The Qur'an: A Book Full of Conjecture and Doubt

Source: Answering Muslims

Posted by Anthony Rogers

"Jesus ressurecting [sic] and dying on the cross is a mere legend. The people who 'saw' him THOUGHT they saw him, but it was someone who looked similar to him, . There;s [sic] no evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus (as), and the Quran refutes that, and the Quran has plenty of evidence on its side." - Muslim Kangaroo (See here [the link is dead])

No doubt Kangaroo has the following passage of the Qur’an in mind here:

And their saying: Surely we have killed the Messiah, Isa son of Marium, the messenger of Allah; and they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to them so (like Isa) and most surely those who differ therein are only in a doubt about it; they have no knowledge respecting it, but only follow a conjecture, and they killed him not for sure. S. 4:157 Shakir

As will be shown, only in a kangaroo court would the verdict come down against the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus in favor of the Qur’anic account of what happened. (For a good example of just such a court, see here.)

What Muslims "see" in the Quran and THINK is a refutation is actually just a bad argument substituted for and made to appear like a good one. Actually, it doesn't really bear much of a resemblance to a good argument; at best all we can say about it is that it is an apparently good enough counterfeit for many people to be convinced (read: deceived) by it. In fact, this passage doesn’t even represent an argument at all; it is simply a claim that contradicts what the Bible and history say about these matters. So calling it a refutation isn’t even accurate.

It has been said on this blog before (see here), but it bears repeating, especially in the context of a discussion of Surah 4:157, every time that we think of the "refutation" supposedly given in the Qur'an the one thing we should be struck with above all else is how many errors the author(s) of the Qur'an were able to make in such a short space, and Muslims really should be encouraged to add this to the list of evidences of the supernatural authorship of the Qur’an, for surely no one person could make so many mistakes AND yet still manage to dupe so many people. A supernatural being is clearly involved with both the composition and reception of the Qur’an; unfortunately, that being is most certainly not God, but is merely a being that masquerades like Him or an angel that pretends to have been sent by Him. This being made it appear to the author(s) of the Qur’an (and those who follow him/her/them) that the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ are mere legends, but they are really only following a satanically inspired conjecture. This point will be made in a myriad of ways over the course of several posts, beginning with the following:

1. This verse represents the Jews as boasting: "We killed the Messiah…."

Contrariwise, the speech attributed to the Jews here is a clear error. The Jewish leaders wanted Jesus crucified precisely because they rejected His claim to be the Messiah, for no Jew would boast of killing the Messiah.

All the author(s) of the Qur'an would have had to do here to accurately reflect what the Jews would or could have said along these lines given their actual beliefs is either drop the word “Messiah”, as the following (mis)translations of the Qur’an, likely out of a recognition of the problem that exists in the Arabic text, do:

and their statement that they murdered Jesus, son of Mary, the Messenger of God, when, in fact, they could not have murdered him or crucified him. They, in fact, murdered someone else by mistake. Even those who disputed (the question of whether or not Jesus was murdered) did not have a shred of evidence. All that they knew about it was mere conjecture. They certainly could not have murdered Jesus. S. 4:157 Muhammad Sarwar

They [proudly] spread a rumor that: “We killed Jesus, son of Mary.” For sure they did neither kill Jesus nor crucify him. Their wishful thinking has created so much confusion in account of the lack of [historical] proof for their saying. Know for sure that they did not kill him. S. 4:157 Bijan Moeinian

Or, add words to the effect that they killed Jesus for His CLAIM to be the Messiah. Indeed, this is exactly the sort of thing the Jews did do in opposition to the sign made by the Romans which called Jesus "the King of the Jews". In protest, the Jews clamored for the sign to be changed so it would read that He SAID He was/is the King of the Jews.

Therefore when Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out, and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Pavement, but in Hebrew, Gabbatha. Now it was the day of preparation for the Passover; it was about the sixth hour And he said to the Jews, "Behold, your King!" So they cried out, "Away with Him, away with Him, crucify Him!" Pilate said to them, "Shall I crucify your King?" The chief priests answered, "We have no king but Caesar." So he then handed Him over to them to be crucified. They took Jesus, therefore, and He went out, bearing His own cross, to the place called the Place of a Skull, which is called in Hebrew, Golgotha. There they crucified Him, and with Him two other men, one on either side, and Jesus in between. Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It was written, "JESUS THE NAZARENE, THE KING OF THE JEWS." Therefore many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city; and it was written in Hebrew, Latin and in Greek. So the chief priests of the Jews were saying to Pilate, "Do not write, 'The King of the Jews'; but that He said, 'I am King of the Jews.'" Pilate answered, "What I have written I have written." (John 19:13-22)

Muslim Defenders shamed themselves in a Public Debate with Catholic Defenders!

For the sake of non-Filipinos who are watching this video, this Muslim was so arrogantly claiming  HE KNEW ARABIC very well, but when being asked by the Catholic Defender to EXPLAIN in PURE ARABIC the meaning of "Alif namin" he immediately withdrew from the debate saying "I don't know."

The Muslim man clearly was pissed off. He cannot accept the painful rebuttal of the Catholic Defender. Instead, he forced the moderator to finish the debate... The Muslim man claimed he knows Arabic but non of the questions he could explain in pure Arabic. Now, the easiest way to save himself from public humiliation is to RUN because they really do not know ARABIC...

Bottom Line: MUSLIMS ARE UNABLE TO DEFEND THEIR FAITH IN PURE AND SIMPLE EXPLANATION!

RUN and HIDE! #ProDeoEtEcclesia #ToGodAndTheChurch!

Who wrote the Muslim "holy" book called Qur'an?

Before you say the Quran is a "word of God" READ these!

• Quran - from Wikipedia
• History of the Quran - from Wikipedia
• Criticism of the Quran - from Wikipedia
• Historical Errors of the Quran - from Answering Islam
• Contradictions in the Quran - from Answering Islam
• Criticism of Islam - from Wikipedia
• Criticism of Muhammad - from Wikipedia
• Islamic Terrorism - from Wikipedia

Who wrote Quran?: Muslims be ready!

By Sister Alicia

Muslims say that Bible is not the word of God because it has no known author or that most of the books of the Bible say, "author - unknown". But careful study of the Bible suggests that there are many evidences which indicate that the writers of the Bible were prophets and apostles themselves. For example the first five books of the Bible were written by Moses.

Moses writes instructions for the kings of Israel in Deu 17:18-20, "Also it shall be, when he sits on the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write for himself a copy of this law in a book, from the one before the priests, the Levites. And it shall be with him, and he shall read it all the days of his life, that he may learn to fear the LORD his God and be careful to observe all the words of this law and these statutes, that his heart may not be lifted above his brethren, that he may not turn aside from the commandment to the right hand or to the left, and that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children in the midst of Israel."

Joshua confirms that there were written Laws with them which was given by God to Moses. In Joshua 1:7-8, "Only be strong and very courageous, that you may observe to do according to all the law which Moses My servant commanded you; do not turn from it to the right hand or to the left, that you may prosper wherever you go. This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success."

Further we read that Joshua made an altar of the LORD God as it was written in the Book of the Law of Moses in Josh 8:30-31, "Now Joshua built an altar to the LORD God of Israel in Mount Ebal, as Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded the children of Israel, as it is written in the Book of the Law of Moses: "an altar of whole stones over which no man has wielded an iron tool." And they offered on it burnt offerings to the LORD, and sacrificed peace offerings."

Joshua also made a copy of the Book of Law when they reached the promised land as we read in Josh 8:32, "And there, in the presence of the children of Israel, he wrote on the stones a copy of the law of Moses, which he had written."

Further it was confirmed in 2 Chr 17:9 So they taught in Judah, and had the Book of the Law of the LORD with them." And throughout the Bible we read about the confirmation that Bible was written by prophets and apostles who had direct contact with God.

Now the question is, who wrote Quran or who was the author of Quran?

Hadith tells us that Muhammad was illiterate and was unable to read or write. So of course Muhammad did not write Quran. Muslims claim that Muhammad dictated the whole Quran to his followers and many of them memorized the Quranic verses word by word and later they wrote it down. The bottom line is that no one knows for sure who wrote the Quran.

After the death of Muhammad there was a time when Uthman the third Caliph of Islam ordered to burn all the copies of Quran except one. It was believed that there were variations in text and recitation practice of Quran at that time and so Uthman took this step. According to Quran and Hadith, Muhammad was the last prophet of Islam. So Uthman was not a prophet and we do not know whether he kept the valid and original Quran or destroyed it? We also do not know how he determined which one was the correct version of Quran?

Muslims claim that Quran was directly given by Allah and Sheikh Ahmed Deedat the Muslim Scholar and other Muslims have claimed that Quran is the word of God because it was written in first person speech unlike Bible, where third person speech is used. But the very first chapter of Quran is written in the third person speech.

Surah 1:1-7. "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Praise be to Allah, the Cherisher and Sustainer of the worlds; Most Gracious, Most Merciful; Master of the Day of Judgment. Thee do we worship, and Thine aid we seek. Show us the straight way, The way of those on whom Thou hast bestowed Thy Grace, those whose (portion) is not wrath, and who go not astray."

This is not the only one example but there are many Surahs which are written in third person speech. So if we take the word of Muslim Scholars, Quran is not the word of God.

What is TAQIYYA?

What Is Taqiyya?
(Source: Answering Muslims)
Taqiyya (also spelled taqiya, taqiyah, or taqiyyah) is a form of Islamic deception. The Quran (16:106 and 3:28) allows Muslims to lie in order to protect themselves or to protect the Muslim community. Protecting the Muslim community, however, involves lying about jihad and portraying Islam as a religion of peace.

AINA NEWS: The '1,500' Year Old 'Bible' and Muslim Propaganda

We know how desperate Muslims are yet most of them haven't read the real Bible! -CD2000

By Peter BetBasoo and Ashur Giwargis

(AINA) -- Much has been made of the recent discovery in Turkey of a Bible purported to be written in the Aramaic language, 1,500 years ago. The Muslim media, as well as Western media outlets, quickly pounced on this, claiming this Bible contains verses attributed to Jesus Christ, in which Christ predicts the coming of Muhammad. No media outlet has published a facsimile of these verses.

This "Bible" is written on leather in gold letters. The picture of the front cover show inscriptions in Aramaic and a drawing of a cross.

For any native speaker of Modern Assyrian (also known as neo-Aramaic), and that would be your average Assyrian today, the inscription is easily read. The bottom inscription, which is the most clearly visible from the published photos, says the following:

Transliteration: b-shimmit maran paish kteewa aha ktawa al idateh d-rabbaneh d-dera illaya b-ninweh b'sheeta d-alpa w-khamshamma d-maran

Translation: In the name of our Lord, this book is written on the hands of the monks of the high monastery in Nineveh, in the 1,500th year of our Lord.

Nineveh is the ancient Assyrian capital and is located in present-day north Iraq, near Mosul.

There are spelling errors that are immediately noticeable.

The first word, b'shimmit maran ("in the name of our Lord"), is erroneously spelled with a 't' instead of a 'd'. The 'd' in Assyrian is the genitive, and it prefixes the word that follows. It should read b-shimma d-maran, not b-shimmit maran (note, the last word of the sentence is correctly spelled d-maran ("of our Lord")).

The first word also contains another spelling error. The correct spelling for "name" in Assyrian is ashma, with the initial 'a' being silent. Therefore, when correctly spelled, 'in the name of our Lord" should be written as b-ashma d-maran.

The word idateh is misspelled, it should end with an 'a', idata. Also the phrase al idateh ("on the hands") is incorrect, it should read b-idata ("by the hands").

The bottom sentence uses the word ktawa ("book") to refer to the book, but in Assyrian the Bible is never referred to as a "book." One says awreta (Old Testament), khdatta (New Testament), or ktawa qaddeesha (holy book). Given this, since no one has seen the inside of this "Bible," we cannot be sure if it is in fact a Bible.

Most significantly, this writing is in Modern Assyrian, which was standardized in the 1840s. The first bible in Modern Assyrian was produced in 1848. If this book were written in 1500 A.D. it should have been written in Classical Assyrian.

It is highly unlikely for monks to make such elementary mistakes. It remains to be seen whether this book is a forgery, or even what kind of book it is.

The bottom inscription also says the book was written in 1500 A.D.. If the book does contain verses predicting the coming of Muhammad, it is no great accomplishment to predict something 870 years after the fact, since Muhammad founded Islam in 630 A.D..

Most media outlets, as well as Muslim and Christian outlets, lead the story with headlines pronouncing "1500 year old Bible predicts the coming of Muhammad" -- without any evidence to support this.

For Muslims, the implications of the headlines are desirable, that Jesus Christ is a Prophet, just like Muhammad, and not the Son of God. According to Al Bawaba, the Turkish culture and tourism minister, Ertugrul Gunay, said "In line with Islamic belief, the Gospel [this Bible] treats Jesus as a human being and not a God. It rejects the ideas of the Holy Trinity and the Crucifixion and reveals that Jesus predicted the coming of the Prophet Mohammed."

Commenting on the errors in the book, Al Bawaba says in another article:

For example, the book says that there are nine heavens and that the tenth is paradise while in Quran they are seven only and claims that Virgin Mary gave birth to Jesus without any pain while the Quran story says she got labor pains. 

According to the gospel, Jesus said to Jewish priests that he is not the Messiah and that the Messiah is Mohammed. This means a denial of the existence of a Messiah, who is in fact Jesus Christ, and makes Jesus and Mohammed seem like they are one and the same person. 

The book also contains information that lack historical credibility like the presence of three armies, each made up of 200,000 soldiers, in Palestine whereas the entire population of Palestine 2,000 years ago did not even reach 200,000. In addition, Palestine was occupied by the Romans at the time and it is impossible that Palestine was allowed to have any army or armies of its own. 

The last sentence in chapter 217 says that 100 pounds of stones were placed on Christ's body. This confirms that the gospel was written quite recently because the first to use the pound as a unit of weight was the Ottomans in their experiments with Italy and Spain and it was never known during the time of Jesus. 

Chapter 20 also stated that the cities of Jerusalem and Nazareth are sea ports.

This same article ends with "According to many studies, the gospel attributed to St. Barnabas was written by a European Jew in the Middle Ages who was quite familiar with the Quran and the Gospels. He, thus, mixed facts from here and there and his intentions remain unknown."

But despite the availability of information on this "Bible," most media outlets, Muslims, liberal and secular organizations have portrayed this discovery as something that undermines Christianity, ignoring the many problems with this book and presenting it as virtual fact. In fact, in their zeal to support the anti-Christian narrative, they have withheld or suppressed information questioning the authenticity of this book. For these organizations and individuals, this is another tool in their arsenal for the attack on the foundations of Christian doctrine.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Very Helpful Articles:

• Answering Islam - "1500 Years Old Bible found in Turkey?"
• Catholic Answers - "Why the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ is a Medieval Fake"
• Vatican Insider - "The Gospel of Barnabas ‘hoax’"
• Wikipedia - "The Gospel of Barnabas"

Anachronisms in the "Gospel of Barnabas"

Some readers have noted that the Gospel of Barnabas contains a number of apparent anachronisms and historical incongruities:

• It has Jesus sailing across the Sea of Galilee to Nazareth – which is actually inland; and thence going "up" to Capernaum – which is actually on the lakeside (chapters 20–21); though this is contested by Blackhirst, who says that the traditional location of Nazareth is itself questionable.
• Jesus is said to have been born during the rule of Pontius Pilate, which began after the year 26.
• Barnabas appears not to realize that "Christ" and "Messiah" are synonyms, "Christ" (khristos) being a Greek translation of the word messiah (mashiach), both having the meaning of "anointed". The Gospel of Barnabas thus errs in describing Jesus as "Jesus Christ" (lit. "Messiah Jesus" in Greek), yet claiming that 'Jesus confessed and said the truth, "I am not the Messiah"' (ch. 42).
• There is reference to a jubilee which is to be held every hundred years (Chapter 82), rather than every fifty years as described in Leviticus: 25. This anachronism appears to link the Gospel of Barnabas to the declaration of a Holy Year in 1300 by Pope Boniface VIII; a Jubilee which he then decreed should be repeated every hundred years. In 1343 the interval between Holy Years was reduced by Pope Clement VI to fifty years.[16]
• Adam and Eve eat an apple (ch. 40); whereas the traditional association of the Fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (Book of Genesis 2:9,17; 3:5) with the apple rests on the translation of the Hebrew Bible into Latin, where both 'apple' and 'evil' are rendered as 'malum'.
• The Gospel talks of wine being stored in wooden casks (chapter 152). Wooden casks were a characteristic of Gaul and Northern Italy, and were not commonly used for wine in the Roman empire until after 300 CE; whereas wine in 1st century Palestine was always stored in wineskins and jars (amphorae). The Pedunculate or English Oak Quercus robur does not grow in Palestine; and the wood of other species is not sufficiently airtight to be used in wine casks,[56]
• In Chapter 91, the "Forty Days" is referred to as an annual fast.[36] This corresponds to the Christian tradition of fasting for forty days in Lent; a practice that is not witnessed earlier than the Council of Nicaea (325). Nor is there a forty days' fast in Judaism of the period (see Mishnah Tractate Ta'anit, "Days of Fasting").
• Where the Gospel of Barnabas includes quotations from the Old Testament, these correspond to readings as found in the Latin Vulgate rather than as found in either the Greek Septuagint, or the Hebrew Masoretic Text. The Latin Vulgate translation was a work that St. Jerome began in 382 AD, centuries after the death of Barnabas.
• In Chapter 54 it says: "For he would get in change a piece of gold must have sixty mites" (Italian minuti). In the New Testament period, the only golden coin, the aureus, was worth approximately 3,200 of the smallest bronze coin, the lepton (translated into Latin as minuti); while the Roman standard silver coin, the denarius, was worth 128 leptons. The rate of exchange of 1:60 implied in the Gospel of Barnabas was, however, a commonplace of late medieval interpretation of the counterpart passage in the canonical Gospels (Mark 12:42), arising from the standard medieval understanding of minuti as meaning 'a sixtieth part'.
• Chapter 91 records three contending Jewish armies 200,000 strong at Mizpeh, totaling 600,000 men, at a time when the Roman army across the entire Empire had a total strength estimated as 300,000.
• In Chapter 119 Jesus instances sugar and gold as substances of equivalent rarity and value. Although the properties of sugar had been known in India in antiquity, it was not traded as a sweetener until industrial-scale production developed in the 6th century. From the 11th to 15th centuries, the sugar trade into Europe was an Arab monopoly, and its value was often compared with gold. From the mid-15th century, however, large-scale sugar estates were established in the Canary Islands and the Azores, and sugar, although still a luxury item, ceased to be exceptionally rare.

Why we need to talk about the real enemy: ISLAMIC JIHAD!

In response to TERRORIST ATTACK IN PARIS FRANCE, we need to look seriously what Islam and Muslims can do to us if we dare to question their beliefs!

What you will learn from this video are:

• History of the Quran
• HIstory of Islam
• Life of Muhammad
• Why Jews and Christians were expelled from Madina and the entire the Middle East
• The Crusades
• Dhimmitude
• History of the Islamic Caliphate under the Turks
• Muslim Brotherhood
• The State of Israel
• Political Correctness
• Rising of Islam in the West and their agenda to dominate
• What we can do as INFIDELS (non-Muslims)
• Who are we in the eyes of Muslims and who are the Muslims.

THANK YOU MS. BRIGITTE GABRIEL! Add her at Twitter @act4america 

Muslim asks about discrimination and gets awesome answer!

Who founded the Catholic Church? Constantine? Oh Come on...!

Yasir Qadhi, the Council of Nicea, and the New Testament Canon

In a recent lecture, Dr. Yasir Qadhi repeated the myth that Constantine and others selected the four canonical gospels and rejected others at the Council of Nicea. While such claims are common among uneducated internet apologists, seeing a respected Muslim scholar repeat this myth should be shocking. We expect scholars to be more careful in their claims.

Here's a brief response by James White:

Islam, ISIS, and the Forced Conversion of Yazidis

SAGOT SA BALIK-ISLAM: Hesus, Hindi Diyos dahil Sumamba sa Diyos Ama? (John 4:22; John 20:17)

Mula sa SAGOT SA BALIK-ISLAM blog

HINDI MATUTULAN ng mga Muslim na si Hesus ay Diyos kaya PILIT silang NAGHAHANAP ng DAHILAN para TUTULAN ang PAGKA-DIYOS ng Kristo.

Isa sa IPINAGPIPILITAN NILA ay “Hindi Diyos si Hesus dahil may sinasamba Siya.” Ang tinutukoy nila ay ang PAGSAMBA ni Hesus sa Diyos Ama.

Ginagamit nila ang John 4:22 at John 20:17 para ipilit ang kanilang pagtutol.

Pero tama ba sila? Dahil ba sinamba ni Hesus ang Ama Niyang Diyos ay hindi na Siya Diyos?

NAGKAKAMALI ang Muslim.

Ang PAGSAMBA ni Hesus sa DIYOS AMA ay PAGKILALA sa pagka-DIYOS ng KANYANG AMA at PAGGALANG ng DIYOS ANAK sa DIYOS AMA.

Dapat lang KILALANIN at IGALANG ng ANAK ang Kanyang AMA. At HINDI NAWALAN ng pagka-DIYOS ang ANAK dahil ginawa Niya iyan.

Kung tayo ba ay KIKILALA at GAGALANG sa ating mga AMA ay NAWAWALA na rin ang ATING PAGIGING ANAK at PAGIGING TAO?

HINDI po.

+++

A. MALING UNAWA

NARITO ang sabi ng Muslim na si Nhordz G Diamal sa Facebook:

Sa kabila na maraming ebidensya na si hesus MAY SINASAMBA: ay ang mga kristyano ay walang tigil sa paghahalungkat ng biblia para lng maging Dios si hesus,, Trying hard maxado,, mapride, may maliwanag na ngang talata na may sinasamba si hesus abay gagawa pa rin ng paraan para maging dios si hesus,,

Muhammad in the Bible? Oh come on...

Manila Standard: "Felix Manalo founded the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC)"

FACT: Felix Manalo founded the Iglesia ni Cristo (INC) and not Christ.

The INC will commemorate the day when INC was established by the late Felix Ysagun Manalo or “Ka Felix”, founder and first Executive Minister of the church. -Manila Standard Today

FELIX MANALO: A Self Proclaimed "Last Messenger" of God

In solemn commemoration of the 98th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, which began April 24, 1915

"I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim." (Hadith from Sahih Muslim, 19.4366).



Article for reading from Facing Islam Blog

Muslim persecution of Christians in the Middle East, read  Raymond Ibrahim Blog

Christian Persecution Ranking Mostly from Muslim dominated Countries

Source: WorldWatch
Read FACING ISLAM

Why Christians laugh at Zakir Naik

From Answering Muslims

Why Zakir Naik Refuses to Debate Ex-Ahmadi Nabeel Qureshi

Dr. Zakir Naik 25 Errors in Less then 25 minutes

Watch more at Answering Muslims

Jesus: A Prophet of Islam?

America forbids to burn the Qu'ran but ordered military men to BURN the Bible - by Answering Muslims

On the Radicalization of Anders Behring Breivik

Is there any way that Anders Behring is a "Christian Terrorist" just as mainstream media wants to depict him? However Anders Behring never quoted the Bible nor been visiting any church so as to consider him performing violence in the name of Christ.

Is there any way that Jihad Watch owner Robert Spencer might have "radicalized" Behring? In his manifesto, Behring already planned his violence since 1990, while Mr. Spencer start blogging only in 2003 right after the Islamic Terrorist attack in the US. Watch this video and learn how to disseminate the truth about Anders Behring's violence and that simply branding him as "Christian Terrorist" is ironical and misleading. -CD2000

http://www.answeringmuslims.com 

The media are blaming critics of Islam (such as Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller) for the radicalization of Norwegian terrorist Anders Behring Breivik. However, Breivik said that he turned to terrorism in response to media censorship. Who's to blame for his extremism?

ALSO READ: Is Anders Behring Breivik a Christian?