إعـــــــلان

**محمد سني 1989** · 11-08-2014, 00:21

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة Burninglight مشاهدة المشاركة

Even if this Codex Sinaitiu was reliable, I don't see how it hurts the message of Christ's death and resurrection. And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid. They were afraid of what? Was it because they didn't see Christ in the tomb? How does this take away from the death and resurrection of Christ? The point is we Christians believe the story of Christ's death and resurrection, and we put our faith in it. We believe Satan would have us believe it is not true. We believe in it as strongly as you do in Islam; so, both our religions can't be right. The judgment day is what I look forward to. I look at the fruit of both our religion, and I see more peace and love in Christianity. Jesus said you will know prophets by their fruit. I see the fruit of Islam in Iraq by how they are killing Christians and hanging their heads on poles. I don't want any part of a religion that does such things.

Peace to you

The gospel of Mark is the oldest of the four gospels written in about 40 AD , The fact that it contains such manipulation gives us many conclusions:

1. The oldest written gospel according to christians contained manipulation in its central theology (ressurection)

2. The fact that the gospel of Mark contradicts the other gospels because there is a difference between not telling anyone and telling someone

In the original in Mark they told no one :

”8 And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

but this ending did not appeal to the other writers so they added something in Matthew:

”8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”
Matthew 28 : 8-10

The first passage shows them with fear and not telling anyone and the second they were with joy and told others clear contradiction in the text

As for the codex Sinaticus (350 AD) it is not just the oldest bible with the whole NT but also the oldest manuscript with the ending of Mark , This short ending of mark also exist in the Codex Vaticanus (4th century)

These are the two oldest manuscripts we have of the ending of Mark. These old manuscripta also contains other multiple varriations from what we have today

The rest of what you said contains a diversion from the actual subject in an attempt to disuade yourself of the topic, but just read about the catholic crusades against the arab christians and the thousands they killed in jerusalim , try to read about the incusitions or the burning of protestants in england , or the hundreds of genocides committed by the roman empire after adopting christianity against jews, pagans and other christian sects called heratics. The history of your religion in rome my friend contains the blood of thousands and thousands of innocents just look at what the spanish did to the original indians in south America when they conquered it.

**Burninglight** · 11-08-2014, 17:38

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة محمد سني 1989 مشاهدة المشاركة

The gospel of Mark is the oldest of the four gospels written in about 40 AD , The fact that it contains such manipulation gives us many conclusions:

1. The oldest written gospel according to christians contained manipulation in its central theology (ressurection)

2. The fact that the gospel of Mark contradicts the other gospels because there is a difference between not telling anyone and telling someone

In the original in Mark they told no one :

”8 And they went out and fled from the tomb, for trembling and astonishment had seized them, and they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

but this ending did not appeal to the other writers so they added something in Matthew:

”8 So they departed quickly from the tomb with fear and great joy, and ran to tell his disciples.9 And behold, Jesus met them and said, “Greetings!” And they came up and took hold of his feet and worshiped him.10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”
Matthew 28 : 8-10

The first passage shows them with fear and not telling anyone and the second they were with joy and told others clear contradiction in the text

As for the codex Sinaticus (350 AD) it is not just the oldest bible with the whole NT but also the oldest manuscript with the ending of Mark , This short ending of mark also exist in the Codex Vaticanus (4th century)

These are the two oldest manuscripts we have of the ending of Mark. These old manuscripta also contains other multiple varriations from what we have today

The rest of what you said contains a diversion from the actual subject in an attempt to disuade yourself of the topic, but just read about the catholic crusades against the arab christians and the thousands they killed in jerusalim , try to read about the incusitions or the burning of protestants in england , or the hundreds of genocides committed by the roman empire after adopting christianity against jews, pagans and other christian sects called heratics. The history of your religion in rome my friend contains the blood of thousands and thousands of innocents just look at what the spanish did to the original indians in south America when they conquered it.

There is no evidence that Jesus didn't rise from the dead in what you wrote or show with ancient manuscripts. Jesus predicted His death three times, and the disciples saw Him after His death. You can choose to believe what you want. As for the Catholic Crusades and what not, what does that have to do with the Bible and true Christianity? Those who committed such acts went in disobedience to the Bible, so what is your point? Look today what Christians and Muslims are doing and judge by that fruit.

Peace

**محمد سني 1989** · 12-08-2014, 00:07

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة Burninglight مشاهدة المشاركة

There is no evidence that Jesus didn't rise from the dead in what you wrote or show with ancient manuscripts. Jesus predicted His death three times, and the disciples saw Him after His death. You can choose to believe what you want. As for the Catholic Crusades and what not, what does that have to do with the Bible and true Christianity? Those who committed such acts went in disobedience to the Bible, so what is your point? Look today what Christians and Muslims are doing and judge by that fruit.

Peace

I am not talking about the ressurection rather the manipulation of the bible . Try to focus

peace

**Burninglight** · 12-08-2014, 02:09

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة محمد سني 1989 مشاهدة المشاركة

I am not talking about the ressurection rather the manipulation of the bible . Try to focus

peace

What manipulation has happened that we don't know about? We didn't have a Christian Uthman to burn our manuscripts that is why we and even Muslims know what has been added or omitted from the Bible. This is all the more reason we could trust the Bible. You cannot prove the perfect preservation of the Quran; so why do you throw rocks when you life in a glass house?

Peace

**محمد سني 1989** · 12-08-2014, 04:00

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة Burninglight مشاهدة المشاركة

What manipulation has happened that we don't know about? We didn't have a Christian Uthman to burn our manuscripts that is why we and even Muslims know what has been added or omitted from the Bible. This is all the more reason we could trust the Bible. You cannot prove the perfect preservation of the Quran; so why do you throw rocks when you life in a glass house?

Peace

Now I know you are a curving to another subject . We already had this discussion about Uthman in the Adam and Eve story clearly you are repeating to run away

however I do praise you about admitting there are ommisions and additions in the bible

**Burninglight** · 12-08-2014, 05:22

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة محمد سني 1989 مشاهدة المشاركة

Now I know you are a curving to another subject . We already had this discussion about Uthman in the Adam and Eve story clearly you are repeating to run away

however I do praise you about admitting there are ommisions and additions in the bible

Curving is sometimes called for. It may have been discussed but by no means gainsaid. You don't need to praise me about my knowing about things that have been added to certain versions of the Bible. The point is we have hundreds of copies to compare and contrast the different versions and determine for ourselves.
This is what you cannot do with the Quran, because the prove was destroyed before recompilation. Who made Uthman Allah's editor and chief or who gave him the divine mandate to put the Quran to writing. Quran means recite so how does one get write out of say? Was Uthman a prophet of Islam? It may have been discussed, but it was cursory and unconvincing IMHO.
Peace

**محمد سني 1989** · 13-08-2014, 02:17

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة Burninglight مشاهدة المشاركة

Curving is sometimes called for. It may have been discussed but by no means gainsaid. You don't need to praise me about my knowing about things that have been added to certain versions of the Bible. The point is we have hundreds of copies to compare and contrast the different versions and determine for ourselves.
This is what you cannot do with the Quran, because the prove was destroyed before recompilation. Who made Uthman Allah's editor and chief or who gave him the divine mandate to put the Quran to writing. Quran means recite so how does one get write out of say? Was Uthman a prophet of Islam? It may have been discussed, but it was cursory and unconvincing IMHO.
Peace

You see you agin prove to me you know nothing about Islam , Uthman did not write the quran rather it was first written during the time of the prophet and gathered and fully written a year after the prophet during the time of Abubakr the first caliph by Zaid , who was the same one to also write many copies of the Quran by the order of Uthman so that it would be distributed to the islamic cities . Your huge mistake is thinking that the Quran was not written for thirty years and then came Uthman , this is a huge misconception.

As for being unconvincing LOL , you did not read my response , I know that for sure because my responses to that subject was by narrating specific narrations from Saheeh Al Bukhary which described the three stages . This was the 17 response in here : https://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t200432-2.html

Unless you can actually answer then by just repeating such statements you are just (with all do respect) making a fool of yourself

As for the bible I am not talking about current versions rather I am talking about ALL the oldest manuscripts before the sixth century almost which DO NOT contain these additions.

peace

**Burninglight** · 13-08-2014, 19:22

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة محمد سني 1989 مشاهدة المشاركة

[SIZE=5]You see you agin prove to me you know nothing about Islam , Uthman did not write the quran rather it was first written during the time of the prophet and gathered and fully written a year after the prophet during the time of Abubakr the first caliph by Zaid , who was the same one to also write many copies of the Quran by the order of Uthman so that it would be distributed to the islamic cities . Your huge mistake is thinking that the Quran was not written for thirty years and then came Uthman , this is a huge misconception.

I have proved nothing of the sought. You are misunderstanding what I said again. I never said that Uthman wrote the Quran or anything about thirty years. I said he didn't depend on memory to recompile it, and used the help of text to recompile it. He uses Hafsah's copy and after he was done recompiling the Quran and after Hafsah's death, her copy that Uthman used to recompile the Quran you now have was destroyed. So you don't have a copy of Hafsah's Quran to find out how well or poorly Uthman copied from it. Most Muslims don't know this story. It seems your not comprehending what I write.

As for the earlier additions of the Bible, what is it you claim is not in them or that detracts from the central gospel message? Be specific or hold you peace. I am not making a fool out of myself ,and you know it. You are responding according to your misconception of the Bible, Christianity, Islam and of even what I write to you.
Peace

**محمد سني 1989** · 14-08-2014, 02:37

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة Burninglight مشاهدة المشاركة

I have proved nothing of the sought. You are misunderstanding what I said again. I never said that Uthman wrote the Quran or anything about thirty years. I said he didn't depend on memory to recompile it, and used the help of text to recompile it. He uses Hafsah's copy and after he was done recompiling the Quran and after Hafsah's death, her copy that Uthman used to recompile the Quran you now have was destroyed. So you don't have a copy of Hafsah's Quran to find out how well or poorly Uthman copied from it. Most Muslims don't know this story. It seems your not comprehending what I write.

As for the earlier additions of the Bible, what is it you claim is not in them or that detracts from the central gospel message? Be specific or hold you peace. I am not making a fool out of myself ,and you know it. You are responding according to your misconception of the Bible, Christianity, Islam and of even what I write to you.
Peace

First Hafsa's copy was not destroyed by uthman rather 15 years later by marwan the govenor of Medina who worked for Moawiyah the ruler at that time . By that time the quran copies were already spread throughout the islamic cities .
Also We have an agreement between the companions of the prophet on what Uthman ordered and the quran manuscripts which existed back then
were multiple narrations agree that the companions such as Ali compared what they had with what Zaid wrote and it was identical .

Second : Actually you are responding according to your lack of your information on bible and Islam . The contradiction hits the central belief of christianity yet you claimed that there is no cintradiction with the central message although there is a clear contradiction as I have shown you before in the two endings OR ELSE the writers of the fifth and sixth century would not have added the passage!!!

peace

**Burninglight** · 14-08-2014, 04:19

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة محمد سني 1989 مشاهدة المشاركة

First Hafsa's copy was not destroyed by uthman rather 15 years later by marwan the govenor of Medina who worked for Moawiyah the ruler at that time . By that time the quran copies were already spread throughout the islamic cities .
Also We have an agreement between the companions of the prophet on what Uthman ordered and the quran manuscripts which existed back then
were multiple narrations agree that the companions such as Ali compared what they had with what Zaid wrote and it was identical .

Second : Actually you are responding according to your lack of your information on bible and Islam . The contradiction hits the central belief of christianity yet you claimed that there is no cintradiction with the central message although there is a clear contradiction as I have shown you before in the two endings OR ELSE the writers of the fifth and sixth century would not have added the passage!!!

peace

First of all, I never said Uthman destroyed Hafsah's copy. I just stated that it was destroyed after her death and FYI, I know who destroyed it, but I mentioned it not, because as far as Christians are concerned, you cannot prove perfect preservation of the Quran, because you have no copy that traces directly back to Muhammad. And even it you could prove it, that is not proof it came or was ordained by my Creator! Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice and they follow me" I hear only Jesus Christ who said, "No man comes unto the father (God) but by ME... You will die in your sin unless you believe I am HE." May you come to the knowledge of truth, and understand what I write.

Peace

**محمد سني 1989** · 14-08-2014, 13:41

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة Burninglight مشاهدة المشاركة

First of all, I never said Uthman destroyed Hafsah's copy. I just stated that it was destroyed after her death and FYI, I know who destroyed it, but I mentioned it not, because as far as Christians are concerned, you cannot prove perfect preservation of the Quran, because you have no copy that traces directly back to Muhammad. And even it you could prove it, that is not proof it came or was ordained by my Creator! Jesus said, "My sheep hear my voice and they follow me" I hear only Jesus Christ who said, "No man comes unto the father (God) but by ME... You will die in your sin unless you believe I am HE." May you come to the knowledge of truth, and understand what I write.

Peace

Difference between us is that we have an oral tradition and narrations in books which shows the preservation of the quran and I have mentioned this in the last response and also in the same post with the narrations which shows the direct trace to the prophet but if manuscripts is your claim well then you have no direct manuscript that traces to jesus , the oldest is a COPY FRAMENT of one simple passage of the gospel of john which traces back to the first half of the second century!!!! thats the oldest and you don't know who wrote it !!!!!

**Burninglight** · 14-08-2014, 15:50

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة محمد سني 1989 مشاهدة المشاركة

Difference between us is that we have an oral tradition and narrations in books which shows the preservation of the quran and I have mentioned this in the last response and also in the same post with the narrations which shows the direct trace to the prophet but if manuscripts is your claim well then you have no direct manuscript that traces to jesus , the oldest is a COPY FRAMENT of one simple passage of the gospel of john which traces back to the first half of the second century!!!! thats the oldest and you don't know who wrote it !!!!!

Christians don't claim perfect preservation of the manuscripts or that it traces back to Jesus; we claim that the central gospel message is sound and whole; this doctrine had been preserved by God. Oral tradition depends on man's ability to keep track, but man is finite and man fails. God never fails and never fails to preserve His word and message the first time He gives it in the torah and gospel. I cannot believe God would not preserve His word the first time He gave it, and then decided to raise up an unread prophet to preserve it. This sounds like contrived human narration and tradition that Jesus warned about when He said: "Beware lest by your tradition you make the laws of God to no effect"
Peace

**Burninglight** · 14-08-2014, 19:25

Abraham paid tithes to the high priest from Salem and he didn't know where he came from or where he went. We don't have to know who put the gospel of John to writing. It is what God had revealed for many centuries before Islam, Mormons and JWs try to change or corrupt it. We believe it goes along with what Jesus said and prophecy about Jesus in the OT.

**محمد سني 1989** · 15-08-2014, 01:49

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة Burninglight مشاهدة المشاركة

Christians don't claim perfect preservation of the manuscripts or that it traces back to Jesus; we claim that the central gospel message is sound and whole; this doctrine had been preserved by God. "
Peace

I will only answer this part by :

I already showed you the contradiction in the central message which actually caused the addition to the Mark

I cannot believe that God would leave his son's and most important message corrupted , if so then it is not from god , I could not depend on it

Since you are comparing us to mormons , You are to be compared with mithraism and hiduism and other ideologies with trinity pagan ideologies

peace

**Burninglight** · 16-08-2014, 04:24

المشاركة الأصلية بواسطة محمد سني 1989 مشاهدة المشاركة

I will only answer this part by :

I already showed you the contradiction in the central message which actually caused the addition to the Mark

I cannot believe that God would leave his son's and most important message corrupted , if so then it is not from god , I could not depend on it

Since you are comparing us to mormons , You are to be compared with mithraism and hiduism and other ideologies with trinity pagan ideologies

peace

Mithraism, (Horus and the sun god you left out) and Hinduism do not resemble Christianity in the slightest. These stories evolved to where people try to make a case for it being the root of my faith to destroy Christianity. This is like me saying your faith is to be compared with moon based paganism, and this gets us nowhere. I only mentioned Mormonism, because they to have a prophet they call the seal of prophets, and he came up with the Book of Mormon. My point is why should I listen to your prophet anymore than Joseph Smith? After all, Mormons and JWs make very intelligent arguments as to why Mormonism and Jehovah Witnesses are the truth in religion. I have to draw the line some where, right?

peace

إعـــــــلان

Where is the “Christ” in “Christianity”?

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق

تعليق