it is not accurate to say that the Holy Bible even now is evolving.

So there you have it.  Every bit of evidence presented which indicates that the New Testament has evolved has been cleanly and clearly refuted.
 
Your final paragraph seems like it would be an excelent addition to our discussion:  "Has it not been trasnformed we would not find descripencies on matters like God, Jesus, and Salvation in it. I have seen the evidence that on those three issues, beside many others, the Bible is inconsistent which makes it disqualified as the pure word of God, plain and simple.  And we have seen the evidence of those inconsistencies from my posts and from many learned people on this board."
 
I'm interested.  Have at it.  Present me with this "evidence," remembering that the goal of course is to prove that the New Testament "evolved."  And please present this new evidenced at about one issue per post, and we'll deal with them one at a time.  Remember this:  just because someone is learned does not mean that what that someone says is truth.
 
Hey, God bless you always, Hasan,
 
Jack Catholic
IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1844
Quote Ron Webb Replybullet Posted: 08 June 2011 at 8:23pm
Originally posted by Jack Catholic

So I ask again my brother, do you have any evidence of the evolution of the Holy Bible that hasn’t been presented yet?
 
Jack, I wish you would give us an idea of what kind of evidence you would accept.  I've already given you a clear example of a major Catholic doctrine, that of the virgin birth, which was not included in the first Gospel, which according to the Gospels themselves was not believed during Jesus's lifetime, which was only added in subsequent Gospels decades after his death and which was obviously invented by the writers since it is not the sort of thing for which they could have any proof.  If that is not evidence of the Gospels evolving, then what would be?
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
Jack Catholic
Male Christian
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 24 March 2010
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 369
Quote Jack Catholic Replybullet Posted: 08 June 2011 at 9:26pm
Dear Ron,
 
And it has been defeated.  Aboslutely no one has taken up your cause, Ron.  Your personal surmising just does not match the historical reasons for the authors writing what they wrote... end of story.
 
But hey, God bless you, Ron,
 
Jack Catholic
IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1844
Quote Ron Webb Replybullet Posted: 09 June 2011 at 4:33am
Originally posted by Jack Catholic

And it has been defeated.  Aboslutely no one has taken up your cause, Ron.  Your personal surmising just does not match the historical reasons for the authors writing what they wrote... end of story.
 
I have offered facts supported by Scripture itself (Luke 3:23. Matthew 13:53-58, Mark 1:1).  You have responded with surmises unsupported (and usually contradicted) by the facts.  No one has joined in because as you well know this is a Muslim forum and the virgin birth is also a doctrine of Islam.  But it is a doctrine for which there is no evidence and can be no evidence.
 
Again: if this is not what an evolving story likes like, then in your opinion what would it look like?
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 74 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com