D
De_Maria
Guest
Why, you don’t? You quote the teachings of the “Master Messiah” or whatever you call him.
Thanks
- Status
Thanks
H
hamba2han
Guest
I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. …(Galatians 1:6-9)
To all who may be questioning whether this “another gospel” is really the Gospel of Barnabas, actually I do not think that it is really the issue here.
The fact of the matter is that Paul has branded this “other gospel” to be a perversion of the gospel of Christ.
And so, it does not matter what Muslims believe what this “other gospel” is, the real question for Christians would have to be – Why do you choose to believe in Paul and not the preacher of this “other gospel” that he warned about in Galatians, whoever he may be?
The simple answer is that you “know” Paul’s gospel to be true because Paul told you so… and therefore, it is entirely a matter of faith in Paul and not Jesus (pbuh).
Christians believe the testimony of one man over the other i.e. Paul over the preacher of this “other gospel”.
Why is this “other gospel” wrong?.. Because Paul said so.
That in a nutshell, is the whole basis of Christian belief i.e. because Paul said so and therefore it must be the gospel truth.
Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
As we said before, so say I now again, If any [man] preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. …(Galatians 1:6-9)
To all who may be questioning whether this “another gospel” is really the Gospel of Barnabas, actually I do not think that it is really the issue here.
The fact of the matter is that Paul has branded this “other gospel” to be a perversion of the gospel of Christ.
And so, it does not matter what Muslims believe what this “other gospel” is, the real question for Christians would have to be – Why do you choose to believe in Paul and not the preacher of this “other gospel” that he warned about in Galatians, whoever he may be?
The simple answer is that you “know” Paul’s gospel to be true because Paul told you so… and therefore, it is entirely a matter of faith in Paul and not Jesus (pbuh).
Christians believe the testimony of one man over the other i.e. Paul over the preacher of this “other gospel”.
Why is this “other gospel” wrong?.. Because Paul said so.
That in a nutshell, is the whole basis of Christian belief i.e. because Paul said so and therefore it must be the gospel truth.
D
De_Maria
Guest
One. No it isn’t the Gospel of Barnabas. The Gospe of Barnabas was written in the 1800’s.
Two, Paul is not speaking about any particular book or even any particular teaching. He is speaking about ANY TEACHING which contradicts the Teaching of Jesus Christ.
Paul isn’t speaking about any particular book. Can’t you read? He says, “** But though we**…” So, he is acknowledging that many distrust him because he is a former enemy of the Church and tells the community, “if you think that I am contradicting Jesus, then reject me but accept Jesus”.
Now you’re back to the Gospel of Barnabas. The reasons we choose to believe Paul is
- Because the GOB contradicts the teachings of Jesus Christ.
- Because the GOB has been proven to come into existence in the 18th century.
No. Not so at all.
All you have to do is compare it to the Bible and you’ll see that it contradicts the Bible point by point.
However, if the Gospel of Barnabas is so true, why don’t you believe it. You take the word of Mohammed over the Gospel of Barnabas, why, because Mohammed said so?
You are absolutely wrong.
We believe Paul because we believe in the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church was established by Jesus Christ in the Apostles who are Her foundation. The Apostles admitted Paul into their fold after he converted based on a vision of Jesus Christ which he could confirm by his miraculous knowledge of Jesus teachings and by the miracles he could perform by his person in the name of Jesus Christ. The Church went on to accept many of Paul’s writings and to read them during the Liturgy, our most important gathering.
Through the centuries, the Church gathered the writings of the Apostles, including Paul’s and grouped them together with the Old Testament into what we now call the Bible.
All writings of the Apostles and of Paul are in perfect conformity with the Traditions of the Apostles as interpreted by the Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church is the longest lasting organization of any sort in the history of mankind. If we compare to Islam, we see that Islam fell into disarray right after Mohammed died. Split after split occurred. Today many sects exist based on the Quran.
Sincerely,
De Maria
I
inJESUS
Guest
we chooe to believe Paul and not Muhammad because Paul taught with other disciples whereas Muhammad is self-proclaimed 
G
George_Waters
Guest
I guess I have asked this question so many times on this thread due to attempted sidetracks that I became careless in my wording. My apologies.
My question is: Since Muslims claim that Jesus and His apostles were Muslim, why is there no Muslim sources recording the teachings and acts of the apostles?
You have brought up isnad; however that does not explain the apparent lack of effort on the part of Muslim scholars to establish isnad on these “Muslim” teachers.
H
hamba2han
Guest
A very important reason why Christians should be paying close attention to the ‘Apocalypse of Peter’ is that according to the New Testament, Peter was the only disciple to witness the crucifixion:
First of all, it is important to know that according to the New Testament itself, all of Jesus’ disciples fled for their lives on the night of crucifixion. None of them witnessed Jesus’ crucifixion except for one, that is Peter! He was the lone and only witness of the actual crucifixion event.
Let us look at what the Bible’s New Testament says:
Matthew 26:34-35, 55-57, 69-75
34 Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.
35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.
…
55 In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me.
56 But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.
57 And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled.
69 Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee.
70 But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest.
71 And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth.
72 And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the man.
73 And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech betrayeth thee.
74 Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew.
75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.
Now as we clearly see, Peter did witness the so-called crucifixion event. He was present there. The only thing that saved him from death is his denial that he knew Jesus. Otherwise, he himself would have been crucified that night.
First of all, it is important to know that according to the New Testament itself, all of Jesus’ disciples fled for their lives on the night of crucifixion. None of them witnessed Jesus’ crucifixion except for one, that is Peter! He was the lone and only witness of the actual crucifixion event.
Let us look at what the Bible’s New Testament says:
Matthew 26:34-35, 55-57, 69-75
34 Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.
35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.
…
55 In that same hour said Jesus to the multitudes, Are ye come out as against a thief with swords and staves for to take me? I sat daily with you teaching in the temple, and ye laid no hold on me.
56 But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.
57 And they that had laid hold on Jesus led him away to Caiaphas the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled.
69 Now Peter sat without in the palace: and a damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee.
70 But he denied before them all, saying, I know not what thou sayest.
71 And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth.
72 And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the man.
73 And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech betrayeth thee.
74 Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew.
75 And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly.
Now as we clearly see, Peter did witness the so-called crucifixion event. He was present there. The only thing that saved him from death is his denial that he knew Jesus. Otherwise, he himself would have been crucified that night.
G
George_Waters
Guest
And the above post has what to do with Muslim’s lack or research in regards to the apostles of Jesus? Yet another sidetrack! 
Since Muslims claim that Jesus and His apostles were Muslim, why is there no Muslim sources recording the teachings and acts of the apostles?
Since Muslims claim that Jesus and His apostles were Muslim, why is there no Muslim sources recording the teachings and acts of the apostles?
D
De_Maria
Guest
One, The Church proved in the third century that Peter did not write the Apocalypse of Peter.
Two, John tells us that he was at the foot of the Cross.
John 19
25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen. 26 When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother:
We know that the disciple whom Jesus loved is John because he reveals himself at the end of his Gospel:
John 21
20 Peter turning about, saw that disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also leaned on his breast at supper, and said: Lord, who is he that shall betray thee? 17 “Feed my sheep”… Our Lord had promised the spiritual supremacy to St. Peter; St. Matt. 16. 19; and here he fulfils that promise, by charging him with the superintendency of all his sheep, without exception; and consequently of his whole flock, that is, of his own church.
21 Him therefore when Peter had seen, he saith to Jesus: Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 Jesus saith to him: So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? follow thou me. 23 This saying therefore went abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die. And Jesus did not say to him: He should not die; but, So I will have him to remain till I come, what is it to thee? *24*** This is that disciple who giveth testimony of these things, and hath written these things;** and we know that his testimony is true.
Three, Why do you persist in telling us to believe that which you don’t believe?
Four, Why do you persist in teaching us Christianity when you aren’t Christian?
Sincerely,
De Maria
H
hamba2han
Guest
The disciples of Jesus (pbuh) are indeed mentioned in the Qur’an.And the above post has what to do with Muslim’s lack or research in regards to the apostles of Jesus? Yet another sidetrack!
Since Muslims claim that Jesus and His apostles were Muslim, why is there no Muslim sources recording the teachings and acts of the apostles?
Therefore their true writings will naturally be a matter of interest to Muslims.
However, since by it’s very nature, it is just NOT possible to do isnad retroactively, Muslims will of course not put their faith in these writings, regardless of their level of veracity.
D
De_Maria
Guest
If I understand this “isnad” correctly, it is not a matter of determining fact or truth, but of determining whether something was possible.
In other words, if I say that St. John said that Jesus was crucified, that would be considered highly improbable since I live in the 21century and John lived in the first. Never mind that it was recorded by several other contemporaries of Jesus.
However, if someone said that someone said that Judas said that Jesus was not God, that would be considered highly probable because Judas was Jesus contemporary.
Is that correct?
The end result, as I see it, is that “isnad” can as easily perpetuate a lie as it can a truth. Because, it seems, the truth is secondary to the genealogy of the message.
Sincerely,
De Maria
G
George_Waters
Guest
But why didn’t Muslims record their teachings and acts as, or shortly after, the occured if they were Muslims and teaching Islam? Claiming it is too late now does not get around the fact that Muslims did not record these things then. Why?
H
hamba2han
Guest
Another piece of early Christian writing is the ‘Acts of John’, this purportedly from John the Disciple, which supports the Qur’anic account of the alleged ‘crucifixion’.
This book was condemned as heretical in 787 CE. Augustine, who was a bishop from 396 to 430 CE, quoted from that book. Besides, a literary analysis of the book suggests that it was composed in the second half of the second century CE. (Cameron R, 1982)
From “The Apocryphal New Testament”
M.R. James-Translation and Notes
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924
97 Thus, my beloved, having danced with us the Lord went forth. And we as men gone astray or dazed with sleep fled this way and that. I, then, when I saw him suffer, did not even abide by his suffering, but fled unto the Mount of Olives, weeping at that which had befallen. And when he was crucified on the Friday, at the sixth hour of the day, darkness came upon all the earth. And my Lord standing in the midst of the cave and enlightening it, said: John, unto the multitude below in Jerusalem I am being crucified and pierced with lances and reeds, and gall and vinegar is given me to drink. But unto thee I speak and what I speak hear thou. I put it into thy mind to come up into this mountain, that thou mightest hear those things which it behoveth a disciple to learn from his teacher and a man from his God… (Jesus Continues): But this is not the cross of wood which thou wilt see when thou goest down hence: neither am I he that is on the cross, whom now thou seest not, but only hearest his (or a) voice. I was reckoned to be that which I am not, not being what I was unto many others: but they will call me (say of me) something else which is vile and not worthy of me. As, then, the place of rest is neither seen nor spoken of, much more shall I, the Lord thereof, be neither seen… (Jesus Continues): 101 Nothing, therefore, of the things which they will say of me have I suffered: nay, that suffering also which I showed unto thee and the rest in the dance, I will that it be called a mystery. For what thou art, thou seest, for I showed it thee; but what I am I alone know, and no man else. Suffer me then to keep that which is mine, and that which is thine behold thou through me, and behold me in truth, that I am, not what I said, but what thou art able to know, because thou art akin thereto. Thou hearest that I suffered, yet did I not suffer; that I suffered not, yet did I suffer; that I was pierced, yet I was not smitten; hanged, and I was not hanged; that blood flowed from me, and it flowed not; and, in a word, what they say of me, that befell me not, but what they say not, that did I suffer. Now what those things are I signify unto thee, for I know that thou wilt understand. Perceive thou therefore in me the praising (al. slaying al. rest) of the (or a) Word (Logos), the piercing of the Word, the blood of the Word, the wound of the Word, the hanging up of the Word, the suffering of the Word, the nailing (fixing) of the Word, the death of the Word. And so speak I, separating off the manhood. Perceive thou therefore in the first place of the Word; then shalt thou perceive the Lord, and in the third place the man, and what he hath suffered.
The above suggests the illusionary crucifixion of Jesus. That he was on the cross but actually he wasn’t and that he was not suffering. His suffering was in what would be said about him after this event.
(earlychristianwritings.com/text/actsjohn.html)
This book was condemned as heretical in 787 CE. Augustine, who was a bishop from 396 to 430 CE, quoted from that book. Besides, a literary analysis of the book suggests that it was composed in the second half of the second century CE. (Cameron R, 1982)
From “The Apocryphal New Testament”
M.R. James-Translation and Notes
Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1924
97 Thus, my beloved, having danced with us the Lord went forth. And we as men gone astray or dazed with sleep fled this way and that. I, then, when I saw him suffer, did not even abide by his suffering, but fled unto the Mount of Olives, weeping at that which had befallen. And when he was crucified on the Friday, at the sixth hour of the day, darkness came upon all the earth. And my Lord standing in the midst of the cave and enlightening it, said: John, unto the multitude below in Jerusalem I am being crucified and pierced with lances and reeds, and gall and vinegar is given me to drink. But unto thee I speak and what I speak hear thou. I put it into thy mind to come up into this mountain, that thou mightest hear those things which it behoveth a disciple to learn from his teacher and a man from his God… (Jesus Continues): But this is not the cross of wood which thou wilt see when thou goest down hence: neither am I he that is on the cross, whom now thou seest not, but only hearest his (or a) voice. I was reckoned to be that which I am not, not being what I was unto many others: but they will call me (say of me) something else which is vile and not worthy of me. As, then, the place of rest is neither seen nor spoken of, much more shall I, the Lord thereof, be neither seen… (Jesus Continues): 101 Nothing, therefore, of the things which they will say of me have I suffered: nay, that suffering also which I showed unto thee and the rest in the dance, I will that it be called a mystery. For what thou art, thou seest, for I showed it thee; but what I am I alone know, and no man else. Suffer me then to keep that which is mine, and that which is thine behold thou through me, and behold me in truth, that I am, not what I said, but what thou art able to know, because thou art akin thereto. Thou hearest that I suffered, yet did I not suffer; that I suffered not, yet did I suffer; that I was pierced, yet I was not smitten; hanged, and I was not hanged; that blood flowed from me, and it flowed not; and, in a word, what they say of me, that befell me not, but what they say not, that did I suffer. Now what those things are I signify unto thee, for I know that thou wilt understand. Perceive thou therefore in me the praising (al. slaying al. rest) of the (or a) Word (Logos), the piercing of the Word, the blood of the Word, the wound of the Word, the hanging up of the Word, the suffering of the Word, the nailing (fixing) of the Word, the death of the Word. And so speak I, separating off the manhood. Perceive thou therefore in the first place of the Word; then shalt thou perceive the Lord, and in the third place the man, and what he hath suffered.
The above suggests the illusionary crucifixion of Jesus. That he was on the cross but actually he wasn’t and that he was not suffering. His suffering was in what would be said about him after this event.
(earlychristianwritings.com/text/actsjohn.html)
H
hamba2han
Guest
I dunno, perhaps they were not aware of the importance of isnad in those days.
H
hamba2han
Guest
Your understanding of ‘isnad’ and the ‘Science of Hadith’ is very limited indeed.
You need to refer to my earlier post and click on the links.
D
De_Maria
Guest
Again, the key word is “purportedly”.
Really? Augustine? May we have the quotation please?
Even if that were true, it does not suggest that it was composed by St. John the Apostle. In fact, the very text shows that it was not written by John:
*18 Now **John **was hastening to Ephesus, moved thereto by a vision.
*Then entire treatise is purportedly about John but not by John.
And that is why this 2nd century forgery is considered heretical.
But again, why do you believe it? There is no mention here of Mohammed, Islam nor of Allah?
Note the following:
*109 **And he asked for bread, and gave thanks thus: What praise or what offering or what thanksgiving shall we, breaking this bread, name save thee only, O Lord Jesu? We glorify thy name that was said by the Father: we glorify thy name that was said through the Son (or we glorify the name of Father that was said by thee . . . the name of Son that was said by thee): we glorify thine entering of the Door. We glorify the resurrection shown unto us by thee. We glorify thy way, we glorify of thee the seed, the word, the grace, the faith, the salt, the unspeakable (al. chosen) pearl, the treasure, the plough, the net, the greatness, the diadem, him that for us was called Son of man, that gave unto us truth, rest, knowledge, power, the commandment, the confidence, hope, love, liberty, refuge in thee. For thou, Lord, art alone the root of immortality, and the fount of incorruption, and the seat of the ages: called by all these names for us now that calling on thee by them we may make known thy greatness which at the present is invisible unto us, but visible only unto the pure, being portrayed in thy manhood only. ***
*110 And he brake the bread and gave unto all of us, praying over each of the brethren that he might be worthy of the grace of the Lord and of the most holy eucharist. And he partook also himself likewise, and said: Unto me also be there a part with you, and: Peace be with you, my beloved. *
This is very close to Catholic Teaching. I believe most of it is consistent with Catholic Teaching, except the parts which you highlighted. In fact, since you advise us to believe in this document, I advise the same of you. This is much closer to the truth than Islam.
Sincerely,
De Maria
D
De_Maria
Guest
Uh, thats where I got my understanding of “isnad”, I read your post and followed the links. That is why I’m asking YOU.
It seems a simple question, what is the problem?
Sincerely,
De Maria
G
George_Waters
Guest
Or maybe they knew very good and well these men were not Muslim, their teachings were in line with Jesus and not Mohammed’s version and were therefore acknowledged only so far as to claim Jesus was Muslim to support their own agendas? That seems far more likely than a lack of knowledge of the artificial “science” of isnad.
Well, at least I got an honest answer with “I dunno.” though that is far from answering the question. So the bottom line is Muslims have no real evidence to support their claims that the apostles were Muslims.
B
Booklover
Guest
.
You can’t prove that the Quran is true!
Instead you put your faith on the word of a highway robber!
Vickie
G
George_Waters
Guest
Simple is the new complex for many on this forum!
I
inJESUS
Guest
97 Thus, my beloved, having danced with us the Lord went forth. And we as men gone astray or dazed with sleep fled this way and that. I, then, when I saw him suffer, did not even abide by his suffering, but fled unto the Mount of Olives, weeping at that which had befallen. And when he was crucified on the Friday, at the sixth hour of the day, darkness came upon all the earth. And my Lord standing in the midst of the cave and enlightening it, said: John, unto the multitude below in Jerusalem I am being crucified and pierced with lances and reeds, and gall and vinegar is given me to drink. But unto thee I speak and what I speak hear thou. I put it into thy mind to come up into this mountain, that thou mightest hear those things which it behoveth a disciple to learn from his teacher and a man from his God… (Jesus Continues): But this is not the cross of wood which thou wilt see when thou goest down hence: neither am I he that is on the cross, whom now thou seest not, but only hearest his (or a) voice. I was reckoned to be that which I am not, not being what I was unto many others: but they will call me (say of me) something else which is vile and not worthy of me. As, then, the place of rest is neither seen nor spoken of, much more shall I, the Lord thereof, be neither seen… (Jesus Continues): 101 Nothing, therefore, of the things which they will say of me have I suffered: nay, that suffering also which I showed unto thee and the rest in the dance, I will that it be called a mystery. For what thou art, thou seest, for I showed it thee; but what I am I alone know, and no man else. Suffer me then to keep that which is mine, and that which is thine behold thou through me, and behold me in truth, that I am, not what I said, but what thou art able to know, because thou art akin thereto. Thou hearest that I suffered, yet did I not suffer; that I suffered not, yet did I suffer; that I was pierced, yet I was not smitten; hanged, and I was not hanged; that blood flowed from me, and it flowed not; and, in a word, what they say of me, that befell me not, but what they say not, that did I suffer. Now what those things are I signify unto thee, for I know that thou wilt understand. Perceive thou therefore in me the praising (al. slaying al. rest) of the (or a) Word (Logos), the piercing of the Word, the blood of the Word, the wound of the Word, the hanging up of the Word, the suffering of the Word, the nailing (fixing) of the Word, the death of the Word. And so speak I, separating off the manhood. Perceive thou therefore in the first place of the Word; then shalt thou perceive the Lord, and in the third place the man, and what he hath suffered.
dear Muslim, read CAREFULLY the passage i highlighted. Allow me to explain to you what the author is saying, as a Gnostic. He is saying that Jesus suffered and did not suffer. What does this mean, according to what i highlighted? IT MEANS THAT JESUS IS THE LOGOS, ETERNAL WORD OF GOD BUT THE ONE THAT SUFFERED IS THE HUMAN JESUS, THE MAN.
Boy you don;t even understand what you quote. It is a Gnostic text that speaks nothing of someone else being crucified or about an illusion. It speaks of JESUS THE MAN BEING CRUCIFIED BUT NOT JESUS THE WORD OF GOD.
the Quran did nothing but promote this Gnostic teaching
boy i LOVE it when Muslims quote Gnostic texts to defend their book
dear Muslim, read CAREFULLY the passage i highlighted. Allow me to explain to you what the author is saying, as a Gnostic. He is saying that Jesus suffered and did not suffer. What does this mean, according to what i highlighted? IT MEANS THAT JESUS IS THE LOGOS, ETERNAL WORD OF GOD BUT THE ONE THAT SUFFERED IS THE HUMAN JESUS, THE MAN.
Boy you don;t even understand what you quote. It is a Gnostic text that speaks nothing of someone else being crucified or about an illusion. It speaks of JESUS THE MAN BEING CRUCIFIED BUT NOT JESUS THE WORD OF GOD.
the Quran did nothing but promote this Gnostic teaching
- Status