after Muhammad’s birth?
**You are frightened for nothing. It was the old time Jewish clergy that kept the name of God secret from common people on some pretext. There was no need to do that. There is no sin to call the God by his name. All good names are His. See the good teachings of the Quran about it in verse 7:180,
Once more you are distorting your own scripture through ignorance/dishonesty. If we check the context of the verse, we see that the verse has nothing to do with Judaism or the way Jews revere God’s holy name:
Your Koran rebuts your claims:
This sounds like another assumption, but anyway
And that is the very point. Doesn’t matter it is biography or something else, we don’t have much information about his life and teachings.
Then all the gospels are supposed to give the same testimony about Jesus (a) and his teachings. What testimony you get from the below gospels.
True. Thats why it is like Gospels are made according to Christian faith rather than christians can rely their faith on the truth of Gospels.
What is wrong in saying this passage is missing in Mk, Mt and Lk if it is truly missing in those gospels as we all know?Since statements like “I am the way, truth, and life” IS in the Gospel of John, it is irrational to claim that these teachings are missing from the Gospel.
OK. Spiritual Inspiration is yet to confirm as we are discussing the differences in the gospels.
I don’t know in what context he said that. Anyway, that is not against my claim. I said, actions without faith is nothing for God as answer to the argument of inJESUS, “Jesus (a) mentionned other “forms” of prayer like standing up or looking up which means God is not that interested in positions.” where we know for sure that all the teachings of Jesus (a) is not there in the gospels. We don’t know if he taught of positions during prayer.
2 situations and different teachings are mentioned above.
Answer the above. Then we will come to the reason for the differences.
I cannot see any point in your argument. What kind of information would satisfy you and prevent you from claiming that the New Testament has limited knowledge about Jesus??? The Evangelists did not need to write their testimonies in the form of encyclopedias or of a novel in many volumes. If you are expecting the Gospels to be similar to a diary in form and content, get ready for disappointment.
And that is the very point. Doesn’t matter it is biography or something else, we don’t have much information about his life and teachings.
First, it would be irrational to claim that Matthew was wrong because Mark was correct or vice versa. How can you deny the possibility that Jesus’ disciples both rebuked Him and prayed to Him during a storm??? Jesus’ disciples asked Him for help (prayer) with a rebuking and defiant tone since He was sleeping at the time of the crisis. I can see nothing contradictory here.
This argument makes no sense. The Gospels were written after Jesus’ disciples witnessed Jesus’ passion and saw Him alive after His death. What determined the significance of Jesus’ passion and resurrection was the Spirit of God, who helped Jesus’ chosen ones understand the scriptures and the reasons for Jesus’ actions.
In order to prove your allegation that this verse is missing from the Gospel of the three Evangelists, you should primarily prove that Matthew, Mark, and Luke had been commanded to write their Gospels in the same way as John or that Matthew, Mark, and Luke had originally included this statement to their written testimonies.
Waiting for your assumptions and objections.
It seems that you have not read hamba2han’s posts on this thread yet. I can no more discuss this issue with you unless you read and understand hamba2han’s point.
These allegations are rebutted above.
Waiting for more questions.
My point and the example follows.
Here is my point and the example. You don’t know what exactly happened and have to go beyond the gospel and assume some possibility!!! I can give you other possibilities but the fact remains as we don’t know what was exact conversation happened in that boat.
Yes. I agree. But the 2nd situation is. Both the situations shows us difference in the details of the same event in different gospels becasue the disciples wrote things from their knowledge and understanding and then circulated among their audience. Audience of Mark couldn’t possibly know what John wrote. They were unable to read gospels together, side by side as we can do today.
You have to assume again what Jesus (a) could have said. What was that original notion Jesus (a) used in the original event?
Who are that chosen ones?
I don’t have to prove. Just read Mk, Mt and Lk. We know that the passage is not there. And the reason is what we have to find out. Instead of asking me, ask yourself, why such an important quote of Jesus (a) is not mentioned in the scenoptic gospels?
Again assumption? I know why you do that always. Because of the same reason, we don’t know what exactly happened.
I have made my point. Actions without faith doesn’t mean anything to God. If he disagree, he is open to argue. I hope he agree on it.
Throw (the child) Into the chest, and throw (The chest) into the river: The river will cast him Up the bank, and he will be taken up by one Who is an enemy to Me And an enemy to him': But I cast (the garment Of) love over thee from Me: And (this) in order that Thou mayest be reared Under Mine eye. Behold thy sister goeth forth And saith, Shall I show you One who will nurse And rear the (child)?’ So We brought thee back To thy mother, that her eye Might be cooled and she Should not grieve. Then thou didst slay A man, but We saved thee From trouble, and We tried Thee in various ways. Then didst thou tarry a number of years With the people of Midian. Then didst thou come hither As ordained, O Moses!” [S. 20:38-40]
What do you mean we do not know what happened
So what? What does your reference to those differences iilustrate?
Those Christians at first could not read John’s Gospel side by side with Mark’s Gospel for sure, but this by no means implies that those Christians had been unaware of the teachings in John’s Gospel. Those early Christians heard “Jesus’ Gospel” at the same time before having access to the written texts. Thus, they knew Jesus’ teaching although they could not read some of the Gospels.
The original notion Jesus pertained to was “a man who dominated over people” (Emperor, King, Tzar, Duke… whatever). This is no assumption since we know that Jesus used a phrase to express His authority. Claiming that Jesus said either Lord or Master of the House is an assumption though.
Jesus’ followers, of course.
It is YOUR duty to prove since YOU assert that Jesus’ statements in John’s Gospel had to be recorded by the other three Evangelists. You answer yourself when you pose that question. John’s Gospel is different from the Synoptics.
How can we be sure that what you claim is true? How can we know exactly that the three Evangelists forgot to write the things related by John? Your starting point is a number of assumptions although you seem to consider them facts.
But, it is a pagan god. Nothing of mohammed’s god is similar to the God of the Jews and the Christians. In fact, mohammed made it up, and changed his own pagan god as he needed to. At one point he was even going to throw in three goddesses of his pagan religion until he was advised not to do that. Their names were Al-'Uzza, al-Lat and Manah.
I agree. In that case, logically we will not take any single report to reconstruct the exact event. Will we? If 4 report differ in detail, we can conclude that the actual event could be something similar but not exactly as in any report.
Use logic again. God quoting history to clear certain points. As far as he is not reporting the actual event with complete details, we do assume the same thing that, the actual event happened in the life of Moses (a) could be something similar as mentioned in different passages. As the Monotheistic faith and message of Moses (a) is clear in the Quran we are not worried about reconstructing the entire life of Moses (a). Even if a recunstructon, it is possible with the above passages without any difference or contradiction. Look below.
**They should not forbid you to believe in One God. If you say you believe in One God only, that is your faith. You should be permitted to register as such. Nobody should stop you.
**The Quran repeats the messages to strenghten the earlier one. And they are all true. Nothing against each other. Each time an incident is mentioned there is some new information in it which was not in the previous one. And it is alright even if it is nothing new in it. That could act as a reminder of the same old message. No problem in repeating it.
Your statements get illogical since none of the Gospels claim to report the exact event. Differences in the accounts have various reasons: the Evangelist’s choice of vocabulary, the Evangelist’s choice of focus, the Evangelist’s choice of theological priorities, cultural peculiarities of the addressed audience…
How you can conclude that differences are errors is beyond me.
This kind of textual variations in the Koran pertain to a big problem that cannot be solved easily. Since these apparent and undeniable differences occur in a single book that is supposedly dictated by Allah (one person), the reasons underlying the variations in an account seem rather odd. One might wonder why the same author (supposedly Allah) relates the same story from different perspectives???
This weak theory can be easily debunked when we remember that many significant issues are related only once throughout the Koran. For instance, one might ask why Allah did not repeat the story of Abraham’s intention to offer His son as a sacrifice?? Why is there no repetition of this significant account?
Your argument is worthless since no Gospel was meant to be Jesus’ biography. The only thing you can do in this forum is to deny your own faulty presumptions. Keep entertaining yourself
According to the Gospels, Jesus accomplished His mission on earth through His death.
OK. I agree. But I said, you don’t get that agrrement of all evangelists from the gospels, but outside of Gospel which is an assumption. As much certainity you can give to the assumption that both rebuke and prayer happened, I can give to the assumption either one happened and the other is wrong.
You have not given me any examples yet to clarify what you mean when you say the information about Jesus in the New Testament is inadequate. Your examples and quotes have been related to the variation in the accounts of the Gospels so far.
What do you mean we do not know what happened
I am only reminding you that what you state about the Gospels are not clear facts, but presumptions.
All the Evangelists agree that Jesus was asleep when Jesus’ disciples were caught in a storm and that Jesus performed a miracle by allaying the storm and manifesting His authority/dominion. One of the Evangelists chose to emphasise Jesus’ disciples’ reaction to His sleep whereas the other chose to emphasise the disciples’ shouts for help, both of which point out the identical fact: Jesus’ disicples were very much afraid and desperate. I see nothing wrong with the difference in those accounts.
Still confused?So what? What does your reference to those differences iilustrate?
Again, you are making assumptions. And as you have said below, I don’t think all three scenoptic gospel writers forgot that passage. But it can be the result of the evolving story about Jesus (a) that was circulating among the people.
See. Now I am confused. You a re saying, Jesus (a) used a word that mean something like Emperor, King, Tzar, Duke etc. that is not an assumption but you are assuming what exactly he said. Unless you know what exactly is the word he used, how can you be so sure about the meaning of that unknown word? Or si it like, whatever Jesus (s) could have said, the meaning must mean “a man who dominated over people” ?
And they wrote according to their own understanding. right?
Rather than thinking of the reason, you are running away from the problem with an assumption. At least tell me your openion about why such an important saying of Jesus (a) is not found in scenoptic gospels?
Only 10 % from the life of Jesus (a) is mentioned in the gospels. In that 10 %, 99 % of his teachings are assumptions. (I give 1% chance to you if there is even a single saying of Jesus (a) mentioned all 4 gospels with exact same words.) Then some of my assumption has to be facts as you know every assumption got 50% possibility.OK. Then we should not take any event or saying in the gospels literally, including the claims about the divinity of Jesus (a).
How you can conclude that differences are errors is beyond me.
It is errors if we have to find the actual event, in differences.
And We inspired the mother of Moses, saying: Suckle him and, when thou fearest for him, then cast him into the river and fear not nor grieve.
b) To put the baby in an ark and throw the ark into the river:
Surah 20:38-39
When we inspired in thy mother that which is inspired, Saying: Throw him into the ark, and throw it into the river.
Both verses have different context. God quoting history to mention certain points. God was not reporting the actual event or saying. If he is clear with his point, he made his intention. The actual event cannot be recunstructed other than assuming and we are ashamed to accept that.
When we inspired in thy mother that which is inspired, Saying: Throw him into the ark, and throw it into the river, then the river shall throw it on to the bank, and there an enemy to Me and an enemy to him shall take him.
b) NO:
Surah 28:7
And We inspired the mother of Moses, saying: Suckle him and, when thou fearest for him, then cast him into the river and fear not nor grieve. Lo! We shall bring him back unto thee and shall make him (one) of Our messengers.
It is impossbile to get the exact words Allah suposedly told Moses’ mother through inspiration.
You think it is impossible to get the agreement of all the Evangelists from the Gospels, which is an assumption.
I am all the more confused when I see that you do not understand the reason for my confusion.
What is that so-called “evolving story of Jesus”? Assumption!
Sorry, but this is an irrational argument. Why do you think we have to know the exact word Jesus used??? How is it possible to know Jesus’ exact words if we take into consideration the fact that Jesus spoke two languages??? What will your next argument be? Will you say it is impossible to know the exact meaning of the word Jesus used without seeing His gestures and facial expressions?
Nope. They were inspired and controlled by God to write their testimonies although they were free to determine the vocabulary, plot, literary figures, etc.
Again you are repeating the assumption that such an important statement must be in the synoptic Gospels. You cannot teach the Evangelists what to add and what to leave out.
This is your presumption. It is an essentially mistaken presumption because there are many verses referring to Jesus’ divinity in the synoptic Gospels. For instance:
This is because John did not employ in his Gospel the major plot used by the other three Evangelists. His Gospel is the most theological and didactic one in content
How can you be so sure about your personal assumptions? What helps you present yourself as an accurate statistician?
Why is that? This argument is by no means related to my statement. Your conclusion only functions to show that you either deliberately or intentionally misunderstand me.
Where is the actual event that you can find?
When the Gospels are in question, you somehow discard this possibility as an assumption.
You are finally agreeing with me that there are differences in the alleged one book of Allah.
This response is completely irrelevant to my questions. Please answer those questions because I want to know what Allah said to Moses’ mother exactly.