My rebuttal to Sam Shamoun's "Osama Abdallah's Mantras" nonsense:
This article is a rebuttal to Mr. Sam Shamoun's article, which is located at: http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/mantras.htm. Just for the sake of record, Mr. Shamoun did not respond to all of my rebuttal to him, which is located at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/jesus_god_rebuttal.htm.
Mr. Shamoun calls my rebuttal as "Mantras", yet he failed to address all of it! So much for your arrogance and nonsense Mr. Shamoun. Here in this article, I will expose you and prove to the reader once again that Islam is the Ultimate Truth of Absolute One and Living GOD Almighty.
He wrote:
A Response to many of
My response:
Your title is very funny and self-contradicting as I will show below.
He wrote:
Osama has taken aim at my answer to his gross errors regarding Luke 23:34. It is quite clear from Osama’s response that he was unable to address the issues, but chose instead to bring up irrelevant points and logical fallacies.
My response:
Osama did not take an aim at your answer. Osama had literally debunked your answer, word for word, and proved the Bible to be full of contradictions and man-made alterations and innovations.
He wrote:
It appears to be a common ploy for Osama to simply repeat the outdated charge that the Bible is corrupt and that its authors were unknown over and over again ad infinitum and ad nauseum. It has almost become a mantra of sorts that Osama often chants, assuming that this will somehow prove his arguments.
My response:
When dealing with the Bible, one must cover all aspects of it. The Bible's corruptions and history of man's tampering and alterations must always be put forward, because this is the most relevant issue! Otherwise, what is the point from debating if we all know that the Bible is a corrupted book?
Therefore, it is important to bring forward the proof that the Bible is corrupted, so that things would be cleared up as to why there are many direct and clear contradictions in the Bible, and why there is utter nonsense existing in the Bible's grammar and wordings.
He wrote:
Here, in this article I will only focus on the main points to my arguments. I will omit the great bulk of Osama’s "response" since it didn’t address anything I had initially presented in my rebuttal. I will also link to articles which have already refuted Osama’s outdated arguments in order to avoid repeating myself for the umpteenth time.
My response:
I don't know how you can say that when all of my points are linked with each others. Picking and choosing from my argument is not right, because it won't present the whole picture of my rebuttal.
He wrote:
Osama begins:
I am not really being inconsistent. It's your funny Bible that is made up of 66+ different books and most of them were written by mysterious people according to the Bible's theologians. I take the parts that agree with Islam as authentic and discard the parts that disagree with Islam. You can call it "inconsistency" all you want, but as long as you refuse to learn the Truth of Islam, you will always be blind and foolish and think of those who don't buy your inconsistent Bible as foolish people, while the Bible itself is the master of inconsistency and foolishness.
Please visit: What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth? and Why?
RESPONSE:
Osama does the very thing that I stated above, namely repeat the same tired argument over and over again. Our good friend Quennel Gale wrote a very thorough response to Osama’s gross lies and misrepresentations:
To be quite frank, Quennel’s article is more of annihilation than a simple response.
My response:
It amazes me why Mr. Shamoun intentionally ignored my direct rebuttal to his friend Quennel Gale's article. Quennel Gale did not refute anything. All he did was go back and forth and give utter nonsense to my direct and clear quotes.
So much for talking, let's have the reader judge for him/herself. My response to Quennel's rebuttal is located at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/authors_gospels_rebuttal.htm.
He wrote:
In answer to which parts of the Bible do Muslims believe in, it is clear that the first Muslims believed IN ALL OF IT. More on this below.
My response:
That is not true as I will prove from our Islamic sources.
He wrote:
Third, Osama begs the question with his claim that he only accepts those parts that agree with Islam. How does he know that Islam is true? Because the Quran or Muhammad said so? It is rather interesting and sad that Osama doesn’t see the irrationality in his reasoning.
My response:
The Miracle of the Noble Quran is within it. If the Noble Quran was a bunch of narartions, conversations and nonsense as most of the Bible is, then I would be the first to attack it.
My favorite Miracles in the Noble Quran are located in www.answering-christianity.com/sci_quran.htm. The links of this section are as follows:
From www.answering-christianity.com/sci_quran.htm:
Non-Muslim Scientists embraced Islam after discovering the Miracles of the Noble Quran!
Allah Almighty Said:
"We will soon show them Our signs in the Universe and INSIDE THEIR SELVES, until it will become quite clear to them that it is the truth. Is it not sufficient as regards your Lord that He is a witness over all things? (The Noble Quran, 41:53)"
Very Important Discovery:
A new star forming out of a cloud of gas and dust (nebula), which is one of the remnants
of the "smoke" that was the origin of the
whole universe. (The Space Atlas, Heather and Henbest, page 50)
Allah Almighty said: "Then He turned to the heaven when it was smoke...(The Noble Quran, 41:11)"
The Noble
Quran on the Origin of the Universe
Only Islam claims that the universe was originated from Dust
and Hot Gas, or Smoke.
Another Very Important Discovery:
Allah Almighty Said: "And when
the heaven splitteth asunder and becometh ROSY LIKE RED HIDE - (The Noble Quran, 55:37)"
What Allah Almighty is Saying here is that when
Galaxies explode, they form a red-rose-shaped explosion. He
is also telling us that the Universe will all turn into red exploded galaxies
looking like red or reddish roses when the Day of Judgement
happens.
"This
web site has been developed with the aim of promoting and publicizing the works of Harun
Yahya, a prominent Turkish thinker and author. His books have attracted great attention
both in Turkey and worldwide. In the 90's especially, the works of Harun Yahya have been a
means of intellectual awakening for many Muslims, and non-Muslims alike, in the face of
the illusions of the modern age. In other words, the name Harun Yahya is an invitation to
the truth.
....................
The books of Harun Yahya and thus this web site seek to recall various
crucial facts, which people are led to disregard and even deny under the influence of the
turmoil of the modern age. One of these basic facts is that of creation, that the
universe, living things and man, are not self-existing entities, but the artifacts of God,
the Supreme Creator. We are all created by Him and to Him we will all return. The
allegedly "scientific" challenges to this fact — like Darwinism and other
materialistic dogmas — are nothing but deceptions, as explained in this site."
(http://www.harunyahya.com/m_about_site.php)
Dr. Zahlool Al-Najjar is a great Muslim
Geologist and Scientist who wrote many
books, publications (131 publications as shown on his
resume in English), and
10s of journals and reports proving many of the Noble Quranic Geological and
Scientific Claims to be accurate through Modern Science and Technologies.
He is well known in the
Scientists community of Geology in both the US and
Europe, because much of his work and research, especially during his early
days of scientific research, was done in these countries while he
resided and
studied in them.
Science in Islam:
The sub sections here are:
1- Life originated from water and dust
in the Noble Quran, Plants and their origins.
2- The Earth's rotation, formation, Mountains and Oceanology.
3- The Universe, Time, Astronomy, UFOs and Space Shuttles.
4- Embryology, Human Anatomy, Formation, and Creation from the time of sexual
intercourse to the time of birth.
5- The number 19 code in the Noble Quran.
6- Medicine, Insects and Animals.
7- Psychology.
8- Great Web Sites and Online Books. More great resources and web site are available online.
9- Rebuttals.
10- Prophecies.
1- Life originated from water and dust in the Noble Quran, Plants and their origins:
Life originated from water in the Noble Quran.
Science and Existence of Plant's pairs - The Noble Quran claimed it 1500 years ago!
2- The Earth's rotation, formation, Mountains and Oceanology:
The Motion of Earth in the Noble Quran.
The Noble Quran confirms that the earth is rotating around its axle.
Allah Almighty said that the earth is "egg-shaped".
The reduction of earth's size in both the Noble Quran and Science!
The Earth is round according to Islam.
Faults on earth in the Noble Quran and Science!
The Black Sea and
Dark Waters in the Noble Quran!
| The amazing creation of earth and
iron in the Noble Quran. Iron came from space,
and the Noble Quran mentioned it. The 7 properties of earth in the Noble Quran and Science. Read the first section of the article. Rebuttal to the "Heaven" and "Stars in the lower Heaven" in Noble Verses 37:6 and 65:12. Read the "Rebuttals" section in the article. This was an attempt to refute the fact that Allah Almighty Claimed that He Created 7 Ozone Layers as well as 7 different Heavens. The dead turning into Fossils and Iron. The Noble Quran Claimed it, and Science today Confirmed it!
http://www.universalunity.net/iron.htm This article shows the Mathematical Codes of Iron in the Noble Quran and Science, and shows how Science confirmed Allah Almighty's Divine Claim in Noble Verses 17:49-50 about the dead converting into rocks and iron. In case the web site is down, you can access the article on my site. http://www.universalunity.net/iron2.htm More elaborations on Noble Verses 17:49-51. In case the web site is down, you can access the article on my site. |
Living Creatures were
sent down from space. Science confirms the Noble Quran's Claim.
The amazing creation of earth and mountains in the Noble Quran. Science confirms that mountains prevent the earth from shaking while it is revolving around itself, and that they are like pegs rooted in it. The Noble Quran made a similar claim.
Mountains prevent the earth from shaking - The Noble Quran claimed it and Science confirmed it!
Geology in the Noble Quran - See the Scientific confirmation.
Oceanology in the Noble Quran - See the Scientific confirmation. The barriers between waters in both science and the Noble Quran.
3- The Universe, Time, Astronomy, UFOs and Space Shuttles:
The fault line and crack (split) of the moon in Noble Quran!
The amazing creation of earth (its 7 properties from
atmospheric and inner layers) and iron in the Noble Quran. Iron came from space, and the Noble Quran mentioned it.
Seven Atmospheric Layers in the Noble Quran confirmed by Science!
Living Creatures were sent down from space. Science confirms the Noble Quran's Claim.
The Speed of Light in the Noble Quran - A superb article by a Muslim Mathematician!
The Noble Quran and Astronomers both claim that the Universe is 18 billion years old.
The Big Bang Theory and the Cosmic Crunch in the Noble Quran. Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him predicted around the time when the Cosmic Crunch occurs, the Sun would rise from the West.
The Noble Quran on the Origin of the Universe. This article has pictures and quotes from Western scientific books that accurately confirm the astronomical claims of the Noble Quran. The Noble Quran was the only book that claimed that the universe originated from Hot Gas or Smoke. Science proved that this claim is true.
Comparison between Allah Almighty's claims about His Creation, and the scientific discoveries that 100% agree with Him. Claims such as: The universe is expanding, the existence of the sun's orbit, the protective atmosphere to the earth, Embryology and many more.
Allah Almighty said in the Noble Quran that He is "Expanding" the Universe. Scientists already proved this claim to be true.The "Clot" and the Creation of the Universe in the Noble Quran.
Is there mention of U.F.Os or other Human Planets in the Noble Quran?
Einstein's time relativity in the Noble Quran.
Time Relativity in the Noble Quran.
UFOs and Space Shuttles were explicitly mentioned in the Noble Quran! Even the communication with UFOs was prophesied in the Noble Quran.
Aliens and UFOs in the Noble Quran.
Black Holes and Piercing Stars in the Noble Quran were confirmed by Science.
4- Embryology, Human Anatomy, Formation and Creation from the time of sexual intercourse to the time of birth:
The Noble Quran on Human Embryonic Development.
Embryology in the Noble Quran. The three stages of the fetus formation in the Noble Quran and Science.
Abortion in Islam is a crime! The fetus is a human child in Islam.
The Noble Quran on the Cerebrum: Lying is generated from the person's forehead.
The region in the brain that controls our movements - In Noble Quran and confirmed by Science.
Sex determination and human creation in Islam. Allah Almighty and Prophet Muhammad both claimed that the human gender is determined by the male's ejaculated semen.
Were human cloning and gender alteration prophesied in Islam?
Why does the Noble Quran, while speaking about determination of the identity of the individual, speak specifically about finger tips? The Noble Quran recognized that finger tips (finger prints) are unique!
The blood circulation and the production of milk in the Breast: In the Noble Quran and Science.
Breastfeeding for 2 years in the Noble Quran. Science had confirmed Islam's Divine Claims.
Thinking with the heart besides the brain in the Noble Quran was proven by Science.
5- The number 19 code in the Noble Quran:
The Miracle of the number 19 in the Noble Quran. Yes, the number 19 is miraculous in the Noble Quran and was proven to be essential in many of the Scientific Theories and Discoveries. But it doesn't at all support Rashad Khalifa's removal of two Noble Verses from the Noble Quran, and his claim to be GOD Almighty's Messenger.
6- Medicine, Insects and Animals:
Animals' urine and it's relationship to medicine in Islam.
Camels could help cure humans.
Honey was proven to be healing for humans as was mentioned in the Noble Quran.
Scientific Miracles in the Quran Regarding Mary.
The fly insect and its cure: Mentioned in Islam and confirmed by Science (Bacteriophages).
7- Psychology:
The psychological Wisdom of Prayers in Islam was proven in Science and Psychology.
The Wisdom of the age of 40 in the Noble Quran, which had been Scientifically and Psychologically proven to be True. See why Allah Almighty is more forgiving to those who are under the age of 40, and how Science and Psychology proved that people under 40 are less mature and tend to make more irresponsible decisions (i.e., mistakes and sins).
8- Great Web Sites:
http://www.geocities.com/thetruebook/index.htm A great web site by a Muslim sister. Her name is Sundus.
http://www.it-is-truth.net/ This is an awesome web site that has Western scientific information that accurately confirms the Noble Quran's claims about astronomy, biology, geology and other sciences.
http://www.universalunity.net/universe.htm A great site with excellent articles that are backed quotes and proofs about science in the Noble Quran.
This web site is rich with irrefutable scientific facts and details that match many of the
Noble Quran's Verses. He has done a wonderful job in explaining things in good
details and providing detailed OBJECTIVE analysis that prove the Noble Quran's Scientific
Miracles. http://www.rationalreality.com.
Warning: This is a Hadith-rejector web site.
A great book that contains several articles backed by good Scientific references that
prove several of the Noble Quran's Scientific Miracles. http://www.islam-guide.com/.
http://www.harunyahya.com/
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_refutation_darwinism.php
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_refutation_atheism.php
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_design_nature.php
Miracles of the
Noble Quran. Video files.
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_miracles_quran.php
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_quran_archaeology.php
http://www.harunyahya.com/c_myth_called_matter.php
The Bible, the Quran and Science. Written by Dr Maurice Bucaille. In his work, Dr. Baucille proves that the Quran correctly stated scientific facts unknown at the time of the Prophet - showing its divine origin!
A web site for the number 19 miracle in the Noble Quran.
Evaluating Islam as a Religion based on Divine Revelation.
Quran Prior to Science and Civilization, Astro, Islam, Mlivo.
Black Holes and Piercing Stars in the Noble Quran were confirmed by Science.
9- Rebuttals:
Does the Noble Quran support "The Earth moves around the Sun" theory? Rebuttal to Mr. Avijit Roy's challenge.
My rebuttal to Avijit Roy's "Does the Quran support the Earth moves around the Sun theory" response.
My rebuttal to Avijit Roy's "Does Quran have any Scientific miracles?" article.
The Black Sea and Dark Waters in the Noble Quran!
A Muslim response to criticism of
Embryology in the Noble Quran. By Nadeem Arif Najmi.
Allah Almighty said that the earth is "egg-shaped". Rebuttal to the Christian "Answering Islam" team about "dahaha" in the Noble Quran.
My rebuttal to Jochen Katz' "The Qur'an and the flight of birds" article.
Did the Noble Quran really plagiarize Greek Embryology? A very nice article.
10- Prophecies:
Please visit The Noble Quran section, and read the "Prophecies" sub section to see the great Prophecies that were fulfilled only in the Noble Quran. The Noble Quran also made mention and promised the discovery of lost ancient cities and people's bodies, and these promises were all fulfilled today.
He wrote:
For instance, Osama turns to the Holy Bible to prove that God commissioned his false prophet, and then uses Muhammad’s message to argue that the Holy Bible has been changed! This has Osama arguing in an illogical circle as the following illustration helps demonstrate:
| OSAMA: | Muhammad’s advent was predicted in the Holy Bible. |
| Muhammad’s teaching contradicts key, essential biblical doctrines. | |
| OSAMA: | The Holy Bible has been corrupted. |
| CHRISTIAN: | How do you know this? |
| OSAMA: | Because, as you yourself indicated, there are parts of the Bible which contradict the message God gave to Muhammad. |
| CHRISTIAN: | How do you know that it wasn’t Muhammad’s message that was corrupt instead of the Holy Bible? |
| OSAMA: | Muhammad was a true prophet of God and the Almighty Allah promised to protect the message given to him. |
| CHRISTIAN: | How do you know that Muhammad was a true prophet of God? |
| OSAMA: | One of the reasons that I know this to be true is that the Holy Bible itself predicted Muhammad’s coming. |
| CHRISTIAN: | In other words, you use the Holy Bible to prove that Muhammad was a true prophet and then use Muhammad to prove that the Holy Bible has been corrupted? |
| OSAMA: | Err, ahh, yes!? |
My response:
Like I mentioned above, I believe in Islam because Islam's Miracles are preserved in the Noble Quran as I showed a sample above. Finding Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him in the Bible is a plus, because it will help us convert Jews and Christians to Islam.
He wrote:
This introduces another problem,
My response:
Only your pornful bible, the book of women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine", has the problems.
He wrote:
namely, even though God supposedly preserved those passages that spoke of Muhammad he failed to do so for the rest of the Holy Bible! Again, note the following illustration:
| How do you know that those passages predicting Muhammad remained intact? | |
| OSAMA: | I know this because the Quran tells me that there are prophecies of Muhammad in the Bible. |
| CHRISTIAN: | So you are saying that Allah protected those passages from being corrupted? |
| OSAMA: | Yes, alhamdulullah! |
| CHRISTIAN: | So if God could protect those passages, why didn’t he simply protect all of it? |
| OSAMA: | Err, ahh, well Allah chose not to protect all of it. |
| CHRISTIAN: | Well, why not? |
| OSAMA: | Allahu-alim ("God knows"- in other words there is no good answer)! |
| CHRISTIAN: | And what makes you think that God didn’t protect the entire Bible? |
| OSAMA: | Because it contradicts Islam. |
| CHRISTIAN: | And what makes you certain that Islam is true? |
| OSAMA: | I know it is true since it is the revelation Allah gave to his messenger. |
| CHRISTIAN: | And how do you know he was a true messenger? |
| OSAMA: | Because the Bible itself predicted his coming! |
My response:
"Err, ahh, well"? Very funny Mr. Shamoun. It's quite hellarious that even the Bible itself admits that it has been tampered with and corrupted by man's garbage:
"`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'?
But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.
(From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
And regarding who wrote the books and gospels of the Bible, well here is a sample of what the NIV Bible's theologians and historians wrote:
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"
"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"
"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)"
"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)"
"It seems safe to conclude that the book, at least in its early form, dates from the beginning of the monarchy. Some think that Samuel may have had a hand in shaping or compiling the materials of the book, but in fact we are unsure who the final author or editor was. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 286)"
"Although, according to tradition, Samuel wrote the book, authorship is actually uncertain. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"
"The date of the composition is also unknown, but it was undoubtedly during the monarchy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"
"The author is unknown. Jewish tradition points to Samuel, but it is unlikely that he is the author because the mention of David (4:17,22) implies a later date. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 360)"
"Who the author was cannot be known with certainty since the book itself gives no indication of his identity. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 368)"
"There is little conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"
"Whoever the author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"
"According to ancient Jewish tradition, Ezra wrote Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (see Introduction to Ezra: Literary Form and Authorship), but this cannot be established with certainty. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 569)"
"Although we do not know who wrote the book of Esther, from internal evidence it is possible to make some inferences about the author and the date of composition. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 707)"
"The unknown author probably had access to oral and/or written sources....(From the NIV Bible commentary, page 722)"
"Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 773)"
etc...
How do you respond to this Mr. Shamoun?
Please visit: Just who
were the original authors of the Bible? to see the book's bibliography to the
above quotes.
Also, why don't you visit: Contradictions and proofs of Historical Corruptions in the Bible, and see exactly what I mean, instead of acting like a total fool and saying things that even the Bible refutes in it!
He wrote:
Osama makes the following claims regarding the variant readings of the Quran:
The Noble Quran did not come down in "variant readings". It came down in Arabic and in one dialect: the Quraishy dialect. You can learn more about the History of the Preservation of the Noble Quran at: www.answering-christianity.com/quran/textual.htm
RESPONSE:
Here are the responses to this lie:
http://answering-islam.org/PQ/index.htm
My response:
Mr. Shamoun, do you care to be a little more specific as to where I lied, or presented a lie? I provided you with Islamic evidence and references that the Noble Quran was perfectly preserved! Care to give a direct refutation to my proofs?
He wrote:
Osama then tries to respond to my statement that the Holy Bible is better attested than any book of antiquity, including the Quran:
That's not what the Bible's theologians think Mr. Shamoun. The Bible's theologians flat out admit and declare that most of the Bible's books and gospels were written by mysterious people! Read their quotes by yourself and judge for yourself at: www.answering-christianity.com/authors_gospels.htm.
As to the Noble Quran and Islam supporting the preservation of the Bible, you obviously don't know what the Quranic Words "Injil" and "Torah" mean. They don't mean the "New Testament" and "Old Testament". They mean the revelations sent to Jesus in Injil, and to Moses in Torah, peace be upon both of those two Prophets. The New Testament of today has little to do with what Jesus spoke. In fact, if you were to collect the quotes of Jesus from the NT, then you would only get a column and a half of News paper worth. That's all. That's all what you have from Jesus' quotes in the 33 years he lived among the People of Israel.
RESPONSE:
Quennel Gale has already documented what Bible theologians think. Read the above link that discusses and exposes Osama’s misinformation.
My response:
The above link of Quennel Gale had been directly debunked, word for word, at: http://www.answering-christianity.com/authors_gospels_rebuttal.htm
He wrote:
We had also presented many links discussing this issue in our first response.
My response:
This link of yours had also been directly debunked, word for word, at: www.answering-christianity.com/jesus_god_rebuttal.htm
He wrote:
Here are some more articles for our readers:
www.tektonics.org/tekton_02_02_01.html
My response:
More boring links with no direct answers!
He wrote:
Second, Osama erroneously assumes that unless the author of the book is known the book’s authenticity is in doubt. Osama doesn’t tell us why this is so and this is simply a fallacious claim which is not supported by scholars or historians.
My response:
Not supported by scholars or historians? Mr. Shamoun, you really need to read the articles I write to see the clear proof from the Bible's own scholars admiting that it was corrupted. Here is the sample that I provided above:
It's quite hellarious that even the Bible itself admits that it has been tampered with and corrupted by man's garbage:
"`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'?
But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.
(From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
And regarding who wrote the books and gospels of the Bible, well here is a sample of what the NIV Bible's theologians and historians wrote:
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"
"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"
"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)"
"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)"
"It seems safe to conclude that the book, at least in its early form, dates from the beginning of the monarchy. Some think that Samuel may have had a hand in shaping or compiling the materials of the book, but in fact we are unsure who the final author or editor was. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 286)"
"Although, according to tradition, Samuel wrote the book, authorship is actually uncertain. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"
"The date of the composition is also unknown, but it was undoubtedly during the monarchy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 322)"
"The author is unknown. Jewish tradition points to Samuel, but it is unlikely that he is the author because the mention of David (4:17,22) implies a later date. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 360)"
"Who the author was cannot be known with certainty since the book itself gives no indication of his identity. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 368)"
"There is little conclusive evidence as to the identity of the author of 1,2 Kings. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"
"Whoever the author was, it is clear that he was familiar with the book of Deuteronomy. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 459)"
"According to ancient Jewish tradition, Ezra wrote Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah (see Introduction to Ezra: Literary Form and Authorship), but this cannot be established with certainty. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 569)"
"Although we do not know who wrote the book of Esther, from internal evidence it is possible to make some inferences about the author and the date of composition. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 707)"
"The unknown author probably had access to oral and/or written sources....(From the NIV Bible commentary, page 722)"
"Regarding authorship, opinions are even more divided....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 773)"
etc...
How do you respond to this Mr. Shamoun?
Please visit: Just who
were the original authors of the Bible? to see the book's bibliography to the
above quotes.
Also, why don't you visit: Contradictions and proofs of Historical Corruptions in the Bible, and see exactly what I mean, instead of acting like a total fool and saying things that even the Bible refutes in it!
He wrote:
What truly matters is if whether the evidence points to the book being written within the first generation of the eyewitnesses to these events, or is based on eyewitness testimony. Both the internal and external evidence demonstrates that the Gospels and the rest of the NT books were written within the first generation where literally hundreds, if not thousands, of both friendly and hostile eyewitnesses were still alive.
My response:
That is not true at all. First of all, as I showed in this article: Just who were the original authors of the Bible?, the original authors of most of the New Testament were unknown. Aside from this, there is clear and irrifutable evidence of third-party narrations throughout the entire Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments:
From www.answering-christianity.com/sake.htm
Who were the authors of the Bible? Were they really the original Prophets and Desciples?
So, who then are the authors of the books of the Bible? Obviously the Church must know them very well since they are popularly believed to have received divine inspiration from God Himself. Right? Actually, they don't. For example, we will note that every Gospel begins with the introduction "According to....." such as "The Gospel according to Saint Matthew," "The Gospel according to Saint Luke," "The Gospel according to Saint Mark," "The Gospel according to Saint John." The obvious conclusion for the average man on the street is that these people are known to be the authors of the books attributed to them. This, however is not the case. Why? Because not one of the vaunted four thousand copies existent carries its author's signature. It has just been assumed that certain people were the authors. Recent discoveries, however, refute this belief. Even the internal evidence suggests that, for instance, Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to him:
"...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man, named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM (Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM (Jesus). (Matthew 9:9)"
Did "Matthew" write this about himself? Why then didn't Matthew write for example: "he (Jesus) saw ME, and my name is Matthew. I was sitting at the receipt of custom…" etc.
Such evidence can be found in many places throughout the New Testament. Granted, it may be possible that an author sometimes may write in the third person, still, in light of the rest of the evidence that we shall see throughout this book, there is simply too much evidence against this hypothesis.
This observation is by no means limited to the New Testament. There is even similar evidence that at least parts of Deuteronomy were not written by their claimed author, prophet Moses . This can be seen in Deuteronomy 34:5-10 where we read
"So Moses....DIED... and he (God Almighty) BURIED HIM (Moses)... He was 120 years old WHEN HE DIED... and there arose not a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses....(Deuteronomy 34:5-10)"
Did Moses write his own obituary? Similarly, Joshua too speaks in detail about his own death in Joshua 24:29-33.
"And it came to pass after these things, that Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, DIED, … And they BURIED HIM … And Israel served the Lord all the days of Joshua, and all the days of the elders that overlived Joshua, and which had known all the works of the Lord, that he had done for Israel ….(Joshua 24:29-33)"
Such evidence is part of the large cache which has driven the Biblical scholars to come to the current recognition that most of the books of the Bible were not written by their supposed authors. For example, the authors of the Revised Standard Version of the Bible by Collins honestly say that the author of "Kings" is "Unknown." But if the author is unknown then why attribute it to God? How can it then be claimed to have been "inspired"? Continuing, we read that the book of Isaiah is "Mainly credited to Isaiah. Parts may have been written by others." Ecclesiastics: "Author. Doubtful, but commonly assigned to Solomon." Ruth: "Author. Not definitely known, perhaps Samuel." and on and on.
Let us have a slightly more detailed look at only one book of the New Testament, that of 'Hebrews':
"The author of the Book of Hebrews is unknown. Martin Luther suggested that Apollos was the author...Tertullian said that Hebrews was a letter of Barnabas...Adolf Harnack and J. Rendel Harris speculated that it was written by Priscilla (or Prisca). William Ramsey suggested that it was done by Philip. However, the traditional position is that the Apostle Paul wrote Hebrews...Eusebius believed that Paul wrote it, but Origen was not positive of Pauline authorship."
From the introduction to the King James Bible, New revised and updated sixth edition, the Hebrew/Greek Key Study, Red Letter Edition
and one book of the Old Testament:
"In tradition, [David] is credited with writing 73 of the Psalms; most scholars, however, consider this claim questionable."
Encarta Encyclopedia, under "David"
Is this how we define "inspired by God"?
I asked a reverand of the local church in my neighboorhod, on what gospel most often quoted and used, he quickly answered, the Gospel of St. John!
He wrote:
The late liberal theologian John A.T. Robinson in his book, Redating the New Testament, believed that all the NT books were completed before 70 A.D. The following comments from the late William F. Albright, considered to be one of the world's foremost archaeologists, regarding the composition of the New Testament are noteworthy:
We can already say emphatically that there is no longer any solid basis for dating any book of the New Testament after about A.D. 80, two full generations before the date between 130 and 150 given by the more radical New Testament critics of today. (Josh McDowell & Bill Wilson, He Walked Among Us- Evidence For The Historical Jesus [Thomas Nelson Publishers; Nashville, TN, 1993], p. 110 emphasis ours)
Albright also went on to say:
"In my opinion, every book of the New Testament was written by a baptized Jew in the forties and eighties of the first century A.D. (very probably sometime between about A.D. 50 and 75)." (Ibid.)
It is quite clear that Osama is alone in his radical claims regarding the alleged anonymity of NT authorship affecting its authenticity.
My response:
Well, I did provide the clear evidence from Christian theologians that the Bible's books and gospels are doubtful Mr. Shamoun. You quoting from other Christian theologians doesn't really refute anything here, because it does not directly refute the historical evidence that are provided in the quotes I provided.
He wrote:
Third, it is obvious that Osama hasn’t read the articles that show what the words "Injil" and "Torah" mean. According to several Muslims, THESE TERMS DO REFER TO BOTH THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS RESPECTIVELY. Here is the link again:
www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Bible/index.html
My response:
Here is what Allah Almighty Himself said in the Noble Quran regarding the Torah and Injil:
"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 Injil.....(The Noble Quran, 57:27)"
The underlined Arabic word says "Injil". GOD Almighty in this Noble Verse clearly says that He gave the Injil to Jesus peace be upon him. This means that Jesus' quotes of the Bible of today are the closest to the Truth of the Injil. The rest isn't according to Islam.
As to the Torah, it is possible that it includes all of the Revelations of Allah Almighty to the People of Israel's Prophets peace be upon all of them. But this still does not mean that the Old Testament of today is the Torah of the Noble Quran.
Allah Almighty did Say in the Noble Quran that the Jews had corrupted the Bible:
"Know they not Allah Knoweth what they conceal and what they reveal? And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book (i.e., the Bible), but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: 'This is from Allah,' To traffic with it for a miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (The Noble Quran, 2:77-79)"
Please visit: What parts of the Bible do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth? and Why?
Also, Allah Almighty did send Prophet Ishmael (Abraham's son) peace be upon him Revelations:
"Say ye: "We believe in God, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma'il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to God (in Islam)." (The Noble Quran, 2:136)"
We today don't have those Holy Revelations.
Allah Almighty's Holy Revelations in the Torah and Jesus' Injil and Ishamel's Book all have One Bottom Line: Believe in GOD Almighty and associate no partners with Him. This is what the Noble Quran's Message is too.
Please visit: What is the Wisdom of Islam?
He wrote:
In fact, had Osama read what we had written he would have seen that THERE IS NOT A SINGLE VERSE IN THE QURAN WHICH SAYS THAT THE TORAH WAS GIVEN TO MOSES:
http://answering-islam.org/Responses/Meherally/taurat.htm
Therefore, here is our challenge to Osama:
PRODUCE THE QURANIC VERSE(S) WHICH SAYS THAT ALLAH GAVE MOSES THE TORAH.
If you can’t, then how do you know that Moses even received the Torah? Where are you getting this information? We eagerly await Osama’s response.
My response:
I don't need to. It is possible that the Noble Quran's "Torah" is referring to the collection of the Holy Books that were revealed to the People of Israel's Prophets peace be upon them. But this however, does not mean that the current Old Testament is the Torah.
Like I mentioned above, Prophet Ishamael peace be upon him received Revelations from Allah Almighty. We today don't have these Holy Revelations. So the same could and would apply to the Bible's Old Testament today.
He wrote:
Finally, the Holy Bible doesn’t claim to be a complete or exhaustive record on the life of the Lord Jesus. It claims to be a sufficient record:
"Now Jesus performed many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples that are not recorded in this book. But these are recorded so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name." John 20:30-31
Seeing that the Holy Bible gives us all the information necessary for our salvation, what more do we need?
My response:
So Mr. Shamoun, given the Miracles of the Noble Quran that I provided above, it is quite possible that Prophet Jesus peace be upon him did foretell the coming of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him by the name as the Noble Quran claims:
"And remember, Jesus, the son of Mary, said: "O Children of Israel! I am the apostle of God (sent) to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me, and giving Glad Tidings of an Apostle to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." But when he came to them with Clear Signs, they said, "this is evident sorcery!" (The Noble Quran, 61:6)"
The New Testament as I proved above is NOT the Noble Quran's "Injil". So what ever you have today from so-called "Gospels" and "Books" in the New Testament, don't really have much Truth in them according to Islam.
Also, the discovered Gospel of Barnabas seem to agree very well with the Noble Quran about the coming of Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.
He wrote:
This is unlike the Quran which claims to be a fully detailed record even though it is far from being a complete guidance:
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/incomplete.htm
This last claim is quite ironic coming from a man who believes in a book which has basically little to nothing of importance to say about Jesus’ life and mission. Talking about a column? One can take all the alleged words of Jesus from the Quran and would still be unable to fill a paragraph, let alone the page!
My response:
Mr. Shamoun, the Noble Quran is not concerned about the innovations and lies that created the so-called "New Testament". We don't really care what's in the New Testament, nor does Jesus really have any value in Islam other than he is a Prophet from GOD Almighty to his people.
All of the Prophets' sayings in the Noble Quran are brief, not just Jesus'. The reason for this is because Allah Almighty is not concerned about Saying narrations and stories that are irrelevant to the True and Divine Message of Islam. The people of Israel and their stories have no special place in Islam.
Islam is for all people and all times and places. The Miracles of Islam are over whelming. And the Truth of Islam is also miraculous and over whelming. I personally find the Noble Quran to be very inspiring and connecting with GOD Almighty.
Again, please visit: What is the Wisdom of Islam?
He wrote:
Osama then tries to tackle my exegesis of Luke 23:34:
My response:
Mr. Shamoun, it's funny how you and your trinitarian fellows always try to elate Jesus to the level of the Creator of the Universe, while Jesus himself said otherwise as I will show in a moment. Let me remind you that GOD in the Old Testament said that He will put the Spirit of Fearing GOD Almighty in Jesus! Now any person with an atom of a brain would immediately realize that Jesus can not be the Creator of the Universe:
1. A shoot will come up from the stump of Jesse; from his
roots a Branch will bear fruit.
2. The Spirit of the LORD will rest on him (Jesus)-- the Spirit of
wisdom and of understanding, the Spirit of
counsel and of power, the Spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the LORD
(From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 11:1-3)
Also, please visit: The Spirit of GOD Almighty came upon others before and after Jesus in the Bible.
Now for what Jesus himself said, let us look at few quotes:
"I do nothing of myself (From the NIV Bible, John 8:28)"
"My Father (GOD) is greater than I (From the NIV Bible, John 14:28)"
"Father (GOD), into thy hands I commend my spirit (From the NIV Bible, Luke 23:46)"
"And Jesus said to him, ‘Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. (From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. (From the NIV Bible, Matthew 24:36)"
Do these quotes to a person with an atom of a brain suggest at all that Jesus is in the same level as the Creator of the Universe?
RESPONSE:
Osama, it is funny how you need to change subjects and toss red herrings instead of dealing with my exegesis of Luke 23:34. And had Osama even bothered looking up those links which were posted at the end of my rebuttal he would have discovered that I deal with all these passages in detail, and clearly show that IN THEIR RESPECTIVE CONTEXTS these passages do nothing to refute the deity of our Lord Jesus Christ.
My response:
Mr. Shamoun, I have debunked your article, word for word, at: My response to Sam Shamoun's rebuttal on Luke 24:44-48.
In fact Mr. Shamoun, you have not yet addressed the several verses from the Old Testament that seem so clearly to be prophesizing about Islam!!
Again, for your convenience, I have increased the size of the font, made the color blue, and centered my questions so that you can easily read them. Care to respond to them Mr. Shamoun?
Again, please visit: http://www.answering-christianity.com/luke24_44_48_rebuttal.htm.
You have yet to answer my response to your "rebuttal".
He wrote:
The one passage I haven’t addressed is Isaiah 11, so I will now address it. Osama erroneously assumes that since the person referred to in Isaiah (which is Jesus of course) is inspired by the Spirit of the Lord to fear God, the person in question cannot also be God at the same time.
My response:
How can GOD Almighty fear Himself?!
He wrote:
Osama’s argument is directly a result of his a priori assumption of Unitarianism, i.e. that God is one in Being and one in Person. Osama thinks that since God is only one Person then the shoot of Jesse (i.e. Jesus) cannot be that God. If he were that God then this basically would imply that he essentially feared himself.
My response:
My argument is that GOD Almighty had put the "Spirit of fearing GOD" in Jesus. This is another proof that Jesus is not GOD Almighty Himself!
He wrote:
Osama’s logic goes something like this:
The problem with this syllogism is that premise 1 is false since God is not only one Person according to the Holy Bible.
My response:
Well according to www.answering-christianity.com/at.htm, the Bible contains tons of verses that prove without doubt that GOD Almighty is an Absolute One GOD Almighty!
He wrote:
The shoot of Jesse can be both distinct from God and be God at the same time, precisely what Isaiah stated in an earlier chapter! Isaiah, under inspiration, wrote:
"For unto us a child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulders, and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The Mighty God (El Gibbor), The Father of Eternity (abi ad), The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this." Isaiah 9:6-7
My response:
Mr. Shamoun is a deliberate liar who misquoted Isaiah 9:6-7! It doesn't say "The Mighty God", nor does it say "The Father of Eternity"! "El Gibbor" means "mighty God", and not "The Mighty God".
Here is what Isaiah 9:6-7 say:
"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with justice and righteousness from hence forth even forever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will perform this. (From the NIV Bible, Isaiah 9:6-7)"
Notice it says "his name" shall be called. It doesn't say "He will be the...." This is very important, because the "God" title was given to others before and after Jesus in the Bible. As to "everlasting Father", it doesn't say "Eternal Father". The Jews also did call others "The Father of Judaism" before.
From www.answering-christianity.com/godtitle.htm
The "God" title in the Bible was given to others:
The sections of this article are:
1- In Isaiah 9:6 and the Old Testament.
2- The "Mighty God" translation.
3- Did Jesus ever claim to be "Mighty God" or "God"?
4- Questions to you.
5- Is Jesus the biological Son of GOD?
6- The "God" title for Jesus and others in the New Testament.
Answering verses such
as Luke 8:39 and others.
- So can we trust the current English
Translations then?
7- The Gospel of Luke is corrupted anyway according to
the Bible's Theologians.
8- What about "The everlasting Father" title for Jesus?
Doesn't that prove he is
GOD Almighty?
9- Conclusion.
In Isaiah 9:6 and the Old Testament:
Christians claim that since the predicted Prophet's name (Jesus) will be called "Mighty God" in Isaiah 9:6-7, then therefore, he must be GOD Almighty Himself.
Let us read the Verses: "For
unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his
shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, The
everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there
shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to
establish it with justice and righteousness from hence forth even forever. The zeal of the
Lord of hosts will perform this. (Isaiah 9:6-7)"
It is quite unfortunate that in the old Jewish culture, people used to be named
"Godly" names. This is quite misleading and deceiving to Christians when
they try to define the deity of Jesus.
Many people in the Jewish old culture were called "God" before Jesus' existence
on earth. The following translations were verified by http://bible.crosswalk.com
and the Jewish Sabbath
Temple:
Note: Some of the words have different translations in the http://bible.crosswalk.com site than in the Jewish Sabbath Temple translation. I trust the Jewish Sabbath Temple translation, because they speak far better and more accurate Hebrew than the Bible Crosswalk site who are Christians and are desperate to prove the trinity dogma even if it means giving inaccurate and wrong/false translations:
(the first two were added later)
1- Jerusalem was called "The LORD our Righteousness". "In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will live in safety. This is the name by which it will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness (Yahweh tsidkenû).' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 33:16)"
2- Abraham called a mountain "The LORD will Provide" (Yahweh Jireh). "So Abraham called that place The LORD Will Provide (Yahweh Jireh). And to this day it is said, "On the mountain of the LORD it will be provided. (From the NIV Bible, Genesis 22:14)"
3- Ezekiel means "Strong God". It also means "Yahweh is Strong
God".
4- Elijah. This name is short for EliJehovah or
"Eli Yahweh". Eli means my GOD, and Yahweh is the name and
title of GOD Almighty in the Bible. Does "Eli Yahweh" or Elijah mean that
the person is Jehovah Himself?
5- Israel means "Challenge God", "he struggles with God", or
"fight with God". It also means "Defeat God".
6- Gabriel also means "Strong God".
7- Isaiah or Jesaiah, which is short for "Jesa Yahweh" means
"Salvation from Yahweh". It could also mean "Salvation".
8- Joshua, which is short for "Josh Yahweh" means
"Yahweh Saves".
9- Elli, which is a common name for men before and after Jesus, means "God". Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' " "gods" here in Hebrew is "Elohim", which is plural of "EL". It is the same exact thing as "EL" used for Jesus in Isaiah 9:6, since "gods" is a combination of several "EL"s. And as clearly shown here, for someone to be called "god" or "God" in the Bible it wouldn't make him GOD Almighty Himself, the LORD or Jehovah. I also want to point out that ANY "Son of GOD" in the Bible is a "god" or "God" as clearly shown in Psalm 82:6.
Note: The trinitarian liars who translate the Bible into English play dirty tricks about capitalizing and lowering the "g" in "God" to prove their trinity lie, while they fully know that it is the same word used for ALL!
10- Immanuel, Emanuel, Emmanuel, Immanuel, or Imanuel are the SAME NAME
and are another name for Jesus, means "With us is God". This name is also
common for men before and after Jesus.
11- Elihu means "My God is He".
12- Gedaliah means "Jehovah is Great". Again, Gedaliah is short for "Gedal Yahweh". Is the person who was called "Jehovah is Great" GOD Almighty Himself? People before and after Jesus are given this name. See 2 Kings 25:22-24.
13- Eliadah or Eliada means "God knows".
14- Eliab means "my God is Father".
15- Elzaphan means "God is Protector"
16- Eliakim means "God raises".
17- Elisha means "God is Salvation".
18- Eleazar means "God has helped"
19- Judah or Yahawdah means "Praised". It generally means "Praised by Yahweh".
20- Hashabiah means "Jehovah has considered".
21- Mattithiah means "Gift of Jehovah".
22- Michael (nick name "Mike") means "who is like God". Yet, non is like Him, the Almighty. See Exodus 8:10.
23- Jesus, Yahshua, Yeshua or Yashua are the SAME NAME, and
mean "Salvation". It doesn't mean "God Saves" as Christians
claim. Jesus (Yeshua) means in Hebrew "salvation" and not "God
saves". Yud Shin Waw Ain - this name doesn't include the word "God".
Joshua (Yehoshya) - Yod Hey - Waw Shin Ain
Isaya (Yeshayah) - Yod Shin Ain - Yod Hey .
These two names are combination of Yod, Shin, Ain - salvation and Yod, Hey - Yahwe.
Yosh Hey (Yah) is common short from Yahwe, for example Alleluia comes from "Halelu
Yah" - "Glorify Yahwe".
In the above examples, we clearly see that the old Jewish culture gave "Godly" titles to people who are not in anyway divine.
Notice that in Isaiah 9:6, it clearly says "and his NAME shall be...." This clearly proves that "Mighty God" is just a name given to the coming Prophet (Jesus). Since this is just a name, this also clearly proves other people in the old Jewish culture were named that name before, even if they're not mentioned in the current Bible.
Have Isaiah 9:6 said "and he will be God Almighty Himself" or "and he will be the God Almighty" then this would be different, because we now would be talking about not just a NAME given to someone, but rather GOD Almighty Himself.
Important Note: There is not a single Verse in the New Testament where Jesus was called directly or named directly "Mighty God" or "God". Notice in Isaiah 9:6 it clearly says "and his name shall be...." Jesus was called "Son of GOD" as many others in the Bible were called Sons of GOD as shown below in this article, but he never even once was addressed as "Mighty God" or "God", nor he ever claimed to be "Mighty God" or "God".
The Jews believe that Isaiah 9:6 was referring to somebody else, other than Jesus. The Book of Isaiah which obviously contains Isaiah 9:6 came 700 before the birth of Jesus. The Jews had absolutely no problem calling somebody who came 700 years before Jesus "El Gibor (Mighty God)". That person's name is Hezekiah. The Jews believe that Isaiah 9:6 is referring to Hezekiah and not Jesus, and they did indeed address Hezekiah as "Mighty God". This proves that many people before Jesus were named even at birth "El Gibor (Mighty God)", just like people were also named "Ezekiel (Strong God)", "Elli (God)", "Gabriel (Strong God)", etc...
The "Mighty God" translation:
"Mighty God" in Isaiah 9:6 is "El Gibor". This is not exactly
"Mighty God", but close. "Strong" is more correct (but it is
different from strong of "hazak"). Here both El and Gibor are nouns - this
is short full spell is "El Hu Gibor".
Anyway "El Gibor" and "Gabriel" are same thing. They both mean "Strong God". "Gabriel" is an angel's name in the Bible.
The word "Gibor" in Isaiah 9:6 and the word "Gibor" of Gabriel have exactly the same root, and they are both the same word. The word itself can also be translated as "Man of God".
By the way, "EL" can also mean "Judge". So "El Gibor" can also be translated as "Strong Judge".
The "Mighty God" translation is just one possibility. This type of differences in translation exists throughout the Hebrew language, where words' meaning change depending on the sentence. That is why there is no one single solid Bible Translation!. Theologians have difficulties agreeing on some key issues in translations. That's why we see so many different Bibles with so many different translations.
But anyhow, even if "Mighty God" was the right translation, it is still just a NAME given to Jesus and nothing more. It doesn't in anyway prove that he is the creator of the Universe. Many people as shown above were given the misleading "Godly" titles before Jesus.
Did Jesus ever claim to be "Mighty God" or "God"?
From Sheikh Ahmed Deedat's work; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Let us look at John 10:30 "I (Jesus) and the Father are One." This verse is severely misunderstood and is taken out of context, because beginning at verse John 10:23 we read (in the context of 10:30) about Jesus talking to the Jews. In verse John 10:28-30, talking about his followers as his sheep, he states: "...Neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father who gave them me, is greater than all, and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are One."
These verses prove only that Jesus and the Father are one in that no man can pluck the sheep out of either's hand. It does not at all state that Jesus is God's equal in everything. In fact the words of Jesus, " My Father, who gave them me is Greater than ALL...," in John 10:29 completely negates this claim, otherwise we are left with a contradiction just a sentence apart. All includes everyone even Jesus.
Also let us look at verse John 17:20-22 "That the ALL may be made ONE. Like thou Father art in me, I in thee, that they may be ONE in us. I in them, they in me, that they may be perfect in ONE". In this verse, the same word ONE used, the Greek, HEN is used, not only to describe Jesus and the Father but to describe Jesus, the Father and eleven of the twelve disciples of Jesus. So here if that implies equality, we have a unique case of 13 Gods.
Of the verse in question, "I and the Father are One" in (John 10:30), we also need to take note of the verses following the 30th verse in the text. In those verses, the Jews accuse Jesus falsely of claiming to be God by these words. He however replies, proving their accusation wrong by their own text: "The Jews answered him saying,'For a good work we stone thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou being a man, makest thyself a God '" (John 10:33).
Jesus replies to this accusation saying: "Jesus answered them, 'Is it not written in your Law, "I said ye are gods. If He can call them gods, unto whom the word of God came, say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, "Thou blasphemeth," because I said I am the son of God?'" (John 10:34-36).
Let us look at Acts 2:22 "O you men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a MAN approved of God among you..." Peter in the Book of Acts testifies about Jesus. Jesus thus even to his disciples, as to early Christians, not poisoned by Pauline doctrine, was a man, not a God.
From www.jewsforjudaism.org:
Question: In John 10:30 Jesus says, "I and the Father are
one [hen]." Doesn't this show that they are one in essence?
This statement does not suggest either a dual or triune deity. What John's Jesus meant by
the word hen ("one") becomes clear from his prayer concerning the apostles:
"That they may be one [hen], just as we are one [hen]" (John 17:22), which means
that they should be united in agreement with one another as he (Jesus) is always united in
agreement with God, as stated: "I [Jesus] always do the things that are pleasing to
Him [God]" (John 8:29).
There is thus no implication that Jesus and God, or the twelve apostles are to be
considered as of one essence.
Please visit Does calling Jesus "Son of God" prove that he is GOD?
Do People and Angels bowing down to Jesus in Worship really prove that he is the Creator of the Universe? See how the word "Worship" used for Jesus doesn't even exist in the original Greek Bibles. The Trinitarian English translations are nothing but hoaxes and deceptions.
Did Jews continually try to stone Jesus prove that he claimed to be GOD?
Does GOD's spirit in Jesus prove that Jesus is GOD? Others had it too.
Did Jesus ever claim to be "Mighty God" or "God"? Responding to the "I and the Father are one. (John 10:30)" claim.
Thomas is misunderstood in verse John 20:28.
Does Jesus saying "I am" prove that he is GOD?
Misunderstanding Jesus' claim about him being the "Alpha and Omega".
Questions to you:
From the names above, do you honestly think that "Strong God", "Yahweh is
Strong God", "Yahweh Saves", "God", "Yahweh", "My
God is He", "God is Salvation", "Jehovah is Great" and
"Mighty God" have much differences in their meanings?
I mean, why consider Jesus as GOD Himself, which is a great blasphemy, when he was given a normal "Godly" title that was given to others before him?
If Jesus was named "Jehovah is Great (Gedaliah)" for instance, then we would see Trinitarian Christians trying their best to prove that he is GOD Almighty Himself. Why then not consider the people who were named "Gedaliah" before and after Jesus as GOD Almighty Himself also? Why not consider these people divine as well?
Important Note: So if Jesus was named "Michael or Mike (who is like God)", then we would see Trinitarian Christians claim that he is GOD Almighty, since Exodus 8:10 clearly states that there is non like GOD, and yet Jesus (Mike) is like GOD which would without a doubt make him GOD.
This is the type of false interpretations and conclusions that Trinitarian Christians fall into.
Very Important Note: The reason why the foretold person would be regarded as "Mighty God" is not because he will be GOD Almighty Himself. His name or title being "Mighty God" is nothing but a way to show that the person will be very important and very powerful. He will be like a God on earth because of his Might. I must emphasize that again, the person's "NAME" will be called "Mighty God". Isaiah 9:6 never said that the person will be GOD Almighty Himself, or GOD Almighty will be that person. The word "NAME" means that the name will be just a (misleading) Godly title as many misleading Godly titles were given to others before and after Jesus peace be upon him in the Bible. I must also emphasize that in the New Testament, Jesus was not even once called or addressed as "Mighty God" or "God", nor did he ever claim to be "Mighty God" or "God". So if he were indeed the foretold person in Isaiah 9:6 (which I personally believe he were), then this means that Jesus peace be upon him is not GOD Almighty, but a powerful Messenger of GOD Almighty or someone who has Might that was chosen by GOD Almighty. The Jews as I mentioned above, believe that the person is Hezekiah and not Jesus. Either way, the person in Isaiah 9:6 is not GOD Almighty Himself.
Is Jesus the biological Son of GOD?
Trinitarian Christians claim that since Jesus was called "Son of GOD", then this would make him the Creator of the Universe Himself. This is a great blasphemy, because this belief holds no concrete ground what so ever!. You do not call someone GOD Almighty Himself from a conclusion, especially when it easily can be refuted.
Many people before Jesus were called "Sons of GOD" in the Bible. Let us look at few of them:
1- Exodus 4:22 "Thus saith Jehovah, Israel is my son, even my firstborn." Israel was GOD's Son before Jesus since Israel is the "first born". Does this make Israel divine?
2- Jeremiah 31:9 "I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my firstborn." Ephraim is another name for Israel.
3- Psalm 2:7 "....Jehovah had said onto me (David), thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee." Since GOD Almighty chose David to be His begotten Son, does this make David divine too?
4- Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' " As clearly shown here, for someone to be called "god" or "God" in the Bible it wouldn't make him GOD Almighty Himself, the LORD or Jehovah. I also want to point out that any "Son of GOD" in the Bible is a "god" or "God".
The "Son of GOD" title that was given to Jesus wasn't the only title for him. Jesus was also called "Son of David." Keep in mind that Jesus came at least 1,000 years after King David. Jesus was also called "Son of Man". See Matthew 1:1, Matthew 9:27, Matthew 12:23, Matthew 15:22, Matthew 20:30-31, Matthew 22:42, and many other verses.
Is the Man whom Jesus was called his son (possibly David) divine? Is David divine since Jesus is his Son?
How come Christian Roman Catholics have created the Theological Science of Maryology, and never created the Theological Science of Davidology? I mean think about it, if Jesus the "Almighty GOD" was called "Son of David", then shouldn't this make David a divine person, since he is one from the many billions that GOD created in this world?
Jesus was called:
Son of GOD
Son of David
Son of Man
Why consider Jesus as the actual biological Son of GOD, when the same expression was used for King David being Jesus' Father who existed 1,000 years before Jesus?
Why can't "Son of GOD" that was used for Jesus be just an expression just like the "Godly" titles and "Son of GOD" expressions that were used for others before Jesus as well as shown above?
The "God" title for Jesus and others in the New Testament:
As clearly shown in the section "Did Jesus ever claim to be "Mighty God" or "God"?" above and all of the articles I linked at the bottom of it, Jesus peace be upon him never claimed to be GOD or anything part of GOD. He never gave the "God" title to himself.
There are however verses in the New Testament that give Jesus the "God" title such as the following:
" 'Return home and tell how much God has done for you.' So the man went away and told all over town how much Jesus had done for him. (From the NIV Bible, Luke 8:39)"
But it is important to know that this "God" title in the New Testament was given to others beside Jesus as well. It is not the unique "The LORD" or "Jehovah" title that was given only to the Father, was given to Jesus. No where in the Bible was Jesus given such title.
Let us look an instance where the "God" title was given to others beside Jesus in the New Testament:
When I debate with Christians about this "God" expression given to Jesus compared to other Prophets and people, they claim that the word "God" with a capital "G" refers to God himself, and the word "god" with small "g" refers to humans. They also claim that they came to this type of translation from the Greek translation. Some lies and discrepancies had been inserted into the Bible through capitalizing the letter "G" when it is supposed to be a small "g" when referring to Jesus:
The following is from the work of Sheikh Ahmed Deedat; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Let us look at John 1:1 "In the
beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." This is often presented from the Gospel of
John to prove that Jesus was God. There are however several problems with this claim: By this verse it is assumed that Jesus was the
"word" and since the word was God and became flesh, Jesus is God. The statement
that John reproduced in his gospel however was uttered not by John but by A. Philo of Alexandria, years before Jesus or John
were born. It is therefore completely unlikely that Philo was even remotely referring to
Jesus.
There is also another reason for not capitalizing the "G" in John 1:1, considering the Greek of the above verse which disproves
the assertion that Jesus is referred to as God in the verse. In the verse above, the first
time the word God is used, the Greek is HOTHEOS (the same exact word
given to Satan as God in 2 Corinthians 4:4. The NIV Bible Author
wrote "god" for Satan instead of "God"), which means The God.
The second time the word God is used,"....and the word was God," the word for
God is TONTHEOS, which means "a god". Europeans have evolved a system of
capital and small letters non-existent in Greek. The God, HOTHEOS is translated as God
with a capital G, whereas Tontheos, which means A or ANY God is translated with a small g,
god. In this case however, we see the unlawful translators trying to prove Jesus being God
by putting capital G for both whereas it doesn't belong in the case of the
"word".
Here is how 2 Corinthians 4:4 is read in the current English translation of the NIV Bible:
"The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. (From the NIV Bible, 2 Corinthians 4:4)"
It should've been written as "The God of this age....." since the same Greek word was used for Jesus in describing him for being a "God".
Let us look at Psalm 82:6 "I said, 'You are "gods"; you are all sons of the Most High.' " As clearly shown here, for someone to be called "god" or "God" in the Bible it wouldn't make him GOD Almighty Himself, the LORD or Jehovah. I also want to point out that any "Son of GOD" in the Bible is a "god" or "God".
So can we trust the current English Translations then?
Absolutely not! Given that facts above about verse John 1:1, how can we expect from an ordinary English speaking Christian who wants to spread his religion with all his heart honestly and faithfully to understand this lie of capitalizing the small "g" in John 1:1 and other verses, and not capitalizing the "g" in 2 Corinthians 4:4 for Satan for instance? Must we allow our faith to be all based on what other authors decide to insert from their own personal views into the Bible?
The Gospel of Luke is corrupted anyway according to the Bible's Theologians:
Regarding the verse Luke 8:39 above, we can't really trust it's validity anyway, because the entire gospel of Luke is corrupt according to the Theologians and Historians of the NIV Bible.
The following was taken from the Just who were the authors of the Bible? article.
The Gospel of Luke:
"The author's name does not appear in the book, but much unmistakable evidence points to Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1529)"
Again, we don't know for sure whether it was Luke or not who wrote the "Gospel of Luke" since his name doesn't appear in the Book. The Gospel itself seems to be a compromising one to the Word of GOD. Let us look at the following:
"Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, (Luke 1:3)"
Few problems with this Gospel from the quote above:
1- The author was not inspired, and knew for sure that he was not inspired by GOD Almighty to write the Book since he didn't mention about any divine inspiration, and he said "...since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning..." Where do we see GOD's inspiration in this?
2- The author wrote it for the purpose of "his most excellent Theophilus." Since when we compromise GOD Almighty and document His Holy Words for the purpose of other higher (in rank) human beings?
I say it again, I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!
Also, beside, what evidence are they talking about?! The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus. So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering as the True Living Word of GOD.
Further from brother Vipor Poison; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Luke 1:3
Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it
seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,
The following is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625b.htm
http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625a.htm
If Theophilus existed in either the 2nd or the 4th centuries then how could the writer of this gospel be the same Luke who is supposed to be with Jesus in the 1st century.
Maybe he lived to about 200 years.
What a