Muhammad and the Bible Proofs, an Islamic quandary

[Milton Platt]

That is the choice we have all been given. That is the most great bounty we can have, choice.

A rock has no choice. Both vegitable and animal can not break free of the natural laws. Man alone on this earth has been given that capacity.

Peace be with you

That post did not at all address the point I made in my post.

 

[Dawnofhope]

The problem is that you cannot include stories from the bible. It was not intended to be and is not an historical account. It is full of events that have no basis in history or reality. You need sufficient outside sources, and you don't have them.

The gospels were written by men in the first century to provide a testimony to the life of Jesus Christ as they understood it. To say it had no basis in history or reality is to ignore history and reality.

Historical reliability of the Acts of the Apostles - Wikipedia

Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia

There were two main Jewish historians, Josephus and Philo. One referred to Christ, the other didn't. You claim the inclusion of the Christianity in the work of Josephus is a forgery. That is simply a theory albeit a popular one amongst atheists that can not be proven.

Modern scholarship has largely acknowledged the authenticity of the reference in Book 20, Chapter 9, 1 of the Antiquities to "the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James"[12] and considers it as having the highest level of authenticity among the references of Josephus to Christianity.[13][1][2][14][15][16] Almost all modern scholars consider the reference in Book 18, Chapter 5, 2 of the Antiquities to the imprisonment and death of John the Baptist also to be authentic and not a Christian interpolation.[17][18][19]

Josephus on Jesus - Wikipedia