The Qur’an’s critical – and corrective – view of the Christian scriptures

(Part 3)

This article is the third of a series of articles (see the first and second) that are in part a refutation of Christian polemics and in part a discussion of recent academic articles by top experts in the field of Quranic exegesis and pre-Islamic Arabia. The two objectives are in fact two sides of the same coin as I hope to demonstrate.

In this article I continue to focus on the insightful recent research by Sidney H. Griffith (published 2013):

k10018The Bible in Arabic: The Scriptures of the ‘People of the Book’ in the Language of Islam by Sidney H. Griffith who is Professor in the Department of Semitic and Egyptian Languages and Literatures at the Catholic University of America. He is also a Roman Catholic priest. The following extract is of particular relevance to recent Muslim-Christian debates about how the Quran supposedly views the previous scriptures of the Christians and the Jews.  

The Wider Horizon of Scriptural Recall in the Qur’an

By the time the longer Medinan surahs had come into their final form, the general pattern of the Qur’an’s recall of the major figures and narratives in the Hebrew and Christian scriptures had been set, and the basic principles of their relationship had been enunciated. Succinctly put, the Qur’an presents itself as confirming the truth that is in the previous scriptures and as safeguarding it. After speaking of the Torah, “in which there is guidance and light,” and of Jesus, “as confirming the veracity of the Torah before him,” and of the Gospel, “in which there is guidance and light,” God says to Muhammad regarding the Qur’an: “We have sent down to you the scripture in truth, as a confirmation of the scripture before it, and as a safeguard for it” (surah 5, vs 44,46,48). The previous scriptures were, of course, in the Qur’an’s telling, principally the Torah and the Gospel, as is clear here and in other places, where the Qur’an says to Muhammad, “He has sent down to you the scripture in truth, as a confirmation of what was before it, and He sent down the Torah and the Gospel (surah 3: vs 3). In these and other passages one might cite, the position of the Qur’an vis-a-vis the Jewish and Christian Bible is clear: the Qur’an confirms the veracity of the earlier scriptures. In other words, the Qur’an not only recognises the Torah and the Gospel, and the Psalms too, as we shall see, as authentic scripture sent down earlier by God, but it now stands as the warrant for the truth they contain.      

But the matter does not rest there. For while the Qur’an, following both the then-current Jewish and Christian view, recognises the Torah as the scripture God sent down to Moses – “We wrote for him in the Tablets about everything” (surah 7 vs 145) – the Gospel that the Qur’an confirms is not the Gospel as Christians recognise it in the Qur’an’s own day. Rather, following the model of its own distinctive prophetology, the Qur’an speaks of the Gospel as a scripture God gave to Jesus: “We gave him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, confirming what he had before him of the Torah (surah 5: 46; surah 57 :27). Here, as in other instances we have noted in the previous chapter, the Qur’an apparently intends to criticise and correct what it regards as a mistaken view of the Christians’ own principal scripture. What is more, by the time of its collection, and principally in criticism of the behavior of the ‘People of the Book’ in regards to their scriptures, the Qur’an is already speaking of the ‘distortion’ and ‘alteration’ of scriptural texts. This is to be found in the very passages (e.g. in 2:75-79; 3:78; 4:46; 5:12-19) that in subsequent Islamic tradition will undergird the doctrine of the corruption of the earlier scriptures, a development that would effectively discount the testimonies drawn by Jews or Christians from their scriptures in behalf of the verisimilitude of their teachings.

pp 58-59          



Categories: Bible, Islam, Judaism, Quran, Recommended Reading

109 replies

  1. Where is the gospel God gave to Jesus?

    Liked by 1 person

    • A good question. Presumably lost, but there are fragments of it in the four canonical gospels.

      Like

    • Lost? Is there any historical or archaeological evidence that it ever existed? Could you direct me to some, please?

      Like

    • oh Yes. God Himself has given us a Book which is pure, undistorted and unchanged, (unlike Jews and Christians who have changed their scripture and distorted it) and which preserves the truth of the previous revelations. We call it the Quran.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paulus,

      The Injeel is lost, although parts of it may have been incorporated into the New Testament.

      This is not surprising, as the Bible itself mentions some books that are now lost:

      Book of Jasher (mentioned in Joshua)
      Book of the Wars of the Lord (mentioned in Numbers)
      Book of the Annals of the Kings of Israel (mentioned in 1 Kings)
      Letter to the Laodiceans (mentioned in Colossians)

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paulus

      You said;
      Lost? Is there any historical or archaeological evidence that it ever existed? Could you direct me to some, please?

      I say;
      Many gospels and Torah and Zabur were lost and discovered recently. Dead Sea scrolls, Nag Hamadi, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Judas, infancy gospel of Thomas, the Shepherd Hermas, Epistle of Banabas etc.

      There are more archaeological evidences that other gospels exist and so more could be found in the future.

      Thanks.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paul

      “A good question. Presumably lost, but there are fragments of it in the four canonical gospels.”

      LOL!!!

      Like

    • Paul

      “God Himself has given us a Book which is pure, undistorted and unchanged, (unlike Jews and Christians who have changed their scripture and distorted it) and which preserves the truth of the previous revelations. We call it the Quran.”

      WHy doesn’t the quran tell muslims how to pray, how to wudu, and a number of basics that you practice? It fails as a book of guidance since you have to resort to the hadiths which are even more obviously man-made texts whose earliest manuscript comes from hundreds of years after the death of mohammed.

      If it doesn’t impart the very basics of your religious practice, why should we take it seriously as a commentary on the christian and jewish texts? It doesn’t even tell you to “refer to the hadith for more details”.

      Like

    • Due to the Quran’s late witness and without multiple attestation, it makes it very difficult to accept historically. Especially so given the enormous historical evidence contrary to the Quran’s claims.

      Like

    • With the name of Allah the Gracious the Merciful

       

      Paulus://Due to the Quran’s late witness and without multiple attestation, it makes it very difficult to accept historically. Especially so given the enormous historical evidence contrary to the Quran’s claims.//

       

      Says paulus.

      The Qur’an — based on a critical use of Arabic literary sources, literary structure and material (codicological as well as epigraphic) was proven to be early. Recent modern scholarship into the earliest Qur’anic parchments, including carbon dating provides evidence of very early composition even traced back within Prophet Muhammad litetime.

      But more importantly we muslims do not rely on manuscript evidences, the Qur’an is always an oral recitation and Thanks God, the Qur’anic recitation is continuously memorized by the time when its revealed till now . Thats why the Qur’an is always the Word of God verbatim pure and unaltered. God protects it Himself.

      You dont have that tradition I dont know anyone memorized the bible let alone in its original language. Thats why your “scripture” is in sorry state, corrupted by men thus mixed with falsehood.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Paul what does the Qur’an actually refer to when speaking about the Torah? Is it the five books of Moses or like the Gospel of Jesus being its own revelation. Say the tablets Moses received from God?

    Liked by 1 person

    • I take it to mean the first 5 books of Moses. There is an interesting discussion about this here:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torah_in_Islam

      Like

    • Paul

      “Paul what does the Qur’an actually refer to when speaking about the Torah?”

      That’s a great question patrice.

      No one knows what the quran is referring to. It shows little evidence that it had any intimate acquaintance with christian or jewish belief – even claiming that the jews worship the prophet Ezra as the son of god (LOL!) – so it is anyone’s guess what book the quran was actually referring to.

      Like

  3. it does get you thinking. look at how many gospels were written an attributed to different people who were suppose to know jesus. maybe the “injeel” is a lost text buried somewhere waiting to be exhumed

    Liked by 1 person

    • The NT has a number of factors that support the claim that they were written by eyewitnesses and by people who actually lived in 1st century palestine.

      The hadith, on the other hand are dodgy – the earliest manuscript you have for your most trusted collection comes from around the 11th century and the quran is full of jewish, christian and probably pagan fables, apocrypha, human commentaries by rabbis and local legends.

      Plus, the quran has changed over time – the birmingham manuscript shows a different verse order than that of modern qurans. Someone was being very naughty and editing the “words of your god.” LOL!!!

      Like

    • The reason we know about these gospels is because of two reasons: (1) physical archaeological evidence, or, (2) they were referred to in other works of antiquity.

      However, the Quran’s claim seems to be entirely unique in that we know of no historical evidence to support this type of gospel. Sadly, it appears to be entirely fabricated

      Like

  4. D, can you cite a paper in support of the claim that there’s mounting evidence of Quranic manuscripts predating Muhammad? I REQUEST THE MUSLIMS NOT TO ENGAGE D UNTIL HE RESPONDS TO THIS QUESTION.

    Liked by 1 person

    • kmak

      This is a sad and pathetic attempt to avoid engaging with the disturbing facts about your holy book that show it to be loose and haphazard cobbling together of fables, legends, fairy tales and probably pagan stories.

      Your book does not tell you how to do the most basic of the practices that muslims do – and it is completely ignorant of christian doctrines.

      Let’s do this – why don’t you or our muslim bros on this blog cite a paper (by new testament scholars) supporting the claim that there exists a lost “injeel” that is different to the NT and I’ll cite sources showing that some parts of the quran are awkwardly too old for mohammed’s lifetime.

      And why should I believe that the injeel is talking about the christian scriptures anyway? You don’t even know what the quran is talking about when it says “tawrat” – the quran is not clear about what it means when it says “injeel”.

      It certainly offers no indication that it had any clue what was in this mysterious book. For example, the quran uses names for NT characters that were not used by 1st century jews, it has no clue that the NT takes place 600 years before, and it shows no knowledge of jesus’ ministry nor the places where he conducted it.

      Like

  5. D

    You said;

    D

    May 18, 2016 • 7:39 am

    kmak

    This is a sad and pathetic attempt to avoid engaging with the disturbing facts about your holy book that show it to be loose and haphazard cobbling together of fables, legends, fairy tales and probably pagan stories

    I say;
    D. You have to go back to school and learn what fables mean, if you do not know the legends, lies and fables that can be found in NT(New Testament)

    a. Did you forgot about the ghosts fables from New Testament where ghosts burst out of their graves and walked the street of Jerusalem during the crucifixion? and Many saw them?

    b. Do you remember the fables and lies in the New Testament where there is a longer and shorter verses? and a verse said you must drink poison and dance with snakes. Do you remember or forgot that fable, legend and lies in the NT or will you drink poison right now and stop your nuisance repletion on this blog?

    Will you be a true Christian and dance with poisonous snakes like black cobra, rattle snake or black mamba like this true Christian is doing and died later on to stop your nuisance repetition here?

    c. Do you think the Quran is talking about NT when it did not say NT or Mark, Luke, Mathew and John? The Quran is not talking about NT but the injeel and it is lost like the dead sea scrolls. Some stories of Jesus can be found in the Gospel of Thomas, NT, infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Aramaic, Syriac, and Arabic scriptures that the Christians have during the time of our prophet.

    You believe in your NT but we do not believe in everything in NT but some.

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Intellect

      “The Quran is not talking about NT but the injeel and it is lost like the dead sea scrolls. ”

      So it might be talking about some scriptures from some other religion that has nothing to do with christianity at all?

      Like

    • “Some stories of Jesus can be found in the Gospel of Thomas, NT, infancy Gospel of Thomas, the Aramaic, Syriac, and Arabic scriptures that the Christians have during the time of our prophet.”

      I think you will find that the gospel of Thomas dates centuries after Islam. Perhaps ask a medieval historian?

      The canonical gospels were well established historically, theologically and geographically prior to Islam, which is very problematic for this type of argument

      Like

  6. correction

    Did you forget……….

    Like

  7. D

    You said;
    So it might be talking about some scriptures from some other religion that has nothing to do with christianity at all?

    I say;
    Roman Catholics have scriptures that some Christians do not use, Eastern Orthodox Christians have their scriptures, gnostic Christians have their scriptures, Jews do not use the NT but they are the true starters of scriptures.

    I mentioned some lost gospels and some Christians are using them and have used them. You must be a wishful thinker and think you are the only Christian.

    The Quran is talking to all Christians and their scriptures including the Gospel of Thomas, Judas, Shephered Hermas, dead sea scrolls, Nag Hamadi etc.

    If you are a true Christian and believe in NT, just let snake bite you and drink poison. You will save us from your nuisance of repetition here.

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Intellect

      Protestants and catholics use the same NT – we just differ on what is in the OT. So that point isn’t relevant here.

      But your god did not know that, so you are ignorant of it too.

      “The Quran is talking to all Christians and their scriptures including the Gospel of Thomas, Judas, Shephered Hermas, dead sea scrolls, Nag Hamadi etc.”

      LOL!!

      So you book takes fables, apocrypha and works known to be written by men who did not know the real story of jesus and claims that these are the injeel? You have agreed with me – the quran is cobbled together from other people’s rejected apocrypha and fables that were rejected because they were obviously man-made.

      Like

    • Intellect- the Dead Sea scrolls aren’t Christian texts. I feel that you need to read up some more on the historical reliability of ancient documents. You seem to be displaying a fair amount of ignorance of the topic

      Like

    • Paulus are you one of those fundamentalist Christians who think the apostle Matthew wrote Matthew’s gospel, and the apostle John wrote the Fourth Gospel?

      Like

  8. “The NT has a number of factors that support the claim that they were written by eyewitnesses and by people who actually lived in 1st century palestine.”

    https://adversusapologetica.wordpress.com/2013/12/17/why-scholars-doubt-the-traditional-authors-of-the-gospels/

    every single claim you made has been shot down .

    what you will see is that it would be impossible for aramaic speaking illiterates to write down the greek stuff in the nt

    what you will see is that the greek speakers are heavily reliant on greek stories in the greek translation of the torah

    what you will learn in this video is that the people who depend on markan wording and sequence know that mark has left of lines which he shouldn’t have .

    the nt’s “eyewitness” has been shot to pieces long time ago.

    how can believe the “eyewitness” peter told mark “the women said nothing to anyone ….”

    when the liar according to john received news from mary m?

    your “eyewitnesses” have been on trial since 2000 years and are continually being exposed for the fraud they are

    do you know why scholars are creating criterion’s? because your religion has know witness .

    Liked by 1 person

    • mrsonic

      Are you that disturbed robert guy?

      That aside, what is your point? Those links don’t come close to showing that the gospels weren’t describing events related by 1st century eye-witnesses who actually lived in palestine.

      No one knows who wrote the quran, and your prophet couldn’t tell the difference between a demon and an angel from god. He had to be convinced by his wife khadija that the being he had encountered was jibril and not some satanic entity.

      The problem there is that mohammed also revealed that women’s testimony is half that of a man, so by his own standards he should have gotten a second opinion.

      Apart from all of that, the quran is not the literal word of god since he came via an intercessor, jibril, whom the shia claim corrupted the revelation to keep verses he was supposed to reveal to Ali hidden.

      Either way, unless the quran comes directly from god, it cannot be his literal word, and the problem gest worse when you consider that it wasn’t obvious that the being who accosted mohammed in the cave was from god – no other prophet had that problem, they all knew god when they encountered him.

      My theory is that mohammed took shelter in a cave, had some kind of epileptic fit, woke up dazed and confused and by coincidence stumbled upon some manuscripts written by heretical christian sects and in his dazed state believed that he had received a revelation. That explains why some manuscripts predate him. It’s just a theory though, but it explains the data more coherently than the muslim narrative.

      Like

  9. “Are you that disturbed robert guy?”

    your god is the disturbed one. he self abused himself because he created easily corruptible humans.

    “That aside, what is your point? Those links don’t come close to showing that the gospels weren’t describing events related by 1st century eye-witnesses who actually lived in palestine.”

    so you read ALL the discussions in that LINK? you see how much of a liar for jesus you are ?


    No one knows who wrote the quran, and your prophet couldn’t tell the difference between a demon and an angel from god. He had to be convinced by his wife khadija that the being he had encountered was jibril and not some satanic entity.”

    my goodness.

    peter was pumped with satan and lied and denied your false “messiah”

    your “eyewitnesses” consist of liars and story tellers

    tell me about how TRUST WORTHY and reliable peter was

    tell me more about this guy

    tell me if mark REPRESENT the true VERSION of judaism CUSTOMS back in jesus’ day

    SHOW EVIDENCE that jews would crucify peasant DURING PASSOVER

    show some evidence

    “The problem there is that mohammed also revealed that women’s testimony is half that of a man, so by his own standards he should have gotten a second opinion.”

    lol, you aren’t addressing the problems in the link

    LOL


    Apart from all of that, the quran is not the literal word of god since he came via an intercessor, jibril, whom the shia claim corrupted the revelation to keep verses he was supposed to reveal to Ali hidden.”

    Either way, unless the quran comes directly from god, it cannot be his literal word, and the problem gest worse when you consider that it wasn’t obvious that the being who accosted mohammed in the cave was from god – no other prophet had that problem, they all knew god when they encountered him.

    My theory is that mohammed took shelter in a cave, had some kind of epileptic fit, woke up dazed and confused and by coincidence stumbled upon some manuscripts written by heretical christian sects and in his dazed state believed that he had received a revelation. That explains why some manuscripts predate him. It’s just a theory though, but it explains the data more coherently than the muslim narrative.

    NOTICE liar of “jesus”

    did not BOTHER to read the evidence i provideD?

    if the writers of the gospels were “raping” the WRITTEN texts how BAD was it when they were telling the stories ORALLY

    do not forget that in your oral tradition you have LIARS AND DENIERS like peter

    tell me who wtiness

    the overshadowing of mary by yhwh?

    who witnessed this?

    tell me how many israeli women went to thier husbands and told them that the holy spirit “overshadowed them” ?

    Like

    • mronic

      “your god is the disturbed one. he self abused himself because he created easily corruptible humans.”

      LOL!!! Busted!!!

      You are that disturbed robert guy whose heart is so full of hatred and darkness that it shows through even on your internet comments.

      Come back to jesus, son. Let the truth set you free.

      Like

    • “You are that disturbed robert guy whose heart is so full of hatred and darkness that it shows through even on your internet comments.
      Come back to jesus, son. Let the truth set you free.”

      truth don’t set you free by worshipping some random unknown ghost with holes in his hands and feet. come to me and i shall remove “jesus” from you. i have done works in which i have removed “jesus” from people and they are living a better life. they try to make me a saint but i tell them i am nothing but a human, i am not asking for peoples worship.

      i have witnessed “jesus ” being REMOVED from people

      the truth has set these people free.

      Like

    • “You are that disturbed robert guy whose heart is so full of hatred and darkness that it shows through even on your internet comments.”

      having hatred does not mean that if i hate someone i should not rescue him from a burning hospital. if i really hated someone, i would not desire to watch them burning in a hospital, i would go and save them. that’s become of fairness and mercy.

      on the other hand if a christian like you were watching the roman open “virgin jesus” you would cry like a bitch ” poor jesus”

      and inwardly , you will tell yourself ” make him bleed, salvation is mine”

      see the diff between you and me?

      Like

    • “Come back to jesus, son. Let the truth set you free.”

      what does this mean? you sin Monday-Friday thinking that your “innocent” jesus took on “guilt” just for the WEEKEND? there are people who lost their eyes for ALL their lives, what is great about taking on guilt just for the weekend ? what good is your jesus’ role play on a cross when the REAL guilty person MUST acknowledge his guilt? jesus can “take on” guilt upon himself 1 million times but it is USELESS. the one who is GUILTY knows his guilt better than “sinless” jesus.. AND what is the “re” in “repayment” ?

      QUOTE:

      guilt:

      noun
      1.
      the fact or state of having committed an offense, crime, violation, or wrong, especially against moral or penal law; culpability:
      He admitted his guilt.
      2.
      a feeling of responsibility or remorse for some offense, crime, wrong, etc., whether real or imagined.
      3.
      conduct involving the commission of such crimes, wrongs, etc.:
      to live a life of guilt.

      the one who acknowledges his GUILT must know his responsibility and remorse better than jesus’ weekend role play on the cross.

      quote :
      Actually, that’s a valid point. How many continue to speak of the guilt they had for all the wrongs that were done.
      One point that never seems to be highlighted by Xtians is, if a person would steal from someone or other wrongs similarly and that person comes to Jsus apparently he doesn’t have to repay those wrongs. I’m sure there are better examples but, in essence, the come to Jsus moments absolves the individual from all responsibility for his actions. Certainly this would make the mind feel comfortable in his new found abdication of responsibility.
      end quote

      Like

    • “Come back to jesus, son. Let the truth set you free.”

      1. no judgement
      2. no need to fear the punishment of god
      3. all sins from monday to friday are gettng “punished on jesus”
      4. no problem if repentance isn’t good enough because “christ punished himself for weak repentance”
      5. guaranteed heaven
      6. hide under the skirt of jesus
      7. try to be good to impress people (i.e, seen by men) because you can never be “perfect as a god”

      Like

  10. “My theory is that mohammed took shelter in a cave, had some kind of epileptic fit, woke up dazed and confused and by coincidence stumbled upon some manuscripts written by heretical christian sects and in his dazed state believed that he had received a revelation. That explains why some manuscripts predate him. It’s just a theory though, but it explains the data more coherently than the muslim narrative.”

    http://drazin.com/?8._The_Sermon_On_The_Mount

    even your scholar r baukman thinks that jesus did not make the sermon on the mount.

    LOL

    Like

  11. “My theory is that mohammed took shelter in a cave, had some kind of epileptic fit”

    i will prove to you that christians were SEEING things , but then i will ask a very INTERESTING question which surely will give you something to think about.

    Peter’s Vision
    9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

    14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

    15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

    16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

    peter was HUNGRY

    he was so hungry that he started to hear a voice

    but the problem is that the dim wit forgot that it was he who asked jesus about hand washing

    and jesus told him

    15 Peter said, “Explain the parable to us.”

    16 “Are you still so dull?” Jesus asked them. 17 “Don’t you see that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and then out of the body?

    and mark says “he declared all foods clean”

    now how is it possible that peter had all these “oral traditions ” before him YET forgot that it was he who asked jeezer ?

    or maybe jeezer did not tell his disiples to eat pig and acts is christian fictional BS?

    Like

  12. D

    You said;
    So you book takes fables, apocrypha and works known to be written by men who did not know the real story of jesus and claims that these are the injeel? You have agreed with me – the quran is cobbled together from other people’s rejected apocrypha and fables that were rejected because they were obviously man-made.

    I say;
    You said “people rejected apocrypha and fables” above in your sentence above.

    Who are these people who rejected the apocrypha and fables? God? Show me where God gave them authority to reject some of his words.

    You need to wash your brain and think.

    Thanks.

    Like

    • Intellect

      “You said “people rejected apocrypha and fables” above in your sentence above.

      Who are these people who rejected the apocrypha and fables? God? Show me where God gave them authority to reject some of his words.”

      Where in these apocrypha – the gospel of thomas, judas etc – do they describe themselves as “injeel”? And how do they support the muslim narrative of jesus and the bible?

      Like

  13. the story changes more than the words told in one version of the story

    http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2397&start=20

    eye witnesses?

    really?

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Paulus, you said:

    “Due to the Quran’s late witness and without multiple attestation, it makes it very difficult to accept historically.”

    Do you apply this same criterion to the Bible? I ask because, in many cases, the Bible lacks eyewitness authority and “multiple attestation”. The gospels themselves are perfect examples. There is no evidence, besides LATER assumptions, that any of the authors were eyewitnesses. Also, they fail in many cases to provide “multiple attestation” to the same events. In fact, they contradict each other on numerous occasions.

    Also, why does the Bible mention so many lost books? We can’t verify their existence, can we? The only evidence we have that they existed is the Bible’s own LATE witness. Furthermore, why is the Bible even mentioning these books? What purpose does it serve now? Would an “inspired” book need to reference lost books?

    “Especially so given the enormous historical evidence contrary to the Quran’s claims.”

    Such as? Can you give examples?

    I have actually found that the Quran makes astonishingly accurate historical statements.

    And again, it needs to be asked whether you apply this criterion to the Bible, since most people who read it will recognize all sorts of historical errors.

    Like

    • Hi Faiz.

      Sure, I agree that there are individual accounts that lack multiple attestation. But the canonical gospels are in and of themselves overwhelming, historically speaking. This isn’t really even disputable.

      If we ask whether a gospel was “given” to Jesus as you believe, we simply have no historical evidence to lead to that conclusion. And considering the canonical gospels are probably the best attested documents of Greek and Roman antiquity, we are best to believe that that the Quran is simply mistaken.

      Like

    • “Sure, I agree that there are individual accounts that lack multiple attestation. But the canonical gospels are in and of themselves overwhelming, historically speaking. This isn’t really even disputable.”

      there is a gospel which says jesus drank his own semen. i think it is called “the great questions of mary”

      now if this account was repeated in 4 gospels, sometimes

      word for word

      in same sequence

      and few bits changed here and there

      would this mean multiple attestation?

      the persons who told the story did not MEET each other and
      learned of jesus drinking his semen from jesus himself.

      that would mean MULTIPLE ATTESTATION ,right?

      matthew USES the text of mark and reproduces it verbatim

      so we don’t have multiple attestation

      back to jesus drinking from his body

      could it also pass the argument from embarrassment considering that no one would make up jesus drinking his own semen?

      Liked by 1 person

    • quote :
      One thing that is clear is that the Gospel writers think pretty highly of Jesus. They thought pretty highly of John the Baptist too, mainly because they construed him as a forerunner for Jesus. The problem, as I say, is that John called upon people to repent, to confess their sins, and to be given a ritual washing to cleanse them of their guilt. This would seem to imply that if Jesus were baptized by John, that he also needed to repent and confess sins. Besides, submitting to John’s baptism seems to concede spiritual authority to John. This is why the gospels have to do a song and dance to explain away this embarrassing fact–with doves descending, divine voices booming, etc.
      end quote

      1. could an argument be made that historical jesus repented and confessed his sins because thats what ritual washing symbolized?

      so we have argument from embarrassment here, right?

      so it must have been multiply attested in oral traditions that jesus confessed his sins and then when it went into text the gospel writers created “son and dance” to explain away jesus’ sinful person?

      Like

    • Fail

      “Do you apply this same criterion to the Bible? I ask because, in many cases, the Bible lacks eyewitness authority and “multiple attestation”. ”

      You are ignorant.

      The earliest gospels were written somewhere outside of Israel at least beginning 50-60 years after the events they describe.

      Yet, they use jewish names of people widely used in israel at the time and to largely the same distribution, when jewish names used in the countries where the gospels were found were very different. They recall specifics about geography and even flora that were unique to the region, it recalls specific locations where jesus ministered, locations that were so obscure that there seemed to be no reason for even recording them.

      The reason they recorded these seemingly insignificant details is because they were eye-witness accounts written by people who had seen jesus and his miracles and were recording what they saw – probably orally at first – so that they could tell others to go to these obscure towns and villages and talk to the people named.

      In other words, the gospels relate the words of people who witnessed the events first hand and were telling others what they saw, where they saw, who else saw it, where they should go to find out for themselves and who they should talk to when they got there.

      The quran on the other hand shows no such intimate acquaintance with 1st century israel – it doesn’t even use jewish names form the period, mentions none of the obscure towns that jesus visited, and has a general ignorance of anything outside of 7th century arabia. Hardly impressive for a self-proclaimed “revelation”.

      The “injeel” is a term that mohammed probably had no idea what it meant, nor what was in it. The quran is so vague that even to this day, no muslim can say what was in it, nor can they explain how it is that mere human beings can destroy, or hide the words of your “god” when he stated explicitly that no one can do this.

      Could your god be the figment of an ignorant imagination?

      Like

    • Fail

      “Also, why does the Bible mention so many lost books? We can’t verify their existence, can we? The only evidence we have that they existed is the Bible’s own LATE witness. Furthermore, why is the Bible even mentioning these books? What purpose does it serve now? Would an “inspired” book need to reference lost books?”

      It just gets better and better!! LOL!! You have truly lost it.

      The quran mentions a “lost book”, you complete bloody fool!! LOL!!! You have just admitted that the quran is not inspired because it mentions a lost book in its own VERY LATE WITNESS.

      Learn to think my failed muslim apologist friend and then come to the true lord and the light. Islam is rotting your brain.

      LOL!!!

      Like

  15. Hey Fido! Back again? Did you take a brief hiatus to seek “inspiration” from your 4-eyed god? 😉

    You left with many unanswered questions! Bad doggie!

    Like

  16. Paulus, you said:

    “The reason we know about these gospels is because of two reasons: (1) physical archaeological evidence, or, (2) they were referred to in other works of antiquity.”

    The “physical archaeological evidence” for the gospels are all LATER. No manuscripts of any of the gospels exist until the 2nd century, and most of these are fragments. How is that proof of their reliability?

    Also, the “other works of antiquity” were also LATER. Unfortunately, I think you are applying double standards in the way you analyze the Bible and the Quran.

    And again, what evidence do we have of the existence of the Book of Jasher or the Book of the Wars of the Lord?

    “However, the Quran’s claim seems to be entirely unique in that we know of no historical evidence to support this type of gospel. Sadly, it appears to be entirely fabricated”

    Sure we do. Remember, the stories about Jesus and his teachings were initially spread by word of mouth. Even if we go by the traditional Christians dates for the gospels (60s and beyond), that means that for almost 3 decades, the Jesus movement spread its teachings orally. This oral tradition was probably very different from the later gospels. Scholars recognize this tradition as the “Q” gospel. I am not saying that the Q gospel was the true gospel. My point is that the Injeel was probably also spread orally and as time went by, it gradually became corrupted.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Faiz.

      you seem to be deflecting from the OP? First, to have manuscript evidence that early is astonishing, as any manuscript scholar would note. Second, it is all still multiple attestation which gives us historical probability.

      We simply know of no such gospel “given” to Jesus as the Quran claims. A hypothesis about the Q source is just that- it has no corroborative evidence to support. And I think that if you were to track down the oral tradition= gospel given to Jesus position, you would need to explain how the oral creeds of 1 Cor 15 work within that hypothesis? Scholars like Bauckham date that oral tradition to within 30 years of Jesus’ death.

      A fair reading of the evidence should lead to the conclusion that the Quran is simply mistake.

      Like


  17. or example, the quran uses names for NT characters that were not used by 1st century jews, ”

    can you show me which jew in palestine called his synagogue

    την συναγωγην

    can you show us which palestinian peasant started having some passion and love for greek PAGAN terms and called his synagogue

    την συναγωγην

    the palestinian galilean peasant told his disciples not to go to the PIGS and DOGS

    how then is it that he starts using the TERMS of PIGS AND DOGS and calls his synagogue

    την συναγωγην

    ???

    i’m waiting for evidence on which jew, back in jesus’ day / before jesus’ day ,IN PALESTINE, CALLED his building

    την συναγωγην

    Like

  18. here is ehrmans reply :

    Bart May 17, 2016
    No, probably not. That’s why it is usually thought that this is something jesus did not actually say.

    την συναγωγην

    so jeezer did not say

    την συναγωγην

    so can we find which jew used PAGAN GREEK TERMS DESCRIBING his/her holy place of GATHERING

    ???

    Like

  19. “d” any attack you rail against the quran , rest assured academia has already plundered your book

    the thing is “d” you need to come up with a solution and then be a good old original sin stained germ and apply your defence on quran too.

    you gotta “d”

    Like

  20. Paulus, you said:

    “Sure, I agree that there are individual accounts that lack multiple attestation. But the canonical gospels are in and of themselves overwhelming, historically speaking. This isn’t really even disputable.”

    How so? Most scholars do not actually consider the gospels to be “overwhelming”. Rather, they regard the gospels to be the product of an oral tradition. The authors are not known with any certainty and each gospel contradicts the other in many instances. How does that make the gospels historically reliable?

    I think you are applying double standards. Do you acknowledge that the authorship of the gospels is a LATER tradition?

    Why does the Bible mention so many lost books?

    “If we ask whether a gospel was “given” to Jesus as you believe, we simply have no historical evidence to lead to that conclusion. And considering the canonical gospels are probably the best attested documents of Greek and Roman antiquity, we are best to believe that that the Quran is simply mistaken.”

    As I said before, we certainly do have such evidence. Jesus’ teachings were initially spread orally. This is beyond dispute. The gospels were written later.

    I also find your statement that the gospels are “the best attested documents of Greek and Roman antiquity” to be curious. How “attested” is the story of the Magi? The Massacre of the Innocents?

    Liked by 1 person

    • “How so?”

      In that the canonical gospels exist and are the best source of information on Jesus’ life.

      By contrast, the injeel the Quran talks about as no archaeological or historical credibility. It’s a myth.

      We can debate the authorship, details etc of the canonical gospels, but that is kind of irrelevant to the OP.

      Do you see the difference? You’re deflecting from the issue at hand- there is no reasonable evidence to support the Quran’s position.

      Like

  21. Paulus, you said:

    “you seem to be deflecting from the OP? First, to have manuscript evidence that early is astonishing, as any manuscript scholar would note. Second, it is all still multiple attestation which gives us historical probability.”

    Again, the “manuscript evidence” you refer to is actually not all that impressive. You are talking about FRAGMENTS. In contrast, we have numerous manuscripts of the Quran from the 1st century of the Islamic calendar, some of them containing large portions of the Quran.

    I don’t regard mere fragments as evidence of “multiple attestation”. Also, how do you explain this alleged “manuscript evidence” and the variant traditions found in other sources? For example, why does Justin Martyr say that the Magi came from Arabia? Or that Jesus was born in a cave, instead of in a manger?

    “We simply know of no such gospel “given” to Jesus as the Quran claims. A hypothesis about the Q source is just that- it has no corroborative evidence to support.”

    You don’t seem to understand that an oral tradition will not have manuscript evidence. Moreover, even Christian scholars accept the existence of an oral tradition. For example, regarding the statements of Justin Martyr, Bruce Metzger stated:

    “In addition to echoes and quotations from the Memoirs of the apostles, Justin also makes use of various extraneous traditions, probably oral, about the life of Jesus” (The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development, and Significance (New York: Oxford University Press, Inc., 1997), pp. x-xi).

    The existence of the Q gospel is not disputed among scholars. The only ones who dispute it are Christian apologists. As Burton Mack states:

    “…scholars discovered that both Matthew and Luke had used a collection of the sayings of Jesus as one of the ‘sources’ for their gospels, the other being the Gospel of Mark. Scholars have known for over 150 years that something like Q must have existed, but they took it for granted until recently” (Who Wrote the New Testament? The Making of the Christian Myth (San Francisco, HarperOne, 1995), pp. 47-48.).

    But you have ask yourself: since the gospels were not written until almost 30 years after Jesus (assuming the traditional dates of authorship), how would his teachings have been spread and preserved? Wouldn’t it have to be through an oral tradition?

    “And I think that if you were to track down the oral tradition= gospel given to Jesus position, you would need to explain how the oral creeds of 1 Cor 15 work within that hypothesis? Scholars like Bauckham date that oral tradition to within 30 years of Jesus’ death.”

    That is not at all surprising. Oral traditions can transform into multiple variants over time. It’s like a game of telephone. The message can become skewed relatively quickly. Interestingly, the resurrection is not attested in some documents. For example, the Didache fails to mention it. I suggest you read my article on the resurrection here: http://quranandbible.blogspot.com/2014/12/raymond-brown-and-resurrection-of-jesus.html

    “A fair reading of the evidence should lead to the conclusion that the Quran is simply mistake.”

    Actually, I think when the evidence is considered, the gospels simply are not the reliable documents that Christians make them out to be. In contrast, the Quran provides evidence of supernatural knowledge.

    You still have yet to answer my question about the various lost books that are mentioned in the Bible.

    Liked by 1 person

    • You are getting lost in the details. Can we stick to the main point for now?

      You keep comparing apple and oranges. For example, re lost books mentioned. Do we have competing or parallel books that would cast doubt on the books mentioned in the bible? That is the difference. Your appeal doesn’t work because we have evidence that is contrary to what the Quran teaches. Overwhelming evidence. Indisputable evidence really. In fact, the Quran doesn’t even tell us that the injeel was oral, does it? That is your interpolation. The Torah, zanies and Quran are written documents, why not the injeel?

      Like

  22. “ Scholars like Bauckham date that oral tradition to within 30 years of Jesus’ death.”

    it failed to mention

    1. joseph of a buried your god
    2. it failed to mention that your god predicted his death
    3. it failed to mention the women as first witnesses

    and , i quote

    “It is important to realize that all the statements of the two sections of the creed are tightly parallel to one another in every respect — except one. The second section contains a name as part of the tangible proof for the statement that Jesus was raised: ‘He appeared to [literally: ‘he was seen by’] Cephas.’ The fourth statement of the first section does not name any authorizing party. There we are told simply that ‘he was buried’ — not that he was buried by anyone in particular. Given the effort that the author of this creed has taken to make every statement of the first section correspond to the parallel statement of the second section, and vice versa, this should give us pause. It would have been very easy indeed to make the parallel precise, simply by saying ‘he was buried by Joseph [of Arimathea].’ Why didn’t the author make this precise parallel? My hunch is that it is because he knew nothing about a burial of Jesus by Joseph of Arimathea.”

    that’s interesting isn’t it?

    early creeds leaving out juicy bits?

    maybe it was all unknown?

    Liked by 1 person

  23. Paulus, you said:

    “In that the canonical gospels exist and are the best source of information on Jesus’ life.”

    How do you know they are the “best source”? There were lots of gospels and other books written about Jesus. What makes the “canonical” gospels the “best source”?

    You seem to be saying that since the canonical gospels are the earliest (although they lack the manuscript evidence and often times contradict each other), they are therefore the “best source”. But this line of reasoning is flawed for the reasons I have already shown.

    “By contrast, the injeel the Quran talks about as no archaeological or historical credibility. It’s a myth.”

    That is just your own personal opinion. The fact is that the “Gospel” was initially spread orally. There is no disputing this. The Injeel would have been the original source, but as it was spread by word of mouth, it splintered into various competing traditions. There is no doubt that an oral tradition existed. Therefore, the Injeel most certainly did exist. It is not a myth.

    “We can debate the authorship, details etc of the canonical gospels, but that is kind of irrelevant to the OP.

    Do you see the difference? You’re deflecting from the issue at hand- there is no reasonable evidence to support the Quran’s position.”

    Thus far, your entire premise against the Quran is that it came later and that there is no evidence of the Injeel. I already showed that the Injeel did indeed exist as an oral tradition. As for the Quran coming later, this line of reasoning is flawed given that if the Quran originated from a supernatural source, then it’s coming later is not a problem at all. Even so, there is no evidence that the Quran is historically inaccurate.

    Liked by 1 person

    • You aren’t proving your point. Saying that an oral tradition existed is not equivalent to demonstrating that Jesus was *given* the injeel from Allah.

      You need to provide some kind of evidence that demonstrates your point. At the moment you are claiming one thing and using arguments for something completely different.

      I think you recognise the problem here (that we know of no evidence that Jesus was given a gospel) which is why you’ve now turned to the supernatural explanation as a backup. But such an appeal is only equally fallacious.

      Like

    • With the name of Allah

      Well this is not a problem to us since we have the Qur’an the genuine and pure revelation from God,… actually it is more of your problem since you believe the “gospels” you have now are the words of God, not us.

      Actually the New Testament, are not accounts of the words of God revealed to Jesus, neither these are the words and deeds of Jesus , nor these were written soon after Jesus ‘death’ by people who knew him and his disciples.

      The “gospels” of the New Testament were written long after Jesus, by unknown people who did not know him, who did not share his aramaic tradition ie.  who did not speak his language.   These unknown people had just heard stories about Jesus that had been in oral circulation long  after his life.   This is the scholarly consensus .

      In other words scholars have concluded that the present gospels first went through oral oral stage formation before written down. There is high probability that actual parables and teachings of Jesus originate orally from the mouth of Jesus himself (as revealed by his God to him) was the actual Injil of Jesus as in the Qur’an.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Paulus would appear to be unfamiliar with NT scholarship on the gospels. Well done for introducing him to the subject in such a succinct way.

      Liked by 1 person

    • What do we expect, like mr. temple he is just a missionary whose main business is telling people how jesus love them and that he has committed suicide in order to pay their sins and so that they may worship human. It does not require good command in biblical scholarship.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Actually Paul, you will find that your assumptions are incorrect. I have no need to discuss the complexities of NT scholarship because that is not the point of the post.

      Notice the subtle shift that Eric made in his comment:

      “There is high probability that actual parables and teachings of Jesus originate orally from the mouth of Jesus himself (as revealed by his God to him) was the actual Injil of Jesus as in the Qur’an.”

      While I would agree with the first sentence, notice how Eric slips in his Islamic parenthesis and conclusions, neither of which logically or historically are actually correct. We have zero evidence that Jesus’ parables were “revealed to him” nor that this was the “actual injil” that Eric mentions.

      It is somewhat troubling that you would make assumptions about my education/knowledge and yet allow Eric to completely fabricate a history to fit his ideology. Perhaps it is not I that is unfamiliar with the topic at hand?

      Perhaps you would be better using your time to ask people like Eric for some actual evidence to suppport his conclusion? Especially when he thinks he has a “good command of biblical scholarship”, despite fabriacting an entire history and theory for the deen. The irony coming from so many Muslim comments on this thread is amusing and yet incredibly revealing!!

      Like

  24. Paulus said:

    “You keep comparing apple and oranges. For example, re lost books mentioned. Do we have competing or parallel books that would cast doubt on the books mentioned in the bible? That is the difference. Your appeal doesn’t work because we have evidence that is contrary to what the Quran teaches. Overwhelming evidence. Indisputable evidence really. In fact, the Quran doesn’t even tell us that the injeel was oral, does it? That is your interpolation. The Torah, zanies and Quran are written documents, why not the injeel?”

    I think you are exaggerating the “evidence” for the Bible. I have studied this evidence and I am not impressed.

    I am still waiting for you to show me what “evidence that is contrary to what the Quran teaches”. Until you show this “evidence”, you are just grasping for straws.

    None of the revealed scriptures came down as written books. They were written down later on. For example, the Quran was not compiled into a “book” until the caliphate of Abu Bakr. Until then, it was largely confined to memory and to separate written records (for example, a surah might have been written on an animal bone or on stone).

    We have no evidence that the teachings of Jesus were written down in his lifetime. Even the New Testament shows no such evidence. Therefore, it is not at all unreasonable to assume that the Injeel was not written down. And again, I have already shown the historical evidence of an oral tradition. There is no dispute there. It is not an “interpolation”.

    Regarding the lost books, you misunderstood my point. I am not asking whether there were “competing or parallel books” nor was I casting “doubt on the books”. My point was that a book can be lost over time. The same thing could have happened to the Injeel. There is no evidence that these lost books ever existed, yet you assume they did simply because the Bible mentions them. Also, the question remains why a supposedly “inspired” book even had to reference these books. Moreover, why did an “inspired” book basically summarize (at least partially) some of these books? For example, when 1 Kings mentioned the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Israel, it basically says that other information about the kings is found in that book! That’s like saying “we don’t have time to go through all the information, so we if you are interested, you can read that book”. Does that sound like an “inspired” book to you? It certainly does not to me.

    “The other events of Jeroboam’s reign, his wars and how he ruled, are written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel” (1 Kings, 14:19)

    “As for the other events of Nadab’s reign, and all he did, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel?” (1 Kings 15:31).

    “As for the other events of Baasha’s reign, what he did and his achievements, are they not written in the book of the annals of the kings of Israel?” (1 Kings 16:5).

    Doesn’t it seem like 1 Kings is basically just a short summary of another, now lost book? None of the information can be verified either way.

    Liked by 1 person

    • “I am still waiting for you to show me what “evidence that is contrary to what the Quran teaches”. Until you show this “evidence”, you are just grasping for straws.”

      Everything we know about Jesus comes from the canonical gospels. These gospels were not ‘given’ to Jesus. And we have no record at all, not an iota, that any other gospel was ‘given’ to Jesus. Everything we have or know about Jesus is contrary to the Quran’s claim. I’m not sure why I needed to spell that out (again).

      Even the oral tradition you appeal to doesn’t help. I know it doesn’t help because the core elements of that tradition we know of (e.g 1 Cor 15) teach things contrary to the Quran (again).

      So you have provided no actual evidence and your (totally unsubstantiated) hypothesis could not possibly work with the evidence we have.

      Like

    • Jesus says many times in authentic fragments still found in the gospels that he was ‘sent’ by God, that he and his disciples were to proclaim the “gospel” (a gospel obviously quite unlike the one proclaimed by Paul). Jesus’s teaching on forgiveness, salvation, judgement etc is essentially the same as the Quran’s. This is because they both come from the same Divine Source.

      Like

    • Paul W

      “Jesus says many times in authentic fragments still found in the gospels that he was ‘sent’ by God, ”

      And? That’s not a problem for trinitarian belief. The key is whether or not jesus made claims to divinity – he did, quite clearly in several places such that the religious authorities wanted to kill him for it.

      You guys just can’t get that. It’s amazing.

      Like

    • Give me an example please

      Like

    • “Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father.”

      Like

    • Ah. So you think that whatever is attributed to Jesus in John’s gospel was actually said by him.

      Like

    • Paul W

      “Ah. So you think that whatever is attributed to Jesus in John’s gospel was actually said by him.”

      ?

      Like

    • It’s a yes or no dude

      Like

    • It’s a leading question – if you have a point make it. Otherwise it looks like you are moving the goalposts.

      You asked where jesus claimed divinity and I showed you.

      Like

    • But you naively assumed that if the words are attributed to Jesus in the fourth gospel then Jesus actually spoken them. The overwhelming consensus of NT scholarship is that he did not.

      Like

    • How do you reconcile that belief with the willingness of muslims on this blog – including yourself, perhaps – to believe that apocrypha like thomas’ gospel and the gospel of judas represent accurate accounts of jesus’ life and words?

      That aside, is there truly a consensus about John? There is general doubt about him being the author, but that does not mean we should not take the contents as inaccurate. If you did that, then the Sanaa manuscript is doubtful since it is written in multiple scripts by anonymous writers, some of whose work was written over other earlier versions of the same texts.

      The same holds true for the Topkapi and Samarkand manuscripts. And don’t get me started on the hadith – the earliest complete manuscript of the most reliable, bukharu,dates from the 11th century with very little documentary trail to support it. So much of what he claims mohammed said is under even more doubt than john’s gospel I would say.

      As for john, there is an abundance of cross-referencing material in his gospel with the synoptics – and the most significant difference being the high christology. But I think that it is not really true that the synoptics don’t themselves have christological significance – they do.

      Like

    • “and the most significant difference being the high christology” – which is why it is considered unhistorical.

      Like

    • But how do you reconcile that approach with the muslims on this blog – including yourself, perhaps – who are willing to accept the gospels of thomas and judas as the “true injeel” even though their historicity is considered more doubtful than john’s?

      And how do reconcile your approach with the fact that the hadith paint such a confused picture of mohammed that it is impossible to know the truth?

      Like

  25. for 40 days jesus is hanging around with his disiples.
    for 40 days he does not tell them to jot anything down.
    for 40 days jesus remains in hiding
    for 40 days jesus’ is telling them about ?

    peter required a vision to explain to him that gentiles could be saved . he couldn’t use those 40 days he spent with paulus’ god?

    40 days and nothing written down

    nothing
    absolutely nothing

    Peter’s Vision
    9 About noon the following day as they were on their journey and approaching the city, Peter went up on the roof to pray. 10 He became hungry and wanted something to eat, and while the meal was being prepared, he fell into a trance. 11 He saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. 12 It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles and birds. 13 Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

    14 “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

    15 The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

    16 This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven.

    peter, can you tell paulus what were you doing with jesus for 40 days? didn’t you guys discuss eating pork, shrimp, bacon and how welcoming you were of non-jews?

    peter, what happen to those 40 days?

    you couldn’t use any evidence from those 40 days?

    oh,wait a second, in your entire sermon you can’t quote much from your god anyway.

    40 days and you jotted down nothing.

    peter, why did you forget that your god explained to you that it isn’t what one eats that defiles?

    Like

  26. Fido barked:

    “You are ignorant.

    The earliest gospels were written somewhere outside of Israel at least beginning 50-60 years after the events they describe.”

    LOL!!! And this is supposed to impress me? Epic fail, Fido!

    You are so lost you don’t even realize the irony of your statement! Notice how you said “somewhere outside of Israel” and “beginning 50-60 years after…” In other words, you have no idea when your so-called “eyewitness accounts” were written! Nor do you know who even wrote them! LOL!!

    “Yet, they use jewish names of people widely used in israel at the time and to largely the same distribution, when jewish names used in the countries where the gospels were found were very different. They recall specifics about geography and even flora that were unique to the region, it recalls specific locations where jesus ministered, locations that were so obscure that there seemed to be no reason for even recording them.”

    LOL!!! So what if they used “Jewish names of people…”? Why is that so important? If that impresses you, then the Quran’s reference to such names as Zakariyah, Imran, Marium etc. should impress you as well!

    And as for your idiotic claim about the gospels recalling “specifics about geography”, research shows that this statement is simply false. The gospels do indeed make mistakes about the geography of Palestine. For example, the story of the Gerasene swine showcases the ignorance of the gospel writers. You will recall that Jesus exorcised some demons and allowed them to possess some pigs, which then drowned by jumping off a cliff and drowning in the Sea of Galilee. But as John Davidson states:

    “The difficulty is that the town of Gerasa (now Jerash) lies more than thirty miles to the southeast of the southernmost tip of the Sea of Galilee! Matthew, who clearly had a Jewish and probably Palestinian background, changes the name to Gadarenes, derived from Gadara, quite another town altogether, while, in Luke, some ancient manuscripts read Gerasenes and other Gadarenes” (The Gospel of Jesus: In Search of His Original Teachings, p. 83).

    LOL!! So, there you go! Another false statement by the Gentile dog!

    “The reason they recorded these seemingly insignificant details is because they were eye-witness accounts written by people who had seen jesus and his miracles and were recording what they saw – probably orally at first – so that they could tell others to go to these obscure towns and villages and talk to the people named.

    In other words, the gospels relate the words of people who witnessed the events first hand and were telling others what they saw, where they saw, who else saw it, where they should go to find out for themselves and who they should talk to when they got there.”

    LOL, yes and they still got the details wrong! Epic fail again, Fido!!

    “The quran on the other hand shows no such intimate acquaintance with 1st century israel – it doesn’t even use jewish names form the period, mentions none of the obscure towns that jesus visited, and has a general ignorance of anything outside of 7th century arabia. Hardly impressive for a self-proclaimed “revelation”.”

    LOL, that’s because the Quran was not concerned with the “intimate acquaintance with 1st century Israel”!

    In contrast, your gospels couldn’t even get the geography of their own land right! Hardly impressive for a self-proclaimed “inspired” book! LOL!!

    “The “injeel” is a term that mohammed probably had no idea what it meant, nor what was in it. The quran is so vague that even to this day, no muslim can say what was in it, nor can they explain how it is that mere human beings can destroy, or hide the words of your “god” when he stated explicitly that no one can do this.”

    LOL!! The Quran actually does provide minor details about what the Injeel contained. For example:

    “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude in the Taurat; and their similitude in the Gospel is: like a seed which sends forth its blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling) the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds forgiveness, and a great Reward” (48:29).

    So, once again, Fido makes an inaccurate statement, reflecting his Gentile dog ignorance! LOL!!

    “Could your god be the figment of an ignorant imagination?”

    LOL, no. The only god that is a figment of an ignorant imagination is your 4-eyed god with bronze-like feet, who requires blood to be satiated, like some pagan god! Now there is an imaginary god!

    Like

    • Here is an admission by a Christian website about the geographical errors in the gospel of Mark (though it offers a pathetic theory to explain the error):

      http://vridar.org/2010/08/06/mark-failed-geography-but-great-bible-student/

      I particularly love the closing statement:

      “Mark may have known little about the geography of Palestine, but he did know his Jewish scriptures.”

      LOL!! So, “Mark” knew the “scriptures” but was completely ignorant of the land which the scriptures talk about! Some “inspired” book, huh?

      Like

    • original sin stained germ failed to mention why would a jewish who told his jewish disciples to avoid going to pigs and dogs, all of a sudden have his “eyewitnesses” using greek names in jewish areas

      it is like you are in pakistan and then you walk into a village and you start hearing a pakistani woman say:

      “oh andrew, steve , eric , simon, peter , come here and help me make bread”

      saas rikaal jii

      ohh kidddddaaaa!

      Like

    • Fail

      That’s a big fail.

      I see no evidence form what you posted that Mark got the geography wrong – you haven’t shown that at all. What exactly are the contradictions or “mistakes”. Try to think for yourself – if you can – and don’t just regurgitate what someone else writes.

      The quran supposedly corrects christian errors – yet it shows no indication that your man-made book had any idea that jesus lived 6 centuries earlier, nor that he ministered in israel. That is significant – your god is ignorant of basic facts about jesus and his life.

      Like

  27. Fido barked:

    “It just gets better and better!! LOL!! You have truly lost it.

    The quran mentions a “lost book”, you complete bloody fool!! LOL!!! You have just admitted that the quran is not inspired because it mentions a lost book in its own VERY LATE WITNESS.”

    LOL, Fido! Thank you for showing that you are the one who has lost it, you bloody Gentile dog! If you had read my previous posts to Paulus, you would see that I was referring to the lost books mentioned in the Bible precisely to refute his claim that the Quran mentions a lost book! Get it now, you bloody fool? Learn to read, Fido! Bad doggie!

    Now perhaps you can answer my question (in addition to the others you have been avoiding like the plague):

    Why did an “inspired” book basically summarize (at least partially) some of these books? For example, when 1 Kings mentioned the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Israel, it basically says that other information about the kings is found in that book! That’s like saying “we don’t have time to go through all the information, so we if you are interested, you can read that book”. Does that sound like an “inspired” book to you? It certainly does not to me.

    LOL!! Where will you go from here, you pathetic Christian? Christianity has rotted your Gentile dog brain! Time to grow up and pull your head out of your rear end! LOL!!!

    Like

    • Faiz, I think you will find that this argument is rather ironic given that numerous fundamentals of the Islamic faith, tradition and practice are only found “outside” of the inspired text.

      Even then, you are still comparing apples and oranges again. Since Jews and Christians allow for diversity of genre within their “scripture” it is not troublesome to have historical works included. And of course, no one would expect all of history to to be included under one title.

      the Quran doesn’t have multiple genre and even then many if not most of your religious beliefs and practices (and basically the entire sunnah that you emulate) is found outside of Allahs revelation

      Like

    • Fail

      LOL!! You moron!

      “I was referring to the lost books mentioned in the Bible precisely to refute his claim that the Quran mentions a lost book! ”

      Then where is it? Is it lost? Don’t fry your two brain cells trying work it out. LOL!! Are you now saying that an oral tradition is a “book”, that when your god says “book” he means oral tradition? Didn’t your clueless god know the difference between a book and the spoken word?

      It’s clear why your god requires blind obedience – if you guys started to think Islam would be dead in days.

      The real question is why does your book contain known christian, jewish and pagan fables, fairy tales and apocrypha from the region if it was a true revelation from god? Even the people in mecca knew that mohammed was telling stories that they knew to be false.

      No other prophet had that criticism leveled at them – they were mocked by ignorant people, but never were they accused of plagiarism nor of claiming that fables and fairy tales were revelations from god. That’s written clearly in your book you fool and you still blindly follow its teachings. LOL!!!

      Like

  28. Fido barked:

    “That’s a big fail.

    I see no evidence form what you posted that Mark got the geography wrong – you haven’t shown that at all. What exactly are the contradictions or “mistakes”. Try to think for yourself – if you can – and don’t just regurgitate what someone else writes.”

    LOL!! What a typical response from a brain-dead apologist! I showed you why the geography is all wrong. There was no place for the Gedarene swine to jump off since the town was more than 30 miles from the Sea of Galilee! That is why your gospels kept changing the location of the town! It is an error, and there is nothing you can do about it!

    You don’t think for yourself. You simply follow the whims of your leaders, who have deceived you into believing that the gospels are historically accurate and reliable. Reasonable people know this is not true.

    “”The quran supposedly corrects christian errors – yet it shows no indication that your man-made book had any idea that jesus lived 6 centuries earlier, nor that he ministered in israel. That is significant – your god is ignorant of basic facts about jesus and his life.”

    LOL!! The Quran says that Jesus was sent to the Children of Israel, you dingbat! Epic, mega fail Fido!

    Like

    • Fail

      “There was no place for the Gedarene swine to jump off since the town was more than 30 miles from the Sea of Galilee! ”

      Try again ignoramus maximus. I’M enjoying this too much to correct you – let’s see how long it takes you to figure this one out. I don’t think you ever will. LOL!!!

      “The Quran says that Jesus was sent to the Children of Israel, you dingbat!”

      But it had no idea what “israel” meant and gives no indication that it knew where it was, you clueless prat. And where does your all-unknowing god show that he knew jesus lived 6 centuries before? he doesn’t because the men who created your religion had no knoıwledge of these facts. LOL!!!

      Like

  29. Paulus said:

    “Faiz, I think you will find that this argument is rather ironic given that numerous fundamentals of the Islamic faith, tradition and practice are only found “outside” of the inspired text.”

    How is that “ironic”? Islam is a continuation of the same faith tradition that the previous prophets brought. Therefore, it shouldn’t be surprising that “numerous fundamentals” are found “outside of the inspired text”. Furthermore, the Quran is not “inspired”. It is the literal word of God.

    “Even then, you are still comparing apples and oranges again. Since Jews and Christians allow for diversity of genre within their “scripture” it is not troublesome to have historical works included. And of course, no one would expect all of history to to be included under one title.”

    What it proves is that Jews and Christians are relying on documents whose accuracy cannot be verified. In fact, in most cases, the exact happens. We actually see historical errors in these works. Moreover, if Jews and Christians “allow for diversity of genre”, then you are admitting that the whole Bible is not “inspired.” In other words, it is the word of fallible men.

    “the Quran doesn’t have multiple genre and even then many if not most of your religious beliefs and practices (and basically the entire sunnah that you emulate) is found outside of Allahs revelation”

    What difference would that make? You keep moving the goal post. Why is it important to have “multiple genres”? If anything, the presence of “multiple genres” would prove that the book is not from a divine source. You have essentially admitted that about the Bible.

    Liked by 1 person

  30. Paulus said:

    “Everything we know about Jesus comes from the canonical gospels. These gospels were not ‘given’ to Jesus. And we have no record at all, not an iota, that any other gospel was ‘given’ to Jesus. Everything we have or know about Jesus is contrary to the Quran’s claim. I’m not sure why I needed to spell that out (again).”

    You are just repeating the same mantra that I have already refuted. The “canonical” gospels were just among MANY “gospels” about Jesus’ life. The word “gospel” didn’t originally signify a written record about Jesus’ life at all. Even the “gospels” themselves agree about this:

    “And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people” (Matthew 4:23).

    He was “preaching the gospel”. Obviously, he was not preaching the Gospel of Mark or the Gospel of Matthew.

    “Even the oral tradition you appeal to doesn’t help. I know it doesn’t help because the core elements of that tradition we know of (e.g 1 Cor 15) teach things contrary to the Quran (again).”

    I also already refuted this. There were multiple oral traditions. The tradition mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15 is just one of them. There were other traditions, which contradicted this tradition. I have already shown the evidence (Justin Martyr’s account of the birth of Jesus). You can deny it all you want but the facts remains.

    “So you have provided no actual evidence and your (totally unsubstantiated) hypothesis could not possibly work with the evidence we have.”

    Your response is typical of apologists. I think I have shown considerable evidence. You simply ignored it, which tells me that you really don’t have a response and you don’t want to acknowledge it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Hello Faiz.

      I must admit that this last comment of your’s made me chuckle. You do understand the difference between a discussion and a refutation?

      I am making a simple point- that we have zero evidence that Jesus was ever “given” a gospel. And here is my evidence.

      1. Everything we know historically about Jesus comes from the canonical gospels (undisputable). These gospels give no evidence that Jesus was “given” anything from Allah. Your appeal to other gospels is fallacious (and irrelevant) to begin with, and even then they don’t demonstrate that Jesus was given anything. You need to provide evidence that Jesus was “given” a gospel. That is the claim being discussed.

      2. You appealed to oral tradition to somehow suggest that the gospel given to Jesus is somehow imbedded in there. However, again, we have zero evidence that ANY oral tradition is a gospel that was “given” to Jesus. I demonstrated that the earliest oral tradition (dating to months after Jesus’ death) teaches things contrary to the Quran. You’ve countered by appeal to much later oral traditions about Jesus. That is fine. They still don’t prove your point, namely, that these traditions are ABOUT Jesus, not something GIVEN to Jesus. Even the Q source is considered sayings of Jesus. This is akin more to ahadith literature if we were going to make a comparison. So you’re still left with nothing that is remotely close to demonstrating the Quran’s claim.

      Can you see the difference? I’ve asked the whole time for some evidence to show that Jesus was “given” a gospel, since this is the Quranic claim. Anything you have presented has only shown to strengthen the evidence against the Quran.

      So, with that said, you can see why your claim that, “You are just repeating the same mantra that I have already refuted. The “canonical” gospels were just among MANY “gospels” about Jesus’ life.” made me chuckle. Generally, to refute someone, you need to engage in their argument, not create a straw man. And ironically, you even appealed to a verse within the canonical gospels to continue your refutation against your straw man argument!! Isn’t it ironic that you need to appeal to the canonical gospels rather than the injeel the Quran talks about? Since we actually have the former and not the latter.

      Anyway I’ve lost motivation to continue this tirade back ad forth. I remain convinced that the Quran is sadly mistaken in claiming that Jesus was “given” a gospel because we have no historical or archaelogical evidence to support this claim.

      Like

  31. Fido barked:

    “Then where is it? Is it lost? Don’t fry your two brain cells trying work it out. LOL!! Are you now saying that an oral tradition is a “book”, that when your god says “book” he means oral tradition? Didn’t your clueless god know the difference between a book and the spoken word?”

    LOL!!! Fido proves once again who the “moron” is! A “book” doesn’t have to mean a literal “book”, you idiot! While the Quran was being revealed, it was referred to as a “book”, even though it was not yet complete or compiled into a book. Get it now, you idiotic Christian dog? LOL!!!

    “It’s clear why your god requires blind obedience – if you guys started to think Islam would be dead in days.”

    LOL, says the Christian whose entire religion is based on ignorance and blind obedience. As soon as people start reading the Bible rationally, they realize it is full of idiotic statements. As Mark Twain once wrote:

    “[The Bible] is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies.”

    People who think will leave Christianity in a second. I guess Gentile dogs like you can’t be blamed because your 1 or 2 remaining brain cells are already operating at maximum capacity! LOL!!! Your 4-eyed god can’t help you much.

    “The real question is why does your book contain known christian, jewish and pagan fables, fairy tales and apocrypha from the region if it was a true revelation from god? Even the people in mecca knew that mohammed was telling stories that they knew to be false.”

    LOL!!! As I said to Paulus, the Quran is a continuation of the same message. It separates the truth from falsehood.

    It is your Bible that actually borrows from other cultures. I asked you about the Book of Revelation in the other thread. You ran off with your tail between your legs, as usual! What say you, Fido? Where did the author of Revelation get the story of the “woman clothed with the sun”, if not from pagan myths regarding Apollo and Isis? LOL!!!

    “No other prophet had that criticism leveled at them – they were mocked by ignorant people, but never were they accused of plagiarism nor of claiming that fables and fairy tales were revelations from god. That’s written clearly in your book you fool and you still blindly follow its teachings. LOL!!!”

    LOL!!! That’s because they had to find a way to explain how Muhammad (pbuh) knew so much even though he had no knowledge of the previous scriptures. They tried to come up with many theories. Some said he was being taught by another person. Yet, none of their theories explained how he knew so much! Alhamdulillah! The skeptics were silenced!

    In contrast, your silly Bible was clearly written by people who had to plagiarize other (now lost) works! The author of 1 Kings was obviously using the Book of the Annals of the Kings of Israel as his main source. Some “inspired” book!! LOL!!!

    Like

    • Faiz: I asked you about the Book of Revelation in the other thread. You ran off with your tail between your legs, as usual! What say you, Fido?

      That’s not the only thing he chickened out from answering. I asked to him to cite one paper in support of his claim that there’s overwhelming evidence of Quranic manuscripts predating Muhammad(saw) and D simply couldn’t provide any.

      I suspect D is a teenager who is new to online debates, hasn’t read his Bible or the Quran, extremely obvious that he doesn’t keep up with scholarship on either the New Testament or the Quran, and thinks he can pull fast ones on us. Pretty sure he gets his knowledge on Islam for selectively watching debates on Youtube.

      Like

    • Fail

      “A “book” doesn’t have to mean a literal “book”, you idiot! While the Quran was being revealed, it was referred to as a “book”, even though it was not yet complete or compiled into a book.”

      LOL!!!

      Yes it does you islamic imbecile!!! If your clueless god meant something other than a book, he should have said so – why create this confusion?

      Here is what is interesting about your false god calling his “revelation” a “book” – we know that some of your earliest manuscripts have been dated to before the time of mohammed which means that when your god (i.e. the men who made up your holy book) used the word “book” they probably meant “book” as in the manuscripts already existent in arabia at the time.

      This is why mohammed was accused of preaching stories that the meccans already knew as stories from the ancients and biblical stories – they had already been written down by other religious groups and were not revelations at all. LOL!!

      So in this case, your “god” was telling the truth – there was a “book” but it wasn’t “revealed”, it was written by men before mohammed was even born. LOL!!

      You cannot hide the truth even in the most dark and lie-infested places.

      Like

    • kmak

      “That’s not the only thing he chickened out from answering. I asked to him to cite one paper in support of his claim that there’s overwhelming evidence of Quranic manuscripts predating Muhammad(saw) and D simply couldn’t provide any.”

      Which thread was that? I don’t remember.

      Some of the earliest quran manuscripts are too early to be revelations through mohammed and the earliest hadith are too late by several centuries to be genuine historical accounts.

      Your entire faith is tradition based on stories plagiarized from earlier fables and sectarian christian and jewish writings. Even the quran acknowledges this but gives no reasonable answer to the problem.

      Like

    • D: Some of the earliest quran manuscripts are too early to be revelations…

      Can you cite the studies making this claim? Thanks.

      Like

  32. Fido barked:

    “Try again ignoramus maximus. I’M enjoying this too much to correct you – let’s see how long it takes you to figure this one out. I don’t think you ever will. LOL!!!”

    LOL!!! In other words, Canis ignoramus has no real answer! I know perfectly well what response you apologists usually give to this clear geographical error. Yet the fact remains that despite their best efforts, the apologists have never been able to explain the error without making complete fools of themselves! Origen tried to find a way to harmonize the contradictory gospel accounts as well as explain Mark’s error. As “Debunking Christianity” states:

    “What is amusing is that the best explanation is given by Origen, the early Christian father, who accepted an error – Mark must have got it wrong. He knew it could no better be Gadara than Gerasa. It seems that Gergesa is conflated with Gerasa (hence Gerasenes and not Gergesenes). Gerasa is anywhere from 20-50 miles further on from Gadara to the point that Origen claimed that Gerasenes must therefore have been a copyist error (or Mark mishearing) of Gergesenes, which he claims is a town next to the Sea of Galilee. Eusebius later puts in his tuppence by confusing both Gadara and Gergesa and the land of the Girgashites, thus contradicting himself, so not much help can be found with him” (http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2012/07/biblical-contradictions-and-christian.html).

    LOL!!! How pathetic are you Christians?

    Well, at least some of you are honest enough to admit that your Bible if full of errors. The late Raymond E. Brown stated:

    “…the twentieth century produced indisputable evidence of historical inaccuracies in the Bible. It was no surprise , then, that when inerrancy was discussed at Vatican II, no less a figure than Cardinal Koenig could dare to read off a list of historical errors in the Bible and to affirm that ‘the Biblical Books are deficient in accuracy as regards both historical and scientific matters” (The Critical Meaning of the Bible, pp. 15-16).

    LOL!!! That’s gotta hurt! An admission from the finest scholars of the Catholic Church that the Bible is full of errors!

    “But it had no idea what “israel” meant and gives no indication that it knew where it was, you clueless prat. And where does your all-unknowing god show that he knew jesus lived 6 centuries before? he doesn’t because the men who created your religion had no knoıwledge of these facts. LOL!!!”

    LOL!!! Canis ignoramus just can’t seem to pull his head out of his read end! It must be tight in there! All of these facts were already known. The Quran didn’t have to mention that at all! But, even so, it is well known that during the first years of Muhammad’s prophethood, the Muslims prayed in the direction of Jerusalem. We know it was Jerusalem because when the direction was changed to Mecca, the Jews questioned why the Muslims had done so:

    “Even if thou wert to bring to the people of the Book all the Signs (together), they would not follow Thy Qibla; nor art thou going to follow their Qibla; nor indeed will they follow each other’s Qibla. If thou after the knowledge hath reached thee, Wert to follow their (vain) desires,-then wert thou Indeed (clearly) in the wrong” (2:145).

    Liked by 1 person

  33. Paulus said:

    “I must admit that this last comment of your’s made me chuckle. You do understand the difference between a discussion and a refutation?”

    Well that’s good, because I have had a nice chuckle reading some of your comments as well! But, I’m glad we can discuss respectfully.

    Our “discussion” is in reality a debate. You have some assertions that I have found to be inaccurate. Therefore, my responses were “refutations”. I don’t know why I have to spell it out for you, but there it is.

    “1. Everything we know historically about Jesus comes from the canonical gospels (undisputable). These gospels give no evidence that Jesus was “given” anything from Allah. Your appeal to other gospels is fallacious (and irrelevant) to begin with, and even then they don’t demonstrate that Jesus was given anything. You need to provide evidence that Jesus was “given” a gospel. That is the claim being discussed.”

    Not quite. Some of the information about Jesus comes from other “non-canonical” sources. Moreover, even the “canonical” gospels were based on an oral tradition.

    I already showed that Jesus preached the “gospel” and that it was spread orally. You are resorting to petty semantics that the gospels don’t say that he was “given” something. But even here, you ignore what your own “canonical” gospels say. The gospel of John actually quotes Jesus as saying:

    “I no longer call you servants, because a servant does not know his master’s business. Instead, I have called you friends, for everything that I learned from my Father I have made known to you” (John 15:15).

    Do you see? Jesus learned from the Father and then he made those things known to his followers.

    “2. You appealed to oral tradition to somehow suggest that the gospel given to Jesus is somehow imbedded in there. However, again, we have zero evidence that ANY oral tradition is a gospel that was “given” to Jesus. I demonstrated that the earliest oral tradition (dating to months after Jesus’ death) teaches things contrary to the Quran. You’ve countered by appeal to much later oral traditions about Jesus. That is fine. They still don’t prove your point, namely, that these traditions are ABOUT Jesus, not something GIVEN to Jesus. Even the Q source is considered sayings of Jesus. This is akin more to ahadith literature if we were going to make a comparison. So you’re still left with nothing that is remotely close to demonstrating the Quran’s claim.”

    You demonstrated nothing except that there was one particular tradition. As I already said, there were many competing traditions. That explains why there were so many “gospels”.

    And yes, I already made the comparison to the ahadith literature. All of the oral traditions were about Jesus, but also represented his TEACHINGS. It is simply inaccurate to claim that they were only “about” him.

    “Can you see the difference? I’ve asked the whole time for some evidence to show that Jesus was “given” a gospel, since this is the Quranic claim. Anything you have presented has only shown to strengthen the evidence against the Quran.”

    I have already given you this evidence. You just don’t want to acknowledge it. In addition, you have certain misconceptions that you don’t want to acknowledge as well.

    “So, with that said, you can see why your claim that, “You are just repeating the same mantra that I have already refuted. The “canonical” gospels were just among MANY “gospels” about Jesus’ life.” made me chuckle. Generally, to refute someone, you need to engage in their argument, not create a straw man. And ironically, you even appealed to a verse within the canonical gospels to continue your refutation against your straw man argument!! Isn’t it ironic that you need to appeal to the canonical gospels rather than the injeel the Quran talks about? Since we actually have the former and not the latter.”

    I have “engaged” your argument. I don’t know why that needs to be spelled out for you. You appealed to the gospels, to which I replied that they are unreliable and are just some among many other “gospels”. What more do you want?

    I quoted your own gospels to prove my side of the argument. You didn’t even bother to engage that!

    You still cannot seem to understand that the “Injeel” was spread via an oral tradition. Your gospels could very well contain snippets of that oral tradition. And what we do know from the oral tradition is that Jesus was a prophet who never claimed to be “God”, something which confirms the Quran.

    “Anyway I’ve lost motivation to continue this tirade back ad forth. I remain convinced that the Quran is sadly mistaken in claiming that Jesus was “given” a gospel because we have no historical or archaelogical evidence to support this claim.”

    I’m not sure how this qualifies as a “tirade”, but if have lost the “motivation”, that’s your prerogative.

    For my part, I remain convinced that the Bible is an inaccurate collection of books that have no historical reliability. Nothing has been presented by you or anyone else that shows that the Quran is “sadly mistaken”. Sufficient evidence exists that Jesus was indeed given a gospel, which he then taught to his followers. Even your own gospels prove that. There is plenty of evidence that the Injeel did indeed exist as an oral tradition, and most likely gave rise to the multiple oral traditions that in turn gave rise to the gospels, both “canonical” and “non-canonical”.

    Liked by 1 person

  34. Fido barked:

    “LOL!!!

    Yes it does you islamic imbecile!!! If your clueless god meant something other than a book, he should have said so – why create this confusion? ”

    LOL!!! No, it doesn’t your Christian moron!!! I already explained the reason why. If you are too stupid to understand, that it is your problem. I can’t be held responsible for a Gentile dog’s inability to understand! LOL!!!

    “Here is what is interesting about your false god calling his “revelation” a “book” – we know that some of your earliest manuscripts have been dated to before the time of mohammed which means that when your god (i.e. the men who made up your holy book) used the word “book” they probably meant “book” as in the manuscripts already existent in arabia at the time.”

    LOL!!! Now we know for sure that you are an ingnoramus! It’s confirmed, Canis ignoramus!

    There are no manuscripts that have been dated to before the time of Muhammad (pbuh), you dingbat! You are are an idiot, plain and simple! LOL!!!

    I asked you to prove this idiotic assertion elsewhere and you ran off with your tail between your legs! Since you are so stupid to bring it up again, the burden of proof is once again on you. But since I think I know what manuscript you are talking about specifically, let me just refute you pre-emptively, as I did elsewhere:

    https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/05/10/understanding-the-qur%ca%beans-creative-use-of-rhetorical-strategies-against-orthodox-christianity-and-a-refutation-of-let-the-study-quran-speak-pt-1-by-sam-shamoun/#comment-15203

    Fido is probably talking about the Birmingham manuscript, but since he is too ignorant, he doesn’t realize that this manuscript actually confirms the reliability of the Quran. According to the University of Birmingham:

    “The tests carried out on the parchment of the Birmingham folios yield the strong probability that the animal from which it was taken was alive during the lifetime of the Prophet Muhammad or shortly afterwards. This means that the parts of the Qur’an that are written on this parchment can, with a degree of confidence, be dated to less than two decades after Muhammad’s death. These portions must have been in a form that is very close to the form of the Qur’an read today, supporting the view that the text has undergone little or no alteration and that it can be dated to a point very close to the time it was believed to be revealed” (http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/news/latest/2015/07/quran-manuscript-22-07-15.aspx).

    LOL!!! Busted!

    “So in this case, your “god” was telling the truth – there was a “book” but it wasn’t “revealed”, it was written by men before mohammed was even born. LOL!!

    You cannot hide the truth even in the most dark and lie-infested places.”

    LOL!!! All you have shown is that you are an uneducated donkey who brays nonsensically and spread false information. Thank you! You have been exposed as a liar, just like the true founder of your pagan religion, Paul the false apostle!

    Like

  35. Radio silence from Fido the Dingbat! LOL!! What’s wrong, Fido? Your bite is again not as bad as your bark? What say you about the geographical error in Mark? What say you about the plagiarism in your so-called “inspired” book? What say you about the Quranic manuscripts which you claim predate Muhammad (pbuh)? Are you running away with your tail between your legs again?

    Like

    • D is just some ignorant kid whose knowledge of Islam and Christianity is limited to the YouTube debates he sees selectively. No reason to take him seriously since he enjoys making a fool of himself.

      Like

  36. Oh where, oh where has my little Fido gone? Come on boy! What are you afraid of?

    Like

  37. Kmak,

    Yes, Fido is definitely ignorant, but I don’t think he is a puppy. He is a fully grown adult dog! LOL!!

    Like

  38. Please, has anyone seen my lost Fido? Oh where, oh where hast thou gone!

    Liked by 1 person

  39. But he usually comes back after doing his business! Please, if you see him, return him to me! His name is Fido. He barks a lot, but believe me, his bite is harmless.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: