The Religion Discussion

[megadoc1]

I researched just one to PROVE that if Historians have made a GENERAL statement, then ALL of the SPECIFIC references you quoted would have been REJECTED with regard to AUTHENCITY and UNDISPUTED HISTORICAL ACCEPTANCE.

what a bam bam
I list the names again Tacitus,Pliny,Lucian,Josephus,Pliny the younger,celsus,thallus

I did what I said I wasn't going to do but now the BURDEN OF PROOF is upon you.

no you did exactly what you said you are not gonna do cause that aint research

And why do you think Dspike has been silent on this topic, he knows what I am saying is the correct view!

so what you are a comedian now?

[AdamB]

We seem to be talking about two different things here now with your reference to David.

no not at all, I quoted David because he is generally accepted as a historical person but the only information about him came from the bible the reason I did this is to show contrast between him and Jesus with the latter having more extra biblical sources available....

I am talking about historical figures that could be proven via real historical evidence, that excludes the Bible.

and that's exactly what I did when I quoted the names of the authors of the extra biblical sources, for you to research but you said that you are not gonna do research so I cant help you there

The historicity of the biblical account of the history of ancient Israel and Judah of the tenth to seventh-centuries BCE is disputed in scholarship. The biblical account of the eighty to seventh-centuries BCE is widely, but not universally, accepted as historical, while the verdict on the earliest period of the United Monarchy (tenth-century BCE) and the historicity of David is unclear.

but why deceive your self? I cant help yuh ,you are now selectively quoting wiki? here is the full piece

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible#Archaeological_and_historical_research

The historicity of the biblical account of the history of ancient Israel and Judah of the tenth to seventh-centuries BCE is disputed in scholarship. The biblical account of the eighty to seventh-centuries BCE is widely, but not universally, accepted as historical, while the verdict on the earliest period of the United Monarchy (tenth-century BCE) and the historicity of David is unclear. Archaeological evidence providing information on this period, such as the Tel Dan Stele, can potentially be decisive. The biblical account of events of the Exodus from Egypt in the Torah, and the migration to the Promised Land and the period of Judges are not considered historical in scholarship.[87][88] Regarding the New Testament, the setting being the Roman Empire in the first-century CE, the historical context is well established. There has been some debate on the historicity of Jesus, but the mainstream opinion is that Jesus was one of several known historical itinerant preachers in first-century Roman Judea, teaching in the context of the religious upheavals and sectarianism of Second Temple Judaism.[citation needed]

ah ketch yuh adam b this is exactly the same way you guys use the bible ,quoting stuff from it and ignoring the very next line...but since you choose to use the text to support your view you must accept it as a whole


now let me quote d spike

Oh, come on, Megadoc... you can't understand this explanation of the blinkered one?
He is willing to accept as proper historians those who agree with his point of view - those who don't are not accepted as proper historians. This is standard fare for his sort.
That was precisely why the Library of Alexandria was destroyed completely by the Muslim invaders who seized Egypt. The General sent a message back to the Caliph, asking what to do with all the books that were within the Library. The response was: "If they agree with the Koran, they are superfluous; if they disagree with the Koran, they are blasphemous. Burn it."

I have asked before: What independent reliable source of unbiased information do you want to agree on using?

you never asked this before! adam b one of your problems on here is your inability to be honest,you are a stranger to AL HAQ
NEVER SAY NEVER MEGADOC, THE EVIDENCE MAY BE RESURRECTED TO PROVE YOU WRONG!! LOL
HONESTY ON THIS THREAD IS A MATTER OF OPINION!

Tacitus was born 25 yrs after Jesus' death.

I posted a lot of names and all you do is come back with one? adam b research is not going looking up dirt on people! but wait..you did say you were not gonna do research! sorry my bad!

[Sky]

Haha things bad when Megadoc pwning you!!!

[maj. tom]

An open mind is the essence of intellect.

[AdamB]

Sky,
Not at all!! Where I am now, in this hot sun, I aint available to continue that discussion with Megadoc.

Majtom,
Then why am I asking for unbiased historical evidence? Sorry but I do not take vague unsupported statements as evidence. The individual books of the New Testament have all been "sanitized" and are of questionable origin and authorship. So what about the New Testament as a whole. Don't you think that a table with crooked legs will fall when burden is placed on it?

Enough said, sun hot, laterzzzz.

[maj. tom]

Wasn't specifically referring to you or your latest islamic inquisition tirade.

[nismotrinidappa]

he takes everything personally... please remember he is not thinking straight

[Sky]

Sky,
Not at all!! Where I am now, in this hot sun, I aint available to continue that discussion with Megadoc.

Majtom,
Then why am I asking for unbiased historical evidence? Sorry but I do not take vague unsupported statements as evidence. The individual books of the New Testament have all been "sanitized" and are of questionable origin and authorship. So what about the New Testament as a whole. Don't you think that a table with crooked legs will fall when burden is placed on it?

Enough said, sun hot, laterzzzz.

And Islamic literature means more how?
Not being able to answer Doc yet is not what I said. He's actually getting the better of you.
You call what shane said babbling or rambling, you don't have to answer him. Yet someone has a problem with how your posts are and your response was what? That's their problem or something like that.
You question Jesus, yet you believe stuff another mortal man said.
You shoulda quit a couple pages back, because like I said, you're late in this discussion.
Earlier in this thread, Islam was about being scientific and proving what is right and wrong, what are facts or beliefs. Now you have the religion looking more stupid than Christianity.
Enjoying life is about pleasing Allah and not actually enjoying it?
Maybe that's why a lot of you are so butthurt all the time and resort to voilence.

[megadoc1]

Then why am I asking for unbiased historical evidence? Sorry but I do not take vague unsupported statements as evidence.

but you claimed that the bible is corrupted,but the quran does not teach this! in fact Muhammad was advised to check out the bible to confirm the quran, the bible is available today in the same original state that it was in when Muhammad was around so you need to tell us when did the change took place, what was changed and who did them! please,provide evidence to support it ....in one breath you are saying that you do not take vague unsupported statements as evidence but yet you make those very statements! see bellow

The individual books of the New Testament have all been "sanitized" and are of questionable origin and authorship. So what about the New Testament as a whole. Don't you think that a table with crooked legs will fall when burden is placed on it?

you are yet to present us with the evidence

[AdamB]

Then why am I asking for unbiased historical evidence? Sorry but I do not take vague unsupported statements as evidence.

but you claimed that the bible is corrupted,but the quran does not teach this! in fact Muhammad was advised to check out the bible to confirm the quran,
Please quote your reference for this statement. I think Dspike mentioned something of the sort OUT OF CONTEXT, so now you jump on the bandwagon.[color=#0000FF][/color]

the bible is available today in the same original state that it was in when Muhammad was around so you need to tell us when did the change took place, what was changed and who did them! please,provide evidence to support it ....
Obviously since this message of being changed by man was sent down by GOD to Muhammad, then the change took place prior to his time ie sometime in the six centuries after Jesus.
What you have written in the current "New Testament" is NOT the Injeel, the Gospel sent down by GOD to Jesus.

You keep fooling yourself or choose to look for the truth concerning it.

The individual books of the New Testament have all been "sanitized" and are of questionable origin and authorship. So what about the New Testament as a whole. Don't you think that a table with crooked legs will fall when burden is placed on it?

you are yet to present us with the evidence

The evidence is the questionable authenticity, authorship and "preservation" which you know is where the tampering took place.

[Sky]

^^ The bible WAS changed with the king James version. We went though this before.
They made a little change here and there. The hebrew to english as in " I say to you now" is different from the hebrew to english as in "Verily I say unto thee".
Which is why I'm a bit skeptical of the bible in the first place.
But it didn't change enough to support AdamB's context. And you know I ain't care enough to look for evidence

[AdamB]

^^ The bible WAS changed with the king James version. We went though this before.
They made a little change here and there. The hebrew to english as in " I say to you now" is different from the hebrew to english as in "Verily I say unto thee".
Which is why I'm a bit skeptical of the bible in the first place.
But it didn't change enough to support AdamB's context. And you know I ain't care enough to look for evidence

And you know for a fact what took place prior to that, at the beginning when the four gospels were chosen from among 37...council of Nicea 375AD Pope Constantine.

The Jesus freaks are blinded from this fact / truth.

[megadoc1]

And you know for a fact what took place prior to that, at the beginning when the four gospels were chosen from among 37...council of Nicea 375AD Pope Constantine.

The Jesus freaks are blinded from this fact / truth.

lo the council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the bible canon, it was to deal wit arianism , the trinity and some other stuff at least read a wiki nah adam b
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

[AdamB]

he takes everything personally... please remember he is not thinking straight

Satan correcting sin...there's a crusade on St Mary's junction, Freeport, singing, dancing, waving hands and all...NOT A CLUE HOW TO WORSHIP GOD, read allyuh bible and see what Jesus did...

[megadoc1]

Obviously since this message of being changed by man was sent down by GOD to Muhammad, then the change took place prior to his time ie sometime in the six centuries after Jesus.
What you have written in the current "New Testament" is NOT the Injeel, the Gospel sent down by GOD to Jesus.

You keep fooling yourself or choose to look for the truth concerning it.


The evidence is the questionable authenticity, authorship and "preservation" which you know is where the tampering took place.

adam b show us where in the quran teaches that the bible was changed by man

[Sky]

^^ The bible WAS changed with the king James version. We went though this before.
They made a little change here and there. The hebrew to english as in " I say to you now" is different from the hebrew to english as in "Verily I say unto thee".
Which is why I'm a bit skeptical of the bible in the first place.
But it didn't change enough to support AdamB's context. And you know I ain't care enough to look for evidence

And you know for a fact what took place prior to that, at the beginning when the four gospels were chosen from among 37...council of Nicea 375AD Pope Constantine.

The Jesus freaks are blinded from this fact / truth.

I'm done questioning the bible. I accept that things aren't what they seem. But guess what, the quran is just as fallable. So if you can ride my post without asking for proof, don't bother asking for proof that the quran is flawed. Go ask the girl who was shot for wanting to learn. Or ask the rape victims who are running for their lives.

[AdamB]

And you know for a fact what took place prior to that, at the beginning when the four gospels were chosen from among 37...council of Nicea 375AD Pope Constantine.

The Jesus freaks are blinded from this fact / truth.

lo the council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the bible canon, it was to deal wit arianism , the trinity and some other stuff at least read a wiki nah adam b
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

And who legislated for them to have the authority to say that they were wrong and then invent Trinity, etc??? Nature of the son, relationship to the father...

[megadoc1]

^^ The bible WAS changed with the king James version. We went though this before.
They made a little change here and there. The hebrew to english as in " I say to you now" is different from the hebrew to english as in "Verily I say unto thee".
Which is why I'm a bit skeptical of the bible in the first place.
But it didn't change enough to support AdamB's context. And you know I ain't care enough to look for evidence

sky the king James version is just that, a version! there are many other translations out there but they are translated from the original Greek and Hebrew languages which is available today, for you to check out yourself you can use an online translator or you can try to learn a bit of the language
but its there

[megadoc1]

And you know for a fact what took place prior to that, at the beginning when the four gospels were chosen from among 37...council of Nicea 375AD Pope Constantine.

The Jesus freaks are blinded from this fact / truth.

lo the council of Nicaea had nothing to do with the bible canon, it was to deal wit arianism , the trinity and some other stuff at least read a wiki nah adam b
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea

And who legislated for them to have the authority to say that they were wrong and then invent Trinity, etc??? Nature of the son, relationship to the father...

hey my post is to show how you are in error! don't try to jump to another topic! the trinity is not up for discussion at the moment, you made an assertion that the four gospels were chosen from among 37...council of Nicea 375AD Pope Constantine. my post is to show how ill advised you are ..you even think Constantine was a pope ...lol

[Sky]

@ Megadoc. I know they're there and I read them side by side, that's how I know that. There's even a version that says Jesus was a prophet like Mohammed apparently.

[AdamB]

^^ The bible WAS changed with the king James version. We went though this before.
They made a little change here and there. The hebrew to english as in " I say to you now" is different from the hebrew to english as in "Verily I say unto thee".
Which is why I'm a bit skeptical of the bible in the first place.
But it didn't change enough to support AdamB's context. And you know I ain't care enough to look for evidence

sky the king James version is just that, a version! there are many other translations out there but they are translated from the original Greek and Hebrew languages which is available today, for you to check out yourself you can use an online translator or you can try to learn a bit of the language
but its there

Precisely the point, you assume it's there, that the translations were correct, not without errors (intentional).

Which is correct the bible with 66 or 73 books? Was this a translation glitch too? But it's there...

[AdamB]

@ Megadoc. I know they're there and I read them side by side, that's how I know that. There's even a version that says Jesus was a prophet like Mohammed apparently.

Then you need to translate that version for Megadoc.

[megadoc1]

@ Megadoc. I know they're there and I read them side by side, that's how I know that. There's even a version that says Jesus was a prophet like Mohammed apparently.

would you mind naming these versions ? or providing the sources? thanks!

[Sky]

@Megadoc: The one I read side by side with the king james version was the hebrew to modern english version. I don't know the name, but you know it.
The one talking about Jesus being a prophet is the one witnesses read. Again, I don't know the version, maybe you can find out. (Yes, that's what witnesses believe)


@ AdamB: There was also the Books of Mary Magdalene and Judas found a couple years back and the Vatican rejected them.
But if I read Romeo and Juliet and don't understand that they were that much in love, then Shakespeare did a shitty job of writing it and the book IS with flaw.
So we have two books, the bible and the quran.
The bible is so vague, we have like what? 40 sects of christianity? And all have different beliefs while using this book.
And while the quran attempts a better job, we have peaceful, passive muslims who are good people, then we have men who kill women and children in the name of God and treat women worse than their animals. They both read the same book.

[DFC]

I found this rather interesting...


John Hunt

Promoting Tolerance -- Building a Mosque

I am truly perplexed that so many people are against a mosque being built at Ground Zero. I think it should be the goal of every American to be tolerant. Thus the Mosque should be allowed, in an effort to promote tolerance. That is why I also propose that two nightclubs be opened next door to the mosque, thereby promoting tolerance from within the mosque. We could call one of the clubs, "The Turban Cowboy", which would be gay, and the other a topless bar called "You Mecca Me Hot." Next door should be a butcher shop that specializes in pork, and adjacent to that an open-pit barbecue pork restaurant, called " Iraq o' Ribs." Across the street there could be a lingerie store called "Victoria Keeps Nothing Secret," with sexy mannequins with short burkas in the window modeling the goods. Next door to the lingerie shop, a liquor store called "Morehammered." All of this would encourage the Muslims to demonstrate the tolerance they demand of us, so the mosque problem would be solved.

[AdamB]

Sky,
There is a huge difference between the wrongful action of individuals and completely different belief systems based on the same book.

[Sky]

And lemme guess, misunderstanding is far worse then murder?

[AdamB]

Sky,
I submit to you that IDOLATRY / POLYTHEISM is far worse than MURDER in the sight of GOD.

Why? Simply because the former is the greatest sin (against GOD that HE will not forgive) and the latter is a lesser but still major sin that can be forgiven (even by the family of the victim).

Perfect Justice will be meted out to all by GOD, so those who were killed for no apparent reason will have their recompense on a most dreadful Day. So too the murderers and perpetrators of similar crimes.

[AdamB]

@Megadoc: The one I read side by side with the king james version was the hebrew to modern english version. I don't know the name, but you know it.
The one talking about Jesus being a prophet is the one witnesses read. Again, I don't know the version, maybe you can find out. (Yes, that's what witnesses believe)


@ AdamB: There was also the Books of Mary Magdalene and Judas found a couple years back and the Vatican rejected them.
But if I read Romeo and Juliet and don't understand that they were that much in love, then Shakespeare did a shitty job of writing it and the book IS with flaw.
So we have two books, the bible and the quran.
The bible is so vague, we have like what? 40 sects of christianity? And all have different beliefs while using this book.
And while the quran attempts a better job, we have peaceful, passive muslims who are good people, then we have men who kill women and children in the name of God and treat women worse than their animals. They both read the same book.

I used to think that Jehovah's Witnesses were somewhat closer to the belief of musliims that Jesus was a prophet, a man, a human only, not divine. But they believe that he was the first of creation, the Archangel who somehow became Jesus the man on Earth. They don't believe that he is part of the Trinity concept of GOD, they don't believe in the Trinity at all. But they believe him to be more than a man but less than GOD, like a mini-god nah.

But though most of Christianity believe in the 3 gods in one thing, they still in origin, in their minds believe in one god. However, the JW view is MUCH WORSE because they believe in the separation of GOD and Jesus, the lesser god. We call this plain and outright associating partners with GOD. First commandment of Moses BROKEN!!

[megadoc1]

^if you did research you will learn that the Jehovah witness' view on Jesus is that of Arianism which was one of the issues dealt with at the council of Nicaea

Obviously since this message of being changed by man was sent down by GOD to Muhammad, then the change took place prior to his time ie sometime in the six centuries after Jesus.
What you have written in the current "New Testament" is NOT the Injeel, the Gospel sent down by GOD to Jesus.

You keep fooling yourself or choose to look for the truth concerning it.


The evidence is the questionable authenticity, authorship and "preservation" which you know is where the tampering took place.

adam b show us where in the Qur'an teaches that the bible was changed by man, theses verses below does not convey that message..the Qur'an disagrees with you!!!
if the bible was changed before Muhammad, why the Qur'an does not speak about it?

The Qur'an declares the Bible acceptable and advocates that it be studied and obeyed.

"It was We who revealed the Law to Moses, therein was guidance and light ... and in their footsteps, We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel, therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him, a guidance and admonition to those who fear Allah. To thee (Mohammed) We sent the Scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety." (Sura 5:47-51). (My own emphasis).

"'O, People of the Book! Ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you 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 ... those who believe (in the Qur'an), those who follow the Jewish (Scriptures), and the Sabaeans and the Christians - any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness, - on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Sura 5:71-72). (My emphasis).

"If only they had stood fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that was sent to them from their Lord, they would have enjoyed happiness." (Sura 5:69). (See also Suras 5:16, 7:169). (My emphasis).

"Dispute not with the People of the Book, save in the fairer manner, except for those of them that do wrong; and say: 'We believe in what has been sent down to us, and what has been sent down to you; Our God and your God is One and to Him we have surrendered.'" (Sura 29:45). (My emphasis).

"This Qur'an could not have been forged apart from God; but it is a confirmation of what is before it ..." (Sura 10:37). (My emphasis).

"Before it was the Book of Moses for a model and a mercy; and this is a book confirming in Arabic tongue to warn the evil-doers and good tidings to the good-doers." (Sura 46:11). (My emphasis).

"Who sent down the Book that Moses brought as a light and guidance to men? You put it onto parchments, revealing some, and hiding much; and by which you were taught that you knew not, you and your fathers. Say, 'God'". (Sura 6:91). (My emphasis).

"And what We have revealed to thee of the Book, is the truth, confirming what is before it." (Sura 35:31). (My emphasis).

"Children of Israel ... believe in that I have sent down, confirming the revelation that is with you and be not the first to disbelieve in it ... and do not confound the truth with vanity and do not conceal the truth wittingly (i.e. concealing the truth against better knowledge)". (Sura 2:40-42). (My emphasis).

The above texts presuppose the availability of knowledge of that which has been confirmed, presupposing that the Torah was available in an unadulterated form during the time of Mohammed.

"We gave Moses the Book and followed him up with a succession of Apostles. We gave Jesus, son of Mary, clear signs and strengthened (or confirmed) him with the Holy Spirit." (Sura 2:87).

"And when there comes to them (the Jews) a Book from Allah, confirming what is with them (the Taurat) ... they refused to believe in it." (Sura 2:89). (My emphasis).

"He has sent down upon thee the Book with the truth, confirming what was before it and He sent down Torah and the Gospel afore time, as guidance to the People and He sent down salvation." (Sura 3:3). (My emphasis).

There is no doubt that at least as early as A.D. 350 well before the time of Mohammed there was a uniform canon of the Bible and nothing has been changed, adulterated, polluted or perverted since.

"Before thee (i.e. Mohammed), also, the Apostles we sent were but men ... If you realise this not, ASK of THOSE WHO POSSESS THE MESSAGE." (Sura 21:7).

"BELIEVE IN Allah and His Messenger and the Scripture which He hath revealed unto his Messenger, and THE SCRIPTURE WHICH HE REVEALED AFORETIME. WHOSO DISBELIEVETH IN Allah and His Angles and the Last Day, HE VERILY HATH WANDERED FAR ASTRAY." (Sura 4:136).

"Each one believeth in Allah and His Angels and His Scriptures and His Messengers - WE MAKE NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN ANY OF HIS MESSENGERS." (Sura 2:285).

"Say: 'Bring you the Torah now and recite (or read) it, if you are men of truth'" (Again the existence of the Torah is presupposed). (Sura 3:93).

"You who have been given the Book, believe in what We have sent down, confirming that which is with you." (Sura 4:47). (My emphasis).

How could they compare the two, if one were lost? (See also Suras 5:43,46,48,65-68; 66:12; 2:44,53; 3:70,78; 5:13,15; 4:44-46 and 2:78,79).

We see quite clearly that the accusations against Jews and Christians are not that they have corrupted Scripture, but they have misinterpreted, concealed or disobeyed it.

"There is none that can change the Words of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those Apostles (or: the other Apostles also say so)." (Sura 6:34).

"No change can there be in the Words of Allah." (Sura 10:64).

http://www.answering-islam.org/Nehls/Answer/corrupt.html