Mt. Carmel Time:: Is Allah the God of the Bible?

[smaneck]

O.K. - here is a series of suggestions for one alleged "contradiction".

Huegonot,

Suggestions do not 'reasonable and rational reconciliations' make.

You need evidence, not guesses.

Like I said, this requires an entire thread to focus on the feloneous fanfare and many posts, and in the end, some "skeptics" will never be satisfied.

In other words you don't sufficiently understand their arguments to present them here coherently in your own words?

But what seems best to solve this difficulty, is, that the order of the books of the Old Testament is not the same now, as it was formerly: the sacred writings were divided, by the Jews, into three parts: the first was called the law, which contains the five books of Moses; the second, the prophets, which contains the former and the latter prophets; the former prophets began at Joshua, and the latter at Jeremy; the third was called Cetubim, or the Hagiographa, the holy writings, which began with the book of Psalms: now, as this whole third and last part is called the Psalms,

The Tanakh is still divided into these three parts. But I've never heard that the entire kitavim was known called Pslams. I'd like to see his evidence for this.

Luk 24:44, because it began with that book; so all that part which contained the latter prophets, for the same reason, beginning at Jeremy, might be called by his name

;

"Might be." Sorry unproven conjections do not constitute "reasonable and rational reconciliations."

"it is a tradition of our Rabbins, that the order of the prophets is, Joshua and Judges, Samuel and the Kings, Jeremiah and Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the twelve.''

And where is the sttement that the whole thing can be referred to as Jeremiah.

Moreover, it is usual with them to say (b), that the spirit of Jeremiah was in Zechariah

;

And the Spirit of Christ is in Baha'u'llah, but I still keep my sources straight.

so might Zechariah have this originally from Jeremy,

Gee, that is kind of like saying that Jesus might have said something which never ended up in the Gospels but found its way into the Qur'an, huh?

After all, it is all the same spirit. :-)

it is to be observed, that the Jew (c), who objects to everything he could in the evangelist, with any appearance on his side, and even objects to the application of this prophecy; yet finds no fault with him for putting Jeremy for Zechariah.

What Jew are we talking about? Certainly Jews have made objections to this!

The Jews themselves own, that this prophecy belongs to the Messiah, though they interpret it of him in another manner.

Which Jews? Where?

The second and also fairly likely explanation is theme fulfilment.

What is that supposed to mean?

Thirdly, as is noted in the Glenn Miller article is that it was a common practise around about the first century to do conflated citations, but attributing it to only one source.

But if the Qur'an does something like that, you are all over it!

[Huguenot]

Huegonot,

Suggestions do not 'reasonable and rational reconciliations' make.

So, you are either obtuse, or unreasonible and you reject the Jewish tradition(s) that Matthew was operating under?

Additionally, you would like to force Matthew to retroactivily operate under the rules of scholarship - as say that modern day Historians do, like yourself?

Complete footnotes with the proper attribution to the original auther, or you are goinin' shout plagerism or worse, misattribution?

Well, bully for you, ain't you grand?

You need evidence, not guesses.

But you are alleging an error or a Contradiction?

We have no reason to doubt the Bible and in this case Matthew.

Might be." Sorry unproven conjections do not constitute "reasonable and rational reconciliations."

So, you refuse to accept the Jewish tradition and Matthew wasn't allowed to allude to both Jeremiah and his spirit little brother Zechariah?

And the Spirit of Christ is in Baha'u'llah, but I still keep my sources straight.

I understand, and if only you could back in time, and teach Matthew the RIGHT way to be a good little historian?

Note, that author of the Qu'ran was NOT working under the tradition of scribes and never attempted to accurately quote the Bible!!!

Are you obtuse?

Mohammad couldn't read and write, RIGHT?

Did he read the Bible in Arabic?

Aramaic? Syriac?

What language did Gabriel speak?

[smaneck]

So, you are either obtuse, or unreasonible and you reject the Jewish tradition(s) that Matthew was operating under?

You've failed to establish he was operating under a Jewish tradition. Finding a Christian who speculates that this might be the case does not constittute evidence. Find me a Jew (and not a Messianic Jew) who asserts this and I'll believe you. Alternatively you can show me a Jewish source which does this.

Additionally, you would like to force Matthew to retroactivily operate under the rules of scholarship - as say that modern day Historians do, like yourself?

That's what you seem to want to do with Qur'an.

We have no reason to doubt the Bible and in this case Matthew.

Okay, so you believe on the basis of faith alone regardless of any evidence to the contrary. Understandable but I wouldn't describe it as reasonable or rational.

So, you refuse to accept the Jewish tradition and Matthew wasn't allowed to allude to both Jeremiah and his spirit little brother Zechariah?

If you can show me any evidence that it was indeed a Jewish tradition I might grant you that this was permissible, though I must point out that you refuse to give the same benefit of a doubt to the Qur'an.

Note, that author of the Qu'ran was NOT working under the tradition of scribes and never attempted to accurately quote the Bible!!!

Then why criticize Him for the discrepancies? In fact, the biblical stories are used in the Qur'an pretty much as they are used in the Midrash, a good example of Jewish tradition.

[Huguenot]

You've failed to establish he was operating under a Jewish tradition.

Game over, you are an unreasonable witch from Hell.

Buh-bye Baha'i.

[barnasha]

Game over, you are an unreasonable witch from Hell.

Buh-bye Baha'i.

You know, that's virtually a compliment on her good arguing skills. If you're going to lose, at least do it with a good attitude.

[smaneck]

Game over, you are an unreasonable witch from Hell.

Buh-bye Baha'i.

Isn't this what got you kicked off of CARM?

[Huguenot]

Isn't this what got you kicked off of CARM?

Telling the truth here is not wrong, and why would it be anyone, any where? Kicked off? The "kicking" I have seen is your rear end.

What is a witch?

What is TRUTH™?

One who is deceptive? Hmmm, one who always spins hopelessly off topic to conflate the original question or topic???



Is Allah the God of the Bible





* sigh *

Muhammad used no footnotes and did not refernce the Holy Bible, since no Bible existed in Arabic. (Matthew references Jeremish as the author - the author that Zechariah was referencing - and why would you - ahem - not tell the truth about this?)

In conclusion!

When we look at the Qur'an we find many stories which contradict the revelations which came before (the Biblical account).

Many contradictions are found concerning Abraham:

Abraham's father is called Azar, instead of Terah (An'am 6:74 vs. Genesis11:26

He did not raise his descendants in the valley of Mecca, but in Hebron (Genesis 13:14-18).

His hometown was not called Mecca but Ur in Chaldea (the secular Ebla tablets of Syria confirm the account of Genesis 11:31

He did not wander in the Meccan valley of Arabia, but through Haran and Canaan (Genesis 11:31 & Genesis 12:5

The Lord made His covenant with Isaac and not the son of the slave, Hagar (see Genesis 17:18-21 & Genesis 22:2



There is no record that he and Ishmael went to Arabia and built the Ka'bah in Mecca, though he did spend some time in Egypt (Genesis 12:10).

Muslims assume that Arabs are Ishmael's descendants???? What is an Ishmaelite???

Historically the first father of the Arabs was Qahtan or Joktan. Some of his sons' names are still found in geographical locations in Arabia today, such as Sheba, Hazarmaveth, Ophir, and Havilah.

Abraham's nephew Lot is another ancestor; as is Jacob's twin brother Esau, the father of the Edomites and the Moabites.

Finally, Keturah, Abraham's third wife (Genesis 25), had six sons who all became forefathers of Arabs (i.e. Sheba and Dedan located in Yemen).

Other contradictions of the Biblical account are found in the Qur'an.

Two of these are:

In the Qur'an, Mary is recorded as the sister of Aaron and the daughter of Imran, as well as the mother of Jesus (Surat Maryam [Mary] 19:28). Thus, the Mary the Qur'an depicts as the mother of Jesus is 1,570 years removed from the Mary of the Bible.

Haman, a Babylonian, not an Egyptian name, is mentioned as the "Wazir" of Pharaoh in Suras 28:5; 29:38: 40:25,38; yet the book of Esther correctly lists him as an official of king Xerxes, in Babylon.

http://debate.org.uk/topics/trtracts/t02.htm#1



Tears of allah?

[mosabdullah]

bibles do not worship Allah

Do me a favour. Find a Christian Arab and get him to read you versus from the Arabic version of the bible. They use the word Allah instead of God. So it must be a good word to use.

Again I am surprised on these forums the number of people who speak out of ignorance and arogance. You need to learn about Christianity before you come bashing on Islams door.

Allah means: The Only Unique Almighty God worthy of Worship. It can not be made plural, nor male, nor female. It is not used for anything else in this creation except God.

Now Regardless of whether you agree whether the Quran contradicts the bible in certain places you need to accept the facts that the bible contradicts it self in certain places.

This is from prominant Christian scholars and priests some of who have become Muslim.

For the Muslims on this forum I suggest that you only reply to the intelligent questions from someone that actually has done some research and not here to try and find faults in a faultless religion.

These people are basing there arguments around what they see of Muslims today not what Islam is or teaches. It is a pitty that Muslims, Christians, and Jews aren't following their books correctly.

[barnasha]

"If only they [i.e. Christians] had stood fast by the Torah/Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness from every side. There is from among them a party on the right course, but many of them follow a course that is evil" (5:66).