Errors in the Quran

[Scimitar]

Nothing you say means anything either, coz you're a nobody and a random on the interwebs - so why take anything you say seriously?

Ad populum that kid

It's a sad day for your type eh? You got answered in a post which you can't refute and so - you talk wet? really? nice one.... noted. For future reference

 

[kashmir]

Nothing you say means anything either, coz you're a nobody and a random on the interwebs - so why take anything you say seriously?

Ad populum that kid

It's a sad day for your type eh? You got answered in a post which you can't refute and so - you talk wet? really? nice one.... noted. For future reference

what on earth are you trying to prove?
Now you try the personal attack method because Ad populum didn't work for you?

 

[Bunyip]

What actual evidence do they use to claim he wasn't crucified?

You want evidence that an event 2000 years ago didn't happen?

That isn't how it works. The point is that there is not enough evidence that the crucifixion DID happen. How could evidence of non-occurance exist, and what form would it take?

The point is that the evidence for the crucifixion is scant.

Or don't they believe the evidence is enough to make the positive claim and this is a burden of proof thing?

There is barely any evidence, so yes - a couple of passing references from later historians is not enough.

I am asking you because finding non-bias discussions on third party websites is next to impossible.

Just look at any book on the historicity of the crucifixion and look in the bibliography. Any scholarly work will have a long bibliography identifying authors on both sides of the debate.

 

[kashmir]

You want evidence that an event 2000 years ago didn't happen?

The point is that the evidence for the crucifixion is scant.



There is barely any evidence, so yes - a couple of passing references from later historians is not enough.



Just look at any book on the historicity of the crucifixion and look in the bibliography. Any scholarly work will have a long bibliography identifying authors on both sides of the debate.

Nonsense, we have text from that time, and is what historians study.
No text refutes the crucifixion, they do refute Jesus's miracles though.
They give merit to his existence as well.

So, yes, there could be evidence that he was not crucified.

1) we have evidence that he was crucified
2) there is nothing, no writings from that time to refute the crucifixion.

Odd that we have writings that refutes his miracles, and his rising from the dead, and who he said he was, but none that refute the crucifixion, ehhh?

 

[Bunyip]

Nonsense, we have text from that time, and is what historians study.

Really? I have studied this for a number of years - other than the brief references in Tacitus and Josephus, which cam many years later, please identify what other text or texts you believe exists?

No text refutes the crucifixion, they do refute Jesus's miracles though.
They give merit to his existence as well.

No offence, but you are not making sense - you are asking for texts from the time that report the non-occurance of an event? That is madness.

I repeat - the issue is the lack of evidence FOR the crucifixion.


There is no record of Jesus birth, but to ask for evidence of his non-birth is to fail to grasp the burden of proof. And for that matter basic logic.

 

[kashmir]

Really? I have studied this for a number of years - other than the brief references in Tacitus and Josephus, which cam many years later, please identify what other text or texts you believe exists?



No offence, but you are not making sense - you are asking for texts from the time that report the non-occurance of an event? That is madness.

I repeat - the issue is the lack of evidence FOR the crucifixion.


There is no record of Jesus birth, but to ask for evidence of his non-birth is to fail to grasp the burden of proof. And for that matter basic logic.

We have text of people refuting Jesus's miracles from back then, if he didn't even exist and people were making him up, we would have refutations saying he was made up by them.
We don't have that do we?

Just like right now, if I create a thread and claim that the president of the USA is posting on here and said he was Obama, people would reply and say, no he isn't you are making it up.
Because there is no such person on here claiming to be Obama.

Years later, that would be valid refutations that Obama didn't come on here.
Because if he was actually on here, the person claiming I was making it up, would look foolish.
That is why there is no writings claiming that Jesus was not crucified.
They would have looked foolish, because the whole city witnessed it happen.

That is how the negative is refuted.
If Jesus was not crucified and the disciples made it up, there would be writings of it, saying that it didn't happen.

here is one link to a series discussing the evidence that we have.
It is much more that two people as you claim.

[youtube]zrRQqYGf4O0[/youtube]

 

[Bunyip]

We have text of people refuting Jesus's miracles from back then, if he didn't even exist and people were making him up, we would have refutations saying he was made up by them.
We don't have that do we?

Just like right now, if I create a thread and claim that the president of the USA is posting on here and said he was Obama, people would reply and say, no he isn't you are making it up.
Because there is no such person on here claiming to be Obama.

Years later, that would be valid refutations that Obama didn't come on here.
Because if he was actually on here, the person claiming I was making it up, would look foolish.
That is why there is no writings claiming that Jesus was not crucified.
They would have looked foolish, because the whole city witnessed it happen.

Do you actually believe that some historian 2000 years ago would have sat down and made a record of all of the things that did not happen that year?
That is how the negative is refuted.
If Jesus was not crucified and the disciples made it up, there would be writings of it, saying that it didn't happen.

Buddy, that is madness - why would contemporary historians report an event that did not occur?

Furthermore, if there were so many eye-witnesses not a single one of them made a record that survives. A whole city worth of eye witnesses is worthless if no record of what those eye witnesses saw has been preserved.

I asked you what texts supported the crucifixion, other than the brief references in Tacitus and Josphus - would you please identify any other source you believe exists?

Mate, in 1429 the Smurfs did not establish a moon base and use it to take over the world - do you seriously think that there should be contemporary historical evidence that it did not happen? A: Nope! What would be needed is evidence that they DID.

In 3045 BC Lindsey Lohan travelled back in time and brought unicorns back from extinction - can you find some contemporary historical evidence that she didn't? A: Nope! You need evidence that an historical event DID OCCUR, evidence that it did not occur can not exist.

What insane historian would compile a list of events that did not occur and then preserve them?

 

[Bunyip]

@Kashmir.

Just FYI, only Josephus actually mentions the crucifixion. It is a very breif reference, that is believed by many scholars to be a later addition and as such is hotly contested.

Other than that single passage in Josephus, there is no mention of the crucifixion in any other contemporary (or even close to contemporary) text. Tacitus, Seutonius, Pliny and Origen (for example) do not mention the cricufixion.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

It seems that the debate is off-topic ------
Suppose that Christ was not crucified ------
But the question is crucified ---
Why put another human being a substitute for Jesus

 

[kashmir]

It seems that the debate is off-topic ------
Suppose that Christ was not crucified ------
But the question is crucified ---
Why put another human being a substitute for Jesus

ask muhammad, he is the one claiming that.
Jesus tried to bring peace to the world, men mocked and killed him, muhammad comes along and doesn't want to follow what Jesus said, so he erased him and made up his own rules.

 

[DawudTalut]

ask muhammad, he is the one claiming that.
Jesus tried to bring peace to the world, men mocked and killed him, muhammad comes along and doesn't want to follow what Jesus said, so he erased him and made up his own rules.

Peace be on you.
Sorry not true.

1-God reveals His message to people through Prophets [the most righteous person of time]

2-People follow him, some resist (free will), resistors are those who do not want to get lifted from raw state to high moral state of spirituality.

3-Eventually many people accepts Prophets message.

4-Then decline starts when more people fall to raw state of self [selfishness].

5-Prophet Moses (on whom be peace) came to uplift fallen human [slave] and gave them light of courage and victory based on spirituality though they resisted with him too].

6-They enjoyed success.

7-They declined and Moses's Messiah came for reform.

8-He was resisted, he was mocked as rebel, he was given sentence, the governor Pilate knew Jesus was innocent, he put him on cross on such time that he should not be there for long.

9-He was taken away from cross after some times, treated and migrated to meet other tribes of Israelite to deliver divine message.

[Ahmadiyya Muslim account based on Holy Quran, Bible, Old medical and Historical records]

10-Latter, Prophet Jesus (on whom be peace) was misinterpreted as literal Son of God and Unity of God was changed into Trinity which as subservient to Moses, Jesus had never thought.

11-Holy Quran and Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) were sent as promised in previos Books to complete the divine message, corrected this and reminded that God is One and Jesus (on whom be peace) was a human and Prophet to Bani Israel.

 

[kashmir]

Peace be on you.
Sorry not true.

1-God reveals His message to people through Prophets [the most righteous person of time]

2-People follow him, some resist (free will), resistors are those who do not want to get lifted from raw state to high moral state of spirituality.

3-Eventually many people accepts Prophets message.

4-Then decline starts when more people fall to raw state of self [selfishness].

5-Prophet Moses (on whom be peace) came to uplift fallen human [slave] and gave them light of courage and victory based on spirituality though they resisted with him too].

6-They enjoyed success.

7-They declined and Moses's Messiah came for reform.

8-He was resisted, he was mocked as rebel, he was given sentence, the governor Pilate knew Jesus was innocent, he put him on cross on such time that he should not be there for long.

9-He was taken away from cross after some times, treated and migrated to meet other tribes of Israelite to deliver divine message.

[Ahmadiyya Muslim account based on Holy Quran, Bible, Old medical and Historical records]

10-Latter, Prophet Jesus (on whom be peace) was misinterpreted as literal Son of God and Unity of God was changed into Trinity which as subservient to Moses, Jesus had never thought.

11-Holy Quran and Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be on him) were sent as promised in previos Books to complete the divine message, corrected this and reminded that God is One and Jesus (on whom be peace) was a human and Prophet to Bani Israel.

In the history of man, religious beliefs changed and each new prophet says the last ones were wrong.
Whippy do, means nothing.
Most likely, in a few hundred years a new prophet will come and say that muhammad was wrong, and people will follow his twisted mentality too.

So basically its the bibles word against muhammeds word.
I pick to believe Jesus over muhammed
Muhammed was a false prophet, or else he would not have has sex with children, no man of God has sex with kids.
Nor attacks defenseless people for their $$$ and put them into slavery.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

Who is that man-like, and who was a substitute on the cross for Jesus

 

[kashmir]

Who is that man-like, and who was a substitute on the cross for Jesus

Jesus was on the cross

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

my friend --
we want to proof the error of qouran --
in this point --

 

[kashmir]

my friend --
we want to proof the error of qouran --
in this point --

No, you prove that quran is right and that Jesus was wrong.

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

yes i believe Jesus in the cross
but this top ice is about error of qouran ---
the verse say the Jesus is not in the cross--
in the cross is man same Jesus--<like Jesus>
in this reasons my view point ---
who are that man like Jesus--
and why god do that --
please i want any muslim answer to those Question

 

[kashmir]

yes i believe Jesus in the cross
but this top ice is about error of qouran ---
the verse say the Jesus is not in the cross--
in the cross is man same Jesus--<like Jesus>
in this reasons my view point ---
who are that man like Jesus--
and why god do that --
please i want any muslim answer to those Question

I am sorry, I misunderstood you.
I gave you a frubal

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

no my friend ---
there is Three evidence to prove the crucifixion of Christ
first --Roman governor
The second is from the Jews the children of Israel
The third is Christ's apostles and disciples of Christ who viewed the cross and crucified

 

[mahasn ebn sawresho]

Cross historic event ---
Jewish historian Yousefinos referring to the fact the crucifixion of Jesus ---