[jawadshahzad]

A religion is based on its scriptures which are considered the word of God, if we see christianity it based on The Holy Bible ,But the authenticity of Bible itself is highly doubtful .This or should I say these Bibles (refering to the various versions)are not the same which was revealed to Jesus Christ by God.Why would I say that ? here are a few of the reasons:

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible1-3.html

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible4-6.html

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible7-9.html

Now if you study these and still think that bible is Gods word, please put me wise..

please dont take it against the spirit of the forum, it is suppose to generate not just a pointless civilized discussion covering only how the article was written but a fruitful one with a logical conclusion.

[Stoner]

The site owner, or at least editor of jamaat.net is one Malik Ali.

Are Amir Abdul-Malik Ali and Malik Ali one and the same person?
( http://www.jamaat.net/mission.htm )

[erick295]

FYI I didn't read those links, but pretty much anything they could say wouldn't disprove that it's the word of God. No amount of translations, different versions, etc. in any way disproves that theory, because God could have very well influenced all of those events to give us the version that we have today. I don't believe that's true -- I find it to be far more likely that the Bible is just a religions text like any other, a compilation written by man over many generations, all with their own cultural influences and motives. But I don't know that it wasn't influenced by God. You can't really come to a logical conclusion about something that isn't bound by science and reason, and deities definitely aren't, at least not on the level that we understand it.

[erick295]

By the way, you ought to delete / modify your duplicate thread before it's too late

[jawadshahzad]

I dont know,and I dont care. And does it really matter to the subject ... I dont think so...

[redivivus]

If I have stated anything that is wrong in the articles, and it goes against the tenets of our deen , then I urge my Muslim brethren to email me the error.

You will need to email him as soon as valley decides to come and flood this thread with counter-evidence.

[linskyjack]

Originally Posted by jawadshahzad

A religion is based on its scriptures which are considered the word of God, if we see christianity it based on The Holy Bible ,But the authenticity of Bible itself is highly doubtful .This or should I say these Bibles (refering to the various versions)are not the same which was revealed to Jesus Christ by God.Why would I say that ? here are a few of the reasons:

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible1-3.html

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible4-6.html

http://www.jamaat.net/bible/Bible7-9.html

Now if you study these and still think that bible is Gods word, please put me wise..

please dont take it against the spirit of the forum, it is suppose to generate not just a pointless civilized discussion covering only how the article was written but a fruitful one with a logical conclusion.

Okay--stop playing games. You are a Muslim. Admit it and stop taking polls. That would be like me taking a poll of people in here on whether or not they thought that Mohammed was a pedophile, or if he split the moon.

[Stoner]

Ahmed Deedat is pretty easy to track down.
So was a response to his Christian bashing:

http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Deedat/index.htm

This was interesting, part of the response to Deedat:
Is Muhammad Foretold in the Bible?
http://answering-islam.org/Gilchrist/muhammad.html

Interesting:
http://answering-islam.org/index.html

[Paquadez]

I do find it tireseome, when some extremist reads a couple of books, discovers how easy it is to publish a very bad website and in a flash is transformed into a cyber-guerilla and thereafter, lets forth with meandering invective, in the propotypical fashion of the ersatz, wannabee intellectual.

It is also highly amusing when these people fail to realise that their quaint and loopy apology for an hypothesis, destroys their own platform!

For your information Mr Al Jazz-Earache, the three Abrahamic religions share many common roots: and what various archaic and most scholars would refer to as sacred writings, are used in the collection and collation more commonly known as the Holy Bible, The Torah and the Khoran/Qur'an. The Talmud, the Judaeic rabbinic collection, also owes it mutitude roots to similar sacred writings.

When the original translation of the Holy Bible was completed in the 1600s, under the volition of King James, scholars had to be versed in ancient Greek, Latin and Aramaic: and considerably so, since all these ancient languages are contextual.
Accordingly, apparent anomolies and contraditions exist: however unless one can read the original texts in the original language and fully comprehend the nuance, such critique is intellectually valueless and smacks of dialectic and empty semantics.

You refer to "Bible Bashers", hopefully numbering yourself with these persons, since the absolute definition of your terms means those who demean and vilify the object. Perhaps we might employ, her, a more apposite term of reference and call those who seek to mawkishly fix on one or more phrases and sentences out of context and create a whole schism in the process, "Bible Benders" since they seek to move away from core meanings, context, nuance and spirit of intent.

In any case, those who really enjoy faith, believe that God reveals his true meaning after study, devotion and humility: the diametric opposite of those critics who seek to vilify and denounce His word.

Whilst it is currently the vogue to pull down spiritual, cultural and intellectual icons, as a countervailing force to other country's social stability, it is always well worth while examining one's own foundations, first, less one leaves oneself open to similar critique.
The current global furore about Muslim women being compelled or feeling compelled to veil their face and many, their whole head, sees its roots in apparent religious teaching.

Unfortunately for this argument, there appears no absolute diktat or commandement in the Qur'an. Thus it can be realised that such Mullahs who preach this seditious nonsense have themselves, created a schism, for whatever personal benefits they see.

There always have been and always will be extremists: mostly, mankind and society tolerate such activities with mild amusement and contempt. The Christian faith is highly secular; mainly since numbers of men, created a schism for whatever reasons they felt justified in so doing. It doesn't make them right, however. Man, living in a temporal state, will inevitably, due to freedom of choice, go against God's will, as we see increasingly today, as ever-greater freedom of personal choice becomes the new mantra of the would be Liberal mindset.

However such reality does not create a firm justification for negative criticism of a belief system: in fact, it reinforces it.

Thus, Mr Al Jazz-Earache, I suggest that you go away with your quaint semantics and acidic invective, read a few more theological works of value, study some ancient history, learn XTML, Java and PHP and try again from a position of slightly greater intellect.

Paq

Originally Posted by linskyjack

Mohammed was a pedophile, or if he split the moon.

who believes that mohammed split the moon?

I like your style, Paquadez & think that you make some good points

[Stoner]

I forgot......what was the reason in Islamic theology for the concept of the moon having been split?

God split it not mohammed

don't tell me... just as bad?

[Stoner]

No............ It just never happened.

Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No! Yes! No!

we aren't going to get anywhere are we?