Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Sam Shamoun vs. Shabir Ally

In listening to the debate between Sam Shamoun and Shabir Ally (link to debate), I was struck by an odd position implied by Shabir Ally's argument.

Shabir Ally argues that Mark is the first gospel and the other three gospels show evidence of a progressive trend, with John having the "highest" Christology. Indeed, he sometimes even accuses the other synoptic gospels of omitting words or changing words that are found in Mark so as to move toward divinizing Jesus.

On the other hand, forced by Sam Shamoun, he concedes that Mark is not a "Muslim Gospel." So what is Shabir Ally's theory regarding what happened to the Muslim Injeel ("gospel")? That seems to be a tricky problem for Shabir Ally. Why on Earth would the Word of God be completely lost while various revisions of a false gospel be maintained?

Also, why would the earliest Christians have attempted to preserve all four gospels, if they were simply revisions of one another - or if the Christology of Mark were too low? To put it another way, if Matthew were really just an editing of Mark, why wouldn't Mark just be thrown away or suppressed?

There is really not a consistent theory of the textual transmission that makes sense from the Muslim standpoint. Basically, the Christians have to become experts at eliminating the true Word of God (such that it goes out of mention immediately, and none of the proto-Muslims are able to preserve even one copy of the Injeel), but for some reasons the Christians don't eliminate Matthew, Mark, and Luke (or any of them) but maintain them.

Furthermore, the earliest Christians don't even try to hide them - we find references to the four-fold gospel quite early in the patristic literature: Irenaeus died 202 and referred to the fact that the gospels are four in number, and argues that they cannot be more or fewer than four. (link)

- TurretinFan

53 comments:

Ex N1hilo said...

Its doctrine of revelation is where Islam self-destructs.

natamllc said...

I know this is rhetoric:

Also, why would the earliest Christians have attempted to preserve all four gospels, if they were simply revisions of one another - or if the Christology of Mark were too low? To put it another way, if Matthew were really just an editing of Mark, why wouldn't Mark just be thrown away or suppressed?

It, however, is the way their logic flows ending up where they want their logic to end up! And where is that? Islam and the Qu'ran.

The battle is to the death!

It is far more encompassing than the Islamic fundamentalists or their Sharia Law enforcements.


As a man, to a man, I have no defense! It is Christ alone who champions His cause! That He would call and use wretches as we, is just marvelous to behold!!

Christ made it quite clear, didn't He with these words that He does not intend on establishing peace on earth or good will towards "all":::>


Mat 24:4 And Jesus answered them, "See that no one leads you astray.
Mat 24:5 For many will come in my name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and they will lead many astray.
Mat 24:6 And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed, for this must take place, but the end is not yet.
Mat 24:7 For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places.
Mat 24:8 All these are but the beginning of the birth pains.
Mat 24:9 "Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name's sake.
Mat 24:10 And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another.
Mat 24:11 And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray.
Mat 24:12 And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold.
Mat 24:13 But the one who endures to the end will be saved.
Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.




Mat 24:29 "Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
Mat 24:30 Then will appear in heaven the sign of the Son of Man, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

I have a question that doesn't speak to the arguments of the two interlocutors but just some feed back.

TF which of the two debate opponents came off as humble and which of the two seemed very arrogant?

of course this is ad hominen but I just want to know what you felt about the style and presentation of arguably Christianities top apologist against Islam?

Coram Deo said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Coram Deo said...

TGV19,

True humility is in submitting oneself wholly to the Lordship of Jesus Christ, and falling on Him as one's sole hope of righteousness and salvation apart from any good thing that was, is, or ever could be inside of us because we are desperately wicked and sinful fallen creatures deserving only of divine wrath and punishment forever and ever.

All those who reject Jesus Christ manifest their perverse and sinful pride, and they will be judged at the bar of His inflexible justice on the last day, and cast into hellfire with Satan and his demons to burn for all eternity.

Sadly this is the current trajectory of your prideful, rebellious, lost soul. You must be born-again, and salvation is only found in the One you reject, the Lord Christ Jesus.

"This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." - Acts 4:11-12

Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” - John 3:3

Repent.

In Christ,
CD

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord.

Coram Deo than you better pray that I am one of those pieces of pottery that God smashes otherwise I could be simply a vessel of destruction.

If it's for his good pleasure and sovereignty at the end of the day there is nothing we can do.

I appreciate your concern but what concerns me is the fact that you think I have any say in the matter, that I can possibly struggle against the might of a holy and powerful God!

You make it seem that if type outwardly on a keyboard "Jesus is Lord" or if I say this with my lips, or get water sprinkled on me or immersed in a tub of water of so many gallons that I will be in the safe zone.

I think you grossly simplify salvation and I would submit sir that you yourself are not saved and have no such assurance.

Remember God is sovereign,and is bigger than your theological constructs.

Turretinfan said...

It is written, "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. (Galatians 6:7)

I do not mind, TGV19, that you come here and challenge the believers, but I encourage you to be careful in how you do so, because the God whom we serve is the Living and True God who will judge the world at the last day.

His way of salvation may seem foolish to you, and it is written: "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God." (1 Corinthians 1:18)

As for His servant and messenger, Sam Shamoun, I am not ashamed to call him my brother, and I commend him for being respectful during the debate.

I thought both debaters seemed confident - I do not conflate confidence and arrogance.

-TurretinFan

Fredericka said...

Verbalizer, it is so true that people should be humble, of what have we to boast? Like Abraham we are "dust and ashes." (Genesis 18:27). But do you think this applies to everybody, or are there exceptions? For instance if a man thought himself so elevated that other people were not permitted to waste his time with small-talk:

"O Believers! enter not into the houses of the Prophet, save by his leave, for a meal, without waiting his time. When ye are invited then enter, and when ye have eaten then disperse at once. And engage not in familiar talk, for this would cause the Prophet trouble, and he would be ashamed to bid you go; but God is not ashamed to say the truth." (Sura 33:53).

Would you say this man is humble?

Coram Deo said...

TVG19 said: Coram Deo than you better pray that I am one of those pieces of pottery that God smashes otherwise I could be simply a vessel of destruction.

I have been praying for you, because you're a lost soul headed for an eternity in unspeakable torments in the lake of fire that burns forever lest you repent and turn to Jesus Christ for salvation. I don't know why you care so little for your own soul, but I find it tragic that your attitude about such a weighty matter is so cavalier.

If it's for his good pleasure and sovereignty at the end of the day there is nothing we can do.

This comment serves only to demonstrate your presumptious and prideful wickedness! You seek to blame God Almighty for your own willful, stiff-necked, and perverse rebellion against the free offer of the Gospel of grace extended to you by Word of the One True and Living God! Blasphemy!

I appreciate your concern but what concerns me is the fact that you think I have any say in the matter, that I can possibly struggle against the might of a holy and powerful God!

Hear the Word of God, oh man!

But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die for his iniquity, but you will have delivered your soul. - Ezekiel 3:19

"For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord God; so turn, and live." - Ezekiel 18:32

I was ready to be sought by those who did not ask for me; I was ready to be found by those who did not seek me. I said, "Here am I, here am I," to a nation that was not called by my name. I spread out my hands all the day to a rebellious people, who walk in a way that is not good, following their own devices; a people who provoke me to my face continually - Isaiah 65:1-3

The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance. - 2 Peter 3:9

For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” - Romans 10:13

Your refusal to bow the knee to Christ is rooted in your own wicked heart, and flows from your own love of sin, therefore you are guilty of trampling the blood of Christ underfoot and counting it as a worthless thing; thus you outrage the One True and Living God, and you are counted as profane!

How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? - Hebrews 10:29

You make it seem that if type outwardly on a keyboard "Jesus is Lord" or if I say this with my lips, or get water sprinkled on me or immersed in a tub of water of so many gallons that I will be in the safe zone.

No, you just typed those words, and you thought them before you typed them, yet you are still profane because your heart is full of uncleanness and corruption!

I think you grossly simplify salvation and I would submit sir that you yourself are not saved and have no such assurance.


My only hope of salvation lies in the Person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ. I rest in His everlasting arms and trust in His grace, mercy, and love which was demonstrated by the fact that He freely laid down His life, and then took it up again promising eternal life to all those who believe. My assurance is grounded in His promise, His faithfulness, and His Word.

For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.” - Luke 19:10

Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends. - John 15:3

Cont.

Coram Deo said...

Cont.

Remember God is sovereign,and is bigger than your theological constructs.

He is sovereign, and His Word says that you must be born-again.

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. - John 14:6

No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. - 1 John 2:23

Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” - John 3:3

If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," and again, "The Lord will judge his people." It is a dreadful thing to fall into the hands of the living God. - Hebrews 10:31

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. - John 3:18

You must be born-again.

Repent, and flee to Christ Jesus as your Lord and Savior.

In Christ,
CD

natamllc said...

TGV19

You have not responded to either CD, TF or Federicka.

Why?

In your previous post to which they respond, you wrote:

Coram Deo than you better pray that I am one of those pieces of pottery that God smashes otherwise I could be simply a vessel of destruction.

I would comment that there seems to me you have been given some insight into the mysteries of God when you say you might be one of those pieces of pottery that God smashes.

Consider:::> Luk 20:16 He will come and destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others." When they heard this, they said, "Surely not!"
Luk 20:17 But he looked directly at them and said, "What then is this that is written: "'The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone'?
Luk 20:18 Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him."



Also you write: If it's for his good pleasure and sovereignty at the end of the day there is nothing we can do.

No, that is not right. There is "plenty" that we are called upon to do. There is simple nothing we are called upon to do to merit God's imputation of Christ's righteousness. However, once the Righteousness of Christ is imputed, we have plenty to do!

For instance, consider:::> Act 26:19 "Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision,
Act 26:20 but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance.


I ask basis those verses of Scripture, could you be mistaken about that there is nothing you can do after repentance and receiving the forgiveness of sins?


Further you write: I appreciate your concern but what concerns me is the fact that you think I have any say in the matter, that I can possibly struggle against the might of a holy and powerful God!

Again, are you not misguided here?


cont'd

natamllc said...

continuing:

Consider this story which I suppose is not far from your memory as I believe you know this story well?

Gen 18:17 The LORD said, "Shall I hide from Abraham what I am about to do,
Gen 18:18 seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?
Gen 18:19 For I have chosen him, that he may command his children and his household after him to keep the way of the LORD by doing righteousness and justice, so that the LORD may bring to Abraham what he has promised him."
Gen 18:20 Then the LORD said, "Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great and their sin is very grave,
Gen 18:21 I will go down to see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry that has come to me. And if not, I will know."
Gen 18:22 So the men turned from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the LORD.
Gen 18:23 Then Abraham drew near and said, "Will you indeed sweep away the righteous with the wicked?


You further respond: You make it seem that if type outwardly on a keyboard "Jesus is Lord" or if I say this with my lips, or get water sprinkled on me or immersed in a tub of water of so many gallons that I will be in the safe zone.

Again, this indicates to me you have been enlightened somewhat elementary, however, to the Truth.

Consider: Deu 30:9 The LORD your God will make you abundantly prosperous in all the work of your hand, in the fruit of your womb and in the fruit of your cattle and in the fruit of your ground. For the LORD will again take delight in prospering you, as he took delight in your fathers,
Deu 30:10 when you obey the voice of the LORD your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that are written in this Book of the Law, when you turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
Deu 30:11 "For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.
Deu 30:12 It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?'
Deu 30:13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?'
Deu 30:14 But the word is very near you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it.
Deu 30:15 "See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.


Based on the warrant of these Scriptures and each of the comments by us now towards you, what do you wait for in responding to the Calling that goes out?

Is it because you fall under the prey of the Prophet? or a spell??

Isa 53:1 Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?
Isa 53:2 For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him.
Isa 53:3 He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

natamllc said...

I am not sure what happened but the post before the one above disappeared?

Oh well. I will start over and post again as best I can from memory what I intended to post before the word "continuing" above!

TGV19

you wrote:

Coram Deo than you better pray that I am one of those pieces of pottery that God smashes otherwise I could be simply a vessel of destruction.


I would say it seems to me you have been enlightened because of those words.

Consider these verses of Scripture:

Luk 20:16 He will come and destroy those tenants and give the vineyard to others." When they heard this, they said, "Surely not!"
Luk 20:17 But he looked directly at them and said, "What then is this that is written: "'The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone'?
Luk 20:18 Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, and when it falls on anyone, it will crush him."


Further you wrote:

If it's for his good pleasure and sovereignty at the end of the day there is nothing we can do.

Again, that is wrong. According to Scripture there is plenty we are to do!

Consider these verses: Act 26:19 "Therefore, O King Agrippa, I was not disobedient to the heavenly vision,
Act 26:20 but declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance.


Although there is nothing required of us that merits God's imputation of Christ's Righteousness to our account, after we are imputed with His Righteousness, we are to bring forth fruits in keeping with repentance.

You further write:

I appreciate your concern but what concerns me is the fact that you think I have any say in the matter, that I can possibly struggle against the might of a holy and powerful God!

Well, no, there is again a lot of authority between the Elect of God with God in intercession for others as this story shows us, the heirs of Abraham's Seed:

You can now go up to the beginning of the previous post to finish!

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God, Peace be unto those who follow the guidance from their Lord,

Fredericka said...

Would you say this man is humble?

Fredericka sounds like the verse you quoted is very self serving indeed!

That is until we check out this one ;)

Holy Qur'an (80:1-11)

1 (The Prophet) frowned and turned away,
2. Because there came to him the blind man (interrupting).
3. But what could tell thee but that perchance he might grow (in spiritual
understanding)?-
4. Or that he might receive admonition, and the teaching might profit him?
5. As to one who regards Himself as self-sufficient,
6. To him dost thou attend;
7. Though it is no blame to thee if he grow not (in spiritual understanding).
8. But as to him who came to thee striving earnestly,
9. And with fear (in his heart),
10. Of him wast thou unmindful.
11. By no means (should it be so)! For it is indeed a Message of instruction:

(Now Moses was a very humble man, more humble than anyone else on the face of the earth.) (Numbers 12:3)

What do you think about the most humble man on earth writing that he's the most humble man on earth Fredericka?

Liberals tend to have problems with these things, but not believers.

thegrandverbalizer19 said...

With the name of God,

TF

"do not mind, TGV19, that you come here and challenge the believers, but I encourage you to be careful in how you do so, because the God whom we serve is the Living and True God who will judge the world at the last day."

I am not aware that I came to challenge anyone? It seems that when ever I go to make comments or talk I'm not allowed to.

Someone must respond! Uh oh there's a Muslim in our midst! I can't simply just go into a blog and comment as a person who happens to be a Muslim. Some one some where feels duty bound to come at me with something.

Sure that's find maybe they feel they are preaching the word to me.

I respect you TF I do. I do respect this blog and your consistency...thus far.

I really don't feel I came in here to challenge anyone. You said you felt the two gentleman came across as 'confident' and I simply let it be.

That's all I wanted to know.

I am not trying to be cynical either when people approach be with biblical passages. I don't believe my respond is incorrect.

Most if not all of us believe God is sovereign as such it is God who guides not us.

Think about those babies who die in their sin. Are we to assume they understood complex theological issues?

They never really got a chance, but hey who are we to question the love of God in this matter correct?

Turretinfan said...

I was just cautioning you, not banning you, TGV19.

Fredericka said...

Hi Verbalizer. I think the man who wrote Sura 80 had a conscience. He had spoken rudely and brusquely to the blind man. But God has never allowed treating the disabled disrespectfully, "Cursed is the one who makes the blind to wander off the road." (Deuteronomy 27:18). God spoke to him, whether through the implanted word of the conscience or by whatever means. Why had he flattered the wealthy man, yet couldn't be bothered to give the blind man the time of day? He had been arrogant; he was in the wrong and he realized it. It is this note, of meekness or willingness to take correction, still present at Mecca, which disappears when he goes to Medina, to my hearing at any rate. They say that power corrupts.

Suppose someone had been watching him, modelling their behavior after his, and had heard him speak brusquely and dismissively to the blind man and respectfully to the affluent man. Suppose this hearer thinks it is a religious duty to mimic what he sees. The diligent imitator then goes out and disrespects the first blind man he comes across, while fawning over the well-to-do. Is this case anything other than the blind leading the blind?

Yahya Snow said...

Hello and greetings TF, TGV and all the ChristiaN readers

I have responded to this post (as a Muslim) here:

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/09/responding-to-turretinfans-probing-on.html


I hope it offers some extra insight

Peace

Turretinfan said...

Mr. Snow,

Thanks for your response.

It seems as though your main points are this:

1) The older writings (the Torah, Injeel, and Abrahamic Suhuf) were lost, because they were not intended for us.

2) A "sayings gospel" (aka Q) was lost.

3) Jesus preached the Gospel but did not see the four gospels.

As to (1), that explains why it would not be necessary for them to be preserved, I supposed. But does not your Koran tell you that Allah preserves his word? In any event, it does not explain why the text is lost.

As to (2), you cannot really show that the "sayings gospel" ever existed. The fact that some higher critics suggest that it may have existed is far from compelling evidence - indeed it is simply speculation.

As to (3), Jesus did not preach "from the Gospel," but instead he preached the Gospel. His life and teachings were later, by the direction of the Holy Spirit, preserved for us in the four authentic gospels.

- TurretinFan

natamllc said...

Yahya Snow,

You write: Why is this so significant?

As taught by Bart Ehrman the Gospels were written as separate documents and were not reliant upon other Gospels – they were meant to be read individually. Coupling this fact with that of the Gospel of Mark being the EARLIEST of the four Gospels we realise a conclusion quite profound [sic]

The reason behind the significance is that this points to early Christians (as well as the author of Mark) NOT believing in the Trinity, incarnation or divine-sonship of Jesus. This sounds very much Islamic as Islam teaches Jesus to be a Prophet rather than divine.


Have you ever thought about that from a far more realistic and down to earth perspective, such as this one?

Mark was right in the middle of a few of the major issues regarding Christ's Life, notwithstanding his gaining the anger of Paul.

Might it be such, that by the time Mark was writing his Gospel account, there wasn't any issue with those things found later on to be an issue, [ the Trinity, incarnation or divine-sonship of Jesus ], as was written and included in the other's compiling their own Holy Spirit inspired record for posterity, that is, for us today, upon whom the ends of the ages has come?

Just to note Luke's approach, as a capstone, as well as noting Paul's, we read from his Gospel writings and then from the preface to his Acts of the Apostles writings, these thoughts:

Luk 1:1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us,
Luk 1:2 just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word have delivered them to us,
Luk 1:3 it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,
Luk 1:4 that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught.

and


Act 1:1 In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach,
Act 1:2 until the day when he was taken up, after he had given commands through the Holy Spirit to the apostles whom he had chosen.


What is tantamount is something similar to what the Apostle Paul said in defense of the Gospel he received directly from the Spirit of Christ instead of as Mark who was around to see, touch, hear and know Christ. Here is Paul's defense to King Agrippa that Luke records later on at Acts 26 that seems to make sense for why, as Luke and Paul, Mark's gospel doesn't include the things you address in the citation above that I take from your writings:

Act 26:25 But Paul said, "I am not out of my mind, most excellent Festus, but I am speaking true and rational words.
Act 26:26 For the king knows about these things, and to him I speak boldly. For I am persuaded that none of these things has escaped his notice, for this has not been done in a corner.
Act 26:27 King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know that you believe."
Act 26:28 And Agrippa said to Paul, "In a short time would you persuade me to be a Christian?"


I would challenge you Yahya to stop and think about particular details of things that occurred 25 years ago or 40 years or so, perchance you are older than that? What details of major events back then can you recall from memory? Can you summon from your recollections such detail as we see from any one of these four Gospels? It is remarkable, if you would, to realize just how profound these records are and have remained down through the centuries!

So it is, simply, that God allows His own, by natural progression of diminishing recollection to be a bit more specific in details on some things than on others, that otherwise would not have been necessary, as in Mark's case, seeing his writing is the earliest of the four and to those he was writing too were more aware of things that needed not to be recollected as in later times the writings of Matthew, Luke and John were.

Sameh said...

With regards to God preserving his word, indeed God did, but if by word you believe what was meant is the written word, then the slightest scribal or translation error in the bible would have negated that promise a long time ago. Fact of the matter is that God preserved his message, by sending prophet after prophet reiterating what previous prophets had said and preached. In fact, according to Islamic theology, since prophet Muhammad was the seal of the prophets, with no more "reiterations" to come after him, and should the Muslim claim be true, preserving God's word/message for all the following generations would have dictate that the Quran itself be preserved, which is what God in the Quran promised, God in the Quran promised to preserve the Quran, he didn't say all the previous scriptures were preserved, as Yaha explained, those were scriptures intended for a certain group of people and a certain period of time, until that is, when the next prophet comes with a new divine book from God superseding the previous one. Christians themselves already subscribe to some version of that explanation, as they believe Jesus's teachings override those of the OT in cases where they conflicted with each other. Islam just takes it one step further in the chain of revelations.

Sameh said...

Hi, I added a somewhat lengthy comment (not offensive in any way) a while back, and it keeps disappearing. If that was due to multiple postings, I'm sorry, but that was a glitch with my firefox for some reason.

Please let me know if you actually read my comment, if not, and if it's OK with you, I can repost it.

Sameh

Turretinfan said...

I was wondering why you kept posting it ... I'm not sure why it is disappearing, as I am not deleting it.

Turretinfan said...

You wrote: (the rest is all from Sameh)

'm just here to answer your question with regards to what Muslims believe about the original "injeel".

The Muslim position is that the Injeel was revealed to Jesus (as a prophet) it wasn't a book in the sense that it wasn't written down as one, although some might have scribbled down the teachings of Jesus as he was uttering them on parchments or whatnot. I would assume, like the Quran, the Injeel was in first person narrative directly from God, but that's only my assumption.

In that sense, none of the books of the bible are part of the original Injeel. The idea is that the authors of the gospels and epistles were trying to convey the teachings of Jesus, and since in Islam we don't believe they were prophets inspired by God, they got some of those teachings wrong, and added their own perspective on the life of Jesus, turning the bible into a holly book about Jesus instead of Jesus's teachings. If you read Jesus Interrupted or Misquoting Jesus, you'll find many textual evidence of authors interpolating and simply writing down events or teachings that support their own personal beliefs and obviously contradicting those of other authors of the Bible. I'm not saying they did this intentionally, perhaps they did believe 100% in what they were writing - only God knows.

In any case, the bible refers in many verses to the "Bible of the Kingdom" that Jesus himself was preaching as he went from town to town. I know the Christian stance on that being a concept of salvation and not a book, but it is possible that this was actually a reference to the original Injeel, which as no one wrote down during the life of Jesus, was simply lost. And what we have now, the Bible, is simply a compilation of Jesus's followers best efforts to reconstruct that Gospel, making it into narratives of their own of what they could remember.

Turretinfan said...

You continued: (again what follows is Sameh)

I'm not saying this to offend Christians, this is just my answer to clear up the position of Islam on the subject; in Islam we don't take any of the books of the bible to be part of the Injeel, as the words attributed to Jesus in them wouldn't full up a newspaper page. But we do not deny that they could still contain the word of God, due to the follower's attempts to convey them in their own writings. I don't believe any of the writers of the Bible as they were writing their gospels or epistles knew or intended for their writings to be taken as holly scripture or the inerrant word of God, but rather as somewhat biographies of Jesus and his teachings. Trying their best probably to be honest in what they convey, but being uninspired human beings, they erred and "misquoted" Jesus.

For instance Johns words condemning whoever adds or takes away from the Bible was not, in fact, referring to the entire bible, as John at the time had no way of knowing that his work will be compiled along with the books or others to form a "Bible - collection of books", rather he intended it to be a sort of "curse" referring to only his book, as was the habit of many writers of religious texts of the day, to put the fear of God into the hearts of scribes who would be copying his work later on, for them to exert a greater diligence during copying and do their best not to make scribal mistakes. The fact that scribes "always" made mistakes during copying that included adding and omitting words from those scriptures, is evidence that that "threat" was not uttered by a God-inspired person.

Again, this is simply showing the Islamic position regarding the matter as best as I understand it. I hope no one takes this as a deliberate offense.

Peace
Sameh

Sameh said...

Would you mind if I repost it one last time? perhapse the blogging app is deleting them automatically thinking it was spam.

Sameh said...

Oh thanks, I see you reposted it yourself. Thanks.

Cheers,

Ex N1hilo said...

Sameh,

If Allah was not able to preserve his earlier revelations, what makes you think he is now able to preserve the Quran?

Has Allah grown stronger with time? Has he, whose word men were able to corrupt, finally found a way to prevent this?

A god who has such trouble preserving his word from human corruption is not much of a god. No one need fear such a weak god. Allah can do us no harm.

Turretinfan said...

Sameh:

You wrote: "The Muslim position is that the Injeel was revealed to Jesus (as a prophet) it wasn't a book in the sense that it wasn't written down as one, although some might have scribbled down the teachings of Jesus as he was uttering them on parchments or whatnot. I would assume, like the Quran, the Injeel was in first person narrative directly from God, but that's only my assumption."

The Koran itself makes reference to previous books. I'm not doubting that many Muslims share your view, but it is not the view expressed and reflected in the Koran.

The Koran reflects the view that that the Injeel was written down and that it was still around in Mohamed's day.

-TurretinFan

Turretinfan said...

"In any case, the bible refers in many verses to the "Bible of the Kingdom" that Jesus himself was preaching as he went from town to town."

Where does the Bible refer to this?

Perhaps you are thinking of verses like this:

Matthew 9:35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.

Or this:

Matthew 13:19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

Or this:

Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

But, of course, none of those say he was preaching from a book, and the final one prophesies what has actually taken place: the gospel of the kingdom has been preached in all the world for a witness to all nations.

-TurretinFan

Turretinfan said...

"John at the time had no way of knowing that his work will be compiled along with the books or others to form a 'Bible - collection of books',"

a) God inspired John, and God did know what books are part of the Bible.

b) John was a prophet of God, and the book clearly is an example of prophecy (whether you accept it or not, you should see that this clearly its genre).

c) It is well established that the Jews in that time identified various books as "Scripture." Thus, John had the necessary category in which to think about this book as Scripture, and particularly as the final book of Scripture.

d) We Christians did not arbitrarily collect the books of Scripture. Instead, the Bible is composed of those books that the Holy Spirit inspired - books that have the authority of God, not the authority of men.

-TurretinFan

Sameh said...

Ex N1hilo

The problem with people like you is that you see someone trying to be polite in their responses and you insist on insulting them. Good for you, I'm sure Jesus would be happy to see what you as a Christian turned into now.

But it seems you weren't paying attention. God didn't attempt to preserve the old revaluations because they weren't relevant to later periods after they were revealed. They were just for a specific group of people for a specific period of time. Remember, even Jesus said he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Pay attention next time. Your comment was logically incorrect, not to mention childish.

Sameh said...

"Where does the Bible refer to this?"

Sorry that was a speed typing mistake. I meant the "Gospel of the Kingdom"

Sameh said...

You said the Quran makes reference to previous books, yes. and it even calls itself a book, even though the word Quran means "That which is recited", and at the time the Quran was not a book in the ordinary sense of the word, it was only after the death of the prophet that the Quran was compiled. Even though during his his life verses were written on parchment when they were revealed by his companions.

Sameh said...

"The Koran reflects the view that that the Injeel was written down and that it was still around in Mohamed's day."

Actually, the Quran speaks about what the Christians had at the time and it speaks about the Injeel that was revealed to Jesus, but it doesn't say they are one and the same. In any case, whenever the Injeel was referenced, just around the corner you found the following verses setting a criteria for how to judge what is from God and what isn't in it, which is the Quran.

Sameh said...

"But, of course, none of those say he was preaching from a book, and the final one prophesies what has actually taken place: the gospel of the kingdom has been preached in all the world for a witness to all nations."

Again, you seem to think that when the Quran says "Book" that it's speaking about a few hundreds of pages bound together with a cover etc. But that isn't the case. It's called "The Book" but what is meant is collection of God's revelations to the people.

As for the final one, that wasn't said by Jesus. And thus, not exactly relevant to our discussion of the Islamic view of things. If you know what I mean.

Sameh said...

"a) God inspired John, and God did know what books are part of the Bible.
b) John was a prophet of God, and the book clearly is an example of prophecy (whether you accept it or not, you should see that this clearly its genre)."

Well I know that is the Christian belief, but it doesn't sit well with the discrepencies in the narratives of events in the gospels. IF they were all inspired by God, I would expect an omniscient omnipotent God to inspire them all the same story, and not to inspire contradictions to them, otherwise, what Ex N1hilo said about "Allah - which is really silly because Allah simply means God in Arabic" would then be applicable to God as portrayed in the Biblel.

Almost every little detail in the crucifixion and resurrection story was not agreed on by the authors of the Gospels. "one angel, two angels? the rock was moved before, the angel moved the rock after, one woman, two women, more than two, both creminals belittled Jesus, only one of them did and the other defended him... and the list goes on and on."

You can't claim inpiration from God and then in the same breath say that Godly inspiration is lacking that it resulted in so many discrepencies.


"d) We Christians did not arbitrarily collect the books of Scripture. Instead, the Bible is composed of those books that the Holy Spirit inspired - books that have the authority of God, not the authority of men."

Yet they were cannonized by a show of hands of a committee. I'm sure you believe the committee was also inspired by God, but where does it end? And how do you know who's inspired and who isn't?

Sameh said...

"As for the final one, that wasn't said by Jesus. And thus, not exactly relevant to our discussion of the Islamic view of things. If you know what I mean."

Oops, my bad :) seems it was said by Jesus.

Sameh said...

Ex N1hilo

The problem with people like you is that you see someone trying to be polite in their responses and you insist on insulting them. Good for you, I'm sure Jesus would be happy to see what you as a Christian turned into now.

But it seems you weren't paying attention. God didn't attempt to preserve the old revaluations because they weren't relevant to later periods after they were revealed. They were just for a specific group of people for a specific period of time. Remember, even Jesus said he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Pay attention next time. Your comment was logically incorrect, not to mention childish.

Turretinfan said...

Sameh,

I'm glad you acknowledge the authenticity of the account of Jesus saying that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the tribe of Israel. I hope you will read the rest of the account and learn what else Jesus said and did:

Matthew 15:24-28
But he answered and said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
Then came she and worshipped him, saying, "Lord, help me."
But he answered and said, "It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs."
And she said, "Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table."
Then Jesus answered and said unto her, "O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt."
And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.

Please hear and learn that Jesus accepted and praised the woman's worship of Him. This would be a grave sin for a mere rasool - it is only right if Jesus is God.

- TurretinFan

Ex N1hilo said...

Sameh,

I want you to know that Muhammad's idol cannot save you from red-hot fury of God's wrath that burns against you as a rebel, a sinner, an idolater. Only the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ, can do that. You need to flee from the false religion of self-righteousness that you are involved in and turn to Him in faith and repentance.

I can understand why you think this message is unkind and insulting. There was a time when I would have agreed. But, having experienced God’s grace and forgiveness in Christ, who gave Himself for me on the cross, I now know this is the kindest message anyone could deliver to you.

As to the preservation of divine revelation, muslims claim that Allah was unable or (as you say) unwilling to preserve his words. What a contrast with the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who has promised to preserved his word throughout all generations.

Psalm 119: 152 (ESV) Long have I known from your testimonies that you have founded them forever.

Psalm 119:160 (ESV) The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever.

Isaiah 40:8 (ESV) The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God will stand forever.

Matthew 5:17-18 (ESV) "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

1 Peter 1: 22-25 (ESV) Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; for "All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever."

Now, if Allah has been unwilling to preserve his words in the past, how can you really know that he has changed his mind and decided preserve the Quran? Because the Quran says so? Could it be that the only reason you believe in the preservation of the Quran is that corrupted portions of the Quran tell you that Allah intends to preserve it? According to Muslims, Allah allowed men to corrupt his revelation to the Hebrew prophets; he could have allowed it again in Muhammad's case.

It is sad to see. I have heard it from the lips of many Muslims. They assert emphatically: “Allah's revelations have been corrupted!” If you believe that you can have no assurance that you posssess the word of God. This is where Islam refutes itself.

Sameh said...

"Please hear and learn that Jesus accepted and praised the woman's worship of Him."

I'm afraid this evidence is frail at best. You see there are two cases of dishonest translation at work here.

First, the woman calling Jesus lord was not necessarily, and probably not, an indication that Jesus was divine. First instance of dishonest translation is the addition of the capital "L" to the word "Lord", there were no capital letters in neither Greek, Aramaic nor Hebrew. distinguishing this "Lord" from the other cases of people being called lord in the Bible is completely unwarranted by the text. It was selective capitalization where it suited the doctrinal purpose of the translator. An example of the top of my head is Sarah calling Abraham “lord” in (1 Peter 3:6).

The second instance of selective - to my mind deceptive translation - is the word "worshiped". The original Greek word is "proskuneo" which among other things (including to adore/worship) means to "to fawn or crouch to, i.e. (lit. or fig.) prostrate oneself in homage" to someone. Here again, many people in the bible "proskuneo'ed" to other people without it implying "worship" or the divinity of the person receiving that act of respect. And we don't have to go far for examples; the soldiers who tortured and ridiculed Jesus before him being crossed “proskuneo'ed” to him sarcastically (how exactly do you worship someone sarcastically?) another example would be Matthew 18:26, which records the story of a slave who proskuneo’ed his master… and the list goes on.

So, simply put, proskuneo’ing was merely the gesture of respect and showing humility that the people of those days used. Neither the use of “Lord” nor “Worshiping” suggests divinity for Jesus in the case you mentioned. It merely shows a desperate woman humbling herself to the great prophet of God who had the power to save her daughter (through the will and permission of God which Jesus himself declared was the only reason he had power to do anything).

Turretinfan said...

Actually, it's worse than you make it out to be. We would capitalize "Lord" in English even if she did not mean to refer to Jesus as God.

That's not how we know it - not from the capital letters.

Recall what the Bible says:

"Then came she and worshipped him, saying, 'Lord, help me.'"

From this we see how it is that the woman worshiped Jesus. She called him Lord, placed her trust in Him, and begged him for assistance.

Jesus tested her by referring to her as a dog, but she replied by again calling him Lord, and suggesting that she could be a domestic dog, that eats the crumbs from the Master's table.

And in response, Jesus praised her faith in Him, and Jesus ordered that it be done as she had asked: He granted her request.

And yes - the word for worship means to prostrate oneself. Surely you, as a Muslim, are familiar with this mode of worship.

Would you prostrate yourself to a mere man? Or do you only prostrate yourself toward the throne of Allah? Would any devout Muslim prophet permit men to prostrate themselves to him? Or would they not insist that men worship Allah alone?

-TurretinFan

Sameh said...

You said “Would you prostrate yourself to a mere man? Or do you only prostrate yourself toward the throne of Allah? Would any devout Muslim prophet permit men to prostrate themselves to him? Or would they not insist that men worship Allah alone?”

True. Indeed, as a Muslim, I would never bow, let alone prostrate myself, to anyone but God. Not even to the prophet or the most religiously pious Muslim cleric. But then again, it doesn’t matter what I as a Muslim would do, since as I do not complete faith in the wording of the Bible , I don’t know whether the woman “actually” prostrated herself to Jesus, or didn’t, or if she merely kissed his hand (another meaning for “proskuneo”). What I do know is that in the bible, many people “proskuneo’ed” to other righteous men of God who, in turn, accepted those gestures of humility/respect, or in the very least did not object to them.

Examples: (NT reference) Acts 10:25: “As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped [proskuneo’ed] him.”, (OT references) Abigail “fell on her face before David, and bowed down to the ground. (prostrated)”… 2 Kings 4:37 the Shunammite woman, after God revived her child through Elisha’s prayer, “fell at his [Elisha’s] feet, and bowed to the ground . . .” Genesis 50:18.

So, you see, you shouldn’t be asking me whether I would bow down to anyone but God, but you should ask yourself why the Bible shows other godly people accepting those gestures when the Bible clearly didn’t intend for Christians to think those people were divine in anyway. The only logical conclusion would be that “prostrating” was common practice of those times, not connected to divinity, but rather the show of reverence and high esteem.

That having been said, both being called “lord” (with or without capitalization) and being prostrated to do not, on their own, suggest divinity. Granted that as a Christian I’m sure this is not the only reason why you believe in the divinity of Jesus, but it was your way of trying to “ensnare me  ” to acknowledge the divinity of Jesus since I quoted from the verses before them. So, other evidence notwithstanding, these verses do very little to convince me that Jesus is God. (no offense).

Now that you presented one of your exhibits for the case for the divinity of Jesus and the inerrancy of the bible. Let me ask you a question of my own. What are your thought with regards to the Comma Johanneum. To me, that passage, and the controversy surrounding it, is a strong indication to the corruptibility of the Bible.

Peace,
Sameh

Turretinfan said...

Yes, Cornelius fell down at Peter's feet and worshiped him, but you forgot to read the very next verse:

Acts 10:25-26
And as Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him, and fell down at his feet, and worshipped him.
But Peter took him up, saying, Stand up; I myself also am a man.

Moreover, as I pointed out before, it is not simply a matter of the women worshiping Jesus, and calling him Lord, but also of her placing her faith in Him, and Him commending her for that.

On top of that, there is something you have overlooked. Jesus does not pray to Allah that the woman's request will be granted, He grants it - He orders that it be done as she requested.

Now, my reason for bringing this up is that you seemed to want to cite some of Jesus' words where you thought it would be convenient for you. But if you would hear all of what Jesus said, you would not make the serious mistake of thinking that he was only a prophet, or only a prophet to Israel.

Here he even helps a woman who was not a Jewess.

And moreover, in the fullness of time, he sent his disciples into all the nations, not limiting them to the Jews:

Matthew 28:16-20
Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw him, they worshipped him: but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

He is with us still, and if you will hear Him, worship Him, and become His disciple, you too can by faith be saved.

-TurretinFan

Fredericka said...

Sameh wrote: "They were just for a specific group of people for a specific period of time. Remember, even Jesus said he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Sameh, the New Testament and the Qur'an agree that Jesus is the Messiah of Israel. If we consult the Old Testament, we discover that the Messiah's reign is universal:

"Behold! My Servant whom I uphold,
My Elect One in whom My soul delights!
I have put My Spirit upon Him; He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles." (Isaiah 42:1).

"Indeed He says, ‘It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant
to raise up the tribes of Jacob,
And to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles, that You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.'" (Isaiah 49:6).

"'On that day I will raise up the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, and repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, and rebuild it as in the days of old; that they may possess the remnant of Edom, and all the Gentiles who are called by My name,' Says the LORD who does this thing." (Amos 9:11-12).

"Ask of Me, and I will give You the nations for Your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for Your possession." (Psalm 2:8).

The "specific group of people" are the nations of the world extending even to the ends of the earth. That's everybody.

natamllc said...

Sameh

to add to or to build onto what both TF and Fredericka have written above, I would add one notable portion of Scripture from the book of the Revelation, a revelation that came to John while he was in the Spirit on the Lord's Day:

Rev 14:6 Then I saw another angel flying directly overhead, with an eternal gospel to proclaim to those who dwell on earth, to every nation and tribe and language and people.
Rev 14:7 And he said with a loud voice, "Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of his judgment has come, and worship him who made heaven and earth, the sea and the springs of water."


Wow! God's Gospel is to be proclaimed to all who dwell on the earth and specifically to every nation and tribe and kindred and people.

Do you see that little phrase: because the hour of his judgment has come,?

That word "judgment has come" can be understood as "to be set" into.

Our proclamation is one of an occurrence that has happened "already"!

Now what remains for us but to be set into that "Judgment that has come already"!

That is not a bad thing.

What is a bad thing can be ascertained by understanding what the Angel showed John that he records in chapter one:

Rev 1:7 Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen.

That Word/judgment there, Revelation 1:7 can be best understood by this Word/judgment, here:

Heb 9:27 And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,
Heb 9:28 so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.


So, there is a judgment we are to be set into already when He comes again. For those of us who are set into this judgment, when He appears a second time, we will be eagerly receiving Him with joy and gladness of heart. If not, then it will be because we did not accept that Judgment done to Christ already when He hung on that cursed tree! These who are not set into this judgment are those who will mourn and wail when He comes again! Why? Because they would not receive being "set into" His judgment already!

Hopefully King David's prophetic song will give you some insight?

Here are the Words of his song that applies to what we are discussing:

1Ch 16:31 Let the heavens be glad, and let the earth rejoice, and let them say among the nations, "The LORD reigns!"
1Ch 16:32 Let the sea roar, and all that fills it; let the field exult, and everything in it!
1Ch 16:33 Then shall the trees of the forest sing for joy before the LORD, for he comes to judge the earth.


To the ones set in, it is really good news, His return. To those who are not, it really isn't much of a good thing!

Turretinfan said...

"Actually, the Quran speaks about what the Christians had at the time and it speaks about the Injeel that was revealed to Jesus, but it doesn't say they are one and the same."

Where does the Quran say that the Injeel was revealed to Jesus?

-TurretinFan

Sameh said...

"Where does the Quran say that the Injeel was revealed to Jesus?"

5:46 (Y. Ali) And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel:

57:27 (Y. Ali) Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our apostles: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel;

Sameh said...

And these are only the references I could remember, I'm sure there are others...

Turretinfan said...

That's interesting. Thanks for the assistance!

Yahya Snow said...

TF

Have you seen the debate aftermath (involving Sam Shamoun with regards to Shabir All)?

If you have not you can view it here:

http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.com/2010/11/sam-shamoun-obsessed-with-shabir-ally.html

Anonymous said...

@natamllc

Gen18:22 God appears to Abraham does not mean God manifest into 3 mens or angels or 1 of them. Only angels appear as men on earth to carry out specific tasks commanded by God.

Phrase "God appears" mean God speaks directly or indirectly. Read Gen12:7 and Gen17:1 for better understanding.