'Apologiz-ing' (1 Pet. 3:15) to Muslims and Islam

[Crosstian]

... Now give me one evidance from trusted non Christian source that your Jesus existed ...

Pliny the Younger:

“C. Pliny to Emperor Trajan

It is customary for me, sir, to refer to you in all matters wherein I have a doubt. Who truly is better able to rule my hesitancy, or to instruct my ignorance? I was never present at examinations of Christians, therefore I do not know what is customarily punished, nor to what extent, nor how far to take the investigation. I was quite undecided; should there be any consideration given to age; are those who are however delicate no different from the stronger? Should penitence obtain pardon; or, as has been the case particularly with Christians, to desist makes no difference? Should the name itself be punished (even if crimes are absent), or the crimes that go with the name?

Meanwhile, this is the method I have followed with those who were brought before me as Christians. I asked them directly if they were Christians. The ones who answered affirmatively I questioned again with a warning, and yet a third time: those who persisted I ordered led [away]. For I have no doubt, whatever else they confessed to, certainly [this] pertinacity and inflexible obstinacy ought to be punished. There were others alike of madness, whom I noted down to be sent to the City, because they were Roman citizens. Soon in consequence of this policy itself, as it was made standard, many kinds of criminal charges occurred and spread themselves abroad. A pamphlet was published anonymously, containing the names of many.

Those who denied that they were or ever had been Christians, when they swore before me, called on the gods and offered incense and wine to your image (which I had ordered brought in for this [purpose], along with images of the gods), and also cursed Christ (which, it is said, it is impossible to force those who are real Christians to do) I thought worthy to be acquitted. Others named by an informer, said they had been Christians, but now denied [it]; certainly they had been, but had lapsed, some three years ago, some more; and more than one [lit. not nobody] over twenty years ago. These all worshiped both your image and the images of the gods and cursed Christ.

They stated that the sum of their guilt or error amounted to this, that they used to gather on a stated day before dawn and sing to Christ as if he were a god, and that they took an oath not to involve themselves in villainy, but rather to commit no theft, no fraud, no adultery; not to break faith, nor to deny money placed with them in trust. Once these things were done, it was their custom to part and return later to eat a meal together, innocently, although they stopped this after my edict, in which I, following your mandate, forbade all secret societies.

All the more I believed it necessary to find out what was the truth from two servant maids, which were called deaconesses, by means of torture. Nothing more did I find than a disgusting, fanatical superstition.

Therefore I stopped the examination, and hastened to consult you. For it appears to me a proper matter for counsel, most greatly on account of the number of people endangered. For many of all ages, all classes, and both sexes already are brought into danger, and shall be [in future]. And not only the cities; the contagion of this superstition is spread throughout the villages and the countryside; but it appears to me possible to stop it and put it right. Certainly the temples which were once deserted are beginning to be crowded, and the long interrupted sacred rites are being revived, while food from the sacrifices is selling, for which up to now a buyer was hardly to be found. From which it may easily be supposed, that what disturbs men can be mended, if a place is allowed for repentance.” [Pliny The Younger; Epistulae, Volume X, Number 96 [English]] - Pliny's letter to Emperor Trajan, c. A.D. 111

“C. Plinius Traiano Imperatori

Sollemne est mihi, domine, omnia, de quibus dubito, ad te referre. Quis enim potest melius vel cunctationem meum regere vel ignorantiam instruere? Cognitionibus de Christianis interfui numquam: ideo nescio quid et quatenus aut puniri soleat aut quaeri. Nec mediocriter haesitavi, sitne aliquod discrimen aetatum, an quamlibet teneri nihil a robustioribus differant; detur paenitentiae venia, an ei, qui omnino Christianibus fuit, desisse non prosit; nomen ipsum, si flagitiis careat, an flagitia cohaerentia nomini puniantur.

Interim in iis, qui ad me tamquam Christiani deferebantur, hunc sum secutus modum. Interrogavi ipsos, an essent Christiani. Confitentes iterum ac tertio interrogavi supplicium minatus: perseverantes duci iussi. Neque enim dubitabam, qualecumque esset quod faterentur, pertinaciam certe et inflexibilem obstinationem debere puniri. Fuerunt alii similis amentiae, quos quia cives Romani erant, adnotavi in urbem remittendos. Mox ipso tractatu, ut fieri solet, diffundente se crimine, plures species inciderunt. Propositus est libellus sine auctore multorum nomina continens.

Qui negabant esse se Christianos aut fuisse, cum praeeunte me deos appellarent et imagini tuae, quam propter hoc iusseram cum simulacris numinum adferri, ture ac vino supplicarent, praeterea male dicerent Christo, quorum nihil posse cogi dicuntur, qui sunt re vera Christiani, dimittendos esse putavi. Alii ab indice nominati esse se Christianos dixerunt et mox negaverunt; fuisse quidem, sed desisse, quidem ante triennium, quidam ante plures annos; non nemo etiam ante viginti. Hi quoque omnes et imaginem tuam deorumque simulacra venerati sunt et Christo maledixerunt.

Adfirmabant autem hanc fuisse summam vel culpae suae vel erroris, quod essent soliti stato die ante lucem convenire carmenque Christo quasi deo dicere secum invicem seque sacramento non in scelus aliquod obstringere, sed ne furta, ne latrocinia, ne adulteria committerent, ne fidem fallerent, ne depositum appellati abnegarent; quibus peractis, morem sibi discedendi fuisse rursusque coeundi ad capiendum cibum, promiscuum tamen et innoxium; quod ipsum facere desisse post edictum meum, quo secundum mandata tua hetaerias esse vetueram.

Quo magis necessarium credidi ex duabus ancillis, quae ministrae dicebantur, quid esset veri, et per tormenta quaerere. Nihil aliud inveni quam superstitionem pravam, immodicam.

Ideo dilata cognitione, ad consulendum te decucurri. Visa est enim mihi res digna consultatione, maxime propter periclitantium numerum. Multi enim omnis aetatis, omnis ordinis, utriusque sexus etiam vocantur in periculum et vocabuntur. Neque civitates tantum, sed vicos etiam atque agros superstitionis istius contagio pervagata est; quae videtur sisti et corrigi posse. Certe satis constat prope iam desolata templa coepisse celebrari, et sacra sollemnia diu intermissa repeti pastumque venire victimarum, cuius adhuc rarissimus emptor inveniebatur. Ex quo facile est opinari, qui turba hominum emendari possit, si sit paenitentiae locus.” [Pliny The Younger; Epistulae, Volume X, Number 96 [Latin]] - Pliny's letter to Emperor Trajan, c. A.D. 111


“You have adopted the proper course, my dear Pliny, in dealing with the Christians who have been brought before you. No general or definite ruling can be laid down. They are not to be hunted out, but if brought before you and convicted of they must be punished. Those, however, who deny their Christianity and prove their denial by praying to our gods, may wipe out past suspicions, and secure a free pardon by their recantation. Anonymous accusations of all sorts are are inadmissible. They are contrary to the spirit of our time.” [Pliny The Younger; Epistulae, Volume X, Number 97; page 216-217 [English]; C. Plinii Caecilii Secundi Epistulae ad Traianum imperatorem cum eiusdem …; for total sections 96-97 [XCVI – XCVII] in Latin and English; see pages 211-217] - C. Plinii Caecilii Secundi Epistulae ad Traianum imperatorem cum eiusdem responsis

“TRAIANUS PLINIO S.

1 Actum quem debuisti, mi Secunde, in excutiendis causis eorum, qui Christiani ad te delati fuerant, secutus es. Neque enim in universum aliquid, quod quasi certam formam habeat, constitui potest. 2 Conquirendi non sunt; si deferantur et arguantur, puniendi sunt, ita tamen ut, qui negaverit se Christianum esse idque re ipsa manifestum fecerit, id est supplicando dis nostris, quamvis suspectus in praeteritum, veniam ex paenitentia impetret. Sine auctore vero propositi libelli <in> nullo crimine locum habere debent. Nam et pessimi exempli nec nostri saeculi est.” [Pliny The Younger; Epistulae, Volume X, Number 97 [Latin]] - Pliny the Younger​

 

[Crosstian]

... Now give me one evidance from trusted non Christian source that your Jesus existed ...

Pliny the Younger, continued ...

Thus, we see yet for a third time from Secular History that we have:

[1.]“Christians”, of all “age(s)”, men, women and children, were being “examined” and subjected to interrogation, even by means “of torture”, by the Romans for their particular practices and faith.

[2.]We see Christianity [thus the “Christians”] spreading outward further from the area of origin in Jerusalem, just as was given in the scriptures. We see that some were even “Roman citizens” themselves; like unto Paul (Acts 22:25-29 *a). They, who refused to renounce and “curse” “Christ”, or to call “on the gods” [Roman pantheon, “our gods”; etc]or to offer “incense and wine to” Caesars “image” when turned in and interrogated were then “led (away)” and if they were also a Roman citizen were sent to the “City” [Rome] for destruction.

[3.]We see that the Romans, including Pliny the Younger, called this Christianity, a “disgusting, fanatical superstition”, and a “madness” that was spreading even among the Roman citizenry; because it was putting to an end of their own Roman worship practices and licentiousness(Acts 14:15; Romans 1:15 *b).

[4.]We see evidence that the greater Roman government feared the Christians, for it was obvious to Pliny [the Younger] of the effect such “superstition” [as he so designated Christianity] was having upon the whole populace of the Roman empire, and so says, “... the number of people endangered. For many of all ages, all classes, and both sexes already are brought into danger, and shall be [in future]. And not only the cities; the contagion of this superstition is spread throughout the villages and the countryside...”. It was all too clear [to Pliny the Younger] that there was direct correlation and evidence that Christianity was greatly and adversely affecting their [Roman] pagan worship and daily lifestyles, etc, for he states that once he had began to put his Roman 'foot down' and enforce laws against their“societies”, and by force make them to cease, as he says that it might be “... possible to stop it and put it right...”, and by so doing, it would bring back all of the pagan worship in their various temples and rites and sacrifices to their “gods”. So, he even notes this correlation, that once he had indeed begun to have Christians “tortured”, etc that the Roman “... temples which were once deserted are beginning to be crowded, and the long interrupted sacred rites are being revived, while food from the sacrifices is selling, for which up to now a buyer was hardly to be found. ...”

[5.]We see evidence that these true Christians worshiped “Christ” as “a god” and would not worship others, nor of the “image” of Caesar, even in the face of “torture” and death. This is also verified in the scripture(Luke 24:52; John1:1-18; etc *c).

[6.]We see that written reports were being sent back to the Caesar [in this instance - Trajan] about these matters, and it was asked whether merely the “name” [Christian], ought to be “punished” [ie simply being Christian], whether there were accusers, charges, or any findings of wrongdoing or not. And yet we see that they [who would not renounce Christ; whom all, who being cognizant of the immediate historical facts, understood to be a real person that existed] in the “meanwhile” before the Caesar replied, were being “punished” and “led (away)” for their “pertinacity and inflexible obstinacy” in adherence and unwillingness to renounce and “curse” “Christ”.

[7.]Many people were examined, and we see at least three types of people. The true Christian, the non-Christian, and the Christian in name only, who either had fallen away at some point, or who once persecuted, turned back, or reneged, etc. When it was made known of these things, accusations and “many criminal charges occurred and spread themselves abroad”, that even “A pamphlet was published anonymously, containing the names of many.” Also it is said, that others were turned in by others, “Others named by an informer...” This, Christ Jesus said would happen(Matthew 24:9-10; Mark 13:11-12 *d). Christianity was easily the scapegoat for the problems of Rome, for the populace and their enemies [even go so far as naming someone as a Christian, in the hopes of possibly eliminating an enemy!], even as they had been in the days of the Nero Caesar. We notice that Pliny remarks of that which was rumored to be known of the True Christian which differentiated them from those who were not, “...when they swore before me, called on the gods and offered incense and wine to your image (which I had ordered brought in for this [purpose], along with images of the gods), and also cursed Christ (which, it is said, it is impossible to force those who are real Christians to do) I thought worthy to be acquitted. Others named by an informer, said they had been Christians, but now denied [it]; certainly they had been, but had lapsed, some three years ago, some more; and more than one [lit. not nobody] over twenty years ago. These all worshiped both your image and the images of the gods and cursed Christ.”

[8.] Pliny [the Younger] even gives specific details as to what these Christians believed and practiced, and we can know the information gathered was most accurate of the true Christians, for it was gained under intense scrutiny [“torture”], in that they were known to “...sing to Christ as if he were a god, and that they took an oath not to involve themselves in villainy, but rather to commit no theft, no fraud, no adultery; not to break faith, nor to deny money placed with them in trust. Once these things were done, it was their custom to part and return later to eat a meal together, innocently...”, and we can see evidence of this directly from the scriptures(Acts 2:46, 5:42, 10:22,32, 16:25, 20:20; Romans 13:9, etc *e).​

 

[firedragon]

Actually, the reference given in Islamic (not mine) hadith, is to a "sheep" (Link; PDF page 114 (n113), chapter corrected, mistyped, should be "C. 36"), not a goat, but it doesn't matter so much to me whether you think it was a sheep or a goat (Link) (I went with the source I have, cited in OP links), I can only go by what is actually written in Islamic sources. The following was the reference cited, in relation to verses which were removed/redacted from "Q".

"...Sunan Ibn Majah, Volume 3, Book 9, Chapter 36, Number 1944 -

“... 1944. It was narrated that 'Aisha said: “The verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” (Hasan)
..." - 'Apologiz-ing' (1 Pet. 3:15) to Muslims and Islam
​

Please notice, that I gave the full citation, from Sunan Ibn Majah, and noted its present 'ranking' therein, as "Hasan". Which according to Islamic scholars and classification, is a "strong" hadith, but with some doubt as to authenticity (by later scholars who came up with the ranking system), based upon a minor alteration in "narration' in differing hadith sources for it (see your own link, you provided).

So, Hasan, doesn't mean invalid, or incorrect, or untrue. It doesn't mean "weak" (Daif) in terms of transmission by "chain", even though later on, Shaykh Shu’aib Arnaud (Musnad Ahmad) classified it as "daif" (of course he would, as he needs it to be, but even if granted it was "daif" (I do not grant), weak still doesn't mean untrue, invalid, not accepted, as "daif" is only dealing with matters of classifying transmission of hadith, based upon current hadith scholarship). It simply means under current classification, that there is some argument (among scholars) as to verifiable authenticity. You will find many such "Hasan" transmissions amidst the Sunnah. Most aren't even questioned, and accepted as genuine by scholars and laymen alike. It usually only comes into play when it would touch "q", such as this, as noticed/pointed out by non-muslims (such as myself).

The notations in Sunan Ibn Majah, are as follows (linked above, same PDF page):

"... a. These are such Verses that their recitation has been abrogated, while the rule remained in force; therefore, the Companions did not write it in the copy of the Qur'an.

b. It is proven from other Ahadith that the latest rule regarding the prohibition of fosterage is for suckling five times, and this is the preferred view. ..."​

That is an amazing admission in regards the "Companions" and what went into the presently compiled "q".

The link which you provided again tries to find fault with Ibn Ishaq, but I can cite as many scholars which praise Ibn Ishaq in his careful studies of hadith. So, merely finding someone to 'poo-poo' on Ibn Ishaq when they need to, isn't all that helpful, especially when just as many if not more are favorable to Ibn Ishaq. Yet, that is all red-herring to the subject of "q" itself, and what constituted the original materials, which are no longer in "q". The matter of Aishah and the sheep (goat, whatever), and the ayah now lost, is in Islamic material, and not something I made up, or pulled from thin air. It is in several sources, even as your own link provided, though attempting to mitigate it to irrelevancy, by simply saying it was "abrogated".

This is the point. That something existed before which was part of "q", and suddenly no longer is, for whatever reason, being accepted as "abrogated" and subsequently redacted by whatever means (sheep/goat, or otherwise (Companions), being most irrelevant).

What I believe of the matter is of no real account. I am not citing for what I believe, per se, but what Islamic sources themselves say.

Thanks for another long body of text that doesn't answer the question.

Anyway, dont cite things you dont believe are fact. I asked your personal attestation to your own evidence you keep citing.

See, I didnt ask for the reference from Imam Buhari's hadith for that particular hadith. Its very easy to find.

Bottom-line is your last statement above makes it clear that you dont believe in hadith but you are just cutting and pasting to make a case. Its false to do that.

Tell me. You said you have studied ahadith, tafsir, Quran etc etc.

Againn, without cutting pasting from a website like you keep doing, can you please brother answer directly?

Do you believe in this hadith to be fact or not?

 

[firedragon]

What I believe of the matter is of no real account. I am not citing for what I believe, per se, but what Islamic sources themselves say.

Do you always cut and paste evidences that you dont believe are true?

 

[Crosstian]

Do you always cut and paste evidences that you dont believe are true?

I didn't say I did or did not believe it (Hadith). I simply stated I can only go with what the source says, and my belief is not relevant to the discussion. Therefore, I neither confirm nor deny any such thing. Non-sequitur.

 

[firedragon]

I didn't say I did or did not believe it (Hadith). I simply stated I can only go with what the source says, and my belief is not relevant to the discussion. Therefore, I neither confirm nor deny any such thing. Non-sequitur.

Right. But dont you analyse and think about your source? Dont you ponder if its correct, historical fact, does it make sense?

You have studied Islam extensively right? Do you know the concept of "Akal"?

Im not trying to offend you, im trying to reason with you. Think and give me a response. thank you.

 

[firedragon]

I understand that the Qur'an speaks of "Isa", as "the Messiah" [Qur'anic, "Masih", to the Jews, not to Muslims until the return of 'Isa]:

Another point Brother.

You said in this post that its a question based on the Muslim sources.

Id like to say that its not correct. Not a single verse in the Quran says that Isa is sent as messiah to the Jews, not to Muslims until the return of Isa. Not a single one.

What is this source you spoke of?

 

[dybmh]

Brother. In order to answer your question, could you explain a bit what you mean by "a single authoritative Quran"?

I think @Firemorphic answered the question.

Thing is, he knows me well, so he was able to pickup on the subtext with the, admittedly, unclear wording.

But: To answer your question:

I'm essentially looking for refutation of the anti-Islam rhetoric. But, I'm picky in which sources I want to use. I want the sources to be completely iron-clad. This is a long term project. ( Not for profit, or publication brother... just in case you were curious. )

One 'talking point' which I am missing data on is the claim that was put forward ( among others ) in the OP relating to many differing Qu'rans. I'm sure you're familiar with this trope/meme.

So, that's the context.

it really is a casual question; because, I'm somewhat confident that the anti-islam trope-meme is just that... a meme, a talking point. But I'm missing the source material that I can quote in a debate if it comes up.

 

[Limo]

Let me see if I understand you (Limo) correctly. As a member of "Islam", who adheres to "Qur'an", "Hadith", etc; you "limo" are denying the historicity of the person "Jesus" of Nazareth because my primary source is scripture (KJB), which itself is an historical documentation of Jesus by multiple eyewitnesses and those present afterwards?

You do realize that to question the historicity of Jesus, by relying upon the already debunked and falsified Jesus-mythers (not taken seriously by anyone in the religious, 'scholarly', or even secular fields of historical studies), you automatically undermine "qur'an", all "hadith" which speak on the subject of Jesus.

So, my question to you remains, in regards merely secular sources, as opposed to the preservers of the oracles of God.

The person we have in Quran is totally different from your invented person Jesus.
Quran's Almaseeh Issa ibn (son of) Mariam is a human created from a mother without father, prophet, was not crucifixed, didn't die, raised to sky.

Yours is an mythic god, son of god, incarnated god, half god / half human, trinity, This person never existed. It's composed of state of the art of pagan gods in roman empire.

 

[Limo]

Let me see if I understand you (Limo) correctly. As a member of "Islam", who adheres to "Qur'an", "Hadith", etc; you "limo" are denying the historicity of the person "Jesus" of Nazareth because my primary source is scripture (KJB), which itself is an historical documentation of Jesus by multiple eyewitnesses and those present afterwards?

You do realize that to question the historicity of Jesus, by relying upon the already debunked and falsified Jesus-mythers (not taken seriously by anyone in the religious, 'scholarly', or even secular fields of historical studies), you automatically undermine "qur'an", all "hadith" which speak on the subject of Jesus.

So, my question to you remains, in regards merely secular sources, as opposed to the preservers of the oracles of God.

Now, as to matters in regards Jesus, dying by crucifixion, etc, worshipped as God, etc was already given to you - Link, see bottom Link


Thus from Secular History we have:

[1.]“Christians”were being persecuted and tortured by Nero, even“nailed to crosses”, of which even arose“a feeling of compassion”after a time from the citizens of Rome(Matthew 10:18; Mark 13:9 *a).

[2.]“Christ”, was the name for which they[Christians]are so named(Acts 11:26, 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16 *b).

[3.]This Christ “suffered the extreme penalty” [crucifixion](Matthew 27:26; Mark 15:15; Luke 24:20; John 19:16; 1 Corinthians 2:8; etc *c).

[4.]This Christ died “at the hands” of “Pontius Pilate” (John 19:15 *d).

[5.]This Christ was put to death “during the reign of Tiberius” Caesar(Luke 3:1-2 *e).

[6.]These Christians, were said to be following a “superstition” (Acts 25:19 *f)[religious belief]by the Romans.

[7.]These Christians had to first be “checked” in Judaea, being according to the Romans, “the first source of the evil” (Matthew 2:1; Acts 1:8, 8:1; etc. *g).

[8.]These Christians were then also found to spring up “even in Rome” itself, after it was found originating from Judaea(Acts 19:21, 23:11; Romans 1:7,15; etc. *h).​

Do you call bible secular resources ?
Are you serious or do you think Moslems don't know these books?

 

[Limo]

For instance:

Tacitus:

“Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order.Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence,even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed.”[Cornelius Tacitus; Annals [Ab excessu divi Augusti (Annals)]; Book 15; Chapter 44 English]- http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...201999.02.0078

“44. Et haec quidem humanis consiliis providebantur. mox petita [a] dis piacula aditique Sibyllae libri, ex quibus supplicatum Volcano et Cereri Proserpinaeque, ac propitiata Iuno per matronas, primum in Capitolio, deinde apud proximum mare, unde hausta aqua templum et simulacrum deae perspersum est; et sellisternia ac pervigilia celebravere feminae, quibus mariti erant. Sed non ope humana, non largitionibus principis aut deum placamentis decedebat infamia, quin iussum incendium crederetur.ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos et quaesitissimis poenis adfecit, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Chrestianos appellabat. auctor nominis eius Christus Tibero imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat; repressaque in praesens exitiablilis superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque. igitur primum correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum multitudo ingens haud proinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis convicti sunt. et pereuntibus addita ludibria, ut ferarum tergis contecti laniatu canum interirent aut crucibus adfixi [aut flammandi atque], ubi defecisset dies, in usu[m] nocturni luminis urerentur. hortos suos ei spectaculo Nero obtulerat, et circense ludicrum edebat, habitu aurigae permixtus plebi vel curriculo insistens. unde quamquam adversus sontes et novissima exempla meritos miseratio oriebatur, tamquam non utilitate publica, sed in saevitiam unius absumerentur.”[Cornelius Tacitus; Annals [Ab excessu divi Augusti (Annals)]] Book 15; Chapter 44 Latin]- Tacitus: Annals: Book 15 [40]

Annals Book 15; Chapter 44 scan [the second Medicean manuscript] [see line 6, 2nd word [chrestianos] and line 7 1st word [christus]] - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...s/1/1d/MII.png​

I was wondering, why didn't you tell about Josephus ?
I know, because Josephus is vague forged text.
What I can tell, I'm not an expert in Greek and Latin but many scholars have commented on these testimony to the level that it's not creditable.

As a startup, one said "Since Josephus was born in the year 37 CE, and Tacitus was born in 55, neither could have been an eye-witness of Jesus, who supposedly was crucified in 30 CE. "

Regarding Tacitus, it's said "There are further problems with the Tacitus story. Tacitus himself never again alludes to the Neronian persecution of Christians in any of his voluminous writings, and no other Pagan authors know anything of the outrage either. Most significant, however, is that ancient Christian apologists made no use of the story in their propaganda – an unthinkable omission by motivated partisans who were well-read in the works of Tacitus. Clement of Alexandria, who made a profession of collecting just such types of quotations, is ignorant of any Neronian persecution, and even Tertullian, who quotes a great deal from Tacitus, knows nothing of the story. According to Robert Taylor, the author of another freethought classic, the Diegesis (1834), the passage was not known before the fifteenth century, when Tacitus was first published at Venice by Johannes de Spire. Taylor believed de Spire himself to have been the forger."

Your books have been forged and changed and keep changing tell date, It's normal to forge some passages in Josephus, Tacitus, and others

If god himself, and/or his son come to earth, this should be noticed not only in Roman empire but also in Persia, India, China, Egypt, Africa, Arabs ..... Red Indians should have known this... whole world should have noticed...
All nations should have recorded these alleged circumstances of god, son of god, crucifixion, resurrections, miracles.

This is not the case , we couldn't find a single reliable evidence eve in Jews books.

 

[Limo]

Pliny the Younger, continued ...

Thus, we see yet for a third time from Secular History that we have:

[1.]“Christians”, of all “age(s)”, men, women and children, were being “examined” and subjected to interrogation, even by means “of torture”, by the Romans for their particular practices and faith.

[2.]We see Christianity [thus the “Christians”] spreading outward further from the area of origin in Jerusalem, just as was given in the scriptures. We see that some were even “Roman citizens” themselves; like unto Paul (Acts 22:25-29 *a). They, who refused to renounce and “curse” “Christ”, or to call “on the gods” [Roman pantheon, “our gods”; etc]or to offer “incense and wine to” Caesars “image” when turned in and interrogated were then “led (away)” and if they were also a Roman citizen were sent to the “City” [Rome] for destruction.

[3.]We see that the Romans, including Pliny the Younger, called this Christianity, a “disgusting, fanatical superstition”, and a “madness” that was spreading even among the Roman citizenry; because it was putting to an end of their own Roman worship practices and licentiousness(Acts 14:15; Romans 1:15 *b).

[4.]We see evidence that the greater Roman government feared the Christians, for it was obvious to Pliny [the Younger] of the effect such “superstition” [as he so designated Christianity] was having upon the whole populace of the Roman empire, and so says, “... the number of people endangered. For many of all ages, all classes, and both sexes already are brought into danger, and shall be [in future]. And not only the cities; the contagion of this superstition is spread throughout the villages and the countryside...”. It was all too clear [to Pliny the Younger] that there was direct correlation and evidence that Christianity was greatly and adversely affecting their [Roman] pagan worship and daily lifestyles, etc, for he states that once he had began to put his Roman 'foot down' and enforce laws against their“societies”, and by force make them to cease, as he says that it might be “... possible to stop it and put it right...”, and by so doing, it would bring back all of the pagan worship in their various temples and rites and sacrifices to their “gods”. So, he even notes this correlation, that once he had indeed begun to have Christians “tortured”, etc that the Roman “... temples which were once deserted are beginning to be crowded, and the long interrupted sacred rites are being revived, while food from the sacrifices is selling, for which up to now a buyer was hardly to be found. ...”

[5.]We see evidence that these true Christians worshiped “Christ” as “a god” and would not worship others, nor of the “image” of Caesar, even in the face of “torture” and death. This is also verified in the scripture(Luke 24:52; John1:1-18; etc *c).

[6.]We see that written reports were being sent back to the Caesar [in this instance - Trajan] about these matters, and it was asked whether merely the “name” [Christian], ought to be “punished” [ie simply being Christian], whether there were accusers, charges, or any findings of wrongdoing or not. And yet we see that they [who would not renounce Christ; whom all, who being cognizant of the immediate historical facts, understood to be a real person that existed] in the “meanwhile” before the Caesar replied, were being “punished” and “led (away)” for their “pertinacity and inflexible obstinacy” in adherence and unwillingness to renounce and “curse” “Christ”.

[7.]Many people were examined, and we see at least three types of people. The true Christian, the non-Christian, and the Christian in name only, who either had fallen away at some point, or who once persecuted, turned back, or reneged, etc. When it was made known of these things, accusations and “many criminal charges occurred and spread themselves abroad”, that even “A pamphlet was published anonymously, containing the names of many.” Also it is said, that others were turned in by others, “Others named by an informer...” This, Christ Jesus said would happen(Matthew 24:9-10; Mark 13:11-12 *d). Christianity was easily the scapegoat for the problems of Rome, for the populace and their enemies [even go so far as naming someone as a Christian, in the hopes of possibly eliminating an enemy!], even as they had been in the days of the Nero Caesar. We notice that Pliny remarks of that which was rumored to be known of the True Christian which differentiated them from those who were not, “...when they swore before me, called on the gods and offered incense and wine to your image (which I had ordered brought in for this [purpose], along with images of the gods), and also cursed Christ (which, it is said, it is impossible to force those who are real Christians to do) I thought worthy to be acquitted. Others named by an informer, said they had been Christians, but now denied [it]; certainly they had been, but had lapsed, some three years ago, some more; and more than one [lit. not nobody] over twenty years ago. These all worshiped both your image and the images of the gods and cursed Christ.”

[8.] Pliny [the Younger] even gives specific details as to what these Christians believed and practiced, and we can know the information gathered was most accurate of the true Christians, for it was gained under intense scrutiny [“torture”], in that they were known to “...sing to Christ as if he were a god, and that they took an oath not to involve themselves in villainy, but rather to commit no theft, no fraud, no adultery; not to break faith, nor to deny money placed with them in trust. Once these things were done, it was their custom to part and return later to eat a meal together, innocently...”, and we can see evidence of this directly from the scriptures(Acts 2:46, 5:42, 10:22,32, 16:25, 20:20; Romans 13:9, etc *e).​

You remind me with Prof. Robert Price said once "using Paul, John, Mark, Luke, Mathew books as a proof of Hoistorical Jesus is like using Doctor Watson sayings as evidence that Holmes existed"

 

[Crosstian]

The person we have in Quran is totally different from your invented person Jesus. ...

Thank you. This is a rare admission. It proves what I said from the beginning, albeit from the opposing side.

 

[Crosstian]

ancient Christian apologists made no use of the story

Why would they need to? All believed Jesus to have actually existed, and that's why they were "Christian apologists", and so even the antagonists believed in His existence (such as; "Celsus , who was a second century Roman author and avid opponent of Christianity. He went to great lengths to disprove the divinity of Jesus yet never denied His actual existence."). The modern (recent), Jesus-mythers, didn't yet exist, nor their arguments. Even those, in such days as Tacitus, acknowledge Jesus existed, even if they didn't accept the resurrection or claims about His being Deity, God (as the majority of Jews didn't). Only 'time' brought the Jesus-mythers, not evidence, or even lack of evidence. Again, why would believers, need to refer to non-believers history? It would be like Moses relying upon Egyptian history when speaking about the flood of Noah.

BTW, your source which you quoted and didn't directly source, isn't Jesus-myther, it's atheistic, which would also deny the existence of "allah". Real nice. Shoot yourself in the foot much?

Did Jesus Exist? | American Atheists

 

[Crosstian]

I was wondering, why didn't you tell about Josephus ?
I know, because Josephus is vague forged text. ..

You didn't ask me to cite Josephus (though I could have, and may yet still). You merely asked me for secular authorities (Josephus was a Jew, not secular) and I provided them, all being unassailable (though Jesus-mythers do laughingly try). As for the texts of Josephus, there is some internal 'debate', mainly upon the first citation, but not so much the second (where "James" is given).

Again, the argument coming from a "Muslim" in attempting to use Jesus-mythers arguments is self-refuting to Islam. It's really strange for them to take up such argument, when it defeats their own religion in so doing. Jesus-mythers, don't care whether speaking about the Jesus of TaNaKh, NT or the "Isa" of Qur'an. It's all the same to them. I would also suspect that the Jesus-myther, may even be Muhammad-mythers also.

 

[Crosstian]

...Your books have been forged and changed and keep changing tell date, ...

Yet, that's not what scripture, itself, relates. It is God, who preserved His own text:

God has stated in His word, that He would preserve His words from generation to generation:

Psalms 12:6 KJB - The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Psalms 12:7 KJB - Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Matthew 24:35 KJB - Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Mark 13:31 KJB - Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

Luke 21:33 KJB - Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

Deuteronomy 8:3 KJB - And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

Matthew 4:4 KJB - But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Luke 4:4 KJB - And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.​

As the saying goes:, "Divine inspiration without Divine preservation would be a Divine waste of time."

Even your own "q" states that God is able to preserve His word. The "q" even tells Jews and Christians to judge by what they had in their hand (text) and to test by it.

Surah 5:47 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... Let the People of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun [the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree)] to Allah. ...”​

Surah 29:46 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... And argue not with the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), unless it be in (a way) that is better (with good words and in good manner, inviting them to Islamic Monotheism with His Verses), except with such of them as do wrong; and say (to them): “We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you; our Ilah (God) and your Ilah (God) is One (i.e. Allah), and to Him we have submitted (as Muslims).” ...”​

Surah 29:47 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... And thus We have sent down the Book (i.e. this Qur'an) to you (O Muhammad), and those whom We gave the Scripture [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) aforetime] believe therein as also do some of these (who are present with you now like 'Abdullah bin Salam) and none but the disbelievers reject Our Ayat [(proofs, signs, verses, lessons, etc.,) and deny Our Oneness of Lordship and Our Oneness of worship and Our Oneness of Our Names and Qualities: i.e. Islamic Monotheism]. ...”
​

Christians, and so also Jews, still had their preserved text in hand, even in the 7-8th cent. We still have copies of it today.

If we judge by what the Qur'an tells the Jew/Christian to do, then Islam is false, and if we judge simply by the Bible [KJB] then Islam is false:

Yet, this is opposite to what many Muslims say, practice.

Surah 3:3-4 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... [v.3] It is He Who has sent down the Book (the Qur'an) to you (Muhammad) with truth, confirming what came before it. And He sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel) (Gospel), [v.4] Aforetime, as a guidance to mankind. And He sent down the criterion [of judgment between right and wrong (this Qur'an)]. Truly, those who disbelieve in the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah, for them there is a sever torment; and Allah is All-Mighty, All-Able of Retribution. ...”​

Surah 18:27 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... And recite what has been revealed to you (O Muhammad) of the Book (the Qur'an) of your Lord (i.e. recite it, understand and follow its teachings and act on its orders and preach it to men). None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him. ...”​

Surah 7:157 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e. Muhammad) whom they find written with them in the Taurat (Torah) (Deut, xviii 15) and the Injeel (Gospel) (John xiv, 16), – he commands them for Al-Ma'ruf (Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained); and forbids them from Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism of all kinds, and all that Islam has forbidden); he allows them as lawful At-Tayyibat (i.e. all good and lawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods), and prohibits them as unlawful Al-Khaba'ith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, person and foods), he releases them from their heavy burdens (of Allah's Covenant with the children of Israel), and from the fetters (bindings) that were upon them. So those who believe in him (Muhammad), honour him, help him, and follow the light (the Qur'an) which has been sent down with him, it is they who will be successful. ...”
​

How can the Qur'an, if it is the word of 'Allah', be eternal, and unchanging, if the Torah and Gospel were also the word of 'Allah', and yet according to Muslims, be altered?

According to the Muslim Apologist, wasn't the Gospel corrupted centuries earlier by Paul, or the Council of Nicea, etc?

Surah 5:47 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... Let the People of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun [the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree)] to Allah. ...”​

Surah 5:68 (Yusuf-Ali translation) -

“... Say: “O People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless you stand fast by the Law [Taurat], the Gospel [Injeel], and all the revelation that has come to thee from your Lord.” It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith. ...”​

Surah 10:94 (Shakir translation) -

“... But if you [Muhammad] are in doubt as to what We have revealed to you, ask those who read the Book before you: certainly the truth has come to you from your Lord. Therefore you should not be of the disputers. ...”
​

Even the "q" outwardly (not inwardly) accepts Isaiah as a prophet, and that his words are from God:

Isaiah 8:20 KJB - To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.​

Paul said the same thing.

1 Corinthians 14:32 KJB - And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.​

 

[Crosstian]

You remind me with Prof. Robert Price said once "using Paul, John, Mark, Luke, Mathew books as a proof of Hoistorical Jesus is like using Doctor Watson sayings as evidence that Holmes existed"

Apples to oranges. A false comparison. Sherlock is placed in the "fiction" section of any bookstore, as no one (not even Jesus mythers), with the possible exeption of the insane or delusional, think Sherlock is historical (even if the character is placed in certain historical settings). The Bible is not so placed, and not so understood by those who have read it and studied it. The materials in relation to the study of it, whether archaeologically, linguistically, mansuscripturally, etc are placed in the history sections. Price is thoroughly refuted here - Link

Again, relying upon Jesus-myther (Robert Price) material and so also atheistic material is self-refuting to the religion of Islam. Even atheists are against Robert Price -"... Robert Price and the embarrassing wing of atheism. ..." - Link

 

[Crosstian]

... It's normal to forge some passages in ...Tacitus, ...

I would like for you to directly cite the evidence of forgery in Tacitus please. I know of no such evidence. Please produce that evidence. In fact, the scholarly world would await such evidence.

 

[Crosstian]

If god himself, and/or his son come to earth, this should be noticed not only in Roman empire but also in Persia, India, China, Egypt, Africa, Arabs ..... Red Indians should have known this... whole world should have noticed...

You have a false apriori, an incorrect assumption built in. You self-define "God" in what God would do, rather than what God said God would do.

[1] First Advent was as a lamb:

Isa 42:2 He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.

Isa_42:3 A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.

Isa_53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.

Joh_1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
Joh_1:36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he saith, Behold the Lamb of God!​

[2] Second/Third Advent is as a Lion:

Jer_25:30 Therefore prophesy thou against them all these words, and say unto them, The LORD shall roar from on high, and utter his voice from his holy habitation; he shall mightily roar upon his habitation; he shall give a shout, as they that tread the grapes, against all the inhabitants of the earth.

1Th_4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Rev 1:7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
​

Therefore, you are committing the same fallacy as the 'Jews' before you in the days of Jesus Christ on earth. Looking for glory and power of His coming the first time, when it is prophesied so of the Second/Third time.

 

[Firemorphic]

Yet, that's not what scripture, itself, relates. It is God, who preserved His own text:

God has stated in His word, that He would preserve His words from generation to generation:

Psalms 12:6 KJB - The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

Psalms 12:7 KJB - Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

Matthew 24:35 KJB - Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Mark 13:31 KJB - Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

Luke 21:33 KJB - Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

Deuteronomy 8:3 KJB - And he humbled thee, and suffered thee to hunger, and fed thee with manna, which thou knewest not, neither did thy fathers know; that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the LORD doth man live.

Matthew 4:4 KJB - But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

Luke 4:4 KJB - And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.​

As the saying goes:, "Divine inspiration without Divine preservation would be a Divine waste of time."

Even your own "q" states that God is able to preserve His word. The "q" even tells Jews and Christians to judge by what they had in their hand (text) and to test by it.

Surah 5:47 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... Let the People of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun [the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree)] to Allah. ...”​

Surah 29:46 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... And argue not with the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), unless it be in (a way) that is better (with good words and in good manner, inviting them to Islamic Monotheism with His Verses), except with such of them as do wrong; and say (to them): “We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you; our Ilah (God) and your Ilah (God) is One (i.e. Allah), and to Him we have submitted (as Muslims).” ...”​

Surah 29:47 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... And thus We have sent down the Book (i.e. this Qur'an) to you (O Muhammad), and those whom We gave the Scripture [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) aforetime] believe therein as also do some of these (who are present with you now like 'Abdullah bin Salam) and none but the disbelievers reject Our Ayat [(proofs, signs, verses, lessons, etc.,) and deny Our Oneness of Lordship and Our Oneness of worship and Our Oneness of Our Names and Qualities: i.e. Islamic Monotheism]. ...”
​

Christians, and so also Jews, still had their preserved text in hand, even in the 7-8th cent. We still have copies of it today.

If we judge by what the Qur'an tells the Jew/Christian to do, then Islam is false, and if we judge simply by the Bible [KJB] then Islam is false:

Yet, this is opposite to what many Muslims say, practice.

Surah 3:3-4 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... [v.3] It is He Who has sent down the Book (the Qur'an) to you (Muhammad) with truth, confirming what came before it. And He sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel) (Gospel), [v.4] Aforetime, as a guidance to mankind. And He sent down the criterion [of judgment between right and wrong (this Qur'an)]. Truly, those who disbelieve in the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah, for them there is a sever torment; and Allah is All-Mighty, All-Able of Retribution. ...”​

Surah 18:27 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... And recite what has been revealed to you (O Muhammad) of the Book (the Qur'an) of your Lord (i.e. recite it, understand and follow its teachings and act on its orders and preach it to men). None can change His Words, and none will you find as a refuge other than Him. ...”​

Surah 7:157 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e. Muhammad) whom they find written with them in the Taurat (Torah) (Deut, xviii 15) and the Injeel (Gospel) (John xiv, 16), – he commands them for Al-Ma'ruf (Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained); and forbids them from Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism of all kinds, and all that Islam has forbidden); he allows them as lawful At-Tayyibat (i.e. all good and lawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods), and prohibits them as unlawful Al-Khaba'ith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, person and foods), he releases them from their heavy burdens (of Allah's Covenant with the children of Israel), and from the fetters (bindings) that were upon them. So those who believe in him (Muhammad), honour him, help him, and follow the light (the Qur'an) which has been sent down with him, it is they who will be successful. ...”
​

How can the Qur'an, if it is the word of 'Allah', be eternal, and unchanging, if the Torah and Gospel were also the word of 'Allah', and yet according to Muslims, be altered?

According to the Muslim Apologist, wasn't the Gospel corrupted centuries earlier by Paul, or the Council of Nicea, etc?

Surah 5:47 (al-Hilali-Khan translation) -

“... Let the People of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah hath revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun [the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree)] to Allah. ...”​

Surah 5:68 (Yusuf-Ali translation) -

“... Say: “O People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless you stand fast by the Law [Taurat], the Gospel [Injeel], and all the revelation that has come to thee from your Lord.” It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. But sorrow thou not over (these) people without Faith. ...”​

Surah 10:94 (Shakir translation) -

“... But if you [Muhammad] are in doubt as to what We have revealed to you, ask those who read the Book before you: certainly the truth has come to you from your Lord. Therefore you should not be of the disputers. ...”
​

Even the "q" outwardly (not inwardly) accepts Isaiah as a prophet, and that his words are from God:

Isaiah 8:20 KJB - To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.​

Paul said the same thing.

1 Corinthians 14:32 KJB - And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.​

Which books in your Bible canon were actually revealed by God to someone?