Why do Muslims believe St Paul was a liar?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cathopologist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cathopologist

Guest
Many modern Muslim apologists mud-sling the saint for inventing Christianity. Some have also accused St Paul of acting out alone and had no interaction with the other disciples of Jesus. However, Muslim sources of antiquity states otherwise:
“Among the apostles and those disciples around them, whom Jesus sent out, there were Peter and his companion Paul.” (Thalabii, Qisas al-Anbiyaa, pp. 389-390)
From al-Tabari:
"Abu Ja’far says: They assert that after Tiberius, Palestine and other parts of Syria were ruled by Gaius, son of Tiberius, for four years. He was succeeded by another son, Claudius, for fourteen years, following which Nero ruled for fourteen years. He slew Peter and crucified Paul head down. For four months Botlaius [Vittelius] ruled thereafter. Then Vespasian, father of Titus whom he sent to Jerusalem, ruled for ten years. Three years after his rise to power, forty years after the ascension of Jesus, Vespasian sent Titus to Jerusalem. Titus destroyed it and slew numerous Israelites in his wrath over the fate of Christ…” (Ibid., p. 126)
“For I give you to understand, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For neither did I receive it of man, nor did I learn it; but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.” - Galatians 1:11-12
For a man to say something like the above with such conviction means he was serious about his honesty. In Judaism, lying was not permitted, nor is lying a practice in Christianity. There is no Taqiyya or Qitman in Christianity.
 
Because the Jesus of Islam is not the same as the Jesus of Christianity, Islam cannot exist 100% theologically beside Christianity. The first few generations of Muslims did not really have the problem. Once they were forced to hear about the True Christ, they were faced with a problem: how do we reconcile the two stories. The easiest way is to say that our Jesus is wrong. To that end, Paul, who wrote the majority of the NT, becomes the target. Add to that the fact that Paul’s writtings clearly show Islam to be incorrect, and there you go.
 
For a man to say something like the above with such conviction means he was serious about his honesty. In Judaism, lying was not permitted, nor is lying a practice in Christianity. There is no Taqiyya or Qitman in Christianity.
lying aside, he preached where eyewitnesses lived, being apostles or followers, thousands of them but who cares about history anyway :whistle: Muslims believe Jesus brought a book, Paul got the only copy Jesus had and corrupted it, the rest of the eyewitnesses and faithful could do nothing :coffeeread: but were waiting for Muhammad to correct him :bluelite: but hey, if Paul corrupted Christianity, how come Christians during Muhammad’s time had a “valid” gospel :ouch: besides, if Paul was able to corrupt the gospels, and hence the churches established by the apostles in different lands and places, he surely had to mesmerize humanity to do so…if Paul was omnipotent, maybe Muslims must start worshipping him:doh2:

yet what do we do with Muhammad quoting Paul, or the interpretors listing him as a disciple:thankyou:
 
Because Paul’s conversion were witnessed by many of his friends, while Muhammad’s visionary was witnessed by none. It seems to me that according to the Muslims, the more witness you have the more unreliable you are.
 
It seems to me that according to the Muslims, the more witness you have the more unreliable you are.
You know, i was thinking just the same. If you are in the presence of God during Judgment Day, you will surely be presented with images of your life works through His eyes. I wonder how Mohammad would fair to that.
 
Muslims must approach Christianity and Judaism with a double-think approach: they say Christians and Jews are good people, yet they bash us for being viloent and evil and they riducle and give false witness against our saints. Ironically enough, they cry when we point out that Mohammed was violent and evil and gvie a number of facts about his life that discredit his being a prophet. But at least we have a great God who has mercy upon them and who asks of us to pray for them.

I find it strange that Muslims have to resort to such petty attacks and stupid excuses for their religious beliefs. It really makes me think that a number of “Muslims” on this board are actually heretics. But I don’t want to judge anyone.
 
We can find in the Bible a sworn affidavit by Paul that he is guilty of fabrication. Sound incredible? Let us have a look:

If we read Acts 9:19-29 and Acts 26:19-21, we will find that Paul was busy persecuting the followers of Jesus in Jerusalem and dragging them from their homes to be tortured, killed or converted, when suddenly one day he decided to branch out and persecute them in Damascus. For this reason, he goes to the High Priest asking for letters sanctioning such actions in Damascus. Why he would do this since the High Priest of Jerusalem had no authority over Damascus remains a mystery to many, however, let us continue.

Shortly after setting out to continue his evil work in Damascus, Paul is supposed to have “seen the Lord in the way” and accepted Christianity after being a staunch enemy of Christians and having become famous for his severe persecution of them. Barnabas (one of the apostles of Jesus) then supposedly vouched for him with the other apostles and convinced them to accept him. Paul then went with all of the apostles on a preaching campaign in and out of Jerusalem and all of Judaea preaching boldly to it’s people. Paul then appointed himself the twelfth apostle of Jesus (in place of Judas who had the devil in him) as seen in his own books Romans 1:1, 1 Corinthians 1:1 …etc…

The verses mentioned are:

“And when he (Paul) had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul (Paul) certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus. And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God. But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests? But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ. And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him: But their laying await was known of Saul. And they watched the gates day and night to kill him. Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket. And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple. But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus. And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem. And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him.”

Acts 9:19-29

“Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance. For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill me.”

Acts 26:19-21

Contradicted by:

“But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother. Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia; And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ: But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.”

Galatians 1:15-23

With regard to the first two passages, Reverend Dr. Davies in “The First Christian,” says: “These assertions are not inconsistent with each other, but are damaging for another reason,: they are contradicted by Paul himself in his letter to the Galatians (Chapters 1 and 2).” Rev. Davies draws attention to Paul’s oath: “Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God I do not lie,” which makes his account a sworn affidavit. He goes on to say:

“To the story in Acts, this contradiction is disastrous. There never was a teaching campaign at Jerusalem and through all of the county of Judea (Acts 26:20). If Paul was unknown to the Judean communities as he says, then he had undertaken no mission among them. In fact he had never joined the Judean movement or even attempted to join it. He only saw Cephas, and Jesus’ brother James. Even of the other apostles, not to mention more ordinary believers, ‘I saw none’ he admits. Instead of his having gone ‘in and out of Jerusalem, preaching boldly in the name of the Lord’ the Jerusalem community had not even known that he was there. ‘They only heard’ he tells us ‘that he who once persecuted us now makes the faith of which he made havoc’; but they never heard him preach it in Judea.”

Rev. Davies concludes that

“…if there is any portion of the New Testament that is authentic, it is Paul’s letter to the Galatians. If we cannot rely upon this letter, we can rely upon nothing and may as well close our inquiry. But the fact is that we can rely upon it. The letter to the Galatians is from Paul himself and by every test is genuine.”

“The First Christian,” A Powell Davies, Farrar Straus & Cudahy, pp. 30-31

To read more, kindly go to this webpage.
 
We can find in the Bible a sworn affidavit by Paul that he is guilty of fabrication. Sound incredible? Let us have a look:

If we read Acts 9:19-29 and Acts 26:19-21, we will find that Paul was busy persecuting the followers of Jesus in Jerusalem and dragging them from their homes to be tortured, killed or converted, when suddenly one day he decided to branch out and persecute them in Damascus. For this reason, he goes to the High Priest asking for letters sanctioning such actions in Damascus. Why he would do this since the High Priest of Jerusalem had no authority over Damascus remains a mystery to many, however, let us continue.
Damascus is in Syria. They would need the permission of the secular leaders there. Geography 101
Shortly after setting out to continue his evil work in Damascus, Paul is supposed to have “seen the Lord in the way” and accepted Christianity after being a staunch enemy of Christians and having become famous for his severe persecution of them. Barnabas (one of the apostles of Jesus) then supposedly vouched for him with the other apostles and convinced them to accept him. Paul then went with all of the apostles on a preaching campaign in and out of Jerusalem and all of Judaea preaching boldly to it’s people. Paul then appointed himself the twelfth apostle of Jesus (in place of Judas who had the devil in him) as seen in his own books Romans 1:1, 1 Corinthians 1:1 …etc…
Paul did not appoint himself anything. The Apostle who was the replacement for Judas was chosen by the 11 at the beginning of Acts. Paul was called by Jesus.
The verses mentioned are:
“And when he (Paul) had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul (Paul) certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus. And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God. But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests? But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ. And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him: But their laying await was known of Saul. And they watched the gates day and night to kill him. Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket. And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple. But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus. And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem. And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him.”
Acts 9:19-29
“Whereupon, O king Agrippa, I was not disobedient unto the heavenly vision: But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance. For these causes the Jews caught me in the temple, and went about to kill me.”
Acts 26:19-21
Contradicted by:
Galatians 1:15-23
With regard to the first two passages, Reverend Dr. Davies in “The First Christian,” says: “These assertions are not inconsistent with each other, but are damaging for another reason,: they are contradicted by Paul himself in his letter to the Galatians (Chapters 1 and 2).” Rev. Davies draws attention to Paul’s oath: “Now concerning the things which I write to you, indeed, before God I do not lie,” which makes his account a sworn affidavit. He goes on to say:
“To the story in Acts, this contradiction is disastrous. There never was a teaching campaign at Jerusalem and through all of the county of Judea (Acts 26:20). If Paul was unknown to the Judean communities as he says, then he had undertaken no mission among them. In fact he had never joined the Judean movement or even attempted to join it. He only saw Cephas, and Jesus’ brother James. Even of the other apostles, not to mention more ordinary believers, ‘I saw none’ he admits. Instead of his having gone ‘in and out of Jerusalem, preaching boldly in the name of the Lord’ the Jerusalem community had not even known that he was there. ‘They only heard’ he tells us ‘that he who once persecuted us now makes the faith of which he made havoc’; but they never heard him preach it in Judea.”
Rev. Davies concludes that
“…if there is any portion of the New Testament that is authentic, it is Paul’s letter to the Galatians. If we cannot rely upon this letter, we can rely upon nothing and may as well close our inquiry. But the fact is that we can rely upon it. The letter to the Galatians is from Paul himself and by every test is genuine.”
“The First Christian,” A Powell Davies, Farrar Straus & Cudahy, pp. 30-31
To read more, kindly go to this webpage.
I don’t have time to discuss this in depth right now. I will point out that the man you cite, A Powell Davies, is a convert from Methodism to Universal Unitarianism. UUs are not considered orthodox Christians, and as a heterodox group, their Bible commentaries are slanted, biased, and not of use to anyone.
 
Hi

I think Jesus was a complete man of his age and his message from God Allah was complete for the Jews.

Paul is no entity for me;when he is brought against Jesus then natually I have to expose him and Peter. I will not talk of Paul and Peter if the Catholics don’t mention them.

**For me **Jesus and Mary are sufficient in the context of their age and the people they lived in.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna

Thanks
 
Hi

I think Jesus was a complete man of his age and his message from God Allah was complete for the Jews.

Paul is no entity for me;when he is brought against Jesus then natually I have to expose him and Peter. I will not talk of Paul and Peter if the Catholics don’t mention them.

**For me **Jesus and Mary are sufficient in the context of their age and the people they lived in.

I love Jesus and Mary as I do love Buddha and Krishna

Thanks
What is wrong with Peter?

And I am still waiting for the names of the faithful disciples who went on this trip to INdia with Jesus and his mother.
 
This seems like a rather hypocritical argument if you ask me.
 
Criticizing Muslims for believing Paul to be a liar, while they profess that Muhammad is the same.
Fair enough.

Let’s take Muhammed out of it.

Do you think that it is a good or bad way to go about things? Do you consider Paul the great corruptor of CHristianity?
 
Does it matter?
Yes and no.

One the one hand, I respect your views as a human and as a Muslim. I do like to see how you feel about issues and why.

On the other hand, I have yet to see a valid reason to rule Paul out as a witness to the faith. Nothing that he wrote disagrees with Jesus, unless you take it in a vacuum. What you say will not change my mind.
 
Criticizing Muslims for believing Paul to be a liar, while they profess that Muhammad is the same.
we do not criticize the idea itself, but the arguments presented, if they can be put in the category of arguments. Likewise, when Muhammad is accused of anything, that’s because the Bible, the Church , the Tradition, and even the apocrypha prove it so at least our arguments have too many legs to stand on …yet although we are used to Islamic conspiracy theories, some wouldn’t work in the worst fiction movies so we try to make the supporters of the theories think just a bit before posting, or at least give rational, historical, theological and geographical sound arguments instead of throwing words, which doesn’t give credit to the followers of these theories and their religion, because, after all, if they believe in such things, no wonder they will fall for other stuff.
 
Yes and no.

One the one hand, I respect your views as a human and as a Muslim. I do like to see how you feel about issues and why.

On the other hand, I have yet to see a valid reason to rule Paul out as a witness to the faith. Nothing that he wrote disagrees with Jesus, unless you take it in a vacuum. What you say will not change my mind.
Then let’s start with skepticism. Why should anyone believe Paul in the first place? Imagine you are alive at the time of Paul, a few years after Jesus has disappeared. Why should you believe Paul, when he starts preaching about Jesus?
 
we do not criticize the idea itself, but the arguments presented, if they can be put in the category of arguments. Likewise, when Muhammad is accused of anything, that’s because the Bible, the Church , the Tradition, and even the apocrypha prove it so at least our arguments have too many legs to stand on …yet although we are used to Islamic conspiracy theories, some wouldn’t work in the worst fiction movies so we try to make the supporters of the theories think just a bit before posting, or at least give rational, historical, theological and geographical sound arguments instead of throwing words, which doesn’t give credit to the followers of these theories and their religion, because, after all, if they believe in such things, no wonder they will fall for other stuff.
Conspiracy theories? Please.
 
Then let’s start with skepticism. Why should anyone believe Paul in the first place? Imagine you are alive at the time of Paul, a few years after Jesus has disappeared. Why should you believe Paul, when he starts preaching about Jesus?
Well, first, he did preach the same message as the other Apostles. Second, he did do amazing things in Jesus’s name. Third, his story does fit into the possible conversion scenarios.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top