The Apostles & Islam

[hamba2han]

Christians are missing the big picture here.

All 3 writings which I have mentioned in this thread i.e. the Gospel of Barnabas, the Apocalypse of Peter and the Acts of John clearly state that Jesus (pbuh) was NOT the one on the cross.

This means of course that he did not die to atone for anyone’s sins.

And so, if Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified, is there salvation to be found in Christianity?

Is it then a big surprise that all of these writings have been either banned or hidden by the Church?

Apocrypha
1387, from L.L. apocryphus “secret, not approved for public reading,” from Gk. apokryphos “hidden, obscure,” thus “(books) of unknown authorship” (especially those included in the Septuagint and Vulgate but not originally written in Hebrew and not counted as genuine by the Jews), from apo- “away” (see apo-) + kryptein “to hide.” Properly plural (the single would be Apocryphon), but commonly treated as a collective sing. Apocryphal “of doubtful authenticity” is from 1590.

‘Apocrypha’ does not mean false, it just means secret and hidden from public view – a very significant difference indeed!

 

[Montalban]

Christians are missing the big picture here.

All 3 writings which I have mentioned in this thread i.e. the Gospel of Barnabas, the Apocalypse of Peter and the Acts of John clearly state that Jesus (pbuh) was NOT the one on the cross.

This means of course that he did not die to atone for anyone’s sins.

Only if those books were genuine. And they’re not. Big picture missed - by you!

 

[De_Maria]

Christians are missing the big picture here.

All 3 writings which I have mentioned in this thread i.e. the Gospel of Barnabas

did not exist til the 18th century.

, the Apocalypse of Peter

Does not mention any substitution in the Crucifixion.

and the Acts of John clearly state that Jesus (pbuh) was NOT the one on the cross.

Not according to the interpretation by InJesus’ interpretation, which makes more sense than your interpretation considering that further in the document, the narrator speaks of the Resurrection.

This means of course that he did not die to atone for anyone’s sins.

No, it means that you believe Gnostic and Apocryphal documents. Errr, no you don’t believe them, do you? You just want us to believe them?

How does that logic work exactly? Since we don’t believe the error of the Quran you want us to embrace any error that comes along?

And so, if Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified, is there salvation to be found in Christianity?

This is your belief, not ours. Jesus was Crucified, died, and was buried and on the third day He rose again. That is your stumbling block. Not ours.

Is it then a big surprise that all of these writings have been either banned or hidden by the Church?

No. It isn’t. The Church burns and bans error. Just like Usman burned the works of Mohammed and installed his version of the Quran. Its quite strange that anyone would burn anything that was authentic, especially if they really thought it contained the Word of God.

Apocrypha
1387, from L.L. apocryphus “secret, not approved for public reading,” from Gk. apokryphos “hidden, obscure,” thus “(books) of unknown authorship” (especially those included in the Septuagint and Vulgate but not originally written in Hebrew and not counted as genuine by the Jews), from apo- “away” (see apo-) + kryptein “to hide.” Properly plural (the single would be Apocryphon), but commonly treated as a collective sing. Apocryphal “of doubtful authenticity” is from 1590.

’

Apocrypha’ does not mean false, it just means secret and hidden from public view – a very significant difference indeed!

Read further,
(books) of unknown authorship
of doubtful authenticity

This is from your own definition above.

But there’s more, even though you selectively chose these definitions you couldn’t find one that would support your claims. Here are the others which you probably saw, but skipped:

a·poc·ry·phal play_w(“A0368100”) (http://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gif...hwa.gif-fhttp://img.tfd.com/hm/GIF/schwa.gifl)*adj.***1. ** Of questionable authorship or authenticity.
**2. ** Erroneous; fictitious: “Wildly apocryphal rumors about starvation in Petrograd . . . raced through Russia’s trenches” W. Bruce Lincoln.

**Definition: **Of questionable authenticity; spurious.

Of questionable authorship or authenticity. Erroneous or fictitious.
hidden,
spurious

There you go, an English lesson.

Now perhaps you might entertain my question to you. Why do you insist on telling us to believe something which you don’t believe?

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[Montalban]

Does not mention any substitution in the Crucifixion.
Sincerely,

De Maria

The best point!

Let’s look up some Ahmadi stuff to prove hamba2han’s version of Islam false - it’d be exactly the same kind of thing - take writings made ages later and not deemed inspired by his faith to show how his faith is faulty.

 

[hamba2han]

Does not mention any substitution in the Crucifixion.

Neither does this following verse mention any substitution:

004.157
That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

Why do you insist on telling us to believe something which you don’t believe?

I believe in the above verse and the next one as well which I might add does mention something about the “resurrection” or rather sort of:

004.158
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-

Point is that Jesus (pbuh) was raised up alive after being saved from the crucifixion by his Lord… and therefore he certainly did not die to atone for anyone’s sins.

 

[Montalban]

Neither does this following verse mention any substitution:

004.157
That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

It’s common amongst Moslems to believe he was substituted

A Moslem book A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understandin Islam’, p58 has that he was substituted.

And apparently the Gospel of Barnabas supports the theory he was substituted - so are you going to accept this *gospel *still?

 

[hamba2han]

And apparently the Gospel of Barnabas supports the theory he was substituted - so are you going to accept this *gospel *still?

Like I have mentioned, I do not not place my faith in the Gospel of Barnabas… or any other early Christian writing for that matter.

Actually, Muslims do not consider it important at all to know whether or not someone else was substituted in place of Prophet Jesus (pbuh)… and when you think of it, it really does not matter one way or the other as far as our faith is concerned.

Christians on the other hand seem to consider this to be a vitally important issue… but the question they should really ask themselves is – Why the need to know??

In the event that Jesus (pbuh) did not die to atone for their sins, then I would think that the question of who the substitute was should be the least of their concerns.

On the Day of Judgment, they will not be questioned as to the identity of the one on the cross… but they will certainly need to answer why they CHOSE to believe that their Creator could have a son and thereby associate partners with Him.

 

[dolphinlove]

On the Day of Judgment, they will not be questioned as to the identity of the one on the cross… but they will certainly need to answer why they CHOSE to believe that their Creator could have a son and thereby associate partners with Him.

On Judgment day, im going to ask Jesus if i can have front row seats when he questions why you didnt believe in him.

 

[hamba2han]

On Judgment day, im going to ask Jesus if i can have front row seats when he questions why you didnt believe in him.

All Muslims believe in Jesus (pbuh).

But on the Day of Judgment there is only one man who will be allowed by his Creator to intercede on behalf of humankind … and it is not Jesus (pbuh).

 

[Montalban]

Like I have mentioned, I do not not place my faith in the Gospel of Barnabas… or any other early Christian writing for that matter.

But you think we should

Actually, Muslims do not consider it important at all to know whether or not someone else was substituted in place of Prophet Jesus (pbuh)… and when you think of it, it really does not matter one way or the other as far as our faith is concerned.

Whether it’s important or not, many Moslems believe it

Christians on the other hand seem to consider this to be a vitally important issue… but the question they should really ask themselves is – Why the need to know??

I think the important thing about it is why would you believe in a god that deceives people - who caused the people to believe they’d killed Jesus - he tricked them.

On the Day of Judgment, they will not be questioned as to the identity of the one on the cross… but they will certainly need to answer why they CHOSE to believe that their Creator could have a son and thereby associate partners with Him.

Your own Koran says that your god could have a son!
39:4
If Allah had willed to choose a son, He could have chosen what He would of that which He hath created.

 

[dolphinlove]

All Muslims believe in Jesus (pbuh).

But on the Day of Judgment there is only one man who will be allowed by his Creator to intercede on behalf of humankind … and it is not Jesus (pbuh).

You dont believe God is his father, therefore you dont believe in him as you should
John 14:6
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
Ref. In the bible!!!

 

[Montalban]

All Muslims believe in Jesus

Yes, and no.

The Dalai Lama *believes *in him too - thinks he was a really wise man.

Even some Jews believe he existed and was a radical rabbi.

But belief in Jesus requires right faith. You don’t have it. Moslems don’t.

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh is someone I believe in insofar as I think he exists. However there’s a whole group of people who think he’s some kind of deity. Thus they believe in him in a different way than I do.

 

[Booklover]

On Judgment day, im going to ask Jesus if i can have front row seats when he questions why you didnt believe in him.

Dolph, I’ll join you!

Vickie

 

[inJESUS]

Christians are missing the big picture here.

All 3 writings which I have mentioned in this thread i.e. the Gospel of Barnabas, the Apocalypse of Peter and the Acts of John clearly state that Jesus (pbuh) was NOT the one on the cross.

This means of course that he did not die to atone for anyone’s sins.

And so, if Jesus (pbuh) was not crucified, is there salvation to be found in Christianity?

!

do you or don’t you understand what i wrote to you? there is no subsitution in gnostic texts. It IS Jesus. There is no substitution in the Quran. It IS Jesus but because you are unwilling to admit it is a gnostic teaching, you just throw absurd statements like someone else being crucified or mass hallucination. The Gnostic gives Gnostic interpretaion and does NOT deny Jesus’ crucifixion…neither does the Quran…deal with it…there is no apocrypha that denies Jesus’ crucifixion.

 

[Booklover]

Like I have mentioned, I do not not place my faith in the Gospel of Barnabas… or any other early Christian writing for that matter.

Actually, Muslims do not consider it important at all to know whether or not someone else was substituted in place of Prophet Jesus (pbuh)… and when you think of it, it really does not matter one way or the other as far as our faith is concerned.

Christians on the other hand seem to consider this to be a vitally important issue… but the question they should really ask themselves is – Why the need to know??

In the event that Jesus (pbuh) did not die to atone for their sins, then I would think that the question of who the substitute was should be the least of their concerns.

On the Day of Judgment, they will not be questioned as to the identity of the one on the cross… but they will certainly need to answer why they CHOSE to believe that their Creator could have a son and thereby associate partners with Him.

If you don’t believe in any of it, why keep bringing it up? For all your denials, it does seem to bother you. Is that because it drives Muslims crazy to think that there are people with beliefs different from their own?? Any belief that contradicts Islam is offensive to Muslims. Hey, as long as your lives or freedom aren’t threatened by our beliefs, they should be no concern of yours!

If someone wants to worship a tree, it’s no concern of mine; however it that tree worshipper decides the tree needs human sacrifice, then I sit up and take notice. Get it?

Vickie

 

[Montalban]

If you don’t believe in any of it, why keep bringing it up?

That’s it exactly. They use texts like this all the time

They deny the Bible, but point to the Bible to show Muhammed.

He denied the Bible, by harping on about the accuracy of Barnabas.

Now suddenly he’s dropped his support for Barnabas.

That’s Islam for you!

 

[De_Maria]

Neither does this following verse mention any substitution:

004.157
That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

I believe in the above verse and the next one as well which I might add does mention something about the “resurrection” or rather sort of:

004.158
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-

Point is that Jesus (pbuh) was raised up alive after being saved from the crucifixion by his Lord… and therefore he certainly did not die to atone for anyone’s sins.

Point is that Mohammed made all of that up. There is no proof that he got it from any angel and your continued belief in that rubbish is simply an exercise in blind faith in Mohammed.

Or possibly blind faith in Usman, since no one can prove that these are actually Mohammed’s words since Usman had the original Quran burnt.

So, answer the question, why are you telling us to believe in the nonQuranic material you presented SINCE YOU DON’T BELIEVE IN ANYTHING BUT THE QURAN.

Sincerely,

De Maria

 

[Montalban]

Point is that Mohammed made all of that up. There is no proof that he got it from any angel and your continued belief in that rubbish is simply an exercise in blind faith in Mohammed.

Sincerely,

De Maria

It’s totally circular in reason.

Muhammed was spoken to by an angel.
How do you know?
It’s in the Koran
How do you know the Koran’s true?
Because Muhammed wrote down what was revealed by an angel
How do you know?
It’s in the Koran

and so on

 

[Booklover]

It’s totally circular in reason.

Muhammed was spoken to by an angel.
How do you know?
It’s in the Koran
How do you know the Koran’s true?
Because Muhammed wrote down what was revealed by an angel
How do you know?
It’s in the Koran

and so on

Hilarious! Typical Muslim “reasoning”!

Vickie

 

[De_Maria]

Neither does this following verse mention any substitution:

004.157
That they said (in boast), “We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah”;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-

I believe in the above verse and the next one as well which I might add does mention something about the “resurrection” or rather sort of:

004.158
Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise;-

Point is that Jesus (pbuh) was raised up alive after being saved from the crucifixion by his Lord… and therefore he certainly did not die to atone for anyone’s sins.

Strange, in message 100 you seem to be saying that you believe in the substitution, read your words below:

*All 3 writings which I have mentioned in this thread i.e. the Gospel of Barnabas, the Apocalypse of Peter and the Acts of John clearly state that Jesus (pbuh) was NOT the one on the cross.

*Now, in this message you admit that the Quran doesn’t mention it. In other words, you don’t believe in the substitution. Yet how many messages have you wasted trying to convince us we should believe those Apocryphal (that is, erroneous, fictitious and spurious) Gospels because according to you they teach that someone else is on the Cross?

How many times will you ram your head against the truth before you will open your eyes?

Sincerely,

De Maria