ISLAM is False, Mulhammad is false

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_Pick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
You may ask where this paran is. We all know that Ishmael and Hagar dwelt in the wilderness of Arabia. We all agree to this so please do not say that no they did not. As we all agree to this fact I will show you the name of this wilderness written in the bible

And he dwelt in the wilderness of Paran: and his mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt.
Genesis 21:21

Now that we see that this Paran was indeed in Arabia, we can indeed say that this verse refers to Muhammad. Now the question is did Muhammad conquer Makkah with 10 000 followers/faithful companions/saints? If you do a little research and learn about the Conquest of Makkah you will learn that Indeed Muhammad did conquer Makkah with 10 000 faithful.

**If you still deny that these prophesies which appear in both the Old and New Testament refers to Muhammad, then go on, please enlighten me on who they refer to.
**
With your indulgence may I. First and foremost Paran is in Sinai peninsula Egypt.
http://www.keyway.ca/gif/wildjour.gif
So how can Paran be in Arabia when this map clearly indicates otherwise.

You and your well informed apologist sole basis for the identification of Paran with Mecca stems from an incidental comment made by a medieval Muslim geographer, WHO WAS LOST :rolleyes: named Yaqut al-Hamawi. In the geographical work which he finished around 1225 AD. Try to learn more on this please.

Muslims who says Paran is the mecca conqured by the madman, needs to go back on their geography class, maybe conducted by a real professor in geography with a master degree in navigation.
 
With your indulgence may I. First and foremost Paran is in Sinai peninsula Egypt.
http://www.keyway.ca/gif/wildjour.gif
So how can Paran be in Arabia when this map clearly indicates otherwise.

You and your well informed apologist sole basis for the identification of Paran with Mecca stems from an incidental comment made by a medieval Muslim geographer, WHO WAS LOST :rolleyes: named Yaqut al-Hamawi. In the geographical work which he finished around 1225 AD. Try to learn more on this please.

Muslims who says Paran is the mecca conqured by the madman, needs to go back on their geography class, maybe conducted by a real professor in geography with a master degree in navigation.
Oh well I stand corrected it is in Egypt but I have also heard of a paran in Israel. Paran is certainly not Mecca that its absurd. Muslims really mutilate the bible to support their beliefs and then wonder why Catholics laugh at them when speak such absurdities.
 
Oh yeah they live in peace.:rolleyes: The Crusades were expeditions undertaken, in fulfilment of a solemn vow, to deliver the Holy Places from Mohammedan — TYRANNY. So how can that be peace?
Exactly Christos makes the same mistakes that many historians and Muslim make on the subject. They ignore the 400 years of prior Muslim aggression against Christianity and then say “ohh look at these barbarous Christians and their brutal attacks on peaceful Muslims”. This is a myth and is not history. History doesn’t happen in a vacuum and any person who says that the crusades didn’t have anything to do with the Muslim invasions of the Byzantine empire, Spain, southern france, Italy, Sicily or the sacking of Rome is a liar.

What caused the crusades was the Byzantine Emperor Alexius requesting aid from pope Urban due to his considerable losses to the Muslim hordes. Pope urban then initiated the 1st crusade in 1096. Alexius was only expecting a few companies of Knights but he got 100,000 men on his doorstep. The pope used this as a chance to regain the Christian lands stolen by the Muslims and to respond to all this Islamic aggression. This is what caused the first crusade. Everywhere the crusaders went had been Christian up to 400 years before. They didn’t take any Muslim land.
 
i just checked it out! a hindus point of view 👍

wasalam
The thumbs up is for what? :confused: The chronological history of the rape, murder, enslavement, pillage, plunder, of desecration and despoliation Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists suffered at the hands of barbarous invaders under the banner of islam — your faith? or you agree with the article on what islam did in India?
 
Oh well I stand corrected it is in Egypt but I have also heard of a paran in Israel. Paran is certainly not Mecca that its absurd. Muslims really mutilate the bible to support their beliefs and then wonder why Catholics laugh at them when speak such absurdities.
Well people get informed and enlightened. Your post are very useful and informative. Sadly some of the poster here are stubborn enough to learn the truth.

Being dupe by self-profess profit of allah is more appealing to them than realizing the Wisdom revealed by the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob on their false faith.
 
I think the real Mt.Sinai is Mt.Lawz in NW Saudi Arabia ,Paran is the area south of Mt.Lawz…

biblebelievers.org.au/images/map2.gif
haha what proof do you have that paran is in saudi arabia? just because Bible Believers say so? (produce archeological records of early Arabian kingdoms calling Mecca paran in either manuscripts or inscriptions)

why would i pay any attention to what those fundie morons have to say?
they dont beleive the holocaust ever happened
biblebelievers.org.au/holohoax.htm and the have all sorts of conspiracy anti-catholic conspiracy theories biblebelievers.org.au/nl314.htm
biblebelievers.org.au/jesuits.htm

Furthermore is you agree with somethign on their site you must also agree with their article entitled “Allah the Moon God” lol
biblebelievers.org.au/moongod.htm

what kind authority do you think it is now ? lol! those bible believers guys rival planteen in their absurdities
 
Another geographer Al-Idrisi’s produced a much more systematic and in-depth geography of the muslim world of his time. This occured 70 years BEFORE Yaqut’s time. In it, he speaks also of Paran, which he refers to as “Faran Ahrun“ (Paran of Aaron)
“This district lies 40 miles from Al Kulzum, and along the sea coast. The city of Faran stands at the bottom of a gulf. It is a small town where certain of the Arabs have their camping ground. Over against Faran is a place where the sea has formed a bay, and beside it is a mountain of very hard rock. The waters surge round this and encircle it, and when the winds rise, the passage thereof is difficult, and no one can accomplish it, except with great effort. Travelers are frequently lost there, unless allah save and guard them. According to the common saying, this is the sea wherein Pharaoh - allah curse him! - was drowned.”
He states that Paran stands at the bottom of a gulf, and indicates that the sea forms a bay next to the city. He further states that it is a “small town” where “the Arabs have their camping ground”.

Further, Al-Idrisi positively nails down the location of Paran in the Sinai peninsula. He comments that the common saying was that the sea on which Paran sat was the sea where Pharaoh was drowned during the attempt to recover his Israelite slaves during the Exodus.

Tradition in all three groups, muslim, Jewish, and Christian, has been that this event occurred in the Gulf of Suez, which is the western finger of the Red Sea that forms a “V” around the Sinai peninsula. Thus, in his mind as well as the minds of his readers at the time, his reference would definitely be to a town on the bank of the Gulf of Suez or Sea of Kulzum.

So how come muslims don’t believe him and believe the one that was lost. Al-Idrisi’s identification seems a little more plausible compared to Yaqut.

Now if you will relate this to mecca. By God’s grace mecca is around 80 km inland from the Red Sea and has no bay to surround it. It is not even a very small town to host camping arabs as well. Why should they camp on the first place if it was an established city for the arabs?
 
Another geographer Al-Idrisi’s produced a much more systematic and in-depth geography of the muslim world of his time. This occured 70 years BEFORE Yaqut’s time. In it, he speaks also of Paran, which he refers to as “Faran Ahrun“ (Paran of Aaron)

He states that Paran stands at the bottom of a gulf, and indicates that the sea forms a bay next to the city. He further states that it is a “small town” where “the Arabs have their camping ground”.

Further, Al-Idrisi positively nails down the location of Paran in the Sinai peninsula. He comments that the common saying was that the sea on which Paran sat was the sea where Pharaoh was drowned during the attempt to recover his Israelite slaves during the Exodus.

Tradition in all three groups, muslim, Jewish, and Christian, has been that this event occurred in the Gulf of Suez, which is the western finger of the Red Sea that forms a “V” around the Sinai peninsula. Thus, in his mind as well as the minds of his readers at the time, his reference would definitely be to a town on the bank of the Gulf of Suez or Sea of Kulzum.

So how come muslims don’t believe him and believe the one that was lost. Al-Idrisi’s identification seems a little more plausible compared to Yaqut.

Now if you will relate this to mecca. By God’s grace mecca is around 80 km inland from the Red Sea and has no bay to surround it. It is not even a very small town to host camping arabs as well. Why should they camp on the first place if it was an established city for the arabs?
Interesting response. I always find it so amusing when Muslim come up with these bible verses which are supposedly about Mohammad. They ignore a verse’s literary context and twist it wo make it say what ever they want. Like Planteen said Mohammad is in the song of Solomon (don’t laugh) because the hebrew word mahamaddim, is used in song of Solomon 5:16 which means delights. Muslims say this about Mohammad. Nevermind that its in the plural form and hence cant be talking about a person called Mohammad. Oh no this is a prophercy lol! What Muslims fail to realize is that this is no prophecy but is due to Semitic similarities between Hebrew and Arabic. The word is used numerous times in the book of Ezekiel to talk about the delights of different women (including Ezekiel’s wife) are these prophecies of Mohammad too? Lol I don’t think so. Muslims really don’t know anything about systematic theology.
 
… I always find it so amusing when Muslim come up with these bible verses which are supposedly about Mohammad.
One might ask why Islam must depend so heavily on the Bible to verify itself. Why doesn’t Mohammed just stand on his own?
 
If you study and learn about life in the Holy Land while the Muslims were ruling you will see that ALL THREE ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS lived in peace and were allowed to practise their own religions in peace. It was the Christians and their HOLY WAR the Crusades Authorized by the POPE who went into The Holy Land and SLAUGHTERED Men, WOMAN, AND CHILDREN both JEWS and MUSLIMS.

Then study that when Muhammad went from Madina to conquer Makkah how did he go.
Here is only a partial history of Muslim warfare against Christians in lands that had been Christian before Muslim invaders took them by force, according to Mohammed’s example:

c. 620-32 AD Mohammed starts Islam, raids Meccan caravans
632 – Mohammed dies
633 – Mesopotamia falls to Muslim invasion, followed by the entire Persian Empire
635 – Damascus falls
638 – Jerusalem capitulates
643 – Alexandria falls, ending 1,000 years of Hellenic civilization
648-49 – Cyprus falls
653 – Rhodes falls
673 – Constantinople attacked
698 – All of North Africa lost
711 – Spain invaded
717 – Muslims attack Constantinople again; repelled by Emperor Leo the Isaurian
721 – Saragossa falls, Muslims sights on southern France
720 – Narbonne falls.
732 – Bordeaux was stormed and its churches burnt down
732 – Charles Martel and his Frankish army defeat Muslims in October, turning back the Muslim tide
732 – Attacks on France continued
734 – Avignon captured by an Muslim force
743 – Lyons sacked
759 – Arabs driven out of Narbonne.
838 – Marseilles plundered
800 – Muslims incursions into Italy begin, Islands of Ponza and Ischia plundered
813 – Civitavecchia, the port of Rome sacked
826 – Crete falls to Muslim forces
827 – Muslim forces begin to attack Sicily.
837 – Naples repels a Muslim attack
838 – Marseilles taken
840 – Bari falls
842 – Messina captured and Strait of Messina controlled
846 – Muslims squadrons arrived at Ostia, at the Tiber’s mouth, sack Rome and St. Peter’s Basilica
846 – Taranto in Apulia conquered by Muslim forces
849 – Papal forces repel Muslim fleet at the mouth of the Tiber
853-71 – Italian coast from Bari down to Reggio Calabria controlled, Muslims terrorize Southern Italy.
859 – Muslims take control of all Messina
870 – Malta captured by the Muslims.
870 – Bari recaptured from the Muslims by Emperor Louis II
872 – Emperor Louis II defeats a Saracen fleet off Capua
872 – Muslim forces devastate Calabria
878 – Syracuse falls after a nine-month siege
879 – Pope John VIII forced to pay tribute of 25,000 mancuses (AUD$625,000) annually to the Muslims
880 – Byzantine Commanders gain victory over Saracen forces at Naples
881 – Muslims capture fortress near Anzio, plunder surrounding countryside with impunity for forty [40] years.
887 – Muslim armies take Hysela and Amasia, in Asia Minor.
889 – Toulon captured
902 – Muslim fleets sacked and destroyed Demetrias in Thessaly, Central Greece,
904 – Thessalonica falls to Muslim forces
915 – After three months of blockade, Christian forces victorious against Saracens holed-up in their fortresses north of Naples
921 – English pilgrims to Rome crushed to death under rocks rolled down on them by Saracens in the passes of the Alps [explain why Muslims were in the Alps in the first place]
934 – Genoa attacked by Muslim forces
935 – Genoa taken
972 – Saracens finally driven from Faxineto
976 – Caliphs of Egypt send fresh Muslim expeditions into southern Italy. Initially the German Emperor Otho II , who had set up his headquarters in Rome, successfully defeated these Saracen forces
977 – Sergius, Archbishop of Damascus, expelled from his See by Muslims
982 – Emperor Otho’s forces ambushed and his army defeated
1003 – Muslims from Spain sack Antibes
1003-09 – Marauding bands of Saracens plunder Italian coast from Pisa to Rome from bases on Sardinia
1005 – Muslims from Spain sack Pisa
1009 – Caliph of Egypt orders destruction of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, the Tomb of Jesus
1010 – Saracens seize Cosenza in southern Italy.
1015 – All Sardinia falls
1016 – Muslims from Spain again sack Pisa
1017 – Fleets of Pisa and Genoa sail for Sardinia, find Saracens crucifying Christians, drive Saracen leader out. Saracens try to re-take Sardinia until 1050
1020 – Muslims from Spain sack Narbonne
1095 – The First Crusade.
This is what Muslim conquerors did. In one case, they reached even as far a Iceland! They had no right to invade lands that had been Christian for close to 1,000 years. Take Spain and France for example. Christians lived in those lands and had a common identity [the Muslim test]. So what makes Muslims right and Christians wrong? Christians had the land before the Muslims invaded. If we apply the Muslim test, Islam can claim no land outside Medina because it is the only place Mohammad was accepted without force.
And I am so glad you brought up the Crusades. The 463 years that elapsed between Muhammad’s death and the calling of a Crusade to free the Holy Places was not, as Islam apologists would have us believe, a time of “peaceful co-existence” between Muslims and European or Byzantine Christians. Nor was it, for Christians living in Muslim-occupied territories. They enjoyed “peace” only by keeping the lowest possible profile, paying the jizya, and accepting non-person status in lands that had been Christian before the Muslim invaders arrived. Conquered peoples converted, lived as dhimmis, or were slain. If the dhimmi under Islamic rule could no longer pay the jizya, Muslims could [and did] resume jihad against him and his entire community.
These events show that Islam did not spread by Muslim missionaries knocking on doors, handing out pamphlets, nor preaching from street corners. It spread by brutal conquest. Yet, Muslims continue to deny these events even occurred.
To the extent that Crusaders committed “atrocities”, they did so contrary to the teachings of Jesus, and Christians today freely concede that the Crusades were a mistake. On the other hand, in carrying out the above, Muslims acted in imitation of their “perfect” example of Islam’s founder Mohammed, and they have yet to admit their conquests were a mistake, much less that they were wrong.
 
These events show that Islam did not spread by Muslim missionaries knocking on doors, handing out pamphlets, nor preaching from street corners. It spread by brutal conquest. Yet, Muslims continue to deny these events even occurred.

To the extent that Crusaders committed “atrocities”, they did so contrary to the teachings of Jesus, and Christians today freely concede that the Crusades were a mistake. On the other hand, in carrying out the above, Muslims acted in imitation of their “perfect” example of Islam’s founder Mohammed, and they have yet to admit their conquests were a mistake, much less that they were wrong.
“A lie told often enough, becomes truth”
 
Here is only a partial history of Muslim warfare against Christians in lands that had been Christian before Muslim invaders took them by force, according to Mohammed’s example:

c. 620-32 AD Mohammed starts Islam, raids Meccan caravans
632 – Mohammed dies
633 – Mesopotamia falls to Muslim invasion, followed by the entire Persian Empire
635 – Damascus falls
638 – Jerusalem capitulates
643 – Alexandria falls, ending 1,000 years of Hellenic civilization
648-49 – Cyprus falls
653 – Rhodes falls
673 – Constantinople attacked
698 – All of North Africa lost
711 – Spain invaded
717 – Muslims attack Constantinople again; repelled by Emperor Leo the Isaurian
721 – Saragossa falls, Muslims sights on southern France
720 – Narbonne falls.
732 – Bordeaux was stormed and its churches burnt down
732 – Charles Martel and his Frankish army defeat Muslims in October, turning back the Muslim tide
732 – Attacks on France continued
734 – Avignon captured by an Muslim force
743 – Lyons sacked
759 – Arabs driven out of Narbonne.
838 – Marseilles plundered
800 – Muslims incursions into Italy begin, Islands of Ponza and Ischia plundered
813 – Civitavecchia, the port of Rome sacked
826 – Crete falls to Muslim forces
827 – Muslim forces begin to attack Sicily.
837 – Naples repels a Muslim attack
838 – Marseilles taken
840 – Bari falls
842 – Messina captured and Strait of Messina controlled
846 – Muslims squadrons arrived at Ostia, at the Tiber’s mouth, sack Rome and St. Peter’s Basilica
846 – Taranto in Apulia conquered by Muslim forces
849 – Papal forces repel Muslim fleet at the mouth of the Tiber
853-71 – Italian coast from Bari down to Reggio Calabria controlled, Muslims terrorize Southern Italy.
859 – Muslims take control of all Messina
870 – Malta captured by the Muslims.
870 – Bari recaptured from the Muslims by Emperor Louis II
872 – Emperor Louis II defeats a Saracen fleet off Capua
872 – Muslim forces devastate Calabria
878 – Syracuse falls after a nine-month siege
879 – Pope John VIII forced to pay tribute of 25,000 mancuses (AUD$625,000) annually to the Muslims
880 – Byzantine Commanders gain victory over Saracen forces at Naples
881 – Muslims capture fortress near Anzio, plunder surrounding countryside with impunity for forty [40] years.
887 – Muslim armies take Hysela and Amasia, in Asia Minor.
889 – Toulon captured
902 – Muslim fleets sacked and destroyed Demetrias in Thessaly, Central Greece,
904 – Thessalonica falls to Muslim forces
915 – After three months of blockade, Christian forces victorious against Saracens holed-up in their fortresses north of Naples
921 – English pilgrims to Rome crushed to death under rocks rolled down on them by Saracens in the passes of the Alps [explain why Muslims were in the Alps in the first place]
934 – Genoa attacked by Muslim forces
935 – Genoa taken
972 – Saracens finally driven from Faxineto
976 – Caliphs of Egypt send fresh Muslim expeditions into southern Italy. Initially the German Emperor Otho II , who had set up his headquarters in Rome, successfully defeated these Saracen forces
977 – Sergius, Archbishop of Damascus, expelled from his See by Muslims
982 – Emperor Otho’s forces ambushed and his army defeated
1003 – Muslims from Spain sack Antibes
1003-09 – Marauding bands of Saracens plunder Italian coast from Pisa to Rome from bases on Sardinia
1005 – Muslims from Spain sack Pisa
1009 – Caliph of Egypt orders destruction of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem, the Tomb of Jesus
1010 – Saracens seize Cosenza in southern Italy.
1015 – All Sardinia falls
1016 – Muslims from Spain again sack Pisa
1017 – Fleets of Pisa and Genoa sail for Sardinia, find Saracens crucifying Christians, drive Saracen leader out. Saracens try to re-take Sardinia until 1050
1020 – Muslims from Spain sack Narbonne
1095 – The First Crusade.
This is what Muslim conquerors did. In one case, they reached even as far a Iceland! They had no right to invade lands that had been Christian for close to 1,000 years. Take Spain and France for example. Christians lived in those lands and had a common identity [the Muslim test]. So what makes Muslims right and Christians wrong? Christians had the land before the Muslims invaded. If we apply the Muslim test, Islam can claim no land outside Medina because it is the only place Mohammad was accepted without force.
And I am so glad you brought up the Crusades. The 463 years that elapsed between Muhammad’s death and the calling of a Crusade to free the Holy Places was not, as Islam apologists would have us believe, a time of “peaceful co-existence” between Muslims and European or Byzantine Christians. Nor was it, for Christians living in Muslim-occupied territories. They enjoyed “peace” only by keeping the lowest possible profile, paying the jizya, and accepting non-person status in lands that had been Christian before the Muslim invaders arrived. Conquered peoples converted, lived as dhimmis, or were slain. If the dhimmi under Islamic rule could no longer pay the jizya, Muslims could [and did] resume jihad against him and his entire community.
These events show that Islam did not spread by Muslim missionaries knocking on doors, handing out pamphlets, nor preaching from street corners. It spread by brutal conquest. Yet, Muslims continue to deny these events even occurred.
To the extent that Crusaders committed “atrocities”, they did so contrary to the teachings of Jesus, and Christians today freely concede that the Crusades were a mistake. On the other hand, in carrying out the above, Muslims acted in imitation of their “perfect” example of Islam’s founder Mohammed, and they have yet to admit their conquests were a mistake, much less that they were wrong.
Wow a very informative post. Tell me have you heard of this alleged Byzantine invasion of Arabia which provoked the poor Muslims in self defense to conquer all of the byzentine empire? (don’t laugh) Planteen seems to think it happened but I can find no record of it. it seems to be just another Muslim pseudo history used to avoid admitting the painful truth that Muslims invaded the Byzantine empire out of their imperialistic desires and hunger for land. Your post proves Muslims were the real aggressors long before the crusades not the Christians . thanks.

Muslims cannot complain about the atrocities of the crusaders as the Muslims behaved just as bad during their history. One muslim warlord who lived in the 1500’s called Tamerlane (founder of the timurid dynasty which invaded Persia) was responsible for the deaths of 17 million people and at least 100,000 Christians which he beheaded in northern iraq.
 
One might ask why Islam must depend so heavily on the Bible to verify itself. Why doesn’t Mohammed just stand on his own?
Muslims will grasp at straws and propagate any falsehood no matter how absurd about the bible to get converts. funny the bible contains all these prophecies of Mohammad when its supposed to be corrupted. muslims cant have it both ways.
 
…Tell me have you heard of this alleged Byzantine invasion of Arabia which provoked the poor Muslims in self defense to conquer all of the byzentine empire? (don’t laugh) Planteen seems to think it happened but I can find no record of it. …
Yes, he’s been harping on it for longer than I’ve been in this forum. The first time I read about it in one of his posts, I thought he was talking about Julius Caesar, and I was :rotfl: LMAO.
 
… funny the bible contains all these prophecies of Mohammad when its supposed to be corrupted. muslims cant have it both ways.
👍

This good analysis is long but it states what you just said and concludes that Islam must be rejected because it is self-contradictory.
 
Muslims will grasp at straws and propagate any falsehood no matter how absurd about the bible to get converts. funny the bible contains all these prophecies of Mohammad when its supposed to be corrupted. muslims cant have it both ways.
**Deus, the entire bible is not corrupted… There is plenty of truth in it. But that truth is also being mis-interpretted by your people. bible is not the word of God. It does not say so. It is not from Jesus too. So what it is?

There is some biography of Jesus in the bibleNT and some useful words of advice in it. No more. it is a small book. Most part of it is not from Jesus. Most part is from paul. So paul is a greater shareholder in the bibleNT.

Even if the bibleNT contained just a few words of wisdom about some one who was to come after Jesus, you people have covered that good news with your own ideas and you did not allow the truth to come out which would have led you into all truth.

Jesus had said that " people will get another Comforter who will lead the people into all truth. Because he will not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak." This is a clear indication of a great man coming after Jesus.

The Ghost does not hear and speak. We understand your bible business better than you. If there was anything useful for you in the bible, you have covered up that truth and tried to stop the spread of truthful matter of the bible.
We Muslims are not catching up at straws as you have accused us. We have the real words of God with us and plenty of support from Jesus too.**
 
**Deus, the entire bible is not corrupted… There is plenty of truth in it. But that truth is also being mis-interpretted by your people. bible is not the word of God. It does not say so. It is not from Jesus too. So what it is? **
hhaa the only people I see misinterpreting it are Muslims, I am a student of theology and everything you have said about the bible can easily be proven wrong because you do not understand what the bible is, you do not understand the principals of Exergesis and Hermeneutics when interpreting a text. Your belief that the song of Solomon is about Christians and Mohammad father convinces me of your utter delusion.

The bible is from Jesus, the gospel’s preserved jesus’ teachings accurately

. The koran claims to preserve the teachings of all the prophets before who preceded Mohammad. You claim this is accurate in doing so even though it was written hundreds if not thousands of years after the prophets who preceded mohamamd died. Yet you claim this is the word of god ? why?

Why is it possible for the Koran to come from god when these prophets never wrote a word of it? but it can still preserve their message right?

That’s because you believe that god was somehow involved in the process which is what Christians also believe about the bible. Whilst we do not believe it was revealed by an angel we believe it was divinely inspired.

Your Koran says numerous times that the new testament is a previous revelation of Allah so how can it be corrupted? Show me 1 verse where it says the New Testament has been corrupted.

The Koran was written 600 years after Jesus lived and as I have already proven in my other post large swathes of the Koran’s tales about Jesus were plagiarized from spurious apocryphal gospels. Yet you consider this more accurate than the NT which was written far far earlier? I find that laughable because if you remove god from the context of both the koran and the NT , the NT is far more likely to be accurate than a document 600 years after the fact.

Even the Word injeel used to talk about the gospels indicates it is referring not to some lost true Islamic text of Jesus but to the Christian gospels because the word injeel comes directly from the word Ευαγγέλιον used in the Greek new testament to refer to the good news. Jesus himself would have never used this word but rather the Aramaic or Hebrew equivalent. But why is this word in the Koran?
**
There is some biography of Jesus in the bibleNT and some useful words of advice in it. No more. it is a small book. Most part of it is not from Jesus. Most part is from paul. So paul is a greater shareholder in the bibleNT. **
There are 4 gospels chronicling the life of Jesus it is not just one book. If Paul invented Christianity prove it! quote one verse where he indicates as such. I could say mohamamd invented islam but unless I produced some evidence to back that up , its not proof.

If you knew anything about Paul’s writings he never claimed any such thing.

You do not understand what the Pauline epistles are either.

The epistles or letters are pauls writings to various churches to sort out different problems and to resolve issue such as in 1 Corinthians. These epistles reveal Paul’s theology applied to a specific context or situation which motivated their writing. Reading an epistle is like hearing 1 end of a telephone conversation b ecuase we don’t have the texts which pau lw as writing in response to. So because the epistles are paul’s theology applied toa specific context, exegesis in necessary to extaract the text’s underlying theological principles which paul was relating. These writings were included in the canon because paul was considered to be a divine apostle and his epistles contain Paul’s theology which is considered divinely inspired.

If you reject paul’s calims of a supernatural encountering Jesus supernaturally then you also have to outright reject Mohammad’s claims of encountering Jibril. Before you said Islam is compelety proven but you have no proof for Mohammad’s encounter so this is another double standard.
**

Jesus had said that " people will get another Comforter who will lead the people into all truth. Because he will not speak of himself but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak." This is a clear indication of a great man coming after Jesus.

The Ghost does not hear and speak. We understand your bible business better than you. If there was anything useful for you in the bible, you have covered up that truth and tried to stop the spread of truthful matter of the bible.
We Muslims are not catching up at straws as you have accused us. We have the real words of God with us and plenty of support from Jesus too. **
No you don’t understand the bible at all. From what you have written so far I can see you have barely read the bible, rather you just parrot the same old propaganda and misinformation from islamist sites and expect thinking Catholics to buy it (which we don’t) You a e grasping at straws as the The παρακλετος or comforter will not be seen or known by the world indicating its not a person and is called the spirit of truth. Mohammad was seen and was not a spirit.

John 14:16-17. “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever - the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.”

The spirit of the parakletos is “τὸ πνεῦμα” is in neuter indicating it is not talking about a male spirit or person metaphoricaly other wise it would be masculine πνευματος. Rahter neuter is used for imaginable things without gender like the holy spirit.

But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit , whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you." John 14:26
 
Now the parakletos is a holy spirit but is this about Mohammad? again I dont think so. τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον again this spirit is neuter so it could not be referring to Mohammad

The parakletos is described as a holy spirit which the world cannot see . this is not about Mohammad in any shape or form . If this spirit was Mohammad it would use the masculine form in the Greek rather than neuter which indicates the parakeltos which is a spirit has no sex.

But let me guess … doesn’t παρακλετος mean praised one in Greek? This is another muslim myth. The word has many meanings they are …

summoned, called to one’s side, esp. called to one’s aid, one who pleads another’s cause before a judge, a pleader, counsel for defense, legal assistant, an advocate
one who pleads another’s cause with one, an intercessor , a helper, succourer, aider, assistant

it does not mean praised one . Ahmed Dedat who invented this myth confused it with the word περικλυτος which means praise worthy . this word is never used once in the entire New testament and if you think it was I challenge you to produce a manuscript proving so.

But lets just say for the sake of argument that all the references to this comforter were about a man (which they aren’t) then what evidence do you have that its about Mohammad? Absolutely none!

The Koran is not the word of any deity but a bunch of recycled Christian oral traditions. How did a Christian saint’s hymns get into tn he Koran? How did a story about Christians persecuted by the Romans make it into the kroan as persecuted muslims In Surah Al Kahb? How did a bunch of highly dubious apocryphal tales some of them written 500 years after the fact make their way into your Koran if it came straight from jibril?

Before you try to comment on the bible please do some study on it because you really don’t know a thing about it, I feel embarrassed for you reading such moronic arguments.

Back to the topic of the bibles corruption, say for the sake of argument I say the bible is corrupted. How can you prove that all these verses which you claim are about mohamamd were not also corrupted with the rest of the bible? Just because they suit you not to? That is hightly hypocritical again and not convincing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top