Are Muslims right about Paul?

[outhouse]

Personally, 60 seconds for me is an issue when thinking about accuracy. For that reason I tend to look at the source rather than looking at the time.

And the koran is not a credible historical source. It Is theology with mythology.

Not a single credible historian in the whole world uses your book, for any aspect of jesus

 

[sojourner]

Yes. Seriously.

Jesus peace be upon him is a prophet in Islam and his story being born to the Virgin mother Mary is mentioned in the Quraan and his first miracle which was speaking as a baby to defend the honor of his mother is mentioned in the Quraan too. I think this isn't mentioned in the bible.

5:48

And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it. So judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations away from what has come to you of the truth. To each of you We prescribed a law and a method. Had Allah willed, He would have made you one nation [united in religion], but [He intended] to test you in what He has given you; so race to [all that is] good. To Allah is your return all together, and He will [then] inform you concerning that over which you used to differ.

So the Standard Answer that Makes Sense is: "So let's trust a document that comes along 600 years after the documents it plagiarizes, over the plagiarized documents, themselves."

 

[sojourner]

Personally, 60 seconds for me is an issue when thinking about accuracy. For that reason I tend to look at the source rather than looking at the time.

Hence, why you're wrong.

 

[Sabour]

So the Standard Answer that Makes Sense is: "So let's trust a document that comes along 600 years after the documents it plagiarizes, over the plagiarized documents, themselves."

Not that I agree with you but let us assume that this was a case for a moment.

Still it would be better to follow the Quraan because if it were plagiarized as you say, tham it is closer to the original scripture since Quraan is the same as it were 1400 years ago.

Back to reality, Quraan is not plagiarized. It is the word of God revealed to our prophet through the angel Gabriel.

 

[outhouse]

Still it would be better to follow the Quraan because if it were plagiarized as you say, tham it is closer to the original scripture since Quraan is the same as it were 1400 years ago.

.

Well your wrong at every turn.

The bible still remains very close to its original form. It context has changed very little.


Your books source is only, what you call the corrupted versions

 

[Sabour]

Well your wrong at every turn.

The bible still remains very close to its original form. It context has changed very little.

Wowwwwwww.

Now I have the opportunity to play your role. Here it goes

You are ignoring facts

 

[sojourner]

Not that I agree with you but let us assume that this was a case for a moment.

Still it would be better to follow the Quraan because if it were plagiarized as you say, tham it is closer to the original scripture since Quraan is the same as it were 1400 years ago.

Back to reality, Quraan is not plagiarized. It is the word of God revealed to our prophet through the angel Gabriel.

An accurate bad copy is still a bad copy.

 

[Sabour]

An accurate bad copy is still a bad copy.

I dont to get into that debate because Quraan is not a copy of any book but an accurate copy cant be bad because if a copy were accurate than it serves its purpose.

 

[sojourner]

I dont to get into that debate because Quraan is not a copy of any book but an accurate copy cant be bad because if a copy were accurate than it serves its purpose.

Of course you don't get into it, because you know I'm right.

 

[Sabour]

Of course you don't get into it, because you know I'm right.

No it is because i don't go against my beliefs and assume something to be true unless I have a point to make, which I already did.

That is not to be mixed with the concept that I don't challenge my beliefs and questions things because I do between now and than.

 

[outhouse]

if a copy were accurate than it serves its purpose.

And nothing in the whole world, proves that book to be accurate.

it is so inaccurate! not a single historian in the whole world can use for any aspect of Jesus.

 

[nazz]

Taking your second point.


Given that Jesus peace be upon him constantly taught following the commandments was the way to salvation, that would imply that Jesus peace be upon him didn't know or understand what he was teaching.

Why would Jesus peace be upon him teach us something that we can't live up to?

God doesn't ask us to do things beyond our capabilities.

I disagree. But he does give us a path towards spiritual transformation that allows us to obey naturally.

 

[nazz]

This is true. The Torah itself tells us that YHVH's laws are NOT to difficult for us to do.

Do you obey everything recorded in the Sermon on the Mount 24/7?

 

[sojourner]

Do you obey everything recorded in the Sermon on the Mount 24/7?

I'm still waiting on a definition for "Torah."

 

[Prophet]

You must not be familiar with the account "prophet". Your cover up theory doesn't hold any water. You have made an assumption here. Just because the rest of the Isrealites were not permitted to go up the mountain does not mean that they couldn't see the fire on the Mt Sinai for themselves.

And to the eyes of the sons of Israel the appearance of the glory of the LORD was like a consuming fire on the mountain top. Ex 24:17

16And it came to pass on the third day in the morning, that there were thunders and lightnings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceeding loud; so that all the people that was in the camp trembled. 17And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet with God; and they stood at the nether part of the mount. Ex 19:16-17

Nice theory.

You seem to have no concept of the size of a mountain. One could see a giant bonfire happening on top of a mountain in a predesignated area without any chance of seeing what is fueling the fire, especially if "God" had three days to have Moses' loyalists set the fire up with "God's" permission to kill off any possible witnesses. If you believe things like this consecration confidence trick, Moses will make as big a fool of you as he did with those who bought that God must be on Moses' side.

Paul is not documented, much less recorded a record of himself doing something this corrupt.

 

[Plato]

Did Paul corrupt the message of Jesus?

No, if the Muslim's said that, they Muslim's are wrong, and inaccurate.
'Corrupt is a way too strong word'. Paul was a true son and Saint of our God . He never claimed to and admitted to the fact he had never written a 'Gospel'. Nor was asked to do ever do so. He never got to be with Jesus on this earth But instead as the 12lh replacement apostle to spread the faith to the rest of the world. To spread the faith, even if occasionally he made mistakes.

 

[Gnostic Seeker]

Acts says Matthias was the replacement of Judas

 

[Simplelogic]

I'm still waiting on a definition for "Torah."

Sorry for the delay. The Torah is the first 5 books of your OT. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy.

Pharisaic Jews of the first century and today believe in the oral laws (Talmud/Mishnah) which have been compiled for centuries. Some Jews believe these oral laws date back to Moses. In the oral law you have many NT items that Yeshua condemned the Pharisees for keeping.

-Hand washing traditions
-Not picking grain on Sabbath
-Not carrying a load on Sabbath
-Not mixing mud on Sabbath
-Washing pots and Jars in a certain way

Christians are largely ignorant to the Law of Moses and have no idea that the things Yeshua came against were not the Torah but man made doctrines and traditions. Yeshua kept every single commandment and even taught others to offer animal sacrifices! He also upheld the stoning commandments in Matthew's gospel. He was 100% Torah compliant in his life and was a model of how we are all suppose to live. I would challenge anyone to show me where Yeshua EVER breaks anything in the law of Moses. Some have tried already but they didn't realize the laws Yeshua was breaking were oral man made traditions…not Torah.

 

[Simplelogic]

Acts says Matthias was the replacement of Judas

This is a fact according to the book of Acts. Matthias was chosen because it says that he knew Yeshua personally and was with the 12 from the beginning. The concept of being an apostle was being an eye witness testimony of Yeshua and his teachings! Paul, of course, never met Yeshua. Thanks for pointing this out.

 

[Simplelogic]

You seem to have no concept of the size of a mountain. One could see a giant bonfire happening on top of a mountain in a predesignated area without any chance of seeing what is fueling the fire, especially if "God" had three days to have Moses' loyalists set the fire up with "God's" permission to kill off any possible witnesses. If you believe things like this consecration confidence trick, Moses will make as big a fool of you as he did with those who bought that God must be on Moses' side.

Paul is not documented, much less recorded a record of himself doing something this corrupt.

Silly