Craig Evans: Some Sayings in John Weren’t Actually Said by Jesus!

Advertisements


Categories: Biblical scholarship

Tags: , , , , , ,

87 replies

  1. Brother Yahya i have a question completely unrelated to this topic.
    What are your thoughts on Sami Aldeeb’s view that the Quran has 2500 linguistic mistakes?

    Like

    • ill answer for Br. Yahya

      Sami Aldeeb is a liar, there is no linguistic or grammatical errors in the Quran.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you for your response brother but can you provide me some examples of his ‘lies’?

      Like

    • Believer,
      Sami aldeeb makes the laughable claim to have discovered 2500 linguistic and stylistic mistakes. However, we are expected to believe that an Atheistic Swiss-Arab lawyer of Christian background discovered such a large number of “errors” even though all of the scholars and great masters of the Arabic language, along with all of the Ulama, and scholars of Islam never found any such “mistakes” in the Qur’an. I will take their word over Sami al deeb any day of the week.

      He does not provide any evidence in his writings, which substantiates any of his claims about the Qur’an with any hard evidence or quotation. He takes a dismissive outlook on the rhetorical devises used in the Qur’an among other things. One good example of this is that Sami considers any repetitions in the Qur’anic text as an “error” when in reality the repetitions are intentionally placed, as a rhetorical device to provide emphasis. This counts for the bulk of the “errors” that he has “found.”

      Sami also makes the ridiculous claim that the Qur’an is not a book, simply because it is not organized to his own liking in a western style format from beginning to end with a linear chronological order. Even though there are other works of literature, (i.e. Japanese lit) and no one questions if those works are “books” or not. Ridiculous
      .
      It is clear that Sami Aldeeb is not a serious critic of the Qur’an, and he seems to be a person who is motivated by more his biased hatred of Islam, than by any honest scholarly pursuit. He is more interested in simply attacking Islam in any underhanded way that he can. It should also be noted, for the record, that he has been described as a highly biased atheistic fundamentalist Islamophobe.
      The Qur’an contains impressive rhetorical devices, and is very poetically deep and filled with poetic imagery, it has a lot of alliteration, parallelisms and rhetorical devices all demonstrated on the level of Mastery in Arabic language. The Qur’anic surahs all contain a certain theme and exhaust alliteration and rhyme to carry out messages, which are often full of teachings and wisdom all of which is highly impressive, intriguing and spritually moving.

      It seems to me that NT historical Criticism has destroyed the Bible, and uncovered thousands of mistakes, errors, misinterpretations, insertions, misinterpolations, forgery, and all sorts of other problems which clearly indicate that the Bible is not of divine origin, and that it is rather, a man made book. In their bitterness after being confronted with the facts about their own book, many fundamentalists, make it their mission to do everything that they can to “even the playing field” by dragging the Qur’an and Islam, down to the same low and muddy height as their own texts and religion has been cast.
      Thankfully, the Qur’an is incomparable and far superior to the Bible, and in the end such liars as Sami Aldeeb will never be successful, and will be recognized only for their baseless, inaccurate and false revisionist theories about Islam.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you for your response brother!

      Like

    • Believer, see this video:

      Like

  2. Wow! Stunned beyond belief!

    Like

  3. The Christians are very quiet around here. I wonder why?

    Like

  4. All of the words of the canonical Gospel of John (taking into account textual variants) are “God-breathed” Scripture, therefore historical and true.

    Like

    • the NT does not claim to be “God-breathed” Scripture

      Like

    • Sure it does. 2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 3:16
      I Tim. 5:18 – both Torah and Gospels are quoted as Holy Scripture.
      the apostles understood they were preaching God’s word ( 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:16; 1 Cor. 14:37 – “the things I am writing to you are the Lord’s commands).
      And they had apostolic authority to write the message down. (Galatians 1:6-9; John 14:26; 16:12-13 – the Holy Spirit will lead you into all the truth and bring to your remembrance all that I have spoken to you.)

      Like

    • No so. None of those verses say all the books from Matthew to Revelation are inspired by God.

      Like

    • I realize we have this discussion many times and yet to fail to see the truth.

      Like

    • This is a sign of a desperate thinking.
      You know that conservative ones struggled with the story of adulterer woman at the fisrt time, yet they accepted it’s a forgery eventually.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Where does John claim to be inspired to WRITE the word of God Ken? And don’t give me verses where it says that the word was HEARD cus that’s NOT answering my question.

      Liked by 1 person

    • When apostle Paul says scripture he is referring to the OT. What does that have to do with what Br Paul just said.
      You also quote verses where it says that the apostles were preaching/heard the word of God.
      What does that have to do with their WRITINGS being scripture? Yes of course they’ll claim to have HEARD the word. That’s what you expect!!! But why on earth pretend that whatever you write on a piece of paper makes it all of a sudden scripture because you heard the word? Many people HEARD it. Does that make their writings scripture as well? Plus the 4 gospels weren’t written by apostles, they are anonymous. You know this Ken.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I realize we have this discussion many times and yet to fail to see the truth Ken.

      Like

    • Paul

      Jesus was god’s word incarnate, therefore, his words are god’s. Seems pretty obvious to me.

      Like

    • How do we know that the words of Jesus in the gospels are historically reliable? Even a top evangelical bible scholar (Craig Evans) cautions us against taking the words of Jesus in John as literal history.

      According to him, and the vast majority of New Testament scholars, Jesus did not go around galilee saying ‘I am the light of the world’ etc.

      As a Christian this shook my faith deeply.

      Like

    • Paul

      How then can you affirm the quran which borrows jesus stories from known pre-islamic christian forgeries, and even makes up stories that no NT scholar would agree is historical?

      My faith is not in the least bit shaken – overall, the historicity of the gospels has stood firm against hostile criticism.

      Like

  5. John 7:53-8:1-11 is not a forgery, but probably a tradition that even as early as Papias mentions.
    It was a tradition that was looking for a place. In Greek manuscripts, it is sometimes found in Luke and other places.

    But we are up front and admit that it is a textual variant; but it has the noble character of Jesus in it.

    Like

    • saviour
      ˈseɪvjə/Submit
      noun
      a person who saves someone or something from danger or difficulty.

      now look at the hebrew :

      – At Ezekiel 14:14, the phrase is יְנַצְּלוּ נַפְשָׁם (y’natsLU nafSHAM).
      – At Ezeloe; 14:20, the phrase is יַצִּילוּ נַפְשָׁם (yaTSIlu nafSHAM).

      now read this and weep :

      14 Certain elders of Israel came to me and sat down before me. 2 And the word of the Lord came to me: 3 Mortal, these men have taken their idols into their hearts, and placed their iniquity as a stumbling block before them; shall I let myself be consulted by them? 4 Therefore speak to them, and say to them, Thus says the Lord God: Any of those of the house of Israel who take their idols into their hearts and place their iniquity as a stumbling block before them, and yet come to the prophet—I the Lord will answer those who come with the multitude of their idols, 5 in order that I may take hold of the hearts of the house of Israel, all of whom are estranged from me through their idols.

      6 Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God: Repent and turn away from your idols; and turn away your faces from all your abominations. 7 For any of those of the house of Israel, or of the aliens who reside in Israel, who separate themselves from me, taking their idols into their hearts and placing their iniquity as a stumbling block before them, and yet come to a prophet to inquire of me by him, I the Lord will answer them myself. 8 I will set my face against them; I will make them a sign and a byword and cut them off from the midst of my people; and you shall know that I am the Lord.

      9 If a prophet is deceived and speaks a word, I, the Lord, have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand against him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel. 10 And they shall bear their punishment—the punishment of the inquirer and the punishment of the prophet shall be the same— 11 so that the house of Israel may no longer go astray from me, nor defile themselves any more with all their transgressions. Then they shall be my people, and I will be their God, says the Lord God.

      12 The word of the Lord came to me: 13 Mortal, when a land sins against me by acting faithlessly, and I stretch out my hand against it, and break its staff of bread and send famine upon it, and cut off from it human beings and animals, 14 even if Noah, Daniel,[a] and Job, these three, were in it, they would save only their own lives by their righteousness, says the Lord God. 15 If I send wild animals through the land to ravage it, so that it is made desolate, and no one may pass through because of the animals; 16 even if these three men were in it, as I live, says the Lord God, they would save neither sons nor daughters; they alone would be saved, but the land would be desolate. 17 Or if I bring a sword upon that land and say, “Let a sword pass through the land,” and I cut off human beings and animals from it; 18 though these three men were in it, as I live, says the Lord God, they would save neither sons nor daughters, but they alone would be saved. 19 Or if I send a pestilence into that land, and pour out my wrath upon it with blood, to cut off humans and animals from it; 20 even if Noah, Daniel,[b] and Job were in it, as I live, says the Lord God, they would save neither son nor daughter; they would save only their own lives by their righteousness.

      21 For thus says the Lord God: How much more when I send upon Jerusalem my four deadly acts of judgment, sword, famine, wild animals, and pestilence, to cut off humans and animals from it! 22 Yet, survivors shall be left in it, sons and daughters who will be brought out; they will come out to you. When you see their ways and their deeds, you will be consoled for the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem, for all that I have brought upon it. 23 They shall console you, when you see their ways and their deeds; and you shall know that it was not without cause that I did all that I have done in it, says the Lord God.

      torah clearly says that noah, daniel and job are EACH Savior OF THEMSELVES.

      your god , according to you is doing shirk, he even imagines times which don’t even exist yet. the righteousness of these people is so GREAT that they could save themselves FROM any calamity.

      the bible clearly calls each individual savior of his self.

      Like

    • “But we are up front and admit that it is a textual variant; but it has the noble character of Jesus in it.”

      there is a difference between textual variant and insertion of a story.

      quote :
      Noun. (plural variant readings) (textual criticism) the observed differences when comparing different documents of a single, original text.

      “but it has noble character of jesus in it”

      usually when there are lack of stories on how jesus did x , y and z, christians were inventing stories to show how jesus did it.

      Like

    • heathclif

      No NT scholar believes that jesus said any of the words that the quran attributes to him. In other words, the quran’s claims about jesus are completely made up.

      Like

    • Ken it’s a FORGERY! It was forged. It was made up. You just try and work it away by saying ‘tradition’. This is just silly evangelical tactics. It’s 2017 already! Are we really gonna do this??? Just admit it’s a forgery so everyone can move on.

      Like

    • “No NT scholar believes that jesus said any of the words that the quran attributes to him. In other words, the quran’s claims about jesus are completely made up.”

      ehrman believes moses is not historical and real person.
      jewish scholars believe job is a story and not a real person

      ehrman does not say that jesus said he was the second person of the trinity or that he thought of himself as a blood sacrifice so in a way he agrees with the quran.

      Like

    • heathclif

      Here we go – this is where the muslim apologists start to unravel and go postal.

      Where in the quran does jesus say that he did not think of himself as a sacrifice? Where in the quran does it accurately outline the doctrine of the trinity? As for the quran agreeing with your prophet, Ehrman, where in the quran does it say that moses was not a real person? Where does it say Job was not a real person?

      Like

    • belieber

      The quranic stories of jesus are based on known apocryphal forgeries – jesus speaking at birth, forming animals out of clay and breathing life into them, and many other stories are talmudic forgeries.

      Again, what the quran says about jesus are made up forgeries. The quran is not the word of god.

      Like

    • “Where in the quran does jesus say that he did not think of himself as a sacrifice?”

      when it says he wasn’t crucified LOL

      “Where in the quran does it accurately outline the doctrine of the trinity?”

      DO NOT SAY 3

      HE HAS NO EQUIVALENT

      LOL

      ” As for the quran agreeing with your prophet, Ehrman, where in the quran does it say that moses was not a real person?”

      i was only employing your retarded christian thinking.


      Where does it say Job was not a real person?”

      i was employing your retarded method.

      Like

    • quote :
      The quranic stories of jesus are based on known apocryphal forgeries – jesus speaking at birth, forming animals out of clay and breathing life into them, and many other stories are talmudic forgeries.

      okay, how much VERBAL agreement?
      how much dependency on ORDER and sequence?

      now lets employ your method on the bible, and here is what scholarship has revealed :

      high level of dependency

      Mark’s two narratives in which Jesus feeds thousands of people by multiplying loaves of bread (6:30-44 and 8:1-10) finds an obvious — and often recognized — parallel in the Elijah-Elisha narrative. The shared details are numerous. All three stories take place in a context where food is needed. In each story, only a small amount of food is available, with each story specifying the amount. Both Elisha and Jesus give instructions that the small amount of food be distributed, and in all three stories, the instructions are met with doubt/hesitation. In all three stories, the food is distributed to and eaten by a large number of people, with each story specifying the number of people present. Finally, at the end of each story, an abundance of food remains. These shared narrative details, as well as the shared order of events are laid out clearly in the chart below.

      That the Markan pericopes are dependent on the Elijah-Elisha narrative is strongly supported by the criteria of shared narrative details and shared narrative order. To deny such dependence seems impossible. Certainly there are differences between the two stories, but these differences are easily explained, and do not stretch the bounds of Greco-Roman imitation. Mark has clearly expanded what is a brief episode in the Elijah-Elisha narrative, adding and changing a number of narrative details. Some of these changes can be attributed to to Markan intensification of the Elijah-Elisha account — an intensification that reflects that Jesus is greater than Elisha. . . . . Mark has taken a relatively simple miracle episode from the Elijah-Elisha narrative, and given it a prominent and significant place in the gospel. . . .

      It seems impossible to deny that the Markan evangelist has used the 2 Kings account of Elisha multiplying bread as a pattern for his double account of Jesus doing the same thing. That the Elijah-Elisha narrative is a literary source for Mark at this point in the gospel is virtually certain.

      /////////////////

      you must now TRASH the new testament stories because it seems like the ONLY source for matthew and MARK was the OLD TESTAMENT .

      think about it moron, EVEN today , you christians can see jesus in the NT and CREATE an image of your mind of prophecy fulfillment,

      i.e YOU ARE RE – ACTUALIZING OT TEXTS IN 1ST CENTURY PALESTINE.

      Like

    • heathclif

      You did not comprehend my points.

      Saying that jesus was not crucified is not the same as saying that he did not think of himself as a sacrifice – that is such a huge, disturbing failure of logical thinking on your part.

      So your holey book saying “say not 3” is an accurate outline of christian theology? Your allah is ignorant if he thought this was the correct doctrine.

      And you agree that the quran makes false historical claims, yet claims to be the product of an all-seeing god.

      Can you tell us the names of the men who wrote your holey book, and since they got these historical claims so wrong, why should we not believe that they completely corrupted this divine word?

      Like

    • “Saying that jesus was not crucified is not the same as saying that he did not think of himself as a sacrifice – that is such a huge, disturbing failure of logical thinking on your part.”

      yes it would be from the qurans perspective. saving jesus would mean saving him from the christian belief that jesus was sacrificed for sins.

      the quran is DENYING a story from the new testament about jesus’ crucifixion, did not the quran know that the MURDER of jesus is LINKED to him being a sacrifice for sins?

      weren’t arab christians saying that the reason why jesus DIED was because he was killed for sins and seen as levitical animal sacrifice?

      so quran denying crucifixion is AUTOMATICALLY denying the christian human sacrificial ritual of jesus.

      from the qurans perspective then , he would not see himself as a sacrifice for sins.

      “So your holey book saying “say not 3” is an accurate outline of christian theology? Your allah is ignorant if he thought this was the correct doctrine.”

      so you dont worship 3 things whom you identify as “complete god” ?

      interesting that the verse said “do not say 3 ”

      “And you agree that the quran makes false historical claims, yet claims to be the product of an all-seeing god.”

      when did i say that liar for jesus?


      Can you tell us the names of the men who wrote your holey book, and since they got these historical claims so wrong, why should we not believe that they completely corrupted this divine word?”

      can you tell me when i said that the quran makes false claims liar for jesus ?

      Like

  6. Okay, I’ll bite.

    No NT scholar accepts that the words attributed to Jesus in the quran were actually said by him.

    Like

    • Wth has that to do with the topic. We don’t claim there is historical evidence for it! We say it’s divine scripture. So either you believe in it or you don’t. Simple as that.
      Your own Bible scholars are ripping apart the NT. So many made up things. It’s just sad to watch really.

      Like

    • Belieber

      Claiming that jesus said things in his historical life is to make a historical claim. No scholar of the NT affirms the words that the quran attributes to jesus as actually being said by him. If we cannot believe that historicity of the quranic claims about history, then why believe its claim to be divine scripture?

      Like

    • Mate you are wrong. They don’t affirm it on a HISTORICAL level. But we are NOT saying it’s historical provable. If a prophet says it then that’s beyond historical realm. You either believe in it or you don’t.
      And btw why on earth are YOU making such claims anyways? You’re a Christian. The Bible has a TON of things that you can’t affirm historically but it’s just a matter of faith.

      Like

    • Can you prove Adam and Eve even existed on historical grounds?

      Like

    • belieber

      A classic of illogical thinking! Special pleading at its finest.

      The quran makes historical claims about jesus and other events, if these cannot be proven, or are known to be false, then that simply means that the quran makes false claims. Its historical claims cannot be both true and false.

      Like

    • Lol repeating yourself again he?

      You are making ridiculous claims: if something cannot be proven than that means it’s false (and you are only willing to apply this to the Quran and NOT to the Bible for obvious reasons).
      If something is known to be false then yes then we have a problem.
      What claims are known to be false which the Quran makes Joel? You mean the crucifiction? Zakir Hussein crucified Jimmy white in his last debate. Your top scholar couldn’t defend it. Sad panda.
      And don’t talk to me about illogical thinking kid. Your religion is a mish mash of logical fallacies. God-man, trinity, Messiah has to be victorious in overthrowing the enemy but at the same gets crushed by them, etc etc etc.
      The Bible makes historical claims about Adam and Eve. PROVE THEM TO ME! You can’t!!!
      ‘Science’ (whatever the hell that means today) says that we are coming from monkeys yet the Bible says that we are coming from Adam and Eve. So who is right Joel? Ehrman believes Moses didn’t exist (based on historical analysis). So are you gonna become an atheist now? Unbelievable how pathetic your arguments are!

      Get lost troll.

      Like

    • belieber

      Now comes the break with any pretense of rational comport.

      Now that your own objections to the NT are applied to your holey book you become enraged. I’ll repeat, the quran makes historical claims about jesus that are so fanciful that even the most skeptical, christianity-hating, liberal scholars avoid it like the plague.

      Sorry if this makes you sad, but the quran is falsified by is falseness.

      Like

    • LOL!
      Apply what you are saying to your bible kid. That’s all I’m asking. And you’ll stop being a Christian.
      But you wouldn’t dare. I asked you to give me historical evidence for the existence of Adam and Eve. You haven’t done so. You keep ignoring this and don’t even try to address it. Then you turn to the Quran and ask the same thing of the Quran and say: see the Quran can’t be backed up by historical evidence so it must be false. Great academic skills joel.
      “Now that your own objections to the NT are applied to your holey book…”
      Actually it’s the other way around. You try to throw these objections on the Quran while ignoring it for the bible. Be consistent kid. Apply the same standards to the Bible and give me historical evidence for the existence of Adam and Eve. You’re the one who makes these claims about historical affirmation. Then provide us with historical ‘affirmation’ about Adam and Eve.
      We don’t claim that we have historical evidence for what Jesus said and did unlike you. But when we look a little closer it all turns out to be a joke. Your own bible scholars are tearing your bible apart. Sad kid. Sad.
      Plus you just spew out accusations with ZERO arguments to back it up. How Christian of you.

      Like

    • belieber

      You’ve lost the plot and misplaced the script.

      We are applying muslim objections to the bible to your holey book and it fails to meet the test. The quran makes clearly false historical claims, yet claims to be the word of an all-knowing god. If the historical claims are not historical, then the word of your god is false.

      Like

    • Brother Believer,

      This is what can be expected from Christians. They will always try to divert every issue regarding their “holey” Bible to the Quran, but will never deal with the problems with their Bible. In short, they are cowards.

      Like

    • q & b

      You are trying to convince us that the bible lacks credibility using arguments that when applied to your own book, completely demolish its credibility. There is no cowardice in pointing this out.

      Maybe you can explain why the quran makes false historical claims yet claims to be the words of an all-knowing god?

      Like

    • Can you actually provide something instead of making pathetic accusations? And good job at running away kid. I said we DON’T claim to have historical evidence of what Jesus said and did. YOU DO! That’s what the video above is all about kid. Ehrman is proving in the debate that the gospels are historically UNRELIABLE because of the massive amount of discrepancies. And almost every biblical scholar backs him up on that. Wow. Not non-christian scholars but Christian scholars! How saaaaad is that?
      Then you say Quran has things in it that can’t be backed up by historical ‘affirmation’. I say that that doesn’t mean it isn’t true. Then you jump to saying that Quran contains things that are PROVEN to be wrong. Then I ask you like what? You don’t give anything in response. I redirect the question back to you: ‘scientific’ evidence (what ever the hell that means) says that we come from apes while YOUR holey bible says we come from Adam and Eve. Care to explain kid? Or are you just gonna ignore it for the third time?
      If you are gonna talk about the crucifiCtion then just look how jimmy white got crucified by Zakir Hussein. So much for your historical evidence. LOOOL!

      Like

    • Quranandbibleblog
      I know brother. He completely diverted the issue to the Quran: No NT scholar accepts that the words attributed to Jesus in the quran were actually said by him.
      As if we pretend that we have historical evidence for it. We say it’s simply revelation. That’s it. Ehrman says you can believe the NT to be true on theological reasons. But on historical reasons he says it is UNRELIABLE. And he is backed up by most scholars (BIBLICAL scholars) That’s just sad, ain’t it? Joel it’s time for you to leave your religion buddy. It’s fake as the 9/11 official story.

      Like

    • belieber

      ” I said we DON’T claim to have historical evidence of what Jesus said and did.”

      You just don’t get it. The quran makes historical claims whether you like it or not, and the claims it makes about jesus are clearly false because they are taken from christian apocryphal forgeries, made up conjecture and are completely ignored for lack of historical credibility by NT scholars.

      This is a huge problem for the quran – it makes historical claims that are clearly false, yet also claims to be the word of an all-knowing god. These are contradictory claims, unless you believe in a god and prophet who deliberately misleads his followers?

      Like

    • “The quran makes historical claims whether you like it or not, and the claims it makes about jesus are clearly false ”

      so jesus was not born of a virgin? do you know, the bible thinks that mary was impregnated by the holy ghost, yet there is no eye witness testimony to this except the claim made by matthew and LUKE. none say they heard mary say she was impregnated by the ghost. none say that they heard joseph narrate his dream. so do you agree that the bible makes false claims?
      according to both matthew , joseph was thought to be the biological father of jesus, so in josephs shame and honour society , the dream from the holy ghost was not good enough. he knew he would be shamed if he told his fellow jews that ghost impregnated his wife.

      so do you agree that bible contains falsehood like you accuse the quran?

      Like

  7. The scholars have to peddle their opinions to make a good living off the credulous. Fine by me. I waste neither my time nor my money.

    Like

  8. Only wasted five minutes to watch this video. Oh well.

    Like

  9. “Where does John claim to be inspired to WRITE the word of God Ken? And don’t give me verses where it says that the word was HEARD cus that’s NOT answering my question.”

    John 21:

    Jesus and the Beloved Apostle

    20 Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved following; which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee? 21 Peter seeing him saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? 22 Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. 23 Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die: yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?

    24 This is the disciple which testifieth of these things, and wrote these things: and we know that his testimony is true.

    Liked by 1 person

    • with what Madmanna wrote,
      with John 20:30-31, saying he is eyewitness, and testifies, and has written the truth, is a claim to writing God-breathed Scripture.

      Truth = حق، حقیقت αληθεια

      John 17:17 – “Your Word is Truth”

      John 17:8 – the word of the Father was given to Jesus, who gave it to His disciples

      John 14:26; 16:12-13 – the Holy Spirit led them into All the truth and brought to their remembrance everything Jesus said.

      They wrote it down. John 20:30-31; 21:20-24
      Luke 1:1-4 – from eyewitnesses and servants of the word (logos, word of God)

      etc. with the verses already given.

      Like

    • Once again you do NOT answer my question. Your sources say that they HEARD the word and that they were writing a testimony of someone. That’s not what I am asking. I am asking: where do the authors (whoever they are) claim to be WRITING the INSPIRED word of God? Just because some has HEARD Jesus and his teachings doesn’t mean that whatever they write down all of a sudden becomes scripture!
      That they claim to be hearing the word of God is what you EXPECT! Yes of course they’ll make these claims. Who is going to sit down and write about Jesus if they haven’t heard his teachings.
      You time and time again give verses that give references to them hearing the word. You always (and I think purposefully) ignore my question.
      These men are writing autobiographies of Jesus. They didn’t think they were writing scripture.
      And btw the gospels aren’t written by the disciples. It’s 2017, I think it’s time to give up on that wishful thinking.

      Ken why do you always quote Luke 1:1-4. This proves MY point and NOT yours.
      Luke1:3 says “With this in mind, since I myself have carefully INVESTIGATED everything from the beginning, I too decided to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus”
      He is NOT claiming to be writing scripture! The man is telling you that he is writing based on INVESTIGATION. Not INSPIRATION. He doesn’t claim that his writing are scripture. Btw he hasn’t even starting writing the message so all these verses about it seeming good to him to write it and saying that he investigated and so on: this most certainly is not scripture. This just Luke’s opinion.

      Like

  10. Defense of the gospel of John, with links to whole commentaries that are older – bishop Lightfoot, Westcott and others like Godet, Leon Morris, Hendrickson, and a new one from Andreas Kostenberger (who was a classmate of mine in seminary in 1987-1988 – M. Div. program; he later went on to get Phd. etc.)

    http://articulifidei.blogspot.com/2017/05/the-gospel-of-john-introduction-to.html

    Like

  11. Because he seems to ignore the principle of inerrancy (he does not accept it) and does not put all the verses together (that I have given) under a unified principle of all of them coming from God in inspiring prophets and apostles to write the Injeel (which Islam affirms that it was true and inspired, and never says the text has been corrupted. Surah 5:47; 10:94)

    Like

    • God does not have any contradictions within Himself, therefore there are not contradictions in His word; “there is no final conflict” as Francis Schaeffer so famously said.

      Like

    • Ken omg! The Quran does not confirm the Bible to be the Word of God. It says Injeel and Torah. That’s it. That’s not the Bible. Christians are VERY good at repeating shredded arguments over and over and over again.

      Like

    • yes it does, since the whole OT & NT (Injeel, gospel, from “Evangel” ευανγελ – was already established for centuries before Islam, but Muhammad could not write, nor read and they didn’t have the OT nor NT in Arabic. he did not know what he was affirming.

      Like

    • Ibn Umar (a companion of the prophet) says they were corruptions! The Quran says that the Injeel was given to Jesus, not to unknown authors. It also says:
      Q 2:75-79 says “Do you covet [the hope, O believers], that they would believe for you while a party of them used to hear the words of Allah and then DISTORT the Torah after they had understood it while they were knowing?
      And when they meet those who believe, they say, “We have believed”; but when they are alone with one another, they say, “Do you talk to them about what Allah has revealed to you so they can argue with you about it before your Lord?” Then will you not reason?
      But do they not know that Allah knows what they conceal and what they declare?
      And among them are unlettered ones who do not know the Scripture except in wishful thinking, but they are only assuming.So woe to those who WRITE the “scripture” WITH THEIR OWN HANDS (like the unknown authors of the NT), then say, “This is from Allah,” in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn.”
      Q 3:187 says “And [mention, O Muhammad], when Allah took a covenant from those who were given the Scripture, [saying], “You must make it clear to the people and not conceal it.” But they threw it away behind their backs and EXHANGED it for a small price. And wretched is that which they purchased.”
      Q 7:162 says “But those who wronged among them CHANGED [the words] to a statement other than that which had been said to them. So We sent upon them a punishment from the sky for the wrong that they were doing.”

      Narrated Ubaidullah: Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah’s Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) CHANGED their scripture and DISTORTED it, and wrote the scripture with THEIR OWN HANDS and said, ‘It is from Allah,’ to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!” (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)

      Sorry Ken but you’re dead wrong. Again.

      Like

    • the Qur’an:

      Affirms/confirms مصدق the inspiration of the previous Scriptures – Surah 3:84, 2:136; 3:3-4
      Affirms/confirms مصدق the preservation of the previous Scriptures – Surah 5:47; 10:94 (between the hands – بین یدیه = what they have at the time of Muhammad)
      Affirms/confirms the authority of the previous Scriptures – 5:43 – why do they come to you when they have the Torah?
      5:47 – let the people of the Gospel judge by what God has revealed therein –

      5:68 – O people of the Scripture, اهل الکتاب you have no standing unless you observe/uphold/ hold fast to / do / obey the Torah and the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord.”

      “Say, “O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord.” And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people.” Qur’an Surah 5:68, Sahih International translation

      10:94 – Gospel and Torah authoritative for Muhammad also. Resort to the previous Scriptures; Ask the people of the book.

      and since none can change the words of Allah – Surah 6:114-5 (or 116 depending on different English translation/numbering system) and 18:27; (see also 6:34, 10:65)

      therefore, the previous Scriptures were not corrupted.

      Like

    • Context of Surah 2:75-79

      Shabir Ally, in one of his debates, tries to say 2:79 means the Torah was completely corrupted.

      Surah 2:75 – “a party/sect/group from among them” ( the Jews) ” فریق منهم , who used to hear the words of Allah and distort / change (the Torah) after they had understood it.
      This goes with Surah 3:78 – منهم لفریقا – “from among them there is a party/group” – a party among them who distort the Scriptures with their tongues

      Surah 7:159 – a faithful party / group of the Jews.

      Surah 3:113-115 – a faithful party of the Jews who stayed up late at night reciting the Scriptures.

      One party cannot totally corrupt all of the Scriptures because there are so many other copies globally of the Scriptures.

      So, it cannot mean that all of the original Torah was corrupted or lost.

      Keep reading to 2:85 – condemns people who don’t accept ALL of the Word of God. (in context, meaning The Torah or Tanakh)
      The context of 2:75-79 points to some parts that people were making up and going apart and saying “this is from Allah”, but it could not effect all the other Scriptures all over the world.

      I would add that Qur’an 2:78 shows that this group is:
      a. Uneducated / illiterate
      b. Don’t know the Scriptures
      c. Only going by what they hear

      so this group of 2:79 are uneducated and illiterate and don’t know the Scriptures and only going by what they hear.

      This seems to be what Muhammad did – he is just hearing things, doesn’t have the Scriptures in Arabic, and cannot read Hebrew or Greek, so he doesn’t know everything about the previous Scriptures and is just assuming that he understands them and approves of them, and assumes the Christians and Jews are teaching wrong things.

      Shabir tried to say that Jesus said John the Baptist is greater than Him, and that there was another one coming after John the Baptist who will be greater than him, and Shabir claimed that is Muhammad, since Jesus said “no one born of woman is greater than John the Baptist”.

      John 1:26-31 – John the Baptist said “this is the one I am speaking about who is higher than me and I am not worthy to untie his sandals”, etc. (Jesus, the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world; the one who stands among you whom I will baptize in water”, etc. )

      Even Matthew 3:11 – John the Baptist clearly says that the one who is greater than him whom he is not worthy to remove his sandals, this is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. (also in Mark 1:7-8; Luke 3:16-17)

      So, Shabir’s argument only from Synoptics is defeated, nuked, destroyed, shish kebab-ed.

      Shabir’s argument about the Paraclete being Muhammad was very weak, since there are no textual variants of the original Greek of those passages in John 14 and 16; and Greek writes vowels; and 14:16-17 says “the Spirit of truth” and “will be with you forever”; and “He will be in you”, etc. Also, John 16:7 Jesus says “I will send Him”, “the Helper” (paracletos), “the Spirit of Truth” (verse 13) – that argument would make Jesus into Allah, since only Allah can send prophets, an argument which Muslims would not want to do.
      The quote from Abdullah Saeed, professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Melbourne, was devastating to Shabir Ally’s argument. Boom!
      The Torah is also called Furqan فرقان (“criterion”) – Surah 2:53 and 21:48. (answering 3:3-4 which adds the Furqan to Torah and Gospel. (maybe Qur’an or maybe other OT books like Zobur or prophets.)

      Like

    • The inspiration of previous scriptures is nothing any Muslim would deny so why even bring it up?
      You ignore 5:48 Ken where it says “And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a CRITERION over it…” So you have to use the Quran to find out what is still true of the previous scriptures (this answers Q 5:47 and Q 5:68) .
      Q 5:43 has a background story to it as you most likely know. The Jews came with a woman to ask what the Prophet would describe as a punishment to her and the Prophet got annoyed by it and Allah said to Muhammad ‘why do they come to you when they have the Torah’. It was talking about the stoning of the woman committing adultery which is a punishment that can still be found in the Torah. So your point is false AGAIN.
      Q 10:94 is talking about if Muhammad is in doubt… in doubt about what. The background story is that the pagans thought that Messengers should be angels and not men. So Q 10:94 was revealed telling Muhammad that if he is in doubt about THIS then ask the people of the Book. And indeed Jews and Christians believe that men are send as Messengers. This in NO way means that the Bible is authority over Muhammad.
      Your claim about 2:79 is wrong. It says clearly ‘woe to those who WRITE the “scripture” WITH THEIR OWN HANDS’. This has nothing to do with the tongues.
      The Quran says none can change the words of Allah. MISUNDERSTANDING.
      Allah says in these verses than none can change the DECREE of Allah. Nothing to do with his revelation! Some translations have translated it in such a way that gives you the impression that Allah is saying that none can change his REVELATION. That’s not what the Quran says!

      Therefor the previous scriptures were corrupted.

      Like

    • “One party cannot totally corrupt all of the Scriptures because there are so many other copies globally of the Scriptures.”

      the guy who invented the different endings attached to the ending of mark got away with distributing his lies far and wide. the question is , how did that ending spread far and wide? how come nobody cared and copied it again and again? your global copies contained inventions and the ending of mark is testimony to it. if the texts weren’t MEMORIZED it would be even easier to add LIES and distribute far and wide. why do nt scholars ALL agree that their are INTERPOLATIONS which are EARLY IN YOUR new testament?
      how did the SCRIBES even get away with their LIES of deliberate change?

      Like

    • “One party cannot totally corrupt all of the Scriptures because there are so many other copies globally of the Scriptures.”

      quote :
      You provide no evidence that Jeremiah 8:8 is only speaking about reinterpretation. The reference to “scribes,” the professionals who specialize in copying, MAKING the Torah into a lie can include BOTH reinterpretation AND changing the text.
      In fact, you ignore that Jeremiah, as reflected in some fragments of 4QJer is one sixth (16%) shorter than the Masoretic Text. That shorter version is in accordance with the Septuagintal version (see Tov, Textual Criticism of the Hebrew Bible, p. 287)
      Did the Masoretic Text ADD that much text AFTER Jeremiah was written, or did the Septuagint version REMOVE 16% of the text AFTER Jeremiah was written?
      Yes, how do you account for a 16% gap in your gapless theory of textual transmission?

      this only reinforces the belief that torah text was not memorized. the texts are being changed and added to.
      globally means nothing. two versions already existed. globally means nothing.

      Like

  12. Evans is more of a synoptic scholar and archeologist; and in those areas, he does a lot of good work. He believes the gospels are generally historically reliable; and certainly defeats Islam by affirming the trials, death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

    Like

    • Licona seems to take a similar position, even though trying to hold to inerrancy. (but honestly does not seem to believe in inerrancy – The Chicago Statement on Inerrancy. (1978)

      Like

    • Ken you have not addressed my question.

      Why does a top NT scholar professor (Craig Evans) who is not a liberal or anti-supernaturalist, think Jesus did not actually say the ‘I am’s in John?

      What forced him to this conclusion?

      Like

    • I answered that; he is avoiding putting all the verses together in a unified whole that they are from the mind of God, who cannot lie, and cannot contradict Himself.

      If the Holy Spirit brought everything Jesus said to them to their remembrance (John 14:24), then John’s “I am” statements are historical.

      Evans and those like him are only coming to that conclusion because the statements are not repeated in the Synoptics, but Mark 6:50 & Matthew 14:27 does have “I am”.

      It also possible that John wrote first, and the synoptics are trying to cover other material left out of John. Also, John may be collecting all the memories of the other disciples that did not write a book into one gospel. (Thomas, Nathaniel, Philip, Andrew, Thaddeus, James, Simon the Zealot ) Mark, for Peter, wrote about the actions of Jesus, and John wrote about Jesus testimony about Himself more; and Matthew and Luke wrote about both and about the teachings of Jesus that John decided to leave out.

      Like

    • Ehrman doesn’t think Jesus got a proper burial. He believes that his body was just dumped into a hole.

      Like

    • And yet ALL four gospels have the testimony of Joseph of Arimethea and his tomb that Jesus was laid in. most scholars agree with that.

      Like

    • For now maybe. But history shows that biblical scholars change their minds ALOT. Be careful Ken. You just might be one of them :).

      Like

    • “And yet ALL four gospels have the testimony of Joseph of Arimethea and his tomb that Jesus was laid in. most scholars agree with that.”

      stop your lies about this

      https://celsus.blog/2017/09/02/review-of-craig-keener-otho-a-targeted-comparison-with-emphasis-on-the-citation-of-eyewitness-sources-and-textual-independence-of-historical-biographers/

      ED’S REPLY: Crossan made the same point as the scholars you cite:

      “When you look at Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, the story of the burial of Jesus, knowing that Mark is the basis for Matthew and Luke and that possibly (this is debated in scholarship) they may be the source for John, you watch the bodyʼs burial get steadily better. Itʼs a hasty hurried burial in Mark. By the time Matthew and Luke read Mark and develop the story itʼs a burial in a tomb in which nobody else has been laid and theyʼre explaining to you why Joseph of Arimathea was able to be a counselor for Jesus but not against him on Thursday night as it were. The story is developing, and by the time you get to Johnʼs account the burial of Jesus is – I wouldnʼt even say royal – itʼs transcendental, thereʼs so many spices used they would have filled almost the entire tomb, itʼs a magnificent burial, itʼs the burial of the son of God when you get to John. What happens is that as a historian when I retroject that trajectory of a burial that keeps getting better and better, and ask what was there in the beginning, it doesnʼt look very good. It looks like all they might have had in the beginning was a hope that maybe some pious non-Christian, a Jew, out of respect for the Jewish law of Deuteronomy, would have buried Jesusʼ body (instead of letting the Romans do what they usually did with the people they crucified, which was to toss the bodies in a common grave). But if a Jew asked Pilate for the body and gave it a burial that immediately raises the issue that the writers of the Gospels also must have seen, namely wouldnʼt Joseph also have buried the two robbers, presumably fellow Jews, who were with Jesus? And wouldnʼt there at least be three in the tomb? Would it be a public tomb for criminals? Then how would we know which was Jesusʼ body? And so you can see the Gospel writers, I think, grappling with the difficulties of trying to have Jesus rescued from a common grave – a story whose original I donʼt think is historical and which grew in the telling over time. I think it is their fervent hope, their best hope, that somebody took care of the body of Jesus.”
      — John Dominic Crossan as heard on “Jesus and Crucifixion, a Historical View,” Fresh Air from WHYY, Mar. 20, 2008 (with some edits)

      Like

  13. “Saying that jesus was not crucified is not the same as saying that he did not think of himself as a sacrifice – that is such a huge, disturbing failure of logical thinking on your part.”

    saying jesus was not crucified automatically refutes the beliefs TIED with the crucifixion i.e jesus saw himself as an ANIMAL or levitical sacrifice for sins. this would mean AUTOMATICALLY that the quranic jesus did not see himself as a SACRIFICE for sins.

    Like

  14. “Since the “authorized” scriptures of Jews and Christians remain very
    much today as they existed at the time of the Prophet, it is difficult to argue
    that the Qur’anic references to Tawrat and Injeel were only to the “pure”
    Tawrat and Injeel as existed at the time of Moses and Jesus, respectively. If the
    texts have remained more or less as they were in the seventh century CE, the
    reverence the Qur’än has shown them at the time should be retained even
    today. Many interpreters of the Qur’an, from Tabari to Râzï to Ibn Taymiyya
    and even Qutb, appear to be inclined to share this view. The wholesale
    dismissive attitude held by many Muslims in the modern period towards
    the scriptures of Judaism and Christianity do not seem have the support of
    either the Qur’an or the major figures of tafsir.”

    Abdullah Saeed, professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies at the University of Melbourne

    THE CHARGE OF DISTORTION OF JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN SCRIPTURES, page 434-435

    http://quranandinjil.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/The-Charge-of-Distortion-of-Jewish-and-Christian-Scriptures_Abdullah%20Saeed.pdf

    Like

    • Ibn Abbas doesn’t say that! Umar doesn’t say that! QURAN doesn’t say that. I gave the references. SO much for your quotation.

      Like

  15. “And yet ALL four gospels have the testimony of Joseph of Arimethea and his tomb that Jesus was laid in. most scholars agree with that.”

    Like

  16. “shish kebab-ed.”

    That’s a good one.

    Like

  17. Crossan is not credible on that point about the burial and tomb.

    Like

Please 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: