Sacred Scriptures Corrupted? Give the Details

[ahmadjoyia]

hlgomez:

ahmadjoyia,

Your statement above is the one that is a “sweeping” statement–pure and simple. It seems to me that you don’t know Christian history on how we got the canon of Scriptures. I suggest that you be true to yourself. Read the accounts of the Council of Hippo in the year 393 AD, and the other important councils. You will find much much more than just pick and choose process in those councils.

Praise be Isa Ibnu Allah!

Pio

O my dear brother, though you haven’t clarified your “sweeping” statement, kindly do let me know which part of my statement you think is “sweeping” for you and hopefully, I shall be able to provide you the reference. Anyhow, thanks for your suggested reading.

 

[hlgomez]

O my dear brother, though you haven’t clarified your “sweeping” statement, kindly do let me know which part of my statement you think is “sweeping” for you and hopefully, I shall be able to provide you the reference.

This is your sweeping statement:

We all know there were many, and not just one, scriptures floating around in the community at that time and **it was only through pick and choose process of canonization, almost 4 centuries later, that this gospel became compulsory part of Christian literature. **

You should clarify those words “pick and choose process…” and “this gospels become compulsory” --because the very terms suggests something insignificant to your view and is very misleading. You are trying to suggest that this is not an important part of the Church’s history.

I would suggest that you be true to the historical accounts by highlighting the important events as to why the Councils of the Church came to that decision of canonizing Sacred Scriptures.

Pio

 

[hlgomez]

My dear brother thanks for your reply, though incomplete.Though I did answer your question fully and not avoided it at all, but it seems someone didn’t understand it. So, I shall repeat it again. Yes, its my believe in the **Prophethood **of Mohammad. I hope one would understand this word “Prophethood” when it comes to knowing about things not known through ordinary human resources. On the more, the Quran is the word of God, sent to us through Prophet Mohammad. Therefore, all that Quran contains, is nothing from Mohammad but from the God alone. Hence with this belief, I say, history of not just 600 years but many thousands of year before is also narrated in it.
Now coming to your argument of “…we Christians believe more in the apostles that were present and heard what Jesus have spoken …”. It would be interesting to know as which of the disciples of Jesus do you consider them “apostle”? On the more interesting note, which book of NT is considered to be authored by these apostles?

Your belief very significantly highlights that Muhammad was receiving the recitations from an angel–not Allah. How can you say that it directly comes from God when he directly receives it from an angel?

There is, to our point of view, that that angel was an angel of darkness masquerading as an angel of light. He gave words to Muhammad both true and false not to detect his grand conspiracy against the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

If you still insist that it comes from God, then show me an evidence in your Quran that God directly–I mean directly–spoke to Muhammad, not just thru an angel. Or at least a statement from Muhammad that God directly spoke to him.

Pio

 

[ahmadjoyia]

hlgomez:

This is your sweeping statement:

You should clarify those words “pick and choose process…” and “this gospels become compulsory” --because the very terms suggests something insignificant to your view and is very misleading. You are trying to suggest that this is not an important part of the Church’s history.

I would suggest that you be true to the historical accounts by highlighting the important events as to why the Councils of the Church came to that decision of canonizing Sacred Scriptures.

Pio

Ok, my brother I do now see that we are getting more of personal than discussing the topic. I really apologize for putting any sarcastic remark that might have offended you in any way. Regarding clarification of “pick and choose process…” I only implied that in whole of the pocess of canonization, whatever the criteria they set, was all based on human intellect. Since this criteria was’t unique, they could have easily selected another combination of set of books, depending upon the composition of the members of the councils.
As far as ““this gospels become compulsory” part of Christian literature” is concerned, I think, canonization process itself explains it. The whole purpose was to standardise both the literature as well as people’s faith. Though for some, it appeared to be good and for some it wasn’t so good (kindly refer to the critiques of canonization), but fact remains that it was thence that the newly canonized Christian dogma started to prevail all over.

 

[ahmadjoyia]

hlgomez:

Your belief very significantly highlights that Muhammad was receiving the recitations from an angel–not Allah. How can you say that it directly comes from God when he directly receives it from an angel?

Yap, its same source from where earlier Prophets like Moses recieved his scripture. Here is the reference from your own Bible. In Acts 7, Stephen’s only sermon confides how an angel spoke to Moses (vs38) and that the Law was given “through angels” (vs53). Paul confirms this in Gal 3:19… Heb 2:2 re-enforces.

There is, to our point of view, that that angel was an angel of darkness masquerading as an angel of light. He gave words to Muhammad both true and false not to detect his grand conspiracy against the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Who is this angel of “darkness”? and what is the source of your info about this angel and then its correlation with Prophet Mohammad?

If you still insist that it comes from God, then show me an evidence in your Quran that God directly–I mean directly–spoke to Muhammad, not just thru an angel. Or at least a statement from Muhammad that God directly spoke to him.

Pio

Yes, God did speak to Prophet Mohammad directly. Kindly refer to the occasion of “isra and miraj” in any good biographies of Mohammad. In fact, it is mentioned that the number of daily prayers was assinged during this episode of life of Prophet Mohammad with direct one to one communication with God.

 

[Booklover]

ahmadjoyia:

Yes, God did speak to Prophet Mohammad directly. Kindly refer to the occasion of “isra and miraj” in any good biographies of Mohammad. In fact, it is mentioned that the number of daily prayers was assinged during this episode of life of Prophet Mohammad with direct one to one communication with God.

Is this when he supposedly "ascended into heaven on the back of a mule?

 

[ahmadjoyia]

Booklover:

Is this when he supposedly "ascended into heaven on the back of a mule?

I knew it brother, perfectly typical of my brothers, though its a matter of faith beyond explanation same way as many dead were raised etc mentioned in the Bible. Isn’t it?

 

[Booklover]

ahmadjoyia:

I knew it brother, perfectly typical of my brothers, though its a matter of faith beyond explanation same way as many dead were raised etc mentioned in the Bible. Isn’t it?

Oh, so you do believe that there are matters of faith beyond explanation! And yet you refuse to believe in the Holy Trinity! As R. Gonzales put it “it defies logic”. It’s not surprising really, because belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God would mean that Mohammed was a false prophet.

So in other words, according to Muslims, if a " matter of faith beyond explanation" occurs in the Qur’an, it’s valid, but if it’s in our Bible it’s a lie, correct?

Vickie

 

[hlgomez]

Who is this angel of “darkness”? and what is the source of your info about this angel and then its correlation with Prophet Mohammad?

It simply means any fallen angel masquerading as an angel of light. The Bible which was in existence 500+ years earlier than the Quran already admonished and foretold of us of this:

Galatians 1:6-9
I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by (the) grace (of Christ) for a different gospel (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!

This is a very clear passage that is given. Muhammad is preaching a different Christ, that is, a different Gospel. Not that there are two different Christs, but there is only one. And his name suggests who he is–Jesus–Yeshua in Aramaic-- the very name means-- Saviour. This name was perverted by an angel who recited the Quran to Muhammad–and I will repeat what the apostle Paul has said–let that angel be anathema!

Pio

 

[hlgomez]

Yap, its same source from where earlier Prophets like Moses recieved his scripture. Here is the reference from your own Bible. In Acts 7, Stephen’s only sermon confides how an angel spoke to Moses (vs38) and that the Law was given “through angels” (vs53). Paul confirms this in Gal 3:19… Heb 2:2 re-enforces.

I will not try to bring the argument into the Bible. Yes the Bible clearly states that there are instances that angels spoke to men. They are messengers, and that is their office. I am not against that, and it is not contradictory to what I said.

However, in Galatians, Paul admonishes us about men or even angels who may preach a different gospel other than the one that we already receive, that is, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and is the LORD. That he was born of the Virgin Mary, suffered and died on the cross, and rose again on the third day. That He came to save us. This is the Gospel truth, but Muhammad thru an angel is speaking a different Jesus in his Quran.

Pio

 

[hlgomez]

Oh, so you do believe that there are matters of faith beyond explanation! And yet you refuse to believe in the Holy Trinity! As R. Gonzales put it “it defies logic”. It’s not surprising really, because belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God would mean that Mohammed was a false prophet.

So in other words, according to Muslims, if a " matter of faith beyond explanation" occurs in the Qur’an, it’s valid, but if it’s in our Bible it’s a lie, correct?

Vickie

Booklover,

You have made a very good point. Muslims sharply critizices us when it comes to Catholic doctrines that is shrouded with mysteries, just like the Trinity. Our human mind cannot fathom He who is Infinite.

When muslims are confronted with arguments that they cannot even explain, they will cry out “it is a matter of faith beyond explanation.” I thought muslims explains every bit of mysteries even in the created world? If they can’t explain things that do happen, then how can they be so sure that the Trinity doesn’t exist because it is beyond our explanation?

I will wait the answer of our dear fellow ahmadjoyia.

Pio

 

[ahmadjoyia]

Booklover:

Oh, so you do believe that there are matters of faith beyond explanation! And yet you refuse to believe in the Holy Trinity! As R. Gonzales put it “it defies logic”. It’s not surprising really, because belief in Jesus Christ as the Son of God would mean that Mohammed was a false prophet.

So in other words, according to Muslims, if a " matter of faith beyond explanation" occurs in the Qur’an, it’s valid, but if it’s in our Bible it’s a lie, correct?

Vickie

O my dear dear booklover, all spiritual matters are “beyond human explanation” let alone the event of “isra and miraj”. For example, the very existance of angels, satan or similar divinely beings, are all matter of faith beyond human logic. Since they are not physically proveable for their existence. It is this very notion that is chanllanged by the athiests and I truely believe, that my brother on this forum are not from among them. However, within the faith, these “spiritual beings” can easily be correlated and explained through comparison with the similar phenomenas with earlier Prophets. On the more, since the topic under discussion is far removed from spiritual entities, therefore, neither I, nor I would expect from someone else to wish away things without human logic. This is what is being discussed here. Isn’t it?

 

[hlgomez]

For example, the very existance of angels, satan or similar divinely beings, are all matter of faith beyond human logic. Since they are not physically proveable for their existence.

Oh my dear ahmadjoyia, let me reply the above for Booklover.

You haven’t really answered her point. How then can you explain the logic of the One God in Three Divine Persons if you can’t even explain the logic of His created beings?

Pio

 

[ahmadjoyia]

hlgomez:

It simply means any fallen angel masquerading as an angel of light. The Bible which was in existence 500+ years earlier than the Quran already admonished and foretold of us of this:

O my dear brother, where is this “fallen angel” mentioned in your quote, not even in your own highlighted text? If some of the “saints” start analogising anything, doesn’t mean anything if not “blasphamy” against the very notion of “angels”, though he had not yet suggested any such notion of “fallen angel”? Thirdly, if some believe in Paul’s sayings more than the sayings of the disciples of Jesus, then we are reading “Pauline Christianity” and not “Jesus Christianity”. Isn’t it? Let us look at your quoted passage a little more deeper:

Galatians 1:6-9
I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by (the) grace (of Christ) for a different gospel (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed!

Of course my Christian brothers would already know that this is a typical Pauline epistle to the people of Galatians to whom he had already preached in his 2nd and 3rd missionary visits. Even Christian scholars agree that there was strong opposition to the teachings of Paul. “In any case, these people were now being enticed by other missionaries to add the observances of the Jewish law, including the rite of circumcision, to the cross of Christ as a means of salvation. For, since Paul’s visit, some other interpretation of Christianity had been brought to these neophytes, probably by converts from Judaism (the name “Judaizers” is sometimes applied to them); it has specifically been suggested that they were Jewish Christians who had come from the austere Essene sect.” On the more, these missionaries or some may call them “…interlopers, insisted on the necessity of following certain precepts of the** Mosaic law along with faith in Christ**. They were undermining Paul’s authority also, asserting that he had not been trained by Jesus himself, that his gospel did not agree with that of the original and true apostles in Jerusalem, that he had kept from his converts in Galatia the necessity of accepting circumcision and other key obligations of the Jewish law, in order more easily to win them to Christ, and that his gospel was thus not the full and authentic one held by “those of repute” in Jerusalem.”
It in this context that one when looks at the Pauline doctrine, totally contrasted by the sayings Jesus especially the sermon at the Mt, one can easily assess the direction in which present day Christianity is. Nevertheless, its all a matter of faith, if someone believes in Paul, more than Jesus, its totally and openly for him to enjoy as what he believes. Yes, God shall make things clear, when we report to him at the day of Judgement.

This is a very clear passage that is given. Muhammad is preaching a different Christ, that is, a different Gospel. Not that there are two different Christs, but there is only one. And his name suggests who he is–Jesus–Yeshua in Aramaic-- the very name means-- Saviour.

My dear brother, variation in preachings of “different Christ” is more of Christians own work as the example above shows it very clearly. Nestorianism concept of Christ is yet one of a kind, what talk of ebonites etc. On the more, at which time of Christian history, afer or even before Islam, do you think, there was not confrontation among the Christians on very basic origin of Christianity? Not only the above mentioned paragraphs, but numerous other occassion can show the stark differences among differnt Christian denominations right from the very begining of Christianity till this day of my writting. They all differ more on the personage of Jesus and his divinity than on anything else.

This name was perverted by an angel who recited the Quran to Muhammad–

The same Angel who brought messages to earlier Prophets as well, as per Bible.

and I will repeat what the apostle Paul has said–let that angel be anathema!

Pio

Though, Paul had not mentioned any specific angel, attributing it to angel Gaberial by my brother would be, in a sense, negating his own Bible.

 

[hawk]

ahmadjoyia:

Of course my Christian brothers would already know that this is a typical Pauline epistle to the people of Galatians to whom he had already preached in his 2nd and 3rd missionary visits. Even Christian scholars agree that there was strong opposition to the teachings of Paul.

Show us an example of this opposition to Pauls teachings!

“In any case, these people were now being enticed by other missionaries to add the observances of the Jewish law, including the rite of circumcision, to the cross of Christ as a means of salvation. For, since Paul’s visit, some other interpretation of Christianity had been brought to these neophytes, probably by converts from Judaism (the name “Judaizers” is sometimes applied to them); it has specifically been suggested that they were Jewish Christians who had come from the austere Essene sect.” On the more, these missionaries or some may call them “…interlopers, insisted on the necessity of following certain precepts of the** Mosaic law along with faith in Christ**. They were undermining Paul’s authority also, asserting that he had not been trained by Jesus himself, that his gospel did not agree with that of the original and true apostles in Jerusalem, that he had kept from his converts in Galatia the necessity of accepting circumcision and other key obligations of the Jewish law, in order more easily to win them to Christ, and that his gospel was thus not the full and authentic one held by “those of repute” in Jerusalem.”
It in this context that one when looks at the Pauline doctrine, totally contrasted by the sayings Jesus especially the sermon at the Mt, one can easily assess the direction in which present day Christianity is. Nevertheless, its all a matter of faith, if someone believes in Paul, more than Jesus, its totally and openly for him to enjoy as what he believes. Yes, God shall make things clear, when we report to him at the day of Judgement.

How does Pauls teachings differ from Jesus in the sermon on the mount?

It was Peter who dreamed that the Lord told him that all things are clean, and the dietary laws do not apply anymore.

It is also Peter who claims that Pauls teachings are true, if hard to grasp.

Anyway there is no point explaining this to muslims, since they must believe all the lies in the Quran.

My dear brother, variation in preachings of “different Christ” is more of Christians own work as the example above shows it very clearly. Nestorianism concept of Christ is yet one of a kind, what talk of ebonites etc. On the more, at which time of Christian history, afer or even before Islam, do you think, there was not confrontation among the Christians on very basic origin of Christianity? Not only the above mentioned paragraphs, but numerous other occassion can show the stark differences among differnt Christian denominations right from the very begining of Christianity till this day of my writting. They all differ more on the personage of Jesus and his divinity than on anything else.

The same Angel who brought messages to earlier Prophets as well, as per Bible.

Though, Paul had not mentioned any specific angel, attributing it to angel Gaberial by my brother would be, in a sense, negating his own Bible.

Except that it isnt the Angel Gabriel, but another fallen angel, deceiving man to ruin

 

[ahmadjoyia]

My dear brother hawk, your question “Show us an example of this opposition to Pauls teachings!” is meaningless since the verses Galatians 1:6-9 themself reflect this issue. Otherwise, whatelse could be the need for Paul to write such a letter showing his superiority over others by cursing them?
As far as your claim of peter vs Paul is concerned, kindly provide appropriate reference to substaniate your point.
In the last, but not the least, can you provide your source of info for a “another fallen angel” other than what has already been presented above?

 

[r.gonzales]

the following was taken from “mysteries of the soul expounded” by abu bilal mustafa al-kanadi, an italian born canadian convert to islam who graduated from the islamic university in mecca, saudi arabia.

In addition, the story of Saul has definite contradictions and elements of untruth which prove that human hands have altered and distorted it. In the beginning of chapter 9 of Samuel, it is said of Saul that he was not corrupt, but rather, “there was not among the Children of Israel a goodlier person than he.” (I Samuel, 9:2) Furthermore, in chapter 10 he was told by Samuel hat God had chosen im as “captan over His ineritance,” (I Samuel, 10:1) that “the Spirit of the Lord” would come upon him (I Samuel, 10:6), and that he could do as occasion served him, for God was with him (I Samuel, 10:7). The Qur’an confirms the righteousness of Talut (Saul) (A brief outline of his story is mentioned in Surah al-Baqarah 2:246-251) and mentions that a prophet from the Children of Israel informed the Israelites that Allah had appointe Talutas king over them. (Surah al-Baqarah, 2:247) The Children of Israel complained about this choice, claiming that he was not deserving of the kingshipsince he was not gifted with an abundance of wealth. Thereupon that prophet replied to the Israelites: “Verily, Allah has chosen him above you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge, bodily structure and prowess.” (Surah al-Baqarah, 2:247)

In contrast to this favourable character description, Biblical narrative also portrays Saul as devoid of moral qualities. According to the picture painted by the chroniclers of the Bible, he goes from the “goodliest of people” to one of the worst. This noble and virtuous Saul, who was chosen by God above the other Children of Israel to be their king, who had the “spirit” of God with him etc., is paintedas a treacherous, envious person who lusts for the blood of his own son-in-lw, David. He is depicted as a desperate man who, being deserted by God and losing all faith in Him, plunges on his swod in suicide!

This is a clear example of the many instances of the Biblical narratives being tampere with and distorted by the Jewish chroniclers and scribes. It reminds one of other false attributions mad regarding certain chosen prophets and messengers of God. These include adultery and murder attributed to David (II Samuel, 11:2-5), incest attributed to Lot (Genesis, 19:30-38), the making of idols and/or their worship ascribed to Aaron (Exodus, 32:1-6) and Solomon! (I Kings, 11:1-10) Such evidence clearly indicates that the Bible narratives have been altered and thus cannot be accepted as truth. Furthermore, it is obvious that the story of Saul’s seeking and requesting a conjures to call up the soul of of the deceased Samuel is nothing but a figment of the Jewish chroniclers’ imaginations. They have woven this myth into the story of the noble King Saul’s life in order to discredit him as a leader of Israel. The Israelites were never pleased with his appointment over them, even though it was by divine will, as mentioned in the Qur’an (Surah al-Baqarah, 2:247). They objected to his appointment to authority over them for he was from the tribe of Benjamin, the smallest tribe in Israel; he had neither wealth nor position in the Israelite society. They unwillingly accepted Saul as king only after they were shown a miraculoussign of his authority - the lost Ark of the Covenant being brought back to them, carried by angels. It contained assurances from their Lordand relics left by the family of Moses and Aaron.

 

[Ghosty]

ahmadjoyia:

In the last, but not the least, can you provide your source of info for a “another fallen angel” other than what has already been presented above?

2 Corinthians 11:

13For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. 14**And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. **15It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

And interestingly enough, whe paired with the quote from Galatians 1:

6I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

Written 500 years before Mohammed was born. We were well warned, and well prepared, to deal with the false prophet with the message from an “Angel of Light” that contradicted the words of Christ.

 

[kristyn]

UnworthySoul:

Especially from a religion based upon the things Mohammed liked about the Judeo-Christian beliefs but left out what he didn’t like. Belloc was dead on about Islam being the 4th Great Heresy.

My muslim friends,
Please with an open hear and mind read Serge Triflovic “The Sword and The Prophet” , that is it–it is the Truth and I am sorry if it is too hard for you to accept. I will pray you put your ego and pride aside, and hear the truth God wants you to hear.

 

[kristyn]

UnworthySoul:

Especially from a religion based upon the things Mohammed liked about the Judeo-Christian beliefs but left out what he didn’t like. Belloc was dead on about Islam being the 4th Great Heresy.

My muslim friends,
Please with an open hear and mind read Serge Triflovic “The Sword and The Prophet” , that is it–it is the Truth and I am sorry if it is too hard for you to accept. I will pray you put your ego and pride aside, and hear the truth God wants you to hear.