BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
GT Haus
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      08-25-2007, 05:30 PM   #111
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
in case you haven't noticed.. no one is being convinced of anything..

the only thing you have proven beyond a doubt is that you are a faithful muslim. and you know what you're talking about when you speak about islam. you have also proven that you don't care about learning about christianity and your current understanding of it is way off. you have proven that you just want to argue instead of dialogue.

thanks, this thread has been informative.
How can I be arguing the way you put it, if I show people respect? People can even vouch for my respect. You sent me a pm and I replied with a humble apology because I dont mean to appear as a know-it-all or someone who wants to argue...

My friend, do you understand how dialogue works? its a 2 way process. I am but one muslim inviting many other Christian brothers to explain what they understand about the information I present. If it was an arguement as such, I would invite many muslims to join my "force". I assure you it's not like that. Infact, I participate a lot in the forum, now you are saying it's just to argue? please...

Also, please dont say I dont care about Christianity. I already told you half of my family are christians and my mother used to be one. I know a lot about it and what I have presented before you is facts with quotes etc. I'm not just basing it on pure conjecture...
__________________
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-25-2007, 07:29 PM   #112
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

After studying the Bible, I see many problems with the Gospels. I’ll try explain why…

Firstly, Mark was written between the late 60s and early 70s. Some people even go as far as 75, but never later than that. This means that it was written a long time after the “crucifixion” which happened around the year 30. The time between is actually around 40 years. Mark was obviously written after Paul’s writings which influence all of the Gospels even more so that Jesus (AS) himself. It’s also worth noticing that the Gospels were intended for different audiences and weren’t meant to be compiled in the Bible.

Now, the last Gospel of John. It was written between the years 90 and 100. Look at the ever bigger gap of 60+ years between John and the “crucifixion”. Also, the gap between Mark and John equates to around 25 years. Now, here are some startling facts:

If we look at Mark, Jesus (AS) refers to God as “The Father” only once. John has it recorded as 73 times. Mark records Jesus as calling God his own father only 3 times. John has it at a scary 100 times. This promotes the trinity and Son-Father relationship coincidently. Mark has Jesus talking about “the Kingdom of God” (which is in the Lord’s prayer) 18 times, but John only has it as 5. We see a reversal or what we seen before and a reduction in Jesus’ original teachings. Mark has Jesus (AS) referring to himself “I am this, I am that” only 9 times. John has it as 118 times. I’m sure you can see where I’m going with this…

However, John make Jesus (AS) talk about himself more, but in a different way too. Look at the thing we see only in John:

“I and the Father are one”, “Whoever has seen me has seen the father”, “For God so loved the world he gave the world his only begotten son.” “I am the way, the truth and the light, no man cometh unto the father but by me”. Etc…

If the Gospel writers are trying to show Jesus (AS)’s true teachings, why is there a reduction of Jesus (AS)’s true teachings and an increase in Paul’s teachings? How can the last Gospel have statements that make Jesus so divine, but the other Gospel writers don’t have them? Seems strange to me. ESPECIALLY if you are going to argue that Matthew was an eyewitness. Many people argue that he wasn’t, I think they might be right. I think the time difference between the Gospels and between the Gospels and the “crucifixion” make it hugely possible that Jesus (AS)’s original teachings are corrupted and lost. Also, we will never know what corruption has happened in Mark’s Gospel since there isn’t one before it. We only have Paul’s writings before it. Here’s something else interesting. Let’s look at the heightening of Jesus (AS)’s position until it reaches Godhood:

Mark: Peter said “Rabbi it is good for us to be here”
Matthew: “Rabbi” is replaced with “Lord”

Mark: “…don’t know when the master of the house is coming”
Matthew: “master” is replaced with “Lord”

Mark: Peter said “You are the Messiah”
Matthew: “You are the Messiah, son of the living God

Mark: Jesus said “whoever does the will of God is my brother, sister and mother”
Matthew: “God” is replaced with “my father in heaven”

Mark: “Teacher, you do not care that we are perishing?”
Matthew: “Lord, save us, we are perishing! (they instead pray to Jesus)

Mark: “The first is, 'Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.
Matthew: skips straight to part about “love”. He doesn’t include oneness of God.

Mark: In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. Peter remembered and said to Jesus, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!"
Matthew: When the disciples saw this, they were amazed. "How did the fig tree wither so quickly?" they asked.

Mark: Jesus cured many
Matthew: Jesus cured all

Mark: Jesus healed many
Matthew: Jesus healed all

Mark: Why do you call me good? Noone is good but God alone
Matthew: Why do you ask me about what is good?

Mark (1:1): NIV Bible tells us in footnote that title “Son of God” was inserted later.

Acts: (8:37): NIV Bible removed the words again because “Son of God” was inserted later.

1 John (5:7,8): Only verse in whole of Bible that deals with the trinity. It has been removed because it is later insertion.

I Timothy (3:16): used to say “God” but we now know it is a forgery and has been corrected back to “he”

John (7:53-8:11): again, later additions.

Mark (16:9-20): The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have these verses.

John (3:16): RSV Bible removes this verse as a later insertion. I'm sure you all know that this verse is "For God so loved the world that he gave the world his only begotten son..."



Etc…


And regarding who wrote the books and gospels of the Bible, well here is a sample of what the NIV Bible's theologians and historians wrote:

"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"

"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"

"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)"

"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)"

"It seems safe to conclude that the book, at least in its early form, dates from the beginning of the monarchy. Some think that Samuel may have had a hand in shaping or compiling the materials of the book, but in fact we are unsure who the final author or editor was. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 286)"

"Although, according to tradition, Samuel wrote the book, authorship is actually uncertain. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"

"The date of the composition is also unknown, but it was undoubtedly during the monarchy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"

"The author is unknown. Jewish tradition points to Samuel, but it is unlikely that he is the author because the mention of David (4:17,22) implies a later date. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 360)"

"Who the author was cannot be known with certainty since the book itself gives no indication of his identity. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 368)"

"There is little conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"

"Whoever the author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"

"According to ancient Jewish tradition, Ezra wrote Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (see Introduction to Ezra: Literary Form and Authorship), but this cannot be established with certainty. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 569)"

"Although we do not know who wrote the book of Esther, from internal evidence it is possible to make some inferences about the author and the date of composition. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 707)"

"The unknown author probably had access to oral and/or written sources....(From the NIV Bible commentary, page 722)"

"Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 773)"

etc...

I’m not sure how to conclude this post, its 1.30am here, I’m so tired but I thought I’d do it anyway. I just begin to wonder a few things. If we see changes between Mark to Matthew and then to John, how was Jesus elevated in Mark’s Gospel? I guess we’ll never know since all we have is Paul’s writings which are earlier and influenced the 4 Gospels.

I also wonder how many more revisions will need to be made to the Bible when we find earlier manuscripts revealing fabrications etc. Unfortunately, the manuscripts are written on perishable material so I doubt we’ll find more. I just feel that there are too many mysteries about the Bible, even its authors. But I guess the real root of the problem is its compilation. It explains why there are many contradictions and we see how Jesus (AS)’s teachings have been lost through time…

Here is also one video that I really want to know what Christian brothers think about:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...75979627863972
__________________

Last edited by hks786; 08-26-2007 at 01:06 PM.
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 01:51 AM   #113
fobunited
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2007 335i, 2011 550i
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Folsom

Posts: 184
iTrader: (1)

There is great harmony in the Gospels, and much like Muslim belief, it is hard to correlate them based on an English Translation. Muslims will never use an English version of the Quran as their basis of belief. Unfortunately, very few "Christians" can read Koine Greek and Aramaic. Therefor, flaws within the translation process to English exist.

The criticisms you point out towards the Bible, however, can also similarly be applied to the Quran, considering revisions also exist. How are you certain they are the original teachings of Muhammad?

In the same light, I believe Christians and Muslims alike believe their religious works have been preserved and passed down through God and Allah, respectively.

Lastly, I do not know where you got that Mark was most likely written around the late 60s or 70s, whereas most scholars place the date of Mark around the 50s. Considering Mark, Luke, and Acts were all written before the destruction of the temple in AD 70, and Acts was most likely written in AD 63, and Luke was written before Acts (Acts 1:1-3), the date for Mark must be before these three, therefore being sometime in the 50's, which places it roughly 20 years from Jesus' crucifixion.
fobunited is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 05:40 AM   #114
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fobunited View Post
There is great harmony in the Gospels, and much like Muslim belief, it is hard to correlate them based on an English Translation. Muslims will never use an English version of the Quran as their basis of belief. Unfortunately, very few "Christians" can read Koine Greek and Aramaic. Therefor, flaws within the translation process to English exist.

The criticisms you point out towards the Bible, however, can also similarly be applied to the Quran, considering revisions also exist. How are you certain they are the original teachings of Muhammad?

In the same light, I believe Christians and Muslims alike believe their religious works have been preserved and passed down through God and Allah, respectively.

Lastly, I do not know where you got that Mark was most likely written around the late 60s or 70s, whereas most scholars place the date of Mark around the 50s. Considering Mark, Luke, and Acts were all written before the destruction of the temple in AD 70, and Acts was most likely written in AD 63, and Luke was written before Acts (Acts 1:1-3), the date for Mark must be before these three, therefore being sometime in the 50's, which places it roughly 20 years from Jesus' crucifixion.
My friend, the problem with the Gospels is not only within them. The whole selection process of using divination etc. is startling. I'm sorry but I begin to wonder what must have been kept out of the Bible. I guess we'll never know. The Gospel of Thomas, however, we do know that it is full of Jesus' sayings and mentions nothing of the "crucifixion"! I have also shown that the whole idea of the trinity cannot work on any ground of logic. We cannot simply dismiss this fact and say "we are finite and cannot understand God". I showed this at great length.

I have also shown that many revisions of the Bible have nothing to do with translation errors. Many fabrications etc. have been inserted into the Bible and had to be removed, so how can we say the Bible has been preserved? Anyway, the writings of the Bible werent intended to be part of the Bible. Also, if we say that since the corrupted parts have been removed from the Bible thus it is preserved, then what about the times when the errors were within the Bible? During those days the Bible wasnt in a preserved form. Also, if we could find more manuscripts, It would be likely that we would find more errors and these would have to be removed. Another point is, as we progress through the Bible, we say statements that ONLY John has. No wonder his Gospel is so different from the other 3. We must note the huge time difference between his Gospel and the "crucifixion". Also, you didnt explain why John was the only one to have these statements and noone else had them.

I have also given you a few accounts from people from 1st/2nd century who complained about the corruption of the Gospels etc. Dionysius even complained that when people asked him to write to them, he did so, but those Christians changed his words! He even showed concern about what they might have done to God's word. Also, even early Church father, Origen said the following:

"The differences among the manuscripts have become great, either through the negligence of some copyists through the perverse audacity of others; they either neglect to check over what they have transcribed, or, in the process of checking, they make additions or deletions as they please."

So how can we say that it is preserved? These complaints go back to the 1st and 2nd Century...

You also speak of revision to the Quran, but that's simply not true bro. We have the most ancient manuscripts and I can tell you a few things. Firstly, the Quran was known to people in 7 dialects. I can also show you (from non-muslims) that these dialects have no effect on the meaning. So when people say there are textual differences, this is a lie. A dialect is a dialect, we cannot call it textual differences.

Anyway, we only read the Quran in the dialect of the Holy Prophet (SAW)'s tribe, however, some people actually know all 7 dialects by heart to the present day! They still recite them! This is why I am sure that we have the original Quran with us. Here's what one author says:

"Also, not one of the differences substantially affects the meaning beyond its own context... All this point to a remarkably unitary transmission in both its graphic form and its oral form."

The author then goes on to say:

"There must have been a parallel written transmission limiting variation in the oral transmission to the graphic form, side by side with a parallel oral transmission preserving the written transmission from corruption."

I'm sure you can see what I'm trying to say now, but maybe this miracle of the Quran will help rest your mind that we actually have the same Quran present today. Maybe you will have more faith in the mathematics of this miracle; I typed it up myself...

Regarding the date for Mark, I guess we differ in scholars because some have a later date than 50. Anyway, let's suppose I agree with you. The problem is still there. A 20 year gap isn’t the only factor though. All of these gospels were written after Paul's writings. Also, even if there are translation errors (which I'm not so convinced about yet) then we would have to account for the mathematical reduction of Jesus (AS)'s original teachings and an increase in Paul's teachings as the Gospels go from Mark to John.

__________________

Last edited by hks786; 08-26-2007 at 06:25 AM.
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 07:34 AM   #115
pcoles78
Private
 
Drives: OC transpo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ottawa

Posts: 63
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
I thought I would launch a new thread because I didnt want to take over Enfields thread. Infact, maybe I should have done this a long time ago because most of my discussion with Christian brothers is in the "Are we at war with Islam?" thread...

Anyway, I invite all Christian brothers to present their answer to the question "Did Jesus die for the sins of the world?". Obviously I will present my views, but I thought I would give Christian brothers a chance first.

Please note that everything I say in response to Christian brothers is out of respect. If I ever offend anyone, then I apologise in advance.

imo, if jesus existed, he was a loonatic missing a few screws in his head. there is probably hundreds of jesuses today, selfless people who would die for a cause. but that doesn't mean they're all sons of god. it doesn't mean they died for the sins of the world. i think the church is overhyping jesus. and yes they did a wonderful job of marketing this guy's death.
pcoles78 is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 07:41 AM   #116
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcoles78 View Post
imo, if jesus existed, he was a loonatic missing a few screws in his head. there is probably hundreds of jesuses today, selfless people who would die for a cause. but that doesn't mean they're all sons of god. it doesn't mean they died for the sins of the world. i think the church is overhyping jesus. and yes they did a wonderful job of marketing this guy's death.
Well, I have many reasons for firstly not believing Jesus (AS) was the Son of God, and that the Bible is the word of God. However, we muslims do believe that Jesus (AS) is a Prophet of Allah and came to reveal a message.
__________________
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 07:53 AM   #117
pcoles78
Private
 
Drives: OC transpo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ottawa

Posts: 63
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
Well, I have many reasons for firstly not believing Jesus (AS) was the Son of God, and that the Bible is the word of God. However, we muslims do believe that Jesus (AS) is a Prophet of Allah and came to reveal a message.
i admire jesus. he wanted to change the world with his message and that's great. i think he'd have a heart attack if he came back and saw the state of the world.
pcoles78 is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 07:56 AM   #118
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcoles78 View Post
i admire jesus. he wanted to change the world with his message and that's great. i think he'd have a heart attack if he came back and saw the state of the world.
it's very ironic that you say that, because we Muslims believe that he WILL be coming back to this world (he didnt die yet) and it will be at a time when the world is hugely corrupt in many ways. I dont think it can be that far away...
__________________
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 08:02 AM   #119
pcoles78
Private
 
Drives: OC transpo
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: ottawa

Posts: 63
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
it's very ironic that you say that, because we Muslims believe that he WILL be coming back to this world (he didnt die yet) and it will be at a time when the world is hugely corrupt in many ways. I dont think it can be that far away...
oh shit. i've gotta delete all the porn from my computer!!!
pcoles78 is offline   Canada
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 08:20 AM   #120
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pcoles78 View Post
oh shit. i've gotta delete all the porn from my computer!!!
__________________
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 09:49 AM   #121
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

Posts: 207
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
How can I be arguing the way you put it, if I show people respect? People can even vouch for my respect. You sent me a pm and I replied with a humble apology because I dont mean to appear as a know-it-all or someone who wants to argue...

My friend, do you understand how dialogue works? its a 2 way process. I am but one muslim inviting many other Christian brothers to explain what they understand about the information I present. If it was an arguement as such, I would invite many muslims to join my "force". I assure you it's not like that. Infact, I participate a lot in the forum, now you are saying it's just to argue? please...

Also, please dont say I dont care about Christianity. I already told you half of my family are christians and my mother used to be one. I know a lot about it and what I have presented before you is facts with quotes etc. I'm not just basing it on pure conjecture...
i apologize for my comment. it was jerky and thoughtless.

i watched that video you linked and it is very interesting. it was thought provoking until it tried to use the bible on itself. i don't know much about ancient egyptian stories and astrology to dispute that information, but i do know the bible and that part is wrong.
its ray den is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 10:16 AM   #122
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
i apologize for my comment. it was jerky and thoughtless.

i watched that video you linked and it is very interesting. it was thought provoking until it tried to use the bible on itself. i don't know much about ancient egyptian stories and astrology to dispute that information, but i do know the bible and that part is wrong.
it's okay bro...

Yeah I thought it was interesting too. I didnt know about much previous "Jesus" figures before. It's quite startling actually. I think the references to the cross of the zodiac and other pagan ideas are interesting given the things I posted about the Gospels being chosen. The use of divination, Roman sungod Mithras etc.

I'm not sure if the parts of the Bible are wrong. Especially the reference to the crown of thorns = sunrays etc. Hmm, very interesting video....
__________________
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 06:10 PM   #123
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

Posts: 207
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by hks786 View Post
it's okay bro...

Yeah I thought it was interesting too. I didnt know about much previous "Jesus" figures before. It's quite startling actually. I think the references to the cross of the zodiac and other pagan ideas are interesting given the things I posted about the Gospels being chosen. The use of divination, Roman sungod Mithras etc.

I'm not sure if the parts of the Bible are wrong. Especially the reference to the crown of thorns = sunrays etc. Hmm, very interesting video....
well here is my problem with zeigeist. i browsed their website and looked at their sources. sadly, the sources they cite are a lot of anti-christian books. i couldn't tell if any were primary sources at all, meaning the source either had no agenda, or it was from someone directly involved with the event. this is damaging to the case zeigeist is trying to make because by using biased sources, the movie itself becomes biased.

i was specifically looking for info on that egyptian character that was supposedly the basis for many christ-like characters in history. sadly i didn't see one that was obvious enough. the author on the website even states that information on this guy is obscure and can't be found using a simple google search. oh well.
its ray den is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 07:11 PM   #124
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
well here is my problem with zeigeist. i browsed their website and looked at their sources. sadly, the sources they cite are a lot of anti-christian books. i couldn't tell if any were primary sources at all, meaning the source either had no agenda, or it was from someone directly involved with the event. this is damaging to the case zeigeist is trying to make because by using biased sources, the movie itself becomes biased.

i was specifically looking for info on that egyptian character that was supposedly the basis for many christ-like characters in history. sadly i didn't see one that was obvious enough. the author on the website even states that information on this guy is obscure and can't be found using a simple google search. oh well.
Interesting. I'll need to research to find out more but the video wasnt just about other "son gods". It also showed the scary connection between Christianty and the zodiac, pagan symbols, constellations, the sun, the crux etc.

Also, my argument didnt rest on any of this at all. My focus was on the corrupt compilation of the Bible and even after that there was corruption in the Bible. Through this history we see the heightening of Jesus (AS) to fit in with Roman Pagan religions etc. This is what my case was.
__________________
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 07:29 PM   #125
its ray den
Second Lieutenant
 
Drives: 2004 Mazda6s
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: NY

Posts: 207
iTrader: (0)

it's possible that the roman catholic side of christianity could be corrupted. even protestant christians believe that some of their theology is more based on tradition (man-made) than the bible.
its ray den is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      08-26-2007, 07:44 PM   #126
phrozen06
NA V8
 
phrozen06's Avatar
 
Drives: 01 330ci, 08 M3 DCT, 08 VW R32
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: 3927'33"N 7758'04"W W. Virgina, Kansas

Posts: 1,443
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
it's possible that the roman catholic side of christianity could be corrupted. even protestant christians believe that some of their theology is more based on tradition (man-made) than the bible.
It is possible because of the doctrine of purgatory which Martin Luther came against during the reformation and got him murdered.
__________________
phrozen06 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      08-27-2007, 12:00 AM   #127
fobunited
Private First Class
 
Drives: 2007 335i, 2011 550i
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Folsom

Posts: 184
iTrader: (1)

The manuscript evidence for the Bible IS corrupted as you say. At the very basic level, the New Testament has 2 distinct text types, conveniently labeled the Majority Text (Byzantine Text Type) and the Minority Text. Much of the King James Version is based upon the Byzantine text type whereas many of the newer translations are based upon the Minority Text. Many of the Minority Text CAN be dated to within a reasonable time frame where people who lived during the life of Jesus could be able to attest to their validity.

This may seem startling to many Christians, and confirms what you say about the history of the Bible, yet the same defenses you brought up regarding the Quran also apply to the Bible. The inconsistencies between the Majority Text and the Minority Text can chiefly be attributed to scribal error, but the errors are 99% grammatical and do not affect the meaning. There are also certain repetitions and emphasis placed that also account for the discrepancies. Much like you said of the Quran, however, the discrepancies do not alter the meaning of the Biblical text.

Another thing we must realize about the Gospels is their intended audience. Matthew and Mark chiefly wrote to the Jewish community, as is evidenced by the lineage attributed to Jesus, references to the Old Testament, fulfilling of prophecy, etc. Luke was primarily written to a Gentile audience, and John was primarily writing to a somewhat established Christian community. Due to the difference in audience, naturally the emphasis and details within the respected Gospels will differ.

Unfortunately, I have not studied the Quran as much as I have liked, and even more unfortunate, some of what I DO know of the Quran comes from the "Christian" camp, and as I said earlier about intended audiences, will be directed towards Christians. It is extremely unfortunate, and I believe it is quite possible the literature surrounding Christian history is also written from a different point of view for Muslims. It is with this knowledge, however, that I have greatly come to appreciate our correspondence and am looking forward to continue learning more.
fobunited is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      08-27-2007, 02:52 AM   #128
ets335
Private First Class
 
ets335's Avatar
 
Drives: e90 335i
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Francisco

Posts: 154
iTrader: (2)

I didn't read all the way through the thread because there is a lot, but this is what I know and how I can explain it.

Jesus is the Son of God. So that means he is full man and full God at the same time. Some of you say how can that be? Well lets say Jesus is God, but came to earth and is now limited to what we are limited to which is time, space, death, etc. But when he thinks and talks it is about Heavenly things.

About Jesus dying...God is a fair God. Now he must punish wrong so that the truth wins out. In the days of old people would sacrifice pure lambs so that God would punish our sins through the lamb and not us. So the lambs take our place on the sacrificing table. Now Jesus is the ultimate sacrifice in that he has taken all ours upon himself on a humiliating platform so that we will never have to sacrifice anything again. So now all we have to do ask for forgiveness.

Now on the first page it mentions the Allhah. Now the Qumran (Sorry I don't know how to spell) is the same as the Christian Old Testament Bible, or very similar. From my understanding it is the same God. But the way things are interpreted are different (because the original language is not in English and was not written in our times). So yes we ask for God for forgiveness of our sins. Yes it is about the motives of our heart. The whole confessing our sins and accepting Jesus in our heart is to one, accept the above statement that Jesus did not die in vain but for a good cause. Two, admit that we are weak (sinners from Adam and Eve, and genuinely want to change from our ways). And three let Jesus now that we love him. God created us to love him, but gave us freewill so that we can prove that we love him. If we were forced to love him then that would not be true love.

Hope that helps.
ets335 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      08-27-2007, 03:20 AM   #129
ets335
Private First Class
 
ets335's Avatar
 
Drives: e90 335i
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Francisco

Posts: 154
iTrader: (2)

Just read the last page and yes there are later additions to the New Testament. I read a doctoral theory on how the term "Son of Man" was added by the early church and that was very interesting. Your points are very valid and I a plod you for your research, because I know I have not taken the time to do that.

But I still so see some truth. Even looking at Paul's writings, he is trying to make it know to the people that Jesus was the Messiah and was the man that all the Jews were looking for. He makes and strong case for that in the book of Romans. Yes the Gospels were "intended" to be records of the what Jesus did but we all tell stories differently. If we both saw a car crash we would probably use different words to describe what we saw.

For me, not saying that you have to believe it too, That concept that Paul and the Gospels bring make me to believe that yes God is the all powerful, but yes Jesus has something to do with it too. And from Paul Jesus is the Messiah we were looking for so if you connect the Old Testament expectations and what Paul is saying, you come up with the divine Jesus.
ets335 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      08-27-2007, 04:47 AM   #130
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by its ray den View Post
it's possible that the roman catholic side of christianity could be corrupted. even protestant christians believe that some of their theology is more based on tradition (man-made) than the bible.
I feel we may be making progress. However, it was Constantine who put together the Council of Nicaea who were responsible for determining if Jesus was God or not. They also chose what books should go into the Bible using divination. I for one, dont believe that the divination actually worked. Someone must have put the 4 Gospels on the table! It was actually the next morning that they found the 4 Gospels. Anything could have happened overnight...

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is that the whole of Christianity depends on what this council has done. How can we then say that Jesus (AS)'s original teachings have not been corrupted over time? It is clear that Constantine "Romanised" Christianity to make it fit in with other pagan religions etc...
__________________
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-27-2007, 05:17 AM   #131
hks786
Major General
 
Drives: *
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK

Posts: 5,348
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by fobunited
The manuscript evidence for the Bible IS corrupted as you say. At the very basic level, the New Testament has 2 distinct text types, conveniently labeled the Majority Text (Byzantine Text Type) and the Minority Text. Much of the King James Version is based upon the Byzantine text type whereas many of the newer translations are based upon the Minority Text. Many of the Minority Text CAN be dated to within a reasonable time frame where people who lived during the life of Jesus could be able to attest to their validity.
I'm not so sure that we can still trust things based on time frames. I have already shown that complaints against the Gospels were as early as the 1st Century. I have also shown that Dionysius wrote letters to fellow Christians and they even changed his words etc! He then goes on to say that if they can do that to his humble efforts, imagine what they have done to the Lords word.

Also, look at what I showed from early Church father Origen. His complaints go back to the 1st century too. He complained about how people corrupted the Bible manuscripts through carelessness or by hidden motives...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fobunited
This may seem startling to many Christians, and confirms what you say about the history of the Bible, yet the same defenses you brought up regarding the Quran also apply to the Bible. The inconsistencies between the Majority Text and the Minority Text can chiefly be attributed to scribal error, but the errors are 99% grammatical and do not affect the meaning. There are also certain repetitions and emphasis placed that also account for the discrepancies. Much like you said of the Quran, however, the discrepancies do not alter the meaning of the Biblical text.
I think you may be missing the point. I showed how the whole of Christianity has been "Romanised" to fit in with other pagan religions etc. Even the way the Bible was compiled is not acceptable in anyway. This, my friend, is the heart of the problem...

Quote:
Originally Posted by fobunited
Another thing we must realize about the Gospels is their intended audience. Matthew and Mark chiefly wrote to the Jewish community, as is evidenced by the lineage attributed to Jesus, references to the Old Testament, fulfilling of prophecy, etc. Luke was primarily written to a Gentile audience, and John was primarily writing to a somewhat established Christian community. Due to the difference in audience, naturally the emphasis and details within the respected Gospels will differ.
Thanks for bringing this up. This actually proves that none of these Gospels were intended to be part of ANY book. The Bible isnt actually a book. It's a collection of different writings. Anyway back to the point...

I think you might have not understood me. Yes, there are different intended audiences, but it's clear that the Gospel writers werent happy with what they wrote. For example, Matthew wasnt happy with Mark's Gospel and then tried to make Jesus appear more Jewish. He copied many parts of Mark word for word and then reworked the message the Gospel gave to people. I'm afraid that this spin he has put on shows that he is not acting as if he is divinely inspired.

Also, Mark and Matthew disagree about the same events. It doesnt matter who the intended audience is, events are events and we cannot change them to make them appeal to certain people. This is a corrupt doing.

Let me explain more. If a certain event happened in Jesus (AS)'s life, it shouldnt matter who explains it, the same structure of events should be there. However, the Gospels actually heighten Jesus to a Godly figure as we progress from Mark to John. Also, we find most of Jesus' divine statements in John's Gospel. It shouldnt matter who the intended audiences are, if Jesus made such statements that are very striking, they should be in ALL of the Gospels, not just one. We cannot put this down as a difference in emphasis on details. I have shown beyond doubt that we see less of Jesus (AS)'s original teachings and MORE of the teachings of Paul.

This is no coincidence, since Pauls writings were written before ALL 4 Gospels. I also have concerns about the time between the "crucfixion" and the Gospels. Even the Gospels have huge time gaps between them. I wonder what must have happened between them. The Bible was never memorised by heart. This is why it is so different from the Quran. I have shown from independant sources that the Quran was preserved in writing and orally. I wish I could say the same about the Bible, but instead I'm left with many doubts...I'll leave one last question with you: If we could find more manuscripts predating what we already have, how many more changes would we need to make to the Bible? It's hugely worrying given what we have already had to remove...

Oh, and one last thing sorry. Do you never wonder about the things that were kept out the Bible? It's clear that they were kept out of the Bible to keep a consistent image of Jesus (AS) although I have proved that this attempt didnt work. For example, the Gospel of Thomas was purely based upon the sayings of Jesus (AS) but it was kept out of the Bible. Probably because it didnt mention anything of the "crucifixion". These books werent just kept out the Bible, they were ordered to be burnt! What I'm saying is that, we have lost a LOT of Jesus (AS)'s true teachings simply because Christianity has been Romanised and this raises serious doubts for me.

My friend, I really do like the way we can have this dialogue without fighting. I feel that we might actually be making progress in understand eachother despite that there is only one of me and many more Christian brothers. This is the way I intended the thread to be. Not a fight between Muslims and Christians...
__________________

Last edited by hks786; 08-27-2007 at 05:34 AM.
hks786 is offline   United Kingdom
0
Reply With Quote
      08-27-2007, 07:01 AM   #132
Ray33
Private First Class
 
Ray33's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 Alpine White M3
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ireland

Posts: 188
iTrader: (0)

Ray33 is offline   Ireland
0
Reply With Quote
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:44 AM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST