Psalm 116

Psalm 116, 117 and 118 indisputably prove that Jesus Christ
never got crucified:

The sections of this article are:
1- Psalm 116, 117 and 118.
(a)- Psalm 116.
(b)- Psalm 117-118.
2- Conclusion.
1-
Psalm 116, 117 and 118:
It is first of all important to know that the Psalms of David, while they are narrated by
him, but they do contain many prophecies about the coming of Jesus Christ or the
Messiah. The New Testament had made many references to many of the Psalms
verses and linked them to Jesus Christ. Also, we've already seen how Psalm 91
clearly and indisputably prophesied about Christ will never get crucified, and we've
seen how the New Testament referenced this Psalm. It is very important that you pay
close attention to Psalm 91:3, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 15 below. These verses speak about:
A Summary of Psalm 91:

1. GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15)
and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
2. GOD Almighty will cover him with His
Protection (Psalm 91:4).
3. Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm

91:5).
4. Christ will then observe with his own eyes the
punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
5. No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster
will even come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this
even contradicts him getting beaten up before
crucifixion).
6. GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to
protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14,
Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the
ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and
punishment.
7. Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will
be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah
52:13). No way would these verses be valid if
Christ got crucified.
8. His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will
live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and
Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus
never got married and had children. In
Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite
possible that Jesus Christ had wives and
children).
9. His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12).
10. "Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be
symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several
English translations, and it never meant a literal
death.
11. Important Note: Psalm 91 is speaking as a

number of Prophecies that WILL take place.
Notice how the verses are speak of future events
that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once
throughout the entire New Testament were the
Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot
against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the
NT is indeed false and corrupt.
With this said, let us now look at the following chapters from the book of Psalm:
(a)-
Psalm 116:
Psalm 116
1 I love the LORD, for he heard my voice; he heard my cry for mercy.
2 Because he turned his ear to me, I will call on him as long as I live.
3 The cords of death entangled me, the anguish of the grave came upon me; I was
overcome by trouble and sorrow.
4 Then I called on the name of the LORD: "O LORD, save me!"
5 The LORD is gracious and righteous; our God is full of compassion.
6 The LORD protects the simplehearted; when I was in great need, he saved
me. (See Psalm 91:3, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 15 below)

7 Be at rest once more, O my soul, for the LORD has been good to you.
8 For you, O LORD, have delivered my soul from death, my eyes from tears, my
feet from stumbling,
9 that I may walk before the LORD in the land of the living.
10 I believed; therefore I said, "I am greatly afflicted."
11 And in my dismay I said, "All men are liars."
12 How can I repay the LORD for all his goodness to me?
13 I will lift up the cup of salvation and call on the name of the LORD.
14 I will fulfill my vows to the LORD in the presence of all his people.
15 Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints.
16 O LORD, truly I am your servant; I am your servant, the son of your
maidservant; you have freed me from my chains. (See Psalm 91:3, 8, 10, 11, 12
and 15 below)
17 I will sacrifice a thank offering to you and call on the name of the LORD.
18 I will fulfill my vows to the LORD in the presence of all his people,
19 in the courts of the house of the LORD in your midst, O Jerusalem. Praise the
LORD.
There few points to notice here:
1-
In Psalm 116:3, we see the Messiah fearing the pain of the grave and death.
2-
As similarly mentioned in Psalm 91, where GOD Almighty specifically said that
He will send down His Angels to lift and save the Messiah from any and all harm,
we see again in Psalm 116:6 GOD Almighty answering the Prayers of the Messiah
and Saving him from any and all harm.
3-
In Psalm 116:8, we see the Messiah confirming that GOD Almighty indeed saved
him from the pain of the grave and death. It does not at all say or mean that Jesus did
die and then was risen from the dead, because again, Psalm 116:6 says that GOD
Almighty will save him, and in Psalm 116:4 we see that Christ or the Messiah have
called upon GOD Almighty to save him.
4-
In Psalm 116:13, we see a clear prophecy about the "Cup of Salvation" that is
referenced in the following New Testament verses:
"Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My
Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as
you will."" (Matthew 26:39)
"He went away a second time and prayed, "My Father, if it is not
possible for this cup to be taken away unless I drink it, may your will be
done."" (Matthew 26:42)
""You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the
cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"" (Mark
10:38)
""We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I
drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with," (Mark 10:39)
""Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean
the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and selfindulgence." (Matthew 23:25)
5-
In Psalm 116:16-18, we see the Messiah thanking and praising GOD Almighty for
freeing him from the "chains", which is referring to the chains, the nails and the cross
that Jesus was never even was harmed with (see Psalm 91:3, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 15
below), and then him walking down preaching to people his thanksgivings to GOD
Almighty and fulfilling his vows to Him, the Almighty. This point is further proven in
the following verses in Psalm 91 and Psalm 118.
The following is Psalm 91 that Luke 4:1011 and Matthew 4:5-6 link to Jesus:
(Pay attention to the red text below, especially in Psalm
91:11-12, 15 and the others)
Psalm 91
1 He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in
the shadow of the Almighty. [a]
2 I will say [b] of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my
fortress, my God, in whom I trust."
3 Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare and from
the deadly pestilence.
4 He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings
you will find refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield
and rampart.
5 You will not fear the terror of night, nor the arrow that
flies by day,
6 nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness, nor the
plague that destroys at midday.
7 A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your
right hand, but it will not come near you.
8 You will only observe with your eyes and see the
punishment of the wicked.
(According to the Noble Quran and
the original writings of the Disciples of
Jesus, Jesus was not crucified, and he
watched the crucifixion of the doomed person.

Also, according to the Apocalypse of Peter that
was discovered in Egypt, Jesus sat on the tree
and watched the crucified one getting
crucified. Peter witnessed this and wrote the
Apocalypse. Not only that, but while
Christians insist that the book is a Gnostic one,
but according to Wikipedia.org, "It is
unclear whether this text advocates
an adoptionist (Jesus was Divine)
or docetist (Jesus' body and crucifixion were
an illusion) christology"
So there is no proof that the book is
Gnostic.)
9 If you make the Most High your dwelling even the

LORD, who is my refuge10 then no harm will befall you, no disaster will come
near your tent.
11 For he will command his angels concerning you to
guard you in all your ways;
12 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will
not strike your foot against a stone.
(If Jesus died on the cross and got buried, then his feet
would've struck the ground and the stones on it from
bringing him down, throwing him on the floor and
burying him).
13 You will tread upon the lion and the cobra; you will
trample the great lion and the serpent.
14 "Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue
him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name.
15 He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be
with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honor him.
16 With long life will I satisfy him and show him my
salvation."
Footnotes:
a. Psalm 91:1 Hebrew Shaddai
b. Psalm 91:2 Or He says
There is no question!
There is no question that the emphasized parts above,
especially in Psalm 91:11-12, 15 and others, clearly and
indisputably agree with the Noble Quran and Isaiah 52:13!
Jesus was neither crucified nor resurrected, and he was
protected and lifted by GOD Almighty. Also, the New
Testament, again, confirms that Psalm 91 is referring to
Jesus Christ.
GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm
91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
GOD Almighty will cover him with His
Protection (Psalm 91:4).
Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm
91:5).
Christ will then observe with his own eyes the
punishment of the crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or
disaster will even come near Christ (Psalm
91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up
before crucifixion).
GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to
protect him and lift him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah
52:13). Not even his foot will strike the
ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and
punishment.
Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will
be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah

52:13). No way would these verses be valid if
Christ got crucified.
His life will be prolonged (extended) and he
will live to even see his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and
Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict Jesus
never got married and had children. In
Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite
possible that Jesus Christ had wives and children).
His life will overpower death (Isaiah 53:12).
"Death" in Isaiah 53:9 is proven to be
symbolic using the Hebrew Lexicon and several
English translations, and it never meant a literal
death.
Important Note: Psalm 91 is speaking as a
number of Prophecies that WILL take place.
Notice how the verses are speak of future events
that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once
throughout the entire New Testament were the
Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot
against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the
(b)- Psalm 117-118:

Psalm 117
1 Praise the LORD, all you nations; extol him, all you peoples.
2 For great is his love toward us, and the faithfulness of the LORD endures forever.
Praise the LORD.
This is a very short chapter.
Psalm 118
1 Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; his love endures forever.
2 Let Israel say: "His love endures forever."

3 Let the house of Aaron say: "His love endures forever."
4 Let those who fear the LORD say: "His love endures forever."
5 In my anguish I cried to the LORD, and he answered by setting me free.
6 The LORD is with me; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?
7 The LORD is with me; he is my helper. I will look in triumph on my enemies.
8 It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in man.
9 It is better to take refuge in the LORD than to trust in princes.
10 All the nations surrounded me, but in the name of the LORD I cut them off.
11 They surrounded me on every side, but in the name of the LORD I cut them off.
12 They swarmed around me like bees, but they died out as quickly as burning thorns;
in the name of the LORD I cut them off.
13 I was pushed back and about to fall, but the LORD helped me.
14 The LORD is my strength and my song; he has become my salvation.
15 Shouts of joy and victory resound in the tents of the righteous: "The LORD's right
hand has done mighty things!
16 The LORD's right hand is lifted high; the LORD's right hand has done mighty
things!"
17 I will not die but live, and will proclaim what the LORD has done.
18 The LORD has chastened me severely, but he has not given me over to death.
19 Open for me the gates of righteousness; I will enter and give thanks to the LORD.
20 This is the gate of the LORD through which the righteous may enter.
21 I will give you thanks, for you answered me; you have become my salvation.
22 The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone; (See Matthew 21:4243 below)
23 the LORD has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes.
24 This is the day the LORD has made; let us rejoice and be glad in it.
25 O LORD, save us; O LORD, grant us success.
26 Blessed is he who comes in the name of the LORD. From the house of the LORD
we bless you.
27 The LORD is God, and he has made his light shine upon us. With boughs in hand,
join in the festal procession up to the horns of the altar.
28 You are my God, and I will give you thanks; you are my God, and I will exalt you.
29 Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; his love endures forever.
There few points to notice here:
1-
Like we've seen in Psalm 91 and 116 above, we see in Psalm 118:5-6 how GOD
Almighty answered the Messiah and had Set him free before suffering the pain of
torture and death. The Messiah also says that man has no power of him in
verse Psalm 118:6.
2-
In Psalm 118:18, we see that while GOD Almighty will allow a great deal of fear
to enter Jesus' heart (see this article for more details), but in the end Jesus Christ
will not die.
3-
In regards to Psalm 118:22, we it clearly referenced in the New Testament in the

following verses, which, again, prove that Psalms 91, 116-118 and many others were,
indeed, referring to Jesus Christ - the coming Messiah:
Matthew 21:42-43
42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which
the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the
Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and
given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.
There is a great evidence that the "nation" that Jesus referred to in
Matthew 21:43 is indeed the Muslim nation from Arabia. Otherwise,
Jesus would've at least said "my nation" or "my people" if he meant
his followers. But no, Jesus said "a nation" and he was referring to
another nation.
Please also visit: Jesus saying the word "Muslim" in Luke
6:40.
And again, we've already seen how Psalm 91 clearly and indisputably prophesied
about Christ would never get crucified, and we've seen how the New Testament
referenced this Psalm. We've also seen how Psalm 91:3, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 15 and
many other verses, above, talked about the saving of Jesus Christ from crucifixion.
2-
Conclusion:
Again and again, we see the book of Psalm confirming Islam and falsifying the false
religion of Christianity. The New Testament's accounts are all false, lies and gossips
that were invented by people. It is a proven fact that the Bible's own theologians
admit that its books and gospels had all been:
1. Written by mysterious men.

2. Written by an unknown number of men.
3. Written in unknown places.
4. Written in unknown dates.
5. Paul never even met Jesus Christ in person while the latter was on earth. It is
falsely claimed that Jesus appeared to Paul while Paul was on his way to
Damascus after the "crucifixion" (Acts 9:2-4. Note: Paul's name used to be
Saul. Yet, Paul admittedly wasn't even sure whether the Holy Spirit was
inspirning him or not).
6. None of the disciples, even in the false writings attributed to them, ever
claimed that their writings were inspired or Divine. Not only that, but we even
ironically see that:
o Luke for instance, wrote his "gospel" for the sake of another person and
not GOD Almighty. See below for details.
o The disciples even fought with each others [1] [2].
o We read about direct invitations to dinner and other occasions between
the disciples in the "books" [1].
o According to the commentaries below, all of the books of the bible were
altered and corrupted.
The Bible's own theologians even admit that the bible contains
"fictions", its original manuscripts "had been lost", and contains
"fairy tails and fables".
And, it is also an indisputable fact that the Bible:
1. Is filled with ample contradictions, man's alterations, corruption, and false

scientific absurdities.
2. Is written in third-party narrations, which is why we find in all of the gospels'
titles "This gospel according to....", and countless verses that speak about the
disciples and about their activities in third-party narrations [1] [2] [3] [4],
which proves that the books and gospels were certainly not written by them.
o This also means that much gossips and exaggerations and fabrications
were made up and inserted into the books and gospels. So even if some
people back then thought that Jesus was crucified, they in reality never
actually saw it. It could very well be that they've only heard about it
from a neighboring town and believed it. There are certainly in the
books and gospels:
Too much gossips.
Too wide of date gaps by the decades [1] [2] [3] [4] between when
the supposed event took place and when it was actually written,
by hand, in the corrupt gospels.
Too many unknown people wrote the stories.
Too many Prophecies in the Old Testament that promise that Jesus
Christ, the Messiah, will be saved from the crucifixion.
Too many mistranslations and desperate misinterpretations in
Isaiah 53 and elsewhere.
o This also means that the books and gospels were definitely not inspired
by GOD Almighty. Paul even admits that he had his delusions and
doubts.
So now based on what objective grounds should we reject the claim about the Bible's
New Testament's accounts being mostly false and fabricated by men? And again, as I
mentioned in the conclusion section, I strongly recommend visiting the following
links:
1. The Overwhelming Scientific Miracles in the Holy Quran.
2. What is Islam?
3. The blessed Jesus in Islam.
4. Answering Trinity.
5. Allah is GOD Almighty's Holy Name in the Bible's original Manuscripts that
were discovered - centuries before Islam.
I also want to end this rebuttal with the following verses from the Holy Quran, and the
Bible's Old and New Testaments:
"Say: He is God, the One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not,
nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him. (The Noble Quran, 112:1-4)"
"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (From the NIV Bible,
Deuteronomy 6:4)"
"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our
God, the Lord is one. (From the NIV Bible, Mark 12:29)"
""Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is goodexcept God alone."
(From the NIV Bible, Mark 10:18)"
"God is not a man, that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his
mind. Does he speak and then not act? Does he promise and not fulfill? (From the
NIV Bible, Numbers 23:19)"
Indeed, Jesus Christ, the man, is only a Messenger from Allah Almighty, and he was
never crucified.
May Allah Almighty enable you to see the Light and the Truth of Islam. And may
Allah Almighty send His Peace, Mercy and Blessings upon our beloved and blessed
Prophet, Teacher and Role Model, Muhammad. Ameen.
Hebrews 5:7-8 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got

crucified and contradicts the Bible!
The sections of this article are:
1- The Chapter of Hebrews 5, and emphasis on verses 5:7-8.
2- Conclusion.
1-
The Chapter of Hebrews 5, and emphasis

on verses 5:7-8:
While I was reading my Bible before bed time (sometimes read the Bible and
sometimes read the Noble Quran), I stumbled upon Chapter Hebrews 5 in the Bible's
New Testament. The following was taken from the New International Version Bible
(NIV). Pay attention to Hebrews 5:7:
Hebrews 5
1 Every high priest is selected from among men and is appointed to represent them in
matters related to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins.
2 He is able to deal gently with those who are ignorant and are going astray, since he
himself is subject to weakness.
3 This is why he has to offer sacrifices for his own sins, as well as for the sins of the
people.
4 No one takes this honor upon himself; he must be called by God, just as Aaron
was.
5 So Christ also did not take upon himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But
God said to him,
"You are my Son;
today I have become your Father.[1] "[2]
6 And he says in another place,
"You are a priest forever,
in the order of Melchizedek."[3]
7 During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and petitions
with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him from death, and he was
heard because of his reverent submission.
8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered
9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey
him
10 and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek.
Warning Against Falling Away
11 We have much to say about this, but it is hard to explain because you are slow to
learn.
12 In fact, though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach
you the elementary truths of God's word all over again. You need milk, not solid
food!
13 Anyone who lives on milk, being still an infant, is not acquainted with the
teaching about righteousness.
14 But solid food is for the mature, who by constant use have trained themselves to
distinguish good from evil.
Footnotes
5:5 Or have begotten you
5:5 Psalm 2:7
5:6 Psalm 110:4
Few points to notice:
1-
In Hebrews 5:7, we clearly see that GOD Almighty had heard Jesus' cries to save
him from death.
2-
In the book of Psalm 91, we see the same reference with the exception that
in Psalm 91:10-12, 15, we read that GOD Almighty will not let the crucifixion to
happen, and that the Angels will protect the Messiah from all harm and lift him up:
From http://www.answering-christianity.com/psalm_91.htm:
Chapter Psalm 91 clearly and indisputably

confirms that Jesus never got crucified!
It is, first of all, important to know that Psalm 91 is referenced more than
once in the New Testament for Jesus Christ. So we know for certainty that
Psalm 91 is referring to the coming Messiah in the Bible:
Luke 4:10-12
10 For the Scriptures say, He will order his angels to protect and guard
you.
11 And they will hold you up with their hands so you wont even hurt
your foot on a stone.
12 Jesus responded, The Scriptures also say, You must not test the Lord
your God.
Matthew 4:5-10
5 Then the devil took him to the holy city, Jerusalem, to the highest point of
the Temple,
6 and said, If you are the Son of God, jump off! For the Scriptures say, He
will order his angels to protect you. And they will hold you up with their
hands so you wont even hurt your foot on a stone.
7 Jesus responded, The Scriptures also say, You must not test the Lord
your God.
8 Next the devil took him to the peak of a very high mountain and showed
him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.
9 I will give it all to you, he said, if you will kneel down and worship
me.
10 Get out of here, Satan, Jesus told him. For the Scriptures say, You
must worship the Lord your God and serve only him.
There are few points to notice in these verses:
1-
Notice how satan referred to Psalm 91 regarding the protection of Jesus.
2-
Notice how Jesus confirmed that Psalm 91 was indeed speaking about
him by saying "the Scriptures also say..." (Luke 4:12 and Matthew 4:7).
3-
As we will see in the points below, Psalm 91 is not just concerned with
preventing Christ or the Messiah from striking his feet against the ground.
This is the least point the chapter is concerned with. The chapter
concentrated heavily on:
(see the detailed points on Psalm 91 below)
Let us now take a look at Psalm 91:

(Please pay specially attention to Psalm 91:11-12, 15)
Psalm 91
1 He who dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of
the Almighty. [a]
2 I will say [b] of the LORD, "He is my refuge and my fortress, my God, in
whom I trust."
3 Surely he will save you from the fowler's snare and from the deadly
pestilence.
4 He will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find
refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

5 You will not fear the terror of night, nor the arrow that flies by day,
6 nor the pestilence that stalks in the darkness, nor the plague that destroys at
midday.
7 A thousand may fall at your side, ten thousand at your right hand, but it
will not come near you.
8 You will only observe with your eyes and see the punishment of the
wicked.
(According to the Noble Quran and the original writings of
the Disciples of Jesus, Jesus was not crucified, and he
watched the crucifixion of the doomed person.
Also, according to the Apocalypse of Peter that was
discovered in Egypt, Jesus sat on the tree and watched the
crucified one getting crucified. Peter witnessed this and
wrote the Apocalypse. Not only that, but while Christians
insist that the book is a Gnostic one, but according
to Wikipedia.org, "It is unclear whether this text advocates
an adoptionist (Jesus was Divine) or docetist (Jesus's body
and crucifixion were an illusion) christology"
So there is no proof that the book is Gnostic.)
9 If you make the Most High your dwelling even the LORD, who is my
refuge10 then no harm will befall you, no disaster will come near your tent.
11 For he will command his angels concerning you to guard you in all
your ways;
12 they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your
foot against a stone. (If Jesus died on the cross and got buried, then his feet
would've struck the ground and the stones on it from bringing him
down, throwing him on the floor and burying him).
13 You will tread upon the lion and the cobra; you will trample the great lion
and the serpent.

14 "Because he loves me," says the LORD, "I will rescue him; I will
protect him, for he acknowledges my name.
15 He will call upon me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in
trouble, I will deliver him and honor him.
16 With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation."
Footnotes:
a. Psalm 91:1 Hebrew Shaddai
b. Psalm 91:2 Or He says
There is no question!
There is no question that the emphasized parts above, especially in Psalm
91:11-12, 15 and others, clearly and indisputably agree with the Noble
Quran and Isaiah 52:13! Jesus was neither crucified nor resurrected, and he
was protected and lifted by GOD Almighty. Also, the New Testament,
again, confirms that Psalm 91 is referring to Jesus Christ.
GOD Almighty will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save
him (Psalm 91:3).
GOD Almighty will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).
Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm 91:5).
Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the
crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even
come near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting
beaten up before crucifixion).
GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift
him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike
the ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.
Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and

honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). No way would these verses
be valid if Christ got crucified.
His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see
his offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way
contradict Jesus never got married and had children. In
Islam's Noble Quran's 13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus
Christ had wives and children).
Important Note: Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of
Prophecies that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak
of future events thatWILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout
the entire New Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from
striking his foot against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the
3-
As shown in the displayed article on Psalm 91, the New Testament in Luke 4:1011 and Matthew 4:5-6 clearly links Psalm 91 to Jesus Christ, or the coming Messiah.
4-
Yet, unlike in the rest of the book of Hebrews and in many parts of the New
Testament, Psalm 91 doesn't go in harmony at all with the crucifixion.
Hebrews 9:11-15
11 When Christ came as high priest of the good things that are already here, he
went through the greater and more perfect tabernacle that is not man-made, that
is to say, not a part of this creation.
12 He did not enter by means of the blood of goats and calves; but he entered
the Most Holy Place once for all by his own blood, having obtained eternal
redemption.
13 The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those
who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean.
14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal
Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts
that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
15 For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are
called may receive the promised eternal inheritancenow that he has died as
a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant."
While we read in Hebrews 9:11-15 about Jesus Christ died for our sins,
but Psalm 91:10-12, 15 clearly contradict that. We are told in the latter verses
that, yes, GOD Almighty:
Will hear his cries (Psalm 91:15) and will save him (Psalm 91:3).
Will cover him with His Protection (Psalm 91:4).
Christ will then not have any fear in him ( Psalm 91:5).
Christ will then observe with his own eyes the punishment of the
crucified ones (Psalm 91:8).
No harm (this includes crucifixion!) or disaster will even come
near Christ (Psalm 91:10....this even contradicts him getting beaten up
before crucifixion).
GOD Almighty will send down the Angels to protect him and lift
him (Psalm 91:11-12, 14, Isaiah 52:13). Not even his foot will strike the
ground from his enemies pushing, grappling and punishment.
Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and
honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah 52:13). Again, no way would these
verses be valid if Christ got crucified.
His life will be prolonged (extended) and he will live to even see his
offspring (Isaiah 53:10 and Psalm 91:16, which by the way contradict
Jesus never got married and had children. In Islam's Noble Quran's
13:38, however, it is quite possible that Jesus Christ had wives and
children).
Important Note: Psalm 91 is speaking as a number of Prophecies
that WILL take place. Notice how the verses are speak of future events
that WILL TAKE PLACE. Never once throughout the entire New
Testament were the Angels sent to save Jesus from striking his foot
against a rock. This, again, clearly proves that the NT is indeed false and
corrupt.
So how do we explain this contradiction

then?
Clearly Psalm 91 is in irreconcilable disagreement with the New Testament. So how
is this possible?
Well, the answer to this question is actually quite simple. There is really not a whole a
lot to it except quoting what the New Testament's own theologians and historians say
about the Canon (the Bible), and about its books and gospels, and in particular about
the book of Hebrews. And since all of the books and gospels had been altered by
unknown men, unknown number of men, and in unknown places and unknown dates,
then it is obviously quite possible and highly probable that false agendas and beliefs
had been injected into the "Scriptures", then this makes the book (the book Hebrews
in this case):
Falsely reference what the older manuscripts say and prophesy. In this
case, Psalm 91 was completely misunderstood and referenced wrongly in the
New Testament.
Contain alterations and insertions by people from different beliefs, times,
places and mindsets, which certainly explains why the Bible, as a whole,
contains ample and countless contradictions, corruptions, man's alterations,
historical errors, and scientific absurdities in it.
By the way, I've just recently purchased 5 new Bibles from among the top English
Bibles in the US. I bought every Bible that had commentaries, history and appendices
for each book and gospel it contained, and the total were, again, 5 Bibles. The rest of
the Bibles in the bookstore didn't have commentaries and history in them; just verses.
I will be updating the article, insha'Allah (if Allah Almighty is Willing), with ample
new quotes that will further prove with any doubt that the Bible is indeed a corrupt
and altered book. You will be amazed, insha'Allah, at what I've read from the many
many different historians and theologians who translated the English Bibles. But
anyway, the article as it stands right now, still contains ample proofs from the NIV
Bible's commentaries that, again, prove that it had been corrupted and altered by
unknown men, unknown number of men, and in unknown places and unknown
dates. The other Bibles' commentaries, which I've already read, will further confirm
this, insha'Allah.
I will update this section once I update the article, insha'Allah.
Please visit: Isaiah 53 clearly confirms Islam's Divine Claim about Jesus never
got crucified.
2-
Conclusion:
The Bible is in clear contradiction with itself regarding Jesus Christ's alleged
crucifixion and in everything else that it essentially talks about. It can not be trusted
nor taken very seriously to base a serious faith on. At best, one would only be
speculating when he tries to use the Bible to prove anything. Islam is the only
Religion, which is by the way also the Only True and uncorrupt Divine Religion
remaining today, that confirms the Truth in the Bible and removes the falsehood from
it.
I pray to Allah Almighty that this article will shed some light upon the reader and
clearly prove to him/her that Islam is the True Way to GOD Almighty, and it is indeed
a True and Divine Religion from GOD Almighty. Ameen.
The Suffering Servant of Isaiah
Written by Abdullah Smith

[Part I] [Part II] [Part III]
Christians ignore the historical background of Isaiah 53 to claim that

Jesus death and resurrection was prophesied, yet Ezekiel and
Jeremiah link Isaiah 53 to Israel, the Prophetic books of Hosea and
Nahum also link Isaiah 53 to Israel using descriptive parallels. God
promises to return the Israelites to Jerusalem and restore
the Temple after the Babylon Captivity (536 B.C.E). Hence, the
context of Isaiah 53 refers to the suffering and restoration of Israel,
absolutely nothing to do with Jesus.
Here is the prophecy:

See, my servant will act wisely; he will be raised and lifted up and highly exalted.
Just as there were many who were appalled at him his appearance was so
disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness
so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their mouths because of him.
For what they were not told, they will see, and what they have not heard, they will
understand. Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the
LORD been revealed? He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root
out of dry ground. He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his
appearance that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men, a
man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their
faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities
and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him,
and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our
iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds
we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed
and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the
slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his
mouth. By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can speak of his
descendants? For he was cut off from the land of the living; for the transgression of
my people he was stricken. He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the
rich in his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.
Yet it was the LORD's will to crush him and cause him to suffer, and though the
LORD makes his life a guilt offering, he will see his offspring and prolong his
days, and the will of the LORD will prosper in his hand. After the suffering of his
soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous
servant will justify many, and he will bear their iniquities. Therefore I will give
him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong,
because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the
transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the
transgressors. (Isaiah 52:13-15, 53)
The Gentiles are speaking in Isaiah 53:
52:15 - 53:1 "So shall he (the servant) startle many nations, the
kings will stand speechless; For that which had not been told
them they shall see and that which they had not heard shall they
ponder. Who would believe what we have heard?" Quite clearly,
the nations and their kings will be amazed at what happens to the
"servant of the L-rd," and they will say "who would believe what
we have heard?". 52:15 tells us explicitly that it is the nations of
the world, the gentiles, who are doing the talking in Isaiah
53. (Jews for Judaism)
The actual prophecy begins at Isaiah 52:13:
See, my servant will act wisely; he will be raised and lifted

up and highly exalted. (Isaiah 52:13)
Who is the Servant spoken here? The Bible identifies Israel:
"But you, O Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen,

you descendants of Abraham my friend, (Isaiah 41:8)
"But now listen, O Jacob, my servant, Israel, whom I have

chosen. (Isaiah 44:1)
For the sake of Jacob my servant, of Israel my chosen, I

summon you by name and bestow on you a title of honor, though
you do not acknowledge me. (Isaiah 45:4)
Jesus was not raised and lifted up; he was rejected and stoned, by
his own people:
He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
He came unto his own, and his own received him not. (John 1:10-11)
From this time many of his disciples turned back and no longer followed
him. "You do not want to leave too, do you?" Jesus asked the Twelve. (John 6:6667)
Jesus rejected praise:
And devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou
art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered
them not to speak: for they knew that he was Christ. (Luke
4:41)
"I do not accept praise from men, but I know you. I know that
you do not have the love of God in your hearts. (John 4:41)
'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far
from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but
rules taught by men. (John 15:8-9)
Therefore, the description cannot apply to him, but applies to Israel.
Let us continue:
Just as there were many who were appalled at him his

appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his
form marred beyond human likeness (Isaiah 52:14)
This description speaks of Israels disfigured face, by affliction and

bondage, as the following passages indicate:
All the splendor has departed from the Daughter of Zion. Her
princes are like deer that find no pasture; in weakness they have
fled before the pursuer. (Lamentations 1:6)
Israel is swallowed up: now shall they be among

the Gentiles as a vessel wherein is no pleasure. (Hosea 8:8)
How the Lord has covered the Daughter of Zion with the cloud of
his anger! He has hurled down the splendor of Israel from
heaven to earth; he has not remembered his footstool in the day
of his anger. Without pity the Lord has swallowed up all the
dwellings of Jacob; in his wrath he has torn down the strongholds
of the Daughter of Judah. He has brought her kingdom and its
princes down to the ground in dishonor. In fierce anger he has cut
off every horn of Israel. He has withdrawn his right hand at the
approach of the enemy. He has burned in Jacob like a flaming
fire that consumes everything around it. (Lamentations 2:1-3)
The splendor of Israel was extinguished; their form was marred

beyond human likeness, God promised to save the Messiah (Psalms
20:6), so Isaiah 52:14 cannot apply to Jesus, born 600 years later.
The next verse says:
so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their

mouths because of him. For what they were not told, they
will see, and what they have not heard, they will understand.
(Isaiah 52:15)
The description refers to Israel:
And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy
glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth
of the LORD shall name. (Isaiah 62:2)
According to the days of thy coming out of the land of Egypt will I
shew unto him marvellous things. The nations shall see and
be confounded at all their might: they shall lay their hand
upon their mouth, their ears shall be deaf. (Micah 7:15-16)
And your fame spread among the nations on account of your

beauty, because the splendor I had given you made your beauty
perfect, declares the Sovereign LORD. (Ezekiel 16:14)
Jesus was only sent to Israel, he did not sprinkle any nation except
his own:
But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying,
Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent
but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (Matthew 15:23-24)
These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way
of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to
the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (Matthew 10:5-6)
The Greek text of Isaiah 52:15 reads:
Hebrew; Septuagint so will many nations marvel at him [1]
The Gospels record the exact opposite, Jesus was attacked and
beaten:
They all condemned him as worthy of death. Then some began

to spit at him; they blindfolded him, struck him with their
fists, and said, "Prophesy!" And the guards took him and beat
him. (Mark 14:64-65)
The men who were guarding Jesus began mocking and beating
him. They blindfolded him and demanded, "Prophesy! Who hit
you?" (Luke 22:63-64)
Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged,

and handed him over to be crucified. (Matthew 27:26)
Jesus was not very popular; many Greek and Roman historians do
not record his miracles. After the departure of Jesus, his teachings
spread to North Africa and Egypt, but he was not popular or widely
known.
Philo-Judaeus (Alexandria)
Seneca (Rome)
Plutarch (Greece)
Apollonius (Alexandria)
Epictetus (Turkey)
Silius Italicus (Spain)

Ptolemy (Egypt)
The scholar Muhammad Ataur-Raheem says:

The more people have tried to discover who Jesus really was the more it has been
found how little is known about him. There are limited records of his teachings and
some of his actions, but very little is known about how he actually lived his life
from moment to moment and how he conducted his everyday transactions with
other people.
Certainly, the pictures many people have given of Jesus - of who he was and what
he did - are distorted ones. Although there is some truth in them, it has been
established that the four accepted Gospels have not only been altered and censored
through the ages but also are not eyewitness accounts. (Jesus Prophet of Islam, p.
5)
Who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the
LORD been revealed? (Isaiah 53:1)
The arm of the Lord is the redemption of Israel, and has nothing to
do with Jesus.
With your mighty arm you redeemed your people, the descendants
of Jacob and Joseph. Selah (Psalms 77:15)
Burst into songs of joy together, you ruins of Jerusalem, for the LORD has
comforted his people, he has redeemed Jerusalem. The LORD will lay bare his
holy arm in the sight of all the nations, and all the ends of the earth will see the
salvation of our God. (Isaiah 52:9-10)
Then his people recalled the days of old, the days of Moses and his people
where is he who brought them through the sea, with the shepherd of his flock?
Where is he who set his Holy Spirit among them, who sent his glorious arm of
power to be at Moses' right hand, who divided the waters before them, to gain
for himself everlasting renown, (Isaiah 63:11-12)
You saw with your own eyes the great trials, the miraculous signs and
wonders, the mighty hand and outstretched arm, with which the LORD your
God brought you out. The LORD your God will do the same to all the peoples you
now fear. (Deuteronomy 7:19)
He grew up before him like a tender shoot, and like a root out of dry ground. He
had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him, nothing in his appearance that we
should desire him. (Isaiah 53:2)
Israel grew up like a plant:
No one looked on you with pity or had compassion enough to do any of these
things for you. Rather, you were thrown out into the open field, for on the day you
were born you were despised. " 'Then I passed by and saw you kicking about in
your blood, and as you lay there in your blood I said to you, "Live!" I made you
grow like a plant of the field. (Ezekiel 16:5-7)
I will be as the dew unto Israel: he shall grow as the lily, and cast forth his
roots as Lebanon. (Hosea 14:5)
Your mother was like a vine in your vineyard planted by the water; it was fruitful
and full of branches because of abundant water. Its branches were strong, fit for a
ruler's scepter. It towered high above the thick foliage, conspicuous for its height
and for its many branches. But it was uprooted in fury and thrown to the ground.
The east wind made it shrivel, it was stripped of its fruit; its strong branches
withered and fire consumed them. Now it is planted in the desert, in a dry and
thirsty land. (Ezekiel 19:10-13)
Israel grew up like a tender shoot:
Then will all your people be righteous and they will possess the
land forever. They are the shoot I have planted, the work of
my hands, for the display of my splendor. (Isaiah 60:21)
"Have you not heard? Long ago I ordained it. In days of old I planned it; now I
have brought it to pass, that you have turned fortified cities into piles of stone.
Their people, drained of power, are dismayed and put to shame. They are like
plants in the field, like tender green shoots, like grass sprouting on the roof,
scorched before it grows up. (Isaiah 37:26-27)
Jesus is never called a tender shoot in the New Testament.
The words He had no beauty or majesty to attract us to him also refer to Israel.
All the splendor has departed from the Daughter of Zion. Her princes are like
deer that find no pasture; in weakness they have fled before the pursuer.
(Lamentations 1:6)
The LORD will restore the splendor of Jacob like the splendor of Israel, though
destroyers have laid them waste and have ruined their vines. (Nahum 2:2)
He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with
suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we
esteemed him not. (Isaiah 53:3)
Israel was despised and rejected by the Gentile nations:
All your allies have forgotten you; they care nothing for you. I have struck you
as an enemy would and punished you as would the cruel, because your guilt is so
great and your sins so many. (Jeremiah 30:14)
On the day you were born your cord was not cut, nor were you washed with water
to make you clean, nor were you rubbed with salt or wrapped in cloths. No one
looked on you with pity or had compassion enough to do any of these things for
you. Rather, you were thrown out into the open field, for on the day you were
born you were despised. (Ezekiel 16:4-5)
Jesus was glorified and praised by all:

Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread
through the whole countryside. He taught in their synagogues, and everyone
praised him. (Luke 4:14-15)
Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered
him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. (Isaiah 53:4)
The Bible rejects atonement:
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father,
neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the
righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
(Ezekiel 18:20)
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be
put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
(Deuteronomy 24:16)
The Bible rejects sin offering
Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but my ears you have pierced; burnt
offerings and sin offerings you did not require. (Psalms 40:6)
You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in
burnt offerings. (Psalms 51:16)
All a man's ways seem right to him, but the LORD weighs the heart. To do what is
right and just is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice. (Proverbs 21:23)
Will the LORD be pleased with thousands of rams, with ten thousand rivers of
oil? Shall I offer my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for
the sin of my soul? He has showed you, O man, what is good. And what does the
LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with
your God. (Micah 6:7-8)
God will save the Messiah:
Now I know that the LORD saves his anointed; he answers him from his holy
heaven with the saving power of his right hand. (Psalms 20:6)
"Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm." (1 Chronicles 16:22)
LORD God, do not reject your anointed one. Remember the great love promised to
David your servant." (2 Chronicles 6:42)
He gives his king great victories; he shows unfailing kindness to his anointed, to
David and his descendants forever. (Psalms 18:50)
Jesus was not stricken by God, or else he wouldnt be the Messiah.
But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our
iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him,
and by his wounds we are healed. (Isaiah 53:5)
Israel will atone for the Gentiles, and carry their transgressions as a
sin offering. Jesus fails the test because the Bible rejects human
sacrifice. Another explanation is that Christian translators distorted
the Hebrew text to substantiate their atonement doctrine. (Ps.
40:6, Deu. 24:16).
Let us continue:
We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his
own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.
(Isaiah 53:6)
The verse entails how Israel will guide the Gentiles (pagans) after
going astray:
And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the
brightness of thy rising. (Isaiah 60:3)
Then thou shalt see, and flow together, and thine heart shall fear,
and be enlarged; because the abundance of the sea shall be
converted unto thee, the forces of the Gentiles shall come
unto thee. (Isaiah 60:5)
He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as
a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his
mouth. (Isaiah 53:7)
The Bible refers to Israel as sheep to be slaughtered.
Yet for your sake we face death all day long; we are considered
as sheep to be slaughtered. (Psalms 44:22)
You gave us up to be devoured like sheep and have scattered us among the
nations. You sold your people for a pittance, gaining nothing from their sale.
(Psalms 44:11-12)
Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him away:
first the king of Assyria hath devoured him; and last this
Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones. (Jeremiah
50:17)
Thus saith the LORD my God; Feed the flock of the slaughter;
Whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty: and
they that sell them say, Blessed be the LORD; for I am rich: and
their own shepherds pity them not. (Zechariah 11:4-5)
And I will feed the flock of slaughter, even you, O poor of the
flock. And I took unto me two staves; the one I called Beauty, and
the other I called Bands; and I fed the flock. (Zechariah 11:7)
"This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Once again I will yield to
the plea of the house of Israel and do this for them: I will make
their people as numerous as sheep, (Ezekiel 36:37)
"For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: I myself will search
for my sheep and look after them. As a shepherd looks after
his scattered flock when he is with them, so will I look after my
sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were
scattered on a day of clouds and darkness. (Ezekiel 34:11-12)
"Woe to the shepherds who are destroying and scattering the sheep of my
pasture!" declares the LORD. (Jeremiah 23:1)
The Bible refers to Israel as lamb
Though thou, Israel, play the harlot, yet let not Judah offend; and
come not ye unto Gilgal, neither go ye up to Bethaven, nor swear,
The LORD liveth. For Israel slideth back as a backsliding
heifer: now the LORD will feed them as a lamb in a large
place. (Hosea 4:15-16)
Israel did not open his mouth:

They have mouths, but cannot speak, eyes, but they cannot see; they have ears,
but cannot hear, nor is there breath in their mouths. (Psalms 135:16-17)
Jesus opened his mouth
Now Jesus stood before the governor, and the governor asked
him, "Are you the King of the Jews?" Jesus said, "You have said
so." But when he was accused by the chief priests and elders, he
gave no answer. (Mk. 15:1-2, Matt. 27:11-12)
As they led him away, they seized Simon from Cyrene, who was
on his way in from the country, and put the cross on him and
made him carry it behind Jesus. A large number of people
followed him, including women who mourned and wailed for him.
Jesus turned and said to them, "Daughters of Jerusalem, do
not weep for me; weep for yourselves and for your children.
(Luke 23:26-28)
From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all
the land. About the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice,
"Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?"which means, "My God, my
God, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46)
Jesus made the prophecy fail by opening his mouth.
By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can

speak of his descendants? For he was cut off from the land of
the living; for the transgression of my people he was stricken.
(Isaiah 53:8)
Israel was politically oppressed by Babylon king Nebuchadrezzar,

who conquered Jerusalem in 587 B.C.E. and destroyed the Temple.
The Israelites were taken away into captivity, but Jesus was never
taken away, he was rather taken away to Heaven! (Psalms 20:6).
Jesus never had children or descendants.
He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in
his death, though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in
his mouth. (Isaiah 53:9)
Needless to say, Jesus was buried alone, he hated rich people (Matt.
19:24), so obviously he wasnt buried beside them.
The grave refers to Babylon, and Israel was buried inside this
grave for seventy years (597-537 BCE), not three days.
Like sheep they are destined for the grave, and death will feed
on them. The upright will rule over them in the morning; their
forms will decay in the grave, far from their princely mansions.
(Psalms 49:14)
The Gentiles slaughtered the lamb that was assigned a grave

with them. (Babylon)
Also, the following verse matches Israel with Isaiah 53:9

But I will leave within you the meek and humble, who trust in the name of the
LORD. The remnant of Israel will do no wrong; they will speak no lies, nor
will deceit be found in their mouths. They will eat and lie down and no one will
make them afraid." (Zephaniah 3:12-13)
Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief:
when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see
his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD
shall prosper in his hand. (Isaiah 53:10)
The Hebrew word for seed is zerah, and it always refers to physical
descendants:
And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his
name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed
me another seed (zerah) instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.
(Genesis 4:25)
And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy
seed (zerah) will I give this land: and there builded he an
altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him. (Genesis 12:7)
And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and
marry her, and raise up seed (zerah) to thy brother. (Genesis
38:8)
God answered the prayer of Jesus:
During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and

petitions with loud cries and tears to the one who could save him
from death, and he was heard because of his reverent
submission. (Hebrews 5:7)
Jesus did not prolong his days; his ministry lasted only three years,
he departed at the age of 33.
After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life [d] and
be satisfied; by his knowledge my righteous servant will justify
many, and he will bear their iniquities. (Isaiah 53:11)
The verse signifies the restoration of Israel, or the resurrection.

I will restore you to health and heal your wounds,' declares the LORD, 'because
you are called an outcast, Zion for whom no one cares.' "This is what the LORD
says: " 'I will restore the fortunes of Jacob's tents and have compassion on his
dwellings; the city will be rebuilt on her ruins, and the palace will stand in its
proper place. From them will come songs of thanksgiving and the sound of
rejoicing. I will add to their numbers, and they will not be decreased; I will bring
them honor, and they will not be disdained. Their children will be as in days of old,
and their community will be established before me; I will punish all who oppress
them. (Jeremiah 30:17-20)
The LORD will call you back as if you were a wife deserted and distressed in spirit
a wife who married young, only to be rejected," says your God. "For a brief
moment I abandoned you,but with deep compassion I will bring you
back. (Isaiah 54:6-7)
I will be found by you," declares the LORD, "and will bring you back from
captivity. I will gather you from all the nations and places where I have banished
you," declares the LORD, "and will bring you back to the place from which I
carried you into exile." (Jeremiah 29:14)
I will bring Judah and Israel back from captivity and will rebuild them as they
were before. (Jeremiah 33:7)
Christianity falls apart without Isaiah 53, the New Testament writers misinterpreted
the prophecy as a reference to Jesus, ripping the context and giving it new meaning.
Unfortunately, the Evangelicals continue to preach the falsehood that Isaiah 53
prophesies Jesus crucifixion. We have debunked the Christian lie that Jesus was
crucified for sins of mankind.
Here is the reality:
That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of
Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor
crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those
who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain)
knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they
killed him not: Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah
is Exalted in Power, Wise;- (Al-Quran 4:157)

The Septuagint Version

The Hebrew reading of Isaiah 53 was adulterated when the Hebrew Scriptures were
translated into Greek. According to the Letter of Aristeas, at least 72 scholars
at Alexandria translated the Hebrew Bible, which is today known as the Septuagint or
LXX.
The New Testament is based on the Greek text, because the writers did not know
Hebrew to quote the Old Testament, so they probably used Acquillas version, and
they carried over the mistakes.
In the second century, to meet the demands of both Jews and Christians, three
other Greek versions of the Old Testament were produced, though they never took
the place of the Septuagint.Only fragmentary remains of them are
preserved, chiefly from Origens"Hexapla" (q.v.). The first and the most original
is that of Aquila, a native of Sinope in Pontus, a proselyte to Judaism, and
according to St. Jerome, a pupil of Rabbi Akiba who taught in the Palestinian
schools, 95-135. Aquila, taking the Hebrew as he found it, proves in his rendering
to be "a slave to the letter". When his version appeared, about 130, its rabbinical
character won approval from the Jews but distrust from the Christians. It was
the favoured among the Greek-speaking Jews of the fourth and fifth centuries, and
in the sixth was sanctioned by Justinian for public reading in the synagogues. Then
it rapidly fell into disuse and disappeared. Origen and St. Jeromefound it of value
in the study of the original text and of the methods of Jewish interpretation in the
early Christian years. (online Source)
The Gospel writers had no choice to use Acquilla because it was the only available
version at that time. Because the Gospels were composed in the 2 nd century, they
obviously used Acquillasversion before other translations appeared. The Church has
failed to provide evidence for an earlier date; the Gospels are not mentioned prior to
180 CE.
There is no doubt the Gospel writers distorted Isaiah 53 to make it less Jewish and
more Christian, since Acquilla was a proselyte to Judaism, he rejected the Messiah
Jesus. Nevertheless,Acquillas version was corrupted, and only fragments exist today.
Theodotion made several corrections to Acqulla, but it was too late, the Gospels had
already used Acquillas corrupted Septuagint!
Another Greek version practically contemporaneous with Aquila's was made
by Theodotion, probably an Ephesian Jew or Ebionite. It held a middle place
among the ancient Greek translations, preserving the character of a free revision of
the Septuagint, the omissions and erroneous renderings of which it corrected. It
also showed parts not appearing in the original, as the deuterocanonical fragments
of Daniel, the postscript of Job, the Book of Baruch, but not the Book of Esther. It
was not approved by the Jews but was favourably received by the Christians.
Origin gave it a place in his "Hexapla" and from it supplied parts missing in the
Septuagint. St. Irenaeus used its text of Daniel, which was afterwards adopted in
the Church.(online Source)
Isaiah 53: Which one is correct?
Greek Septuagint
The Lord also is pleased to purge him
from his stroke. If ye can give an
offering for sin, your soul shall see a
long-lived seed: the Lord also is
pleased to take away from the travail
of his soul, to shew him light, and to
form him with understanding; to
justify the just one who serves many
well; and he shall bear their sins.
Therefore he shall inherit many, and
he shall divide the spoils of the
mighty; because his soul was
delivered to death: and he was
numbered among the transgressors;
and he bore the sins of many, and was
delivered because of their iniquities.
(Isaiah 53:10-12)
Hebrew translation
Christian Translation
And the Lord wished to crush him,

He made him ill; if his soul would
acknowledge guilt, he shall have
descendants [or, he shall see
progeny], he shall prolong his
days, and Gods purpose shall
prosper in his hand. From the toil
of his soul he shall see [and he
shall] be satisfied; with his
knowledge My servant will
vindicate the righteous before the
multitudes, and their iniquities he
shall carry. Therefore, I will allot
him a portion among the
multitudes, and with the mighty he
shall share booty, because he has
bared his soul to death, and with
transgressors he was counted; and
he bore the sin of many, and he
will [continue to] to intercede for
the transgressors. (Isaiah 53:1012)
Yet it was the will of the LORD

to crush him; he has put him to
grief; when his soul makes an
offering for sin, he shall see his
offspring; he shall prolong his
days; the will of the LORD shall
prosper in his hand. Out of the
anguish of his soul he shall
seeand be satisfied; by his
knowledge shall the righteous
one, my servant, make many to
be accounted righteous, and he
shall bear their iniquities.
Therefore I will divide him a
portion with the many, and he
shall divide the spoil with the
strong, because he poured out his
soul to death
and was numberedwith the
transgressors; yet he bore the sin
of many, and makes intercession
for the transgressors.(Isaiah
53:10-12)
The Christian version contains words which do not appear in the Septuagint:
After the suffering of his soul, he will see the light of life and be satisfied (Isaiah
53:11, NIV)
Regarding this verse, the footnote states:
Dead Sea Scrolls (see also Septuagint Masoretic Text does not have the light of
life. [1]
The Christian scribes inserted the words light of life to support a Christian
interpretation, by forgery and deceit.
Strangely, today Christians reject the Septuagint when the New Testament writers
used the Greek Septuagint, and the oldest Christian manuscripts are all in Greek!
Here are some relevant facts:
1. Christians reject the Septuagint, yet the New Testament writers used the Septuagint.
2. Christians reject the Septuagint, yet the sayings of Jesus were composed in Greek.
3. The Old Testament of the Codex Sinaiticus is a Septuagint.

The Bible provides evidence that Jesus closest followers did not believe Isaiah 53
prophesied his death and resurrection.
When Jesus (allegedly) foretold the crucifixion, the disciples did not understand, even
though he was speaking plainly.
They left that place and passed through Galilee. Jesus did not want anyone to
know where they were, because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them,
"The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him,
and after three days he will rise." But they did not understand what he
meant and were afraid to ask him about it. (Mark 9:30-32)
Leaving there, they went through Galilee. He didn't want anyone to know their
whereabouts, for he wanted to teach his disciples. He told them, "The Son of Man
is about to be betrayed to some people who want nothing to do with God. They
will murder him. Three days after his murder, he will rise, alive." They didn't
know what he was talking about, but were afraid to ask him about it. (Mark
9:30-32, The Message Bible)
This shows the disciples never acknowledged the prophecy as Messianic. The Jews
have been reading Isaiah 53 for hundreds of years, yet none of the apostles claimed
Jesus death was foretold in the Hebrew Scriptures.
Jesus did not believe he was prophesied to die for the sins of mankind.
Jesus and his immediate followers were Pharisees. Jesus had no intention of
founding a new religion. He regarded himself as the Messiah in the normal Jewish
sense of the term, i.e. a human leader who would restore the Jewish
monarchy, drive out the Roman invaders, set up an independent Jewish state, and
inaugurate an era of peace, justice and prosperity (known as 'the kingdom of God,)
for the whole world. Jesus believed himself to be the figure prophesied in the
Hebrew Bible who would do all these things. He was not a militarist and did not
build up an army to fight the Romans, since he believed that God would perform a
great miracle to break the power of Rome. This miracle would take place on
the Mount of Olives, as prophesied in the book of Zechariah. When this miracle
did not occur, his mission had failed. He had no intention of being crucified in
order to save mankind from eternal damnation by his sacrifice. He never
regarded himself as a divine being, and would have regarded such an idea as pagan
and idolatrous, an infringement of the first of the Ten Commandments.
(Hyam Maccoby, TheProblem of Paul)
The concept of dying and rising god was unknown to Judaism:
Jesus could not have foreseen his rejection, death, and resurrection, as the idea of a
suffering, dying, and rising Messiah or son of Man was unknown to Judaism.
(Israel Knohl, The Messiah before Jesus, The Suffering Servant of the Dead Sea
Scrolls, p. 2)
Jesus did not know his destiny:

Jesus had no foreknowledge of his failure and crucifixion. The Last Supper was a
celebration with his closest disciples of his appearance as King and the imminent
overthrow of the Roman power (Hyam Maccoby, Revolution in Judea: Jesus and
the Jewish Resistance)
Jesus was unwilling to be crucified:
Then he said to them, "My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death.
Stay here and keep watch with me." Going a little farther, he fell with his face to
the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from
me. Yet not as I will, but as you will." (Matthew 26:38-39)
It is very clear from the above verse in Matthew 26:39 that Jesus had no intention of
dying. In this verse it is shown that Jesus was praying strongly (Matthew mentions
Jesus repeating this prayer three times) to have this death removed from him. Had
Jesus Christ been sent to be crucified, he would not have hesitated to be killed at all.
When I raise this point in front of my Christian friends, they tell me that this
hesitation came from the flesh side of him (in other words he was tempted), and that
his soul which is godly did not have this hesitation at all. When we look at Matthew
26:38 we see that Jesus was contradicting this idea by saying, "My soul is exceeding
sorrowful, even unto death." (Matthew 26:38). He himself said that its really his
soul that was hesitating and not his body. These were Jesus own words. (1)
The scholar Ulfat-Aziz-us-Samad says:
To demand the price of blood in order to forgive the sins of men is to show a
complete lack of mercy, and to punish a man who is not guilty for the sins of
others, whether the former is willing or not, is the height of injustice.
Christian apologists try to defend this by saying that Jesus Christ willingly suffered
death to pay the price for the sins of men. To this our reply is:
Firstly, it is not historically correct to say that Jesus had come to die willingly and
deliberately for the sins of men. We read in the Bible that he did not wish to die on
the cross. (Islam and Christianity, p. 50)
God always protected Jesus:
But if I do judge, my decisions are right, because I am not alone. I stand with the
Father, who sent me. (John 8:16)
The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what
pleases him." (John 8:29)
"But a time is coming, and has come, when you will be scattered, each to his
own home. You will leave me all alone. Yet I am not alone, for my Father is
with me. (John 16:32)
So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, "Father, I thank you
that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the
benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me." (John
11:41-42)
Jesus is recorded to have said:
Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find
it. (Matthew 10:39)
Peter was willing to die for Jesus!
Simon Peter asked him, "Lord, where are you going?" Jesus replied, "Where I am
going, you cannot follow now, but you will follow later." Peter asked, "Lord, why
can't I follow you now? I will lay down my life for you." (John 13:36-37)
It was Judas Iscariot who died for Jesus on the cross.
When the soldiers with Judas drew near to the place where Jesus was, Jesus heard
the approach of many people, wherefore in fear he withdrew into the house. And
the eleven were sleeping. Then God, seeing the danger of his servant, commanded
Gabriel;, Michael;, Rafael;, and Uriel, his ministers, to take Jesus out of the world.
The holy angels came and took Jesus out by the window that looks toward the
South;. They bare him and placed him in the third heaven in the company of angels
blessing God for evermore.
Judas entered impetuously before all into the chamber whence Jesus had been
taken up. And the disciples were sleeping. Whereupon the wonderful God acted
wonderfully, insomuch that Judas was so changed in speech and in face to be like
Jesus that we believed him to be Jesus. And he, having awakened us, was seeking
where the Master was. Whereupon we marvelled, and answered: 'You, Lord, are
our master; have you now forgotten us?'
And he, smiling, said: 'Now are you foolish, that know not me to be Judas
Iscariot!' And as he was saying this the soldiery entered, and laid their hands upon
Judas, because he was in every way like to Jesus. We having heard Judas' saying,
and seeing the multitude of soldiers, fled as beside ourselves. And John, who was
wrapped in a linen cloth, awoke and fled, and when a soldier seized him by the
linen cloth he left the linen cloth and fled naked. For God heard the prayer of
Jesus, and saved the eleven from evil (Gospel of Barnabas)
Judas cried My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
And the soldiers came before him, bowing down in mockery, saluting him as King
of the Jews. And they held out their hands to receive gifts, such as new kings are
accustomed to give; and receiving nothing they smote Judas, saying: 'Now, how
are you crowned, foolish king, if you will not pay your soldiers and servants?'
*The chief priests with the scribes and Pharisees, seeing that Judas died not by the
scourges, and fearing lest Pilate should set him at liberty, made a gift of money to
the governor, who having received it gave Judas to the scribes and Pharisees as
guilty to death. Whereupon they condemned two robbers with him to the death of
the cross.
So they led him to Mount Calvary, where they used to hang malefactors, and there
they crucified him naked;, for the greater ignominy. *Judas truly did nothing else
but cry out: 'God, why have you forsaken me, seeing the malefactor has escaped
and I die unjustly?' *Truly I say that the voice, the face, and the person of Judas
were so like to Jesus, that his disciples and believers entirely believed that he was
Jesus; wherefore some departed from the doctrine of Jesus, believing that Jesus
had been a false prophet, and that by art magic he had done the miracles which he
did: for Jesus had said that he should not die till near the end of the world; for that
at that time he should be taken away from the world.
According to the apocryphal Gospel of Peter, Jesus cried out: My power, my power,
why have you forsaken me?
Now it was midday and darkness prevailed over all Judaea. They were troubled
and in an agony lest the sun should have set for he still lived. For it is written that,
"The sun should not set upon him that hath been executed." And one of them said,
"Give him vinegar and gall to drink." And they mixed it and gave it to him to
drink. And they fulfilled all things and brought their sins upon their own heads.
Now many went about with lamps, supposing that it was night, and
they laid down. And the Lord cried out aloud saying, "My power, my power, you
have forsaken me." When he had said this, he was taken up. And in the same
hour the veil of the temple of Jerusalem was rent in two. (Gospel of Peter)
Did Jesus say the words "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?", or was it
Judas?
The Bible says God would never forsake His servants.
For the LORD loves the just and will not forsake his faithful ones. They will be
protected forever, but the offspring of the wicked will be cut off; (Psalms 37:28)
LORD God, do not reject your anointed one. Remember the great love promised
to David your servant." (2 Chronicles 6:42)
For the sake of David your servant, do not reject your anointed one. The LORD
swore an oath to David, a sure oath that he will not revoke: "One of your own
descendants I will place on your throne- (Psalms 132:10-11)
So it was Judas who was forsaken by God, not Jesus!
The scholar Ibn Kathir comments on 4:157
(O you to whom the Dhikr (the Qur'an) has been sent down! Verily, you are a mad
man!) When Allah sent Ìsa with proofs and guidance, the Jews, may Allah's
curses, anger, torment and punishment be upon them, envied him because of
his prophethood and obvious miracles; curing the blind and leprous and bringing
the dead back to life, by Allah's leave. He also used to make the shape of a bird
from clay and blow in it, and it became a bird by Allah's leave and flew.
Ìsa performed other miracles that Allah honored him with, yet the Jews defied and
bellied him and tried their best to harm him. Allah's Prophet Ìsa could not live in
any one city for long and he had to travel often with his mother, peace be upon
them. Even so, the Jews were not satisfied, and they went to the king
of Damascus at that time, a Greek polytheist who worshipped the stars. They told
him that there was a man in Bayt Al-Maqdis misguiding and dividing the people
in Jerusalem and stirring unrest among the king's subjects. The king became angry
and wrote to his deputy in Jerusalem to arrest the rebel leader, stop him from
causing unrest, crucify him and make him wear a crown of thorns. When the king's
deputy in Jerusalem received these orders, he went with some Jews to the house
that Ìsa was residing in, and he was then with twelve, thirteen or seventeen of his
companions. That day was a Friday, in the evening. They surrounded Ìsa in the
house, and when he felt that they would soon enter the house or that he would
sooner or later have to leave it, he said to his companions, "Who volunteers to be
made to look like me, for which he will be my companion in Paradise'' A
young man volunteered, but Ìsa thought that he was too young. He asked the
question a second and third time, each time the young man volunteering,
prompting Ìsa to say, "Well then, you will be that man.'' Allah made the young
man look exactly like Ìsa, while a hole opened in the roof of the house, and
Ìsa was made to sleep and ascended to heaven while asleep.
Allah sid (And (remember) when Allah said: "O Ìsa! I will take you and raise you
to Myself.'') When Ìsa ascended, those who were in the house came out. When
those surrounding the house saw the man who looked like Ìsa, they thought that
he was Ìsa. So they took him at night, crucified him and placed a crown of thorns
on his head. The Jews then boasted that they killed Ìsa and some Christians
accepted their false claim, due to their ignorance and lack of reason. As for those
who were in the house with Ìsa, they witnessed his ascension to heaven, while the
rest thought that the Jews killed Ìsa by crucifixion. They even said
that Maryam sat under the corpse of the crucified man and cried, and they say that
the dead man spoke to her. All this was a test from Allah for His servants out of
His wisdom. Allah explained this matter in the Glorious Qur'an which He sent to
His honorable Messenger, whom He supported with miracles and clear,
unequivocal evidence. Allah is the Most Truthful, and He is the Lord of the
worlds Who knows the secrets, what the hearts conceal, the hidden matters in
heaven and earth, what has occurred, what will occur, and what would occur if it
was decreed. (Online Source)
Does Isaiah 53 say that the Servant will be crucified?

This article is located at: http://ozzycda.blogspot.com/. It is a rebuttal from
brother Musa Mayotte, a former American Christian who converted to Islam, to a
Christian named "VenomFangX". The rebuttal was given to brother Ozzy, who is also
an American convert to Islam, to upload on his blog. May Allah Almighty always be
pleased with the two brothers. Ameen. I have formatted the article for easier read,
but left all of the writings unaltered.
Note: Musa is the Arabic word for Moses.
VFX wrote:
VFX - What did Satan do to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden? He made Adam
and Eve doubt God's word by saying 'did God REALLY say you couldn't eat from the
forbidden fruit?
Musa's Response:
As Muslims we believe in this story the way the Christians do with some small
differences. However putting those differences aside one story does not prove the
other to be wrong or right. Thus there is nothing here to refute to either strengthen or
weaken Islam's argument or Christianity's.
VFX wrote:
The Quran was written 6 centuries after The Bible was completed, and Muslims do
not believe in The Bible. The Bible was before the Quran, but Muslims reject it! Islam
attempts to make you doubt ALL the revelations of God given to humanity before
Muhammad was born. Isn't that convenient? God sent dozens of prophets, each that
confirmed the next, and foretold the coming of the Messiah who would die for the sins
of the world (Isaiah 53). They said that the Messiah would bring an end to the
prophets (Daniel 9:24), bring the final Covenant (Malachi 3:1), and that false prophets
would come after the Messiah (Matthew 24:24).
Musa's Response:
First, the Quran was written 300 and not 600 years after the Bible. You have to
remember that the Bible was not compiled or complete until roughly 300 AD with the
Nicaea council. We all know what happened there. Men basically decided what God's
word was and what wasn't. Before then you had groups of different Christians running
around killing each other trying to prove whose Gospel was more superior.
Second Muslims do believe in the Bible. This is a common statement that is thrown
around like it is yesterday's trash by both Christians and Muslims alike. I will make it
blunt. The Bible contains God's word but the Bible is not God's word in a whole. For
example, if you had a document that would make or break a case in determining
you're innocence in court one would gladly use it against or for you. Now let's assume
this document got into other people's hands and you could not determine whether or
not this person was on your side or against you. Now, you somehow obtain the
document back and know that it has been tampered with. You don't know if one
sentence is changed or maybe a whole chapter or even more. All you know is that it
has been tampered with. Due to this fact alone no righteous judge in the entire world
would allow such. It may have been tampered with to support or sabotage you. The
point is you do not know.
The Bible is riddled with Errors, additions and revisions. Examples are 1 st John
5:7, last 11 verses of Mark, John 3:16 and the word begotten (Monogenes in Greek).
There are dozens more to support this. Even Raymond Brown a leading scholar in
Christianity has stated that the Gospel of John has at least 4 different Authors. This is
obvious when reading through the gospel finding Jewish events described as "The
Jewish Passover". There are no other groups in the area at the time that celebrated a
Passover. The author who wrote this sentence was clearly an outside source. Let alone
your oldest manuscript in existence today is no older than 120 AD and is the size of a
credit card. It is called p-52 and guess what gospel it is from? John! One could go on
for hours about this issue. This is however not why I am here. These examples are
only to illustrate how we feel about the Bible. Maybe it was only one sentence maybe
more. The point is it has been altered and we do not know what parts are the original
or not. Due to this we disregard it. However the Bible is still a book that should be
treated with the upmost respect as it does contain God's word.
Third, We believe in all the revelations sent to man before Islam. You are forgetting
that we dub people who are prophets in Islam that are not considered so in
Christianity. Example; Adam, Noah and Ismael. Peace be upon all of them. For the
most part Muslims agree with the OT. There is nothing in there about worshipping a
man. People dying for other people's sin and so on. You say that Islam makes us doubt
the past prophets/revelations. Wrong it is history and the preservations methods of
their writings. Jeremiah 8:8 confirms that scribes have tampered with scrolls. The
earliest COMPLETE Torah in existence today is only from the 9 th century at best (that
is younger then the Quran).
Fourth, Yes the prophets did foretell of a coming Messiah and they also preached
the oneness of God as I am sure you are familiar with the Shima of Israel. However
where your wrong is the role of the messiah and his contribution(s) etc. No prophesy
in the OT states that a messiah would die for the sins of mankind. This is heresy to a
Jew, and the OT was written by Jews so why would a Jew write that? No prophesy in
the OT says that people will worship the Messiah.
Fifth, Isaiah. Isaiah 53 is not prophesying about the Messiah. Isaiah 52 is but not
53. The Jews only have 16 messianic prophesy in the entire OT. The Christians have
come in and told the Jews this. Ignoring the fact that the Jews are the ones who wrote
the OT originally. The Christians say that the Jews statements in the book of so and
so, chapter whatever, verse umteem is actually a foretelling event when in plain reality
it was only a passage about current events. Now, let's assume that Isaiah 53 is about
the Messiah. Have you read it? Jesus does not fulfill that prophecy at all. Isaiah 53:3
says that "Jesus" is despised by all men. In Luke chapter 10 verse 1 Jesus has at least
70 followers and today Christianity is the largest religion! In verse 5 it says he was
wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the death of
Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not killed. But let us go with killed for
your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made
a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly
what happened. Verse 7 then states that he opened not his mouth. Wrong! Jesus spoke
during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. Verse 9 then says that he made
his grave with the wicked and rich. Jesus did not make his grave, was buried alone.
Yes I know he was meant to be buried like a criminal because he was considered one.
But verse 9 says he was to be buried with both. Jesus was buried alone. It then goes
on to say that God was please by bruising Jesus and that Jesus's seed would
prolong the days in verses 10-11. Jesus never had any seed.
Isaiah 53:9's mistranslation and the rest of the

Chapter:
(From me, Osama Abdallah)
(Most of the following points were taken from brother Musa's rebuttal; may
Allah Almighty always be pleased with him)
1-
Isaiah 53:3 says that "Jesus" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus
has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and
healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses).
2-
In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right
away one might assume this is the death of Jesus. However it says he was
WOUNDED not killed. But let us go with killed for your arguments sake.
This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so
he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly
what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves
that Christ was never killed.
3-
Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two
possible interpretations and answers to this:
1. Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial.
This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with
both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and
final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama
sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you
forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth.
2. Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong,
because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD
why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to
GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified!
(Matthew 16:39,Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed
down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging
Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object.
4-
Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich.
According to http://scripturetext.com/isaiah/53-9.htm:
"in his death" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst,
it should be translated as "in death", making the word a symbolic one as
further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon:
"in his death
maveth (maw'-veth)
death (natural or violent) [notice not "his death". It only says
"death"]; concretely, the dead, their place or state
(hades); figuratively, pestilence, ruin -- (be) dead(-ly), death, die(d)."

(http://scripturetext.com/isaiah/53-9.htm)
So in his death here is symbolically referring to his execution
trial and not necessarily his physical and literal death. This is
further proven inYoung's Literal Translation of the verse:
He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich
in his death [Here is how the literal translation says: "And it
appointeth with the wicked his grave, And with the rich [are] his high
places"....This is verified at this link: (Young's Literal
Translation)], though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in
his mouth.
Other translations read:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah
53:9;&version=51;
Isaiah 53:9 (New Living Translation)
9 He had done no wrong and had never deceived anyone. But he was
buried like a criminal; he was put in a rich mans grave.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah
53:9;&version=46;
Isaiah 53:9 (Contemporary English Version)
9 He wasn't dishonest or violent, but he was buried in a tomb of
cruel and rich people.
There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy:
1. Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was
temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after
that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get
buried.
2. Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER
BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an
isolated area as recorded in the gospels.

Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the
rich. Jesus was buried alone.
5-
In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus
will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the
Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his
soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the
countless criesand Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save
him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never
made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the
gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from
any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have
and see his children.
6-
In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto
death. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified,
and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts
with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that
many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus
never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient
texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto
death means to me that Jesus' life will overpower death! This is
indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not
get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down
the Angels toPROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says
that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR
him andHONOR him. Christ would not have been honored if he have died
the humiliating death of the cross. And certainly, he would not have been
"saved" either by the Angels.
Verse 12 (which is where your case is strongest) states that his soul shall be poured
out unto death. However in the Hebrew and Aramaic texts the word death is not
present. Now again assuming this is Jesus (AS) this description fits the Islamic story
much better. Jesus was not killed as the word for death is not present. He MAY have
been put on the cross. And he was exalted and lifted up (the ascension). But again,
this is clearly not Jesus as he does not fulfill this.
Sixth, You said the Messiah would bring the end of the prophets. Well in Acts 11
and 21 there is a prophet mentioned by the name of Agabus. In fact if you read chapter
11 there is a whole group of prophets who came from Antioch to Jerusalem. A group
of Prophets! Daniel 9:24 and 7:13 and the Messiah found within those texts is not the
Jewish messiah it is Cyrus the Persian King who was the founder of the Persian
Empire. He allowed the Jews to rebuild the Temple and return to Jerusalem. This is
what is meant by reconciling their sin in Daniel 9:24 as they can offer sacrifices again
in the new temple. Cyrus reigned in the exact time when Daniel was writing. This is
why Jews praise Cyrus and even say he was anointed (a messiah) by God.
"Thus says Yahweh to his anointed, to Cyrus, whom he has taken by his right hand
to subdue nations before him and strip the loins of kings, to force gateways before him
that their gates be closed no more: I will go before you levelling the heights. I will
shatter the bronze gateways, smash the iron bars. I will give you the hidden treasures,
the secret hoards, that you may know that I am Yahweh. (Isaiah 45:1-3)"
Seventh, As for Malachi 3:1 the Ryrie Study Bible states that this is about John The
Baptist. So you have Christian scholars against you on this. You must read into the
context of the passages being used here Shawn. As for Matthew 24:24 I have already
refuted that with the man named Agabus found within Acts who from a group of
prophets. In fact
VFX wrote:
In the New Testament of Jesus Christ, God warned us that Satan the devil would come
as an angel of light and preach a false religion. All the prophets of God spoke with
God, however, the false prophet Mohammad spoke with an angel only! Look at what
God warned us; 'And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of
light.' (2 Corinthians 11:14) and 'But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should
preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be
accursed!' (Galatians 1:8) Mohammad met Satan 600 years after God warned us in the
New Testament, and then Satan, calling himself 'allah', created the false religion of
Islam.
Musa's Response:
Paul never said Satan would do this. He said Satan had this ability. Now assuming
he has this ability is pretty safe to say he has or is going to do so. But if your ead the
description Paul gives when meeting Jesus, it is described as so much light Paul was
blinded by it. So by this logic one can assume Paul was visited by Satan. Do you
know who else was visited by an Angel of light? Mary, Peace be upon her. Allah
Praise be upon him does not only call himself 'Allah' He also calls himself al hauul al
qayyum which is his most holy name. It is found in Chapter 2 Verse 256 of the Quran.
It roughly translates into He who is and to be the self efficient and sustainer of all that
exists. Do you know what else translates into this? YHWH!
VFX wrote:
The entire purpose of Islam is to deny everything that God revealed through the
prophets, and finally, in the person of Jesus Christ. Between the discovery of the Dead
Sea Scrolls, which are over 2000 years old and match perfectly what we use today,
and the 24000 manuscripts of the New Testament, we can know 100% for certain that
The Bible has never been changed. Infact, The Bible is the most trust worthy book in
all of antiquity. Muslims claim their scriptures are authentic because they haven't
changed in 1400 years. While that is simply not true, the more important fact is that
The Bible has been proven to be preserved for over 2000 years. It is an old Islamic lie
to claim The Bible is corrupt, because if The Bible is true, that means Islam is not
true; The Bible teaches the total opposite of the quran.
Musa's Response:
The Bible being Corrupt I already touched on this but since you bring it up again I
will as well. Yes the Dead sea scrolls are over 2000 years old. However the Dead Sea
Scrolls are not the COMPLETE OT. They are some of the books found within the OT
but not all of them. Dead Sea Scrolls are dated from 300-100 BC. That is not all that
great when there are books within the OT that are dated from 700-500 BC. Where are
these copies? Also the dead Sea Scrolls were found in the Qumran cave with Esseane
documents. The Essene (Jewish) school of thought believes in two messiahs not one.
You know what book is an Essene document and found within the Dead Sea Scrolls?
Isiaha! That means Isaiah 53 and your other prophesy in Isaiah have to be about two
messiahs not one.
VFX wrote:
God would never make us trust a single prophet; how could we verify that his words
are true? God instead gave us many prophets, and they all confirmed each other. The
only thing Jesus ever said about Muhammad was this; 'This is the antichrist, he who
denies that Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who
confesses the Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the
antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed
and all the Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the
New Testament scriptures.
Musa's Response:
Right, If Muhammed peace be upon him or Islam is the Anti Christ then where is
your rapture, tribulation, second coming, and oh yes, third temple? Muhammed
(peace be upon him) also never denied Jesus (peace be upon him) is the Christ. Are
you forgetting that Muslims believe Jesus is the anointed one sent to bring all
mankind under God's law, destroy the anti-Christ and lead the world in a reign of
peace? Do you know who else reject the son of God? Jews and they do not even
accept Muhammed (peace be upon him).
VFX wrote:
Muslims claim that The Old Testament and the New Testament are not trustworthy,
because they believe mankind corrupted them. However, in the Old Testament, God
promised to preserve His word forever. 'As for me, this is my covenant with them,
saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy
mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of
the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. ' (Isaiah
59:21) and 'The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of
earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them
from this generation for ever.' (Psalms 12:6-7). So, either Islam is a lie, or Islam's god
'allah' is weak and can not preserve his word as promised.
Musa's Response:
God promised to preserve his word then tell me why your oldest complete Torah is
only 1400 years old at best? Tell me why out of your 24,000 manuscripts the Bible is
based on not one of them is identical? Muslims around the world are dying to hear
this. Now for the big one, tell me why if God shall preserve his word for all
generations why Christians do not follow Torah? You have shot yourself in the foot.
VFX wrote:
So, in conclusion; Satan used Muhammad to create a religion that denies the truth
God revealed to humanity, in order to damn as many souls as possible by making
them anti-christs.
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father
except through me." (John 14:6)
Musa's Response:
using this statement correctly and how it is meant to be used Muslims agree
VFX wrote:
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever
believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Musa's Response:
Will touch on this.
From me, Osama Abdallah:

Son of GOD in the Bible means Servant of GOD. Not
only "Son" means Servant in the Bible, but also John 3:16
was not said or written by Jesus. It is a man-made verse.
The Bible's theologians all say that the gospel of John was
written and changed by mysterious people and by unknown
number of them:
Who were the authors of the Bible?
VFX wrote:
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see
life, for God's wrath remains on him. (John 3:36)
Musa's Response:
Again using the term son of God correctly Muslims have no problem with this
statement.
Son of GOD in the Bible means Servant of GOD.
VFX wrote:
Now, what is Satan's goal? We see Satan's goal in the Garden of Eden was to destroy
Adam and Eve by making them sin, so God would have to punish them.
Now, if what Jesus said above is true, all Satan has to do is make you reject Jesus
Christ as the Son of God as your Savior. Then, you will go to Hell, and Satan wins.
So, if Satan makes a copy of The Bible, but excludes the belief that Jesus Christ is the
Son of God and that He died for your sins, then you will die in your sins and go to
Hell, just as Satan wants.
That is the quran; it contains many of the beautiful things found in The Bible, but it
denies that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who died for your sins to save you.
Mohammed was foretold, in these passages; 'This is the antichrist, he who denies that
Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the
Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the antichrist is
coming, so now many antichrists have come' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed and all the
Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the New
Testament scriptures
That is why Islam is evil. Everything good about the quran can be found in The Bible,
but there is no salvation in the quran. It denies the one and only way, thus, it is from
Satan.
Here are some of my problems with Islam. Like all man made religions, Islam
believes that through good works, you can earn your way to Heaven. However, God
makes it clear that 'All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God' (Romans
3:23), and 'there is none that doeth good, no, not one.' (Psalm 14:3) and 'but we are all
as an unclean thing, and all our good works are as filthy rags'. (Isaiah 64:6)
Musa's Response:
Islam does not say god works will allow you into heaven. In fact there are numerous
Hadith that state that good works will not permit paradise. This is another common
misconception about Islam. When asked about good deeds by one of his companions
the prophet said; know that your good deeds will not earn you paradise. The
companion responded; not even you oh apostle of Allah? Muhammed peace be upon
him said; no! Not even me. The only thing that gets us into heaven is God's mercy,
will, and our faith. Our works are only a by product of our faith. After all Faith
without works is dead as said in James 2:22 of the NT.
VFX wrote:
Have you ever heard the story of Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve? One day,
they both brought a sacrifice to God. Cain brought good fruit, and Abel brought an
animal to sacrifice. Cain's good fruits were rejected, but Abel's blood sacrifice was
received. Why is that? It is because the wage of sin is death, so something must die for
your sins. In a court of law, your good works can not pay the fine or debt in the place
of the judgment you deserve. So, Islam, like all false religions, makes you do good
works to try and get to Heaven. However, your 'good fruits' will be rejected, because
they do not wash away your sins. Justice must be served.
We are all sinners who deserve to be judged guilty of sin and put to death. However,
God became a man, Jesus Christ, according to prophecies given over 1500 years by
the Jewish prophets, and Jesus took the judgment we deserved upon Himself, dying
for our sins. This satisfies justice, and allows us to be forgiven, by the blood
atonement, just like with Abel, Adam's son! Jesus then came back from the dead,
because God is stronger than death.
Musa's Response:
Show me one JEWISH prophesy where God is supposed to become a man. Again
Muslims believe Jesus is the Christ peace be upon him). As a former Jew you should
know that Jews do not have to offer a sacrifice to be forgiven by God they may repent
with teshob(v)a meaning roughly in Hebrew 'to return'. If a sacrifice is required for all
sin then what of the people of Nineveh in the story of Jonah (peace be upon
him). Again we do not believe works grant us heaven. This is clearly stated in our
Hadith. Think of it like this. It is the mercy and will plus our faith that will allow us
heaven. The works are like a currency that we may spend once we are in heaven. They
help us out once inside but they are not what gets us in initially. Again this is another
huge misconception about Islam. Im still surprised you haven't brought up the 72
Virgins.

The 72 virgins in Islamic Paradise is actually supported in
the Bible.
VFX wrote:
Testament scriptures. Muslims do not understand what the title 'Son of God' actually
means. Jesus had two titles, Son of Man refers to His manhood and the Son of God
refers to His godhood. Muslims also have difficulty understanding the doctrine of the
Trinity; God is One, in 3 persons; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All 3 are divine, and
make up the One God. Jesus said 'I and the Father are One.' John 10:30.
Musa's Response:
John 10:30, I was waiting for this one. Start at John 10:23 for the context. I love this
passage for more than one reason. The Jews pick up stones to stone Jesus for saying
he and the father are one. He then corrects them and quotes to them psalms 82:6.
Where God called the Israelites GODS! So he is using the title in its context like I
have been telling you too. Second Reason under Jewish Law as stated in Deut 18 you
may stone somebody even if they claim to be just a prophet and not God or the son of
God. So that is very well the reason the picked up stones. He was claiming to be a
prophet not God. Third and favorite reason. Read John 10:24 "IF THOU BE THE
CHRIST TELL US PLAINLY" Are they asking him if he is God or if he is the Son of
God? No! they are asking him if he is the Christ. They never thought he was claiming
to be God until he said I am and the father are one. Now look at it again. They say
"tell us plainly". Why do they say this? Because they need evidence to condemn him
in court. What kind of court? A Jewish one that follows Torah law. However, they did
not have this evidence. In Torah court you need four witnesses. In John 8:58 there
were more than four witnesses present so why don't they use that ammo on him in
court? The Christians seem to love that one. Yet here they are again 2 chapters after
john 8:58 asking for more evidence. But Jesus plays it smart he back his statement up
with a quote for psalm and they have nothing. If all the passages like John 3:16, John
1:1-14, John 8:24, John 7:14 and the many other ones before John 10:24 are actually
Jesus claiming to be God. Then why are the Jews still asking him for evidence when
they had more than 4 witnesses present and were looking for the slightest slip f
tongue. John 10:24 wipes out all claims before it and proves that the Jews by asking if
he was the Christ and not God didn't think he was God. They were so powerless in the
issue and could not even deliver a verdict under their own law. They had nothing! Just
as you do VFX.
Yes you are correct Muslims do have trouble understanding this. So do Jews. Look
Jesus did have the title 'Son of Man' I agree. But so did many other righteous people at
the time. Lets take a look at John 3:16 and the word Begotten. First off the word is not
even present in the earliest manuscripts but lets ignore that for now. In the Greek the
word Monogenes is used. In Hebrews 11:17 (which by the way as of today does not
have a known author). Isaac is called Abrahams only begotten son (monogenese in
Greek). Now this is false because Abraham had 8 children but Ismael was the first. So
when Isaac was alive, so was Ismael as he was 13 years older. Now the common
Christian response is that Issac is called only begotten because he was born of the
spirit and Ismael the flesh etc. Fine! Let's go with that. The Greek word is Monogenes
meaning begotten or sired. It is present in both Hebrews 11:17 and John 3:16. The
Hebrew Equivalent 'yalad' is found within Psalm 2:7 referring to David. Now in both
Psalms and Hebrews you would say that the term begotten is only meant to mean
(spiritual) importance or a way to describe a special status. David is the first begotten
son of God and Issac the only begotten son of Abraham. If taken literally it is an
obvious error. Take it metaphorically however, you find the solution. So then why are
the rules broken or changed when they're applied to Jesus in John 3:16? The answer is
simple, the rules aren't broken or at least they weren't until Christianity came along.
Nobody took the idea that Jesus was the actual son of God literally in his day. If they
did then they would have did the same with David and Moses and Elijah and many
others peace be upon all of them. As the famous Ahmed Deedat God rest his soul said
"sons in tons"
VFX wrote:
In fact, The Father even calls Jesus the 'Son' and even calls Jesus 'God'. Hebrews 1:8
'But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O GOD, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of
righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.' Flipping back to the Old Testament, this
was written many hundreds of years before Jesus Christ was born. This is a prophecy
of His birth; Isaiah 9:6 'For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And
the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful
Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.' A child called God?
Incredible.
Musa's Response:
Isaiah 9:6. In order to understand this you must read the context. It starts in Isaiah
chapter 7 where Isaiah is delivering a letter to King Ahaz. You know the King of
Judah nobody liked. They wanted to replace him with the son of Tabel because he was
aligning with Assyria etc. Again the context matters so much. This is going to be a bit
long so buckle your seat belts.
This verse in Isaiah is quoted often, demonstrating the Messiah's nature and
character foretold 700BC before he was even born. Here, Isaiah proclaims the
Messiah would be a son of man by being born as a child, and at the same time be a
"son" given. He goes on to identify the nature of this "son" and "child" by identifying
him as "Mighty God", "Everlasting Father" and "Prince of Peace" terms only used
here in the Hebrew, EXCEPT for Mighty God (El Gabor)which appears two other
times in Isaiah 10:21 and Ezekiel 32:21. In Isaiah 9 it is Ahaz who is referred to as
the 'House of David' as he is the current King. Not Israel. In fact the Jewish reads like
this;

The "God" title was given to MANY in both the Old and
New Testaments! Only "Yahweh" is the Unique title for
GOD Almighty.
VFX wrote:
For a child has been born to us, a son has been given us. And authority has settled
on his shoulders. He has been named "The Mighty God is planning grace; The Eternal
Father, a peaceable ruler"
Musa's Response:
Also you have to remember Ahaz was to be given a sign. Ahaz died long before
Jesus walked the Earth. So this could not have been talking about a sign that would
occur outside of the lifetime of Ahaz. Ask yourself, was Israel at war with Judea when
Jesus walked the Earth? Was Judea teaming up with Assyria during his time? No, but
this is what was happening in Isaiah. Again Context matters. In fact among further
investigation these verses are easily fulfilled in Hezekiah, the royal son, who sat on
the throne of David, where his father Ahaz sat. Again however, let's assume this is
about Jesus, All of this is about what Jesus would be called not what he would beor
his character. Jesus according to Christianity was called either Yahushua or Yeshua
coming from the words 'Yah' and 'Yasha' meaning God's Salvation. So even if this is
about Jesus it is wrong! Jesus was called Yahushua or yeshua and not the other names
listed in Isaiah 9. Remember what is aid before about Isaiah being an Essene
document? Essenes believe in 2 messiahs not one. So even all my arguments are
refuted you still have that very small hoop to jump through.
VFX wrote:
Jesus Christ is God, and Muslims reject Him as God. In Exodus, God gave Moses His
holy name. Exodus 3:14 'This is what you shall tell the Israelites: I AM sent me to
you.' Now look at what Jesus said. John 8:24 ' That is why I told you that you will die
in your sins; for, unless you believe that I AM HE, that is what will happen.' and 'I tell
you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I AM!' (John 8:58) Jesus
used the name of God for Himself, and said that anyone who rejects Him as God will
die in their sins. That means all Muslims will go to Hell. If you want to be saved,
repent and put your faith in Jesus Christ, your Lord and Saviour.
Musa's Response:
The name given in Exodus in Hebrew is HayahHayah or in Greek Ho-On. The name
used in John 8:58 is Ego Eimi. It is not the same period. Again though lets assume it
is. Even if Jesus did use the name the Jews would not have been able to know as the
Jews stopped using the name and forgot its true pronunciation 300-200 BC. The
reason is the commandments given in Exodus 20. Thou Shall Not Use The Lords
Name In Vein. They did not want to say his name in vein so it became practice to not
use his name except only in the Temple. But the Temple was destroyed and his name
eventually became unknown. This is noted in the Jewish Encyclopedia. So even if he
did say it how did they know? John 8:24 simply states that he is 'He'. Well who is He?
He is the one who is the anointed. Muslims believe in this. I have no objection here. In
fact if you fast forward the same title is used in John 9:9. By Jesus you ask? No,
by the blind man who Jesus healed. It is also the same as the Greek Ego Eimi. Does
this make the blind man God? No, Again VFX you must read the context.
VFX wrote:
Part 2
If you concept of God is wrong and contradictory to logic why debate or even care
about what your holy book states? -you
Exactly, which is why you should leave Islam immediately. Your 'god' is clearly not
the Creator, because the Creator of the Universe doesn't contradict Himself.
In the New Testament of Jesus Christ, God warned us that Satan the devil would come
as an angel of light and preach a false religion. All the prophets of God spoke with
God, however, the false prophet Mohammad spoke with an angel only! Look at what
God warned us; 'And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of
light.' (2 Corinthians 11:14) and 'But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should
preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be
accursed!' (Galatians 1:8) Mohammad met Satan 600 years after God warned us in the
New Testament, and then Satan, calling himself 'allah', created the false religion of
Islam.
The entire purpose of Islam is to deny everything that God revealed through the
prophets, and finally, in the person of Jesus Christ. Between the discovery of the Dead
Sea Scrolls, which are over 2000 years old and match perfectly what we use today,
and the 24000 manuscripts of the New Testament, we can know 100% for certain that
The Bible has never been changed. Infact, The Bible is the most trust worthy book in
all of antiquity. Muslims claim their scriptures are authentic because they haven't
changed in 1400 years. While that is simply not true, the more important fact is that
The Bible has been proven to be preserved for over 2000 years. It is an old Islamic lie
to claim The Bible is corrupt, because if The Bible is true, that means Islam is not
true; The Bible teaches the total opposite of the quran.
God would never make us trust a single prophet; how could we verify that his words
are true? God instead gave us many prophets, and they all confirmed each other. The
only thing Jesus ever said about Muhammad was this; 'This is the antichrist, he who
denies that Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who
confesses the Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the
antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed
and all the Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the
New Testament scriptures.
Muslims claim that The Old Testament and the New Testament are not trustworthy,
because they believe mankind corrupted them. However, in the Old Testament, God
promised to preserve His word forever. 'As for me, this is my covenant with them,
saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy
mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of
the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. ' (Isaiah
59:21) and 'The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of
earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them
from this generation for ever.' (Psalms 12:6-7). So, either Islam is a lie, or Islam's god
'allah' is weak and can not preserve his word as promised.
So, in conclusion; Satan used Muhammad to create a religion that denies the truth
God revealed to humanity, in order to damn as many souls as possible by making
them anti-christs.
Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father
except through me." (John 14:6)
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son,that whoever
believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see
life, for God's wrath remains on him. (John 3:36)
Now, what is Satan's goal? We see Satan's goal in the Garden of Eden was to destroy
Adam and Eve by making them sin, so God would have to punish them.
Now, if what Jesus said above is true, all Satan has to do is make you reject Jesus
Christ as the Son of God as your Savior. Then, you will go to Hell, and Satan wins.
So, if Satan makes a copy of The Bible, but excludes the belief that Jesus Christ is the
Son of God and that He died for your sins, then you will die in your sins and go to
Hell, just as Satan wants.
That is the quran; it contains many of the beautiful things found in The Bible, but it
denies that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who died for your sins to save you.
Testament scriptures
Psalm 22 and 88 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got

crucified:
To put everything in the proper perspective, please first visit: Did Isaiah 53
really prophesies about the crucifixion of Jesus? to see all of the Old Testament's
verses that clearly confirmed Islam's Divine Claims about Jesus never got crucified.
Having said that, let us now look at Psalm 22 and 88:
Psalm 22 (Young's Literal Translation)
1 To the Overseer, on `The Hind of the Morning.' -- A Psalm of David. My God, my
God, why hast Thou forsaken me? Far from my salvation, The words of my
roaring?
2 My God, I call by day, and Thou answerest not, And by night, and there is no silence
to me.
3 And Thou [art] holy, Sitting -- the Praise of Israel.
4 In Thee did our fathers trust -- they trusted, And Thou dost deliver them.
5 Unto Thee they cried, and were delivered, In Thee they trusted, and were not
ashamed.
6 And I [am] a worm, and no man, A reproach of man, and despised of the people.
7 All beholding me do mock at me, They make free with the lip -- shake the head,
8 `Roll unto Jehovah, He doth deliver him, He doth deliver him, for he delighted in
him.'
9 For thou [art] He bringing me forth from the womb, Causing me to trust, On the
breasts of my mother.
10 On Thee I have been cast from the womb, From the belly of my mother Thou [art]
my God.
11 Be not far from me, For adversity is near, for there is no helper.
12 Many bulls have surrounded me, Mighty ones of Bashan have compassed me,
13 They have opened against me their mouth, A lion tearing and roaring.
14 As waters I have been poured out, And separated themselves have all my bones,
My heart hath been like wax, It is melted in the midst of my bowels.
15 Dried up as an earthen vessel is my power, And my tongue is cleaving to my jaws.
16 And to the dust of death (some translations don't have "death" in the verse.
See below for proofs) thou appointest me, For surrounded me have dogs, A
company of evil doers have compassed me, Piercing my hands and my feet.
17 I count all my bones -- they look expectingly, They look upon me,
18 They apportion my garments to themselves, And for my clothing they cause a lot to
fall.
19 And Thou, O Jehovah, be not far off, O my strength, to help me haste.
20 Deliver from the sword my soul, From the paw of a dog mine only one.
21 Save me from the mouth of a lion: -- And -- from the horns of the high places Thou
hast answered me!
22 I declare Thy name to my brethren, In the midst of the assembly I praise Thee.
23 Ye who fear Jehovah, praise ye Him, All the seed of Jacob, honour ye Him, And be
afraid of Him, all ye seed of Israel.

24 For He hath not despised, nor abominated, The affliction of the afflicted, Nor hath
He hidden His face from him, And in his crying unto Him He heareth.
25 Of Thee my praise [is] in the great assembly. My vows I complete before His
fearers.
26 The humble do eat and are satisfied, Praise Jehovah do those seeking Him, Your
heart doth live for ever.
27 Remember and return unto Jehovah, Do all ends of the earth, And before Thee bow
themselves, Do all families of the nations,
28 For to Jehovah [is] the kingdom, And He is ruling among nations.
29 And the fat ones of earth have eaten, And they bow themselves, Before Him bow
do all going down to dust, And he [who] hath not revived his soul.
30 A seed doth serve Him, It is declared of the Lord to the generation.
31 They come and declare His righteousness, To a people that is borne, that He hath
made!
There are few important points to notice here:

1-
In the red-colored verses above, we see claims that, on the surface, seem to
support the Christians' claims about Jesus Christ got crucified and died on the cross.
However, this prayer of King David, peace be upon him, proves otherwise, since it
was the Prayer of David, and David didn't die on any cross nor was he crucified! So
these words, if they were to prove anything, they would prove that the Servant will
not be crucified because David, who prayed those exact words for himself, never
suffered through this experience, and never got killed from his enemies.
(See also point #4 below)
(a)- Also, the words in Psalm 22:1 are very common in these types of prayers.
Any desperate person who is enduring a heavy burden of punishment or suffering
would naturally say or be inclined to say such words.
(b)- If Jesus was indeed the Creator of the Universe, then why would he utter such
stupid and blasphemous words upon himself?? These words, while they're words
of desperation, nonetheless remain to be words of BLASPHEMY!
Please visit: Jesus Blasphemed in the Bible.
So if anything, these words take away from the perfection of GOD Almighty,
going along with the trinitarians' blasphemies and lies about Jesus being our
GOD.
2-
The highlighted parts above - along with the ample other Old Testament verses
that talked about GOD Almighty "lifting" and "raising" the Messiah from death clearly state that GOD Almighty would deliver and did deliver and save him from the
evil, pain and suffering.
3-
As to the lie in Psalm 22:16, when one looks at the Arabic and few other English
translations, he will clearly see that "death" isn't part of the original text. In Arabic for
instance, it says .
. which translates as to the soil of the earth you put
me (i.e., physically wrestled down by the "dogs" who pierced his hands and feet). But
even if we take the word "death" as the real translation, this still doesn't mean actual
death for the following reasons:
(a)- As I mentioned above, if the words in the verse were to prove anything, they
would prove that the Servant will not be crucified because David, who prayed
those exact words for himself, never suffered through this experience and never
got killed from his enemies.
(b)- Assuming that the text is referring to the coming Messiah, the text of the Psalm
22:16 verse doesn't explicitly say that the Messiah will actually die. It says that
he will be laid on the soil of the ground with "dogs" piercing his hands and feet.
(c)- The text doesn't give any indication that Christ will actually die.
(d)- No where in the entire OT was the resurrection ever prophesied!
(e)- The text of the verse seems to clearly be talking about Christ being
physically brought/wrestled down by the "dogs".
(f)- The original text seems to be speaking of poetical, metaphoric and symbolic
style. Examples:
i- Christ is a "worm" and "not a man" in Psalm 22:6.
ii- The enemies are "dogs" in Psalm 22:16,20.
We can not use this text to support the lies of the crucifixion and
the resurrection, especially when there are ample OT verses that clearly state that
the crucifixion never happened!
4-
And even if we were to assume that Psalm 22 did indeed prophecy about the
crucifixion of the Messiah (no resurrection mentioned here nor throughout the entire
Old Testament, and the corrupt New Testament lied about it (1), [2]), then still given
the fact that GOD Almighty in the Old and New Testaments did abrogate and
nullify His Divine Promises and Predictions that He even took Personal OATHS
on many times, and given the fact that there are ample other verses in the Old
Testament that clearly predict the saving of the Messiah from crucifixion or death (see
the link above), then we have no reason not to believe that GOD Almighty could not
and would not have saved Jesus Christ from crucifixion.
Psalm 88 (Young's Literal Translation)

1 A Song, a Psalm, by sons of Korah, to the Overseer, `Concerning the Sickness of
Afflictions.' -- An instruction, by Heman the Ezrahite. O Jehovah, God of my
salvation, Daily I have cried, nightly before Thee,
2 My prayer cometh in before Thee, Incline Thine ear to my loud cry,
3 For my soul hath been full of evils, And my life hath come to Sheol.
4 I have been reckoned with those going down [to] the pit, I have been as a man
without strength.
5 Among the dead -- free, As pierced ones lying in the grave, Whom Thou hast
not remembered any more, Yea, they by Thy hand have been cut off.
6 Thou hast put me in the lowest pit, In dark places, in depths.
7 Upon me hath Thy fury lain, And [with] all Thy breakers Thou hast afflicted. Selah.
8 Thou hast put mine acquaintance far from me, Thou hast made me an abomination
to them, Shut up -- I go not forth.
9 Mine eye hath grieved because of affliction, I called Thee, O Jehovah, all the
day, I have spread out unto Thee my hands.
10 To the dead dost Thou do wonders? Do Rephaim rise? do they thank Thee? Selah.
11 Is Thy kindness recounted in the grave? Thy faithfulness in destruction?
12 Are Thy wonders known in the darkness? And Thy righteousness in the land of
forgetfulness?
13 And I, unto Thee, O Jehovah, I have cried, And in the morning doth my prayer
come before Thee.
14 Why, O Jehovah, castest Thou off my soul? Thou hidest Thy face from me.
15 I [am] afflicted, and expiring from youth, I have borne Thy terrors -- I pine away.
16 Over me hath Thy wrath passed, Thy terrors have cut me off,
17 They have surrounded me as waters all the day, They have gone round against
me together,
18 Thou hast put far from me lover and friend, Mine acquaintance [is] the place of
darkness!
Comments on this chapter:

Nothing of substance to be noticed here. This song was no more than a prayer from
King David, peace be upon him, to GOD Almighty during his bad times. The words
are very common and there is nothing unique about them. They don't contain
prophecies in them, nor do they represent any prophecy. Christians are fond on
twisting and perverting this chapter to support the crucifixion and resurrection lies,
which are refuted by the bible itself. See my notes above.
Conclusion:
Psalm 22 by itself appears, on the surface, to be an impressive prophecy about Christ's
crucifixion, but when one reads it in the context of the other Old Testament
verses, then one would clearly see that Psalm 22 is no more than a Prayer and not a
Prophecy nor a confirmation about any crucifixion of Christ. Let's put it this way:
It doesn't explicitly say that Christ will ever die! Let alone be buried and then
resurrect again on the third day! The way I read it is that Christ, or the Servant, will
be attacked by some human-dogs, and that he is absolutely helpless and weak. He is
no more than a worthless "worm," and that without the help of GOD Almighty, he
won't be able to prevail. This is how I read the text. I did not see any crucifixion
or resurrection, especially that the man (David) who spoke them to GOD Almighty for
himself and his own aid remained alive and was never crucified, and never did he get
killed by his enemies. King David died a natural death. Not only that, but like I said,
there are ample OT verses that say Christ will never get crucified. Please
visit Did Isaiah 53 really prophesies about the crucifixion of Jesus?
The Forgery of Matthew 23

Written by Abdullah Kareem
Jesus opposed and rebuked the Pharisees for breaking the Law and for hypocrisy. The
chapter of Jesus aggressive behavior towards the Pharisees is Matthew 23. What
about Jesus character of love and mercy? He referred to the Gentiles as dogs (Matt.
7:6, 15:26). He also ignored a Gentile woman pleading for help (Matt. 15:23-25).
Jesus acted in a ruthless manner (John 2:15). Jesus said But those mine enemies,
which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before
me (Luke 19:27). And Jesus also killed children (Rev. 2:23) for the sins of their
mother. Yet the Old Testament says The fathers shall not be put to death for the
children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be
put to death for his own sin. (Deu 24:16). We are responsible for our own sins
(Deu 24:16, Ez. 18:20, Jere. 31:30, Ps. 40:6, Isa. 1:11, Micah 6:7-8, Matt 9:13, 12:7,
Heb. 5:7), so Christianity is rendered false. Also, there is no historian who mentioned
Jesus resurrection 1, so Christianity becomes even more useless.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the
kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let
those enter who are trying to.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over
land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him
twice as much a son of hell as you are.
"Woe to you, blind guides! You say, 'If anyone swears by the temple, it means
nothing; but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.'
You blind fools! Which is greater: the gold, or the temple that makes the gold
sacred? You also say, 'If anyone swears by the altar, it means nothing; but if
anyone swears by the gift on it, he is bound by his oath.' You blind men! Which is
greater: the gift, or the altar that makes the gift sacred? Therefore, he who swears
by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. And he who swears by the temple
swears by it and by the one who dwells in it. And he who swears by heaven swears
by God's throne and by the one who sits on it.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of
your spicesmint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important
matters of the lawjustice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the
latter, without neglecting the former. You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but
swallow a camel.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the
outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence.
Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also
will be clean.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like
whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full
of dead men's bones and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you
appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and
wickedness.
"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You build tombs
for the prophets and decorate the graves of the righteous. And you say, 'If we had
lived in the days of our forefathers, we would not have taken part with them in
shedding the blood of the prophets.' So you testify against yourselves that you are
the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of
the sin of your forefathers!
"You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?
Therefore I am sending you prophets and wise men and teachers. Some of them
you will kill and crucify; others you will flog in your synagogues and pursue from
town to town. And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been
shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son
of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. I tell you
the truth, all this will come upon this generation.
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you,
how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her
chicks under her wings, but you were not willing. Look, your house is left to you
desolate. 39For I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, 'Blessed is he
who comes in the name of the Lord."
So much for Jesus passive character of love and mercy (9:13, 12:7), he condemned
the Pharisees in a very harsh manner. But are these passages historically true?
Did Jesus reject the Pharisees as hypocrites and brood of snakes?
The reality is Jesus was a Pharisee himself, he never condemned the Pharisees, and so
the chapter Matt 23 is a forgery.
The whole picture of Jesus at loggerheads with the Pharisees is the creation of a
period some time after Jesus death, when the Christian Church was in conflict
with the Pharisees because of its claim to have superseded Judaism. The Gospels
are a product of this later period; or rather, the Gospels consist of materials, some
of them deriving from an earlier period, where edited in an anti-Pharisee sense.
Thus it is possible to refute the anti-Pharisee picture in the Gospels themselves,
which even after their re-editing retain many details from the earlier accounts
which show that Jesus was not in conflict with the Pharisees and was a Pharisee
himself. (Hyam Maccoby, The MythMaker: Paul and the Invention of
Christianity, p. 29)
The process of re-editing is not just an hypothesis; it can be plainly seen within the
Gospels by comparing the way in which the various Gospels treat the same
incident. The fact that there are four Gospels, instead of just one, makes the task of
reconstructing the original story much easier, especially when one bears in mind
the results of modern scholarship, which have shown in what order the Gospels
were written. According to the most firmly based scholarship Mark is the earliest
Gospel, so we can often be enlightened just by comparing the version of Mark
with that of any later Gospel. (ibid p. 35)
What was the motive for the re-editing of stories about conflict between Jesus and
the Sadducees so that he was portrayed as in conflict with the Pharisees instead?
The reason is simple. The Pharisees were known to be the chief authorities of the
Jews, not the Sadducees. In fact, at the time that the Gospels were edited,
Sadducees had lost any small religious importance that they had once had, and the
Pharisees were the sole repository of religious authority. As we shall see shortly in
more detail, it was of the utmost importance to the Gospel editors to represent
Jesus as having been a rebel against Jewish religion, not against the Roman
occupation. The wholesale re-editing of the material in order to give a picture of

conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees was thus essential. Also, since it was
known that the Sadducees were collaborators with Rome, any substantial picture of
opposition by Jesus to the Sadducees, even on purely religious grounds, would
have given an impression of Jesus as an opponent of Rome just the impression
that the Gospel editors wished to avoid.
An important indication that the stories about Pharisee opposition to Jesus on the
question of Sabbath healing are not to be taken at face value is the fact that there is
no mention of this charge at Jesus trial. If Jesus, as the Gospels represent, actually
incurred a capital charge in Pharisee eyes because of his Sabbath activities, why
was this not brought against him at a time when he was on trial for his life? Why,
in fact, is there no mention of any charges brought specifically by the Pharisees at
Jesus trial? As we shall see in the next chapter, Jesus trial was not on religious
charges at all, but on political charges, though the Gospels, pursuing their general
aim of depoliticizing Jesus aims, try to give the political charge a religious favor.
Yet, if the trial really had been a religious one, who better than the Pharisees, the
alleged bitter religious enemies of Jesus, to play the most prominent part in the
proceedings? (ibid p. 36)
The scholar Hyam Maccoby proves the Pharisee passages are forgeries. This means
the Gospels are baseless, they contradict each other and misquote the Old Testament,
they contain historical errors and discrepancies [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]
The anti-Pharisee passages were penned by Pauline Christians who hated the Jews and
Hebrew Christians. On the same level, the Semitic passages were penned by Hebrew
Christians who believed Jesus was not God (Matt 9:8, 12:18, 19:17, 23:9, 24:36).
The Gospels were written under Pauls influence, and the Jewish sects of Galilee.
After Jesuss time, there came to be two sects of Christians: those who followed St.
Paul (who is the real founder of modern Christianity) and those who followed the
Apostles of Jesus. In course of time, the Pauline sect overshadowed the Apostles
sect. So Pauls own writings, as well as the Gospels written under his
influence, came to be accepted by the later Christian Church as Scripture. [1]
The Gospels were written by people more interested in a living Lord present in
their midst than in Jesus the historical man from Nazareth. Many scholars now
hold that much of what is placed on the lips of Jesus in the Gospels was put
there by Gospel writers (just as the writers of Hellenistic history placed speeches
on the lips of famous persons). It is really the understanding that Gospels are faith
documents that has led to what is called the quest for the historical Jesus.
(Bonnie Thurston, Women in the New Testament, p. 63)
The Gospels, however, were religious dramas used for worship and as a form of
evangelism. They were meant not to impart history but to buttress and convey
belief. The editor of Johns Gospel (the least historical of them all) boldly and
honestly states his aims in the text itself when he says, But these things are
written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. The goal is to
establish the faithful and to create new converts, not to create an authentic
biography. (Tom Harper, The Pagan Christ, p. 126)
The New Testament contains unreliable surmisesLet me cite one fairly typical
and significant example, from the opening page of the first chapter of Norman
Perrins important and influential book, Rediscovering the Teaching of Jesus.
Perrin gives his reasons why teaching ascribed to Jesus is likely to be rather a
teaching that stems from the early Church, not from Jesus himself. I quote the
first three reasons, The early Church made no attempt to distinguish between the
words the earthly Jesus had spoken and those spoken by the risen Lord through a
prophet in the community The early Church absolutely and completely
identified the risen Lord of her experience with the earthly Jesus of Nazareth
Further, the gospel form was created to serve the purposes of the early Church,
but historical reminiscence was not one of those purposes. (John C.
Meagher, The Five Gospels, 1989, p. 9)
There is a mixture of Jewish and Gentile material. For example, the passage Matthew
5:17-20 was penned by a Jewish Christian, but Jesus praise for wine (Matt. 9:17, Mk.
2:22, Lk 5:37) and glorifying the Roman emperor (Matt. 22:21, Mk 12:17) is penned
by a Pauline. The Old Testament condemns wine (Lev. 10:9, Prov 4:17, 20:1, Isa.
28:7, Hos. 4:11, Joel 1:5), the Jews opposed Roman taxes in 6 CE under the
leadership of Judas the Galilean, so how could Jesus say Give to Caesar what is
Caesars? when the Israelites expected the opposite? According to Isaiah 42, Micah
5:2, the Messiah is supposed to destroy the foreign occupiers; not bow down to their
taxes. Jesus said he was not a political Messiah: My kingdom is not of this world
(John 18:36). The Jews rejected Jesus for not driving out the Romans, they probably
felt betrayed when Jesus said Give to Caesar what is Caesars because they
expected a political Messiah (Matt. 27:41-43, Mk. 15:30-31, Lk. 23:35-36, 38-39, Ps.
18:50, 20:6) but Jesus was the exact opposite! At least 600 years later, the figurative
Messiah (Islam) liberated the land of Palestine after so many failed Messiahs [1].
According to Jewish conceptions the only way to distinguish between a true and a
false Messiah was success: He who does not succeed in overthrowing the Roman
yoke cannot be the Messiah, and vice-versa. Hence, the Jews claimed that Jesus
was an impostor because he could not lead them to a successful revolt
against Rome. The danger for Rome was not represented by someone claiming to
be King of the Jews, but by the fact that the Jews expected a king who would
overthrow Roman power. Jesus in some way or another claimed to be the Messiah,
but at the same time he did not advocate in-surrection. Therefore it was in the
interest of the Roman government to have the Jews recognize Jesus as their king:
This would dispose forever of the Jewish messianic threat to Rome. [2]
There are no legitimate prophecies of Jesus death in the Old Testament.
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~slocks/buckner/tough.html
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/messianic.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/steven_carr/non-messianic.html
http://www.askwhy.co.uk/christianity/0240Prophecies.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1996/2/2third96.html
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/docmagee/godstruth/godstruth/gt220BPRPropheciesoftheM
essiahGodsTruth.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/examine_prophecies.html
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/psychics.html
The verse On the eighth day, when it was time to circumcise him, he was named
Jesus, (Luke 2:21) is penned by a Jewish Christian (Gen 7:14), but Paul abrogated
the Circumcision (Gal. 5:2), because it was no longer required. Jesus turning water
into wine (John 2:1-10), and saying All foods are clean (Mk 7:18-20) is penned by a
Pauline. The deceiver Paul said all foods are clean (Rom 14:14, 20), but Jewish
Christians abstained from pork and only ate kosher meat (Lev. 11:7). The Old
Testament condemns wine (Lev. 10:9, Prov 4:17, 20:1, Isa. 28:7), Paul said it was
okay (1 Tim 5:23), so the Gospels have Jesus praise and glorify wine (Matt. 9:17, Mk.
2:22, Lk. 5:37, Jhn 2:1-10). Yet, Jesus preached the Law and Prophets (Matt 5:17-20)
that condemned wine! The pagan god Dionysus transformed water into wine hundreds
of years before Jesus [1]. The command to baptize the world (Matt. 28:19) is from a
Pauline Christian who believed Jesus ought to share the Gospel with gentiles, yet
Jewish Christians wrote: "Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the
Samaritans. Go rather to the lost sheep of Israel (Matt. 10:5-6) and "I was sent only
to the lost sheep of Israel." (Matt. 15:24-25).Why should Jesus specifically
forbid, on the one hand, preaching the Gospel to the
Gentiles Matthew 7:6,15:24,26) and yet on the other, tell the disciples to teach
all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the
Son and the Holy Ghost? (Matthew 28:19). In fact, the passage Matt. 28:19 is a
complete forgery:
"It cannot be directly proved that Jesus instituted baptism, for Matthew 28:19 is
not a saying of the Lord. The reason for this assertion are: (1) It is only a later
stage of the tradition that represents the risen Christ as delivering speeches and
giving commandments. Paul knows nothing of it. (2) The Trinitarian formula is
foreign to the mouth of Jesus and has not the authority of the Apostolic age which
it must have had if it had descended from Jesus himself. On the other hand, Paul
knows of no other way of receiving the Gentiles into the Christian communities
than by baptism, and it is highly probable that in the time of Paul all Jewish
Christians were also baptized. We may perhaps assume that the practice of baptism
was continued in consequence of Jesus' recognition of John the Baptist and his
baptism, even after John himself had been removed. According to John 4:2, Jesus
himself baptized not, but his disciples under his superintendence. It is possible
only with the help of tradition to trace back to Jesus a "Sacrament of Baptism," or
an obligation to it ex necessitate salutis, through it is credible that tradition is
correct here. Baptism in the Apostolic age was in the name of the Lord Jesus
(1 Cor. 1:13; Acts 19:5). We cannot make out when the formula in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit emerged" (History of Dogma, Vol. 1,
Adolph Harnack, 1958, page 79).
All but the most conservative of scholars agree that at least the latter part of this
command (Matt. 28:19) was inserted later (Tom Harper, For Christs Sake, p. 84)
"The historical riddle is not solved by Matthew 28:19, since, according to a wide
scholarly consensus, it is not an authentic saying of Jesus, not even an elaboration
of a Jesus-saying on baptism" (The Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 1, 1992, page
585).
"It has been customary to trace the institution of the practice (of baptism) to the
words of Christ recorded in Matthew 28:19. But the authenticity of this passage
has been challenged on historical as well as on textual grounds. It must be
acknowledged that the formula of the threefold name, which is here enjoined, does
not appear to have been employed by the primitive Church, which, so far as our
information goes, baptized 'in' or 'into the name of Jesus' (or 'Jesus Christ' or Lord
Jesus': Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5, 1 Cor. 1:13, 15) (The Dictionary of the Bible,
1947, page 83).
Matthew 28:19, "the Church of the first days did not observe this world-wide
command, even if they knew it. The command to baptize into the threefold name is
a late doctrinal expansion. In place of the words "baptizing... Spirit" we should
probably read simply "into my name," i.e. (turn the nations) to Christianity, "in my
name," i.e. (teach the nations) in my spirit" (Peake'sCommentary on the Bible,
1929, page 723).
Jesus ignorance of the Gentile woman (Matt. 15:24, 26, Mk 7:25-28) indicates he was
only sent to Israel. Do you understand? The Gospels are a mixture of Jewish and
Gentile material.
The same goes for a more familiar passage, the Great Commission to preach
the gospel among the nations (Matt. 28:19). If Jesus had really said this, how can
we imagine the controversy over Peter preaching to the Gentile Cornelius (Acts
10-11) ever having risen? How can Peter have been initially reluctant? How can
his colleagues in Jerusalem have called him on the carpet, questioning his
orthodoxy? If the parting words of the Risen Christ were a command to preach to
Gentiles, whence the dispute? Notice, too, that Peter is not simply stubborn: he is
readily convinced by the vision of the animals and the sail-cloth (Acts 10:9-16)
that he ought to heed Corneliuss invitation. But why did it take even this, if Jesus
had not long before made it clear that the chief business of the apostles was to
convert the heathen nations? Clearly, then, the Great Commission sayings were
coined only once the great Gentile Mission debate began, as an attempt by liberal
pro-mission faction to win their point. (Robert Price, The Incredible Shrinking Son
of Man, p. 15)
It doesnt make sense for Jesus to avoid the Gentiles (Matt. 7:6, 10:6-7, 15:24, 26, Mk
7:25-28) and then allow preaching. Matt. 28:19 is a desperate forgery by the Pauline
Christians who put the words Go ye therefore, and teach all nations into Jesus
mouth.
In reality, Jesus never commanded his disciples to teach all nations. But Paul
corrupted the Gospel and created a new religion, preached the name of Jesus to the
Gentiles, violating Jesus own words (Matt 7:6, 10:6-7, 15:24, John 4:22). Peter
preached the True Jesus to the Gentiles (Acts 10:9-23) and the Law, and he was
rebuked for doing so (Gal 2:11). The point is that Jesus never included the Gentiles,
only the Jews!
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the
remission of sins. (Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24)
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give
his life a ransom for many. (Matthew 20:28, Mark 10:45)
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of
God, who takes away the sin of the world! (John 1:29)
He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins
of the whole world. (1 John 2:2)
John is the last gospel, dating from 100 CE, and there was a sudden change from
many to the world. Where is the formula Jesus died for the sins of mankind in
the synoptic Gospels? There is no statement because it does not exist.
Christians changed the word many to the world to include the Gentiles! They also
blamed the death of Jesus upon the Jews (Matt. 27:25) to exonerate the Romans.
The story of Barabbas has special social significances, partly because it has
frequently been used to lay the blame for the Crucifixion on the Jews and justify
anti-Semitism. Equally, the social significance of the story to early hearers was that
it shifted blame away from the Roman imperium, removing an impediment to
Christianity's eventual official acceptance. (*)
The Gospels all state that there was a custom at Passover during which the Roman
governor would release a prisoner of the crowd's choice. Mark 15:6; Matt. 27:15;
John 18:39; Luke 23:17 (though this verse in Luke is not present in the earliest
manuscripts and may be a later gloss to bring Luke into conformity) The gospels
differ on whether the custom was a Roman one or a Jewish oneHowever, no
such release or custom of such a release is recorded in any historical document, not
even as a passing mention.
This practice of releasing a prisoner is said by some analysts to be an element in a
literary creation of Mark, who needed to have a contrast to the true "son of the
father" in order to set up an edifying contest, in a form of parable. [1]
Pontius Pilate, as he is depicted in the Gospels, appears to be a decent person who
consents only reluctantly to the crucifixion of Jesus. History paints a different
picture of him. He was a procurator of Judea from A.D. 26 to 36, and he was a
cruel and corrupt man. Why is there no criticism of him in the Gospels? [2]
Apparently, the Gospels were penned by Christians of pagan descent, they had to
exonerate the Romans.
Let us recognize Luke 16:16-17 as a changed text of Matt. 5:17-20, a Pauline
Christian altered the Law-passage. We can give more examples of alteration by the
Church.
"As the brethren desired me to write epistles (letters), I did so, and these the
apostles of the devil have filled with tares (changes), exchanging some things and
adding others, for whom there is a woe reserved. It is not therefore, a matter of
wonder if some have also attempted to adulterate the sacred writings of the Lord,
since they have attempted the same in other works that are not to be compared
with these." (Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, [1]
For we, brethren, receive both Peter and the rest of the apostles as Christ Himself.
But those writings which are falsely inscribed with their name, we as experienced
persons reject, knowing that no such writings have been handed down to us.
(Serapion of Antioch, [2]
"And yet these are veritable fables, which have led to the invention of such stories
concerning a man whom they regarded as possessing greater wisdom and power
than the multitude, and as having received the beginning of his corporeal substance
from better and diviner elements than others, because they thought that this was
appropriate to persons who were too great to be human beings. (Origen, 254
CE) [3]
The truth of these matters must lie in that which is seen by the mind. If the
discrepancy between the Gospels is not solved, we must give up our trust in the
Gospels, as being true and written by a divine spirit, or as records worthy of
credence, for both these characters are held to belong to these works. (Origen,
Commentary on John, [online Source]
"Whether a Church which stands convicted of having forged its Creed, would have any scruple of forging its
Gospels, is a problem that the reader will solve according to the influence of prejudice or probability on his
mind." (Rev. Robert Taylor, The Diegesis p. 10) [1]
"It is clear to me that the writings of the christians are a lie, and that your fables are not well-enough constructed
to conceal this monstrous fiction: I have even heard that some of your interpreters, as if they had just come out
of a tavern, are onto the inconsistencies and, pen in hand, alter the originals writings, three, four and several
more times over in order to be able to deny the contradictions in the face of criticism." (Celsus 178 CE) [2]
"Orthodox theologians were tempted, by the assurance of impunity, to compose fictions, which must be
stigmatized with the epithets of fraud and forgery. They ascribed their own polemical works to the most
venerable names of Christian antiquity." (Edward Gibbon, History of Christianity, p. 598)
"[the New Testament had] in many passages undergone such serious modification
of meaning as to leave us in painful uncertainty as to what the Apostles had
actually written" Secrets of Mount Sinai, James Bentley, p. 117
In all, Tischendorf uncovered over 14,800 "corrections" to just one ancient
manuscript of the Bible, the Codex Sinaiticus (one of the two most ancient copies
of the Bible available to Christianity today), by nine (some say ten) separate
"correctors," which had been applied to this one manuscript over a period from
400AD to about 1200AD. Tischendorf strove in his dealings with his holy texts
themselves to be as honest and sincere as humanly possible. For this reason he
could not understand how the scribes could have so continuously and so callously.
[3]
Possibly, no Jewish Christian got his hands on the Greek gospels (Matthew, Mark,
Luke and John) but Gentile authors inserted the Jewish material by their own pens.
According to Papias, Matthew preached the Logia to the Hebrews, who transmitted
the Logia to the Gentiles, so the verses (e.g. Matt 5:17, Lk 2:21) are based on the
Logia. But the Church believed the heretics were corrupting the Gospels by adding
Jewish material.
Metzger states, "Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Eusebius and many
other Church Fathers accused the heretics of corrupting the Scriptures in order to
have support for their special views". Burgon Says, "Even the orthodox were
capable of changing a reading for dogmatic reasons. Epiphanius states that the
Orthodox deleted he wept' from Luke 19 : 41 out of jealousy for the Lord's
divinity."
Irenaeus (130 - 200) A western Father. He was born in Asia Minor, and in his
youth was a disciple of the aged Polycarp. He laboured for some years
in Lyons (Gaul) and became its bishop in 177. He accused heretics of corrupting
the Scriptures. His major work "Against Heretics" (c l85) are about equal in
volume to those of all his preceding Fathers put together. He quotes the last twelve
verses of Mark. He quotes from every N.T. book except Philemon and III John.
Thus the dimensions of the Now Testament canon recognized by Irenaeus are very
close to what we hold today. [1]
Ignatius, bishop of Antioch in Syria, is known mainly as the author of 7 letters that
had exceptional influence in the early church. A Catholic Encyclopedia article is
online at St. Ignatius ofAntioch. He was apparently anxious to counteract the
teachings of two groups: the Judaizers, who did not accept the authority of the
New Testament (although the NT did not really exist at that time); and
the Docetists, who held that Christ's sufferings and death were only apparent. The
letters have often been cited to determine what beliefs were held in the early
church Ignatius does not refer to older Christian writings by name. [2]
But these heretics were the True Christians (Acts 22:4, 24:14) who followed the
Law.
The Ebionites were stigmatized by the Church as heretics who failed to understand
that Jesus was a divine person and asserted instead that he was a human being who
came to inaugurate a new earthly age. Moreover, the Ebionites refused to accept
the Church doctrine, derived from Paul, that Jesus abolished or abrogated the
Torah, the Jewish law. Instead, the Ebionitesobserved the Jewish law and regarded
themselves as Jews. The Ebionites were not heretics, as the Church asserted,
nor 're-Judaizers', as modern scholars call them, but the authentic successors of
the immediate disciples and followers of Jesus, whose views and doctrines they
faithfully transmitted, believing correctly that they were derived from Jesus
himself. They were the same group that had earlier been called the Nazarenes, who
were led by James and Peter, who had known Jesus during his lifetime, and were
in a far better position to know his aims than Paul, who met Jesus only in
dreams and visions. Thus the opinion held by the Ebionites about Paul is of
extraordinary interest and deserves respectful consideration, instead of dismissal as
'scurrilous' propaganda -- the reaction of Christian scholars from ancient to modern
times The Ebionites are thus by no means a negligible or derisory group. Their
claim to represent the original teaching of Jesus has to be taken
seriously (Hyam Maccoby, The Myth Maker: Paul and the Invention of
Christianity)
The Nazarenes/Ebionites were labeled as heretics because they refused to accept the
innovations of Paul. The early Jewish sects identified Jesus as Messiah, but they
rejected the Pauline New Testament [1].
In the solitude of the Arabian desert, he had marked out a course of action for
himself in which he would not accept any interference or advice. Had he discussed
this matter with the apostles or taken any of them into his confidence, it would
mean a definite setback to his scheme of preaching a modified religion to the
Gentiles. The apostles would have very strongly opposed the whole idea, and
would have denounced the whole idea as an abomination. There is ample proof
provided by the New Testament that the Disciples and the earliest followers of
Jesus abhorred the innovations of Paul. (A.D. Ajijola, The Myth of the Cross)
None of these doctrines are to be found within the gospels. They were not taught
by Jesus. They were the fruits of Pauls innovations and the influence of Greek
culture and philosophy.Paul never experienced the company nor the direct
transmission of knowledge from Jesus. Before his conversion, he vigorously
persecuted the followers of Jesus, and after it he was largely responsible for
abandoning the code of behaviour of Jesus when he took Christianity to the nonJews of Greece and beyond. (ibid, p. 196)
Jesus was teaching his disciples in the outer court of the Temple and one of them
said unto him: Master, it is said by the priests that without shedding of blood there
is no remission. Can then the blood offering of the law take away sin? And Jesus
answered: No blood offering, of beast or bird, or man, can take away sin, for
how can the conscience be purged from sin by the shedding of innocent blood?
Nay, it will increase the condemnation. (Gospel of the Nazarenes)
Christianity, or one would rather say "Christianities," of the second and third
centuries were a highly variegated phenomenon. We really can't imagine
Christianity as a unified coherent religious movement. Certainly there were some
religious organizations.... There were institutions developing in some Christian
churches, but only in some. And this was not universal by any means. We know
from, for example, the literature recovered at Nag Hammadi,
that gnostic Christianity didn't have the kind of clear hierarchy that other forms of
Christianity had developed. They still clung to a charismatic leadership model.
And so there was a lot of variety in 2nd and 3rd century Christianity [2]
Here is what they believed about Paul:
The Ebionites, or Nazarenes, who were the first Christians, rejected all the
Epistles of Paul and regarded him as an imposter. They reported, among other
things, that he was originally a pagan; that he came to Jerusalem where he lived
some time; and that having a mind to marry the daughter of a high priest, he
caused himself to be circumcised. But, that not being able to obtain her, he
quarreled with the Jews and wrote against circumcision, and against observing the
Sabbath and against all the legal ordinance. (The Age of Reason by Thomas
Paine, p. 167)
'They declare that he was a Greek ... He went up to Jerusalem, they say, and when
he had spent some time there, he was seized with a passion to marry the daughter
of the priest. For this reason he became a proselyte and was circumcised. Then,
when he failed to get the girl, he flew into a rage and wrote against circumcision
and against the sabbath and the Law' (Epiphanius,Panarion, 30.16.6-9)
The Greek version of Matthew is allegedly a translation of a previous gospel called

Gospel According to Hebrews.
The Gospel According to the Hebrews was a work of early Christian literature,
already known by the mid 2nd century AD, to which reference is frequently made
by the church fathers during the first five centuries of the Christian
era, andlgk of which some twenty or more fragments, have been preserved by
quotations in their writings.
The book itself has completely disappeared. All that survives to us from the
'Gospel of the Hebrews' are the quotations, made by Clement, Origen, Jerome, and
Cyril of Jerusalem. Jerome took a lively interest in this book, an Aramaic copy of
which he found in the famous library at Caesarea in Palestine. More than once he
tells us (and with great pride) that he made translations of it into Greek and Latin.
These translations, which would have made the Gospel of the Hebrews readily
available to the Western church, have also not survived. [2]
Many scholars reject the idea that Matthew is a translation.
Distinct unity of plan, an artificial arrangement of subject-matter, and a simple,
easy style--much purer than that of Mark--suggest an original rather than a
translation.
Although the phraseology is not more Hebraic than in the other Gospels, still it not
much less so. To sum up, from the literary examination of the Greek Gospel no
certain conclusion can be drawn against the existence of a Hebrew Gospel of
which our First Gospel would be a translation; and inversely, this examination
does not prove the Greek Gospel to be a translation of an Aramaic original. (The
Catholic Encyclopedia, [2]
Most contemporary scholars, based on analysis of the Greek in the Gospel of
Matthew and use of sources such as the Greek Gospel of Mark, conclude that the
New Testament Book of Matthew was written originally in Greek and is not a
translation from Hebrew or Aramaic. If they are correct, then the Church
Fathers such as Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and Jeromepossibly referred to a
document or documents distinct from the present Gospel of Matthew. A smaller
number of scholars believe the ancient writings that Matthew was originally in
Aramaic, arguing for Aramaic primacy. These scholars normally consider
the Peshitta and Old Syriac versions of the New Testament closest to the original
autographs. [3]
The Gospel of Matthew is not a translation, the Gospel According to Hebrews was
probably a gospel based on oral traditions.
Matthew put together the oracles [of the Lord] in the Hebrew language, and each
one interpreted them as best he could. (Fragments of Papias [1]
Yet, the Dutch scholar Erasmus (1516 CE) said:
"It does not seem probable to me that Matthew wrote in Hebrew, since no one
testifies that he has seen any trace of such a volume." [2]
It is possible the gospel Matthew borrowed from the Gospel of Hebrews because
the gospel was quite similar. The Greek Matthew contains 2500 lines; the Hebrews
gospel had only 2200 lines. Yet, the Hebrews gospel was compiled by Hebrew
Christians, the Greek Matthew is compiled by Gentile Christians.
"The ancient tradition that the author was the disciple and apostle of Jesus named
Matthew (see 10:3) is untenable because the gospel is based, in large parts, on the
Gospel according to Mark (almost all the verses of that gospel have been utilized
in this) and it is hardly likely that a companion of Jesus would have followed so
extensively an account that came from one who admittedly never had such an
association rather than rely on his own memories. The attribution of the gospel to
the disciple Matthew may have been due to his having been responsible for some
of the traditions found in it, but that is far from certain." (The New American
Bible, Introduction to Matthew)
"Early tradition ascribed this Gospel to the apostle Matthew, but scholars
nowadays almost all reject this view. The author whom we can still conveniently
call Mathew has plainly drawn on the mysterious 'Q', which may have been a
collection of oral traditions." (Bilal Philips, The Message of Jesus Christ, p. 23)
The scholar Robert Price casts doubt on Papias:
Papias was the bishop of Hierapolis, the third in a triangle of cities
with Laodicea and Colossae (both mentioned in the New Testament). Papias was
an antiquarian who researched as much as he could about the earliest Christians.
He compiled what he could scrape up into a book, now lost, called The Oracles of
the Our Lord. The book appears, from the surviving quotations of it, to have been
filled with gross legend, misattributed quotations, and misinformation. Writing
about 130 C.E., Papias says this about the origin of the only two gospels he
knew
But are we sure Papias is even referring to our familiar gospels of Matthew and
Mark? From his description of the Peter-Mark document, he might as easily be
talking about the Ebionitework The Preachings of Peter. And as
D.E. Nineham notes, our Mark does not sound like anyones table talk. And
Matthew? Our Matthew was certainly not originally composed in Hebrew or
Aramaic, for the simple reason that most of it is the reproduced text of the Greek
Mark! (For the same reason, the evangelist cannot have been the disciple Matthew,
since an eyewitness of Jesus would scarcely crib from a book written by someone
who hadnt been one!)
There remains one last consideration. It is striking to realize that we have no actual
text of Papias, only a set of quotations in various ancient authors, and it seems
rather strange that we do not have it. After all, it would seem to have been a widely
respected and nonheretical repository of lore from the earliest days of Christianity.
If it ever existed, that is. It seems worth asking if Papias simply functioned as a
blanket attestation for any stray bit of lore or speculations about early Christianity
and its heroes
Since we have no text of Papias at all and no manuscript of Irenaeus as old as
Eusebius, it becomes reasonable to treat the passages we have quoted
from Papias and Irenaeus as no older than Eusebiuss Ecclesiastical History. For
us, they are no more than apologetical garnishes to that fourth-century treatise and
may be no older. (The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, pp. 37-38)
The disciple Matthew didnt write Matthew (the Greek version), nor did Matthew
compose the Gospel according to Hebrews but Papias reports he merely preached
the Logia to the Hebrews. Subsequently the Hebrews produced the gospel in written
form. The disciple was already dead when the Greek gospel was forged in his name.
Most date Matthew about 80 C.E. because Matthew uses Mark, almost all of Mark.
Essentially he was producing a corrected and expanded edition of Mark for the use
of his own missionaries (analogous to the circle of missionaries supervised by the
Elder in the Johannine Epistles). Apologists figure they have to allow a decade
from the early date assigned to Mark to give Matthew time to have gotten hold of
Mark, become familiar with it, and worked up a new version. But this is way too
early. We must allow more than a decade, in all probability, for
theMatthean revision of Mark to have gone through at least two stages. For
instance, someone had added the regulation that missionaries not go among
unwashed Samaritans and Gentiles (10:5), while a later Matthean redactor has
opened up the evangelistic mission to all the nations (28:19). The original section
contrasting true piety with hypocritical (6:1-6, 16-18) has been interrupted by
verses 7-15, addenda on prayer that ruin the structure. And as Arlo J. Nau has
demonstrated, an initial Matthean redactor must have rehabilitated Marks
insulting portrait of Peter, while a later Matthean redactor has gone and
punctured Petrine pretensions anew. How long before Matthew even got a look at
Mark? Then how long had it been used in his church community before someone
felt the need to revise it? And then how long, in how many stages, did it take?
Matthew must at the earliest have appeared in the mid-second century. (Robert
Price, The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, p. 33)
The first historical mention of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, was made
by the Christian Father, St. Irenaeus, about the year 190 A.D. The only earlier
mention of any of the Gospels was made by Theopholis of Antioch, who
mentioned the Gospel of John in 180 A.D. [1]
None of these authors identifies himself. Who were they? Were they honest? Did
they have first-hand knowledge or accurate sources? We don't know. The first
record we have of anybody clearly associating the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke,
and John with these books was Irenaeus in 180 AD, a century and a half after the
reported events. [2]
In fact, none of the Gospels were produced in the 1 st century.
In reality, the four gospels selected for inclusion in the New Testament do not
make any appearance in the literary and archaeological record until the last quarter
of the 2nd century, between 170 and 180 C.E., and even then they are not much
mentioned for a couple of decades. In this regard, Church Fathers and archbishop
of Constantinople John Chrysostom (c. 347-407) stated that the names traditionally
attached to the canonical gospels were first designated at the end of the second
century (Acharya S, The Suns of God)
"The Four Gospels were unknown to the early Christian Fathers. Justin Martyr, the
most eminent of the early Fathers, wrote about the middle of the second century.
His writings in proof of the divinity of Christ demanded the use of these Gospels
had they existed in his time. He makes more than 300 quotations from the books of
the Old Testament, and nearly one hundred from the Apocryphal books of the New
Testament; but none from the four Gospels. (The Book Your Church Doesnt Want
You to Read, (*)
The Hadith of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is based on isnad (chain of narration). But
Jesus traditions have no isnad; the sources of the Gospels are Q, Mark, L, and M
according to the Four-Source Hypothesis.
The two-source hypothesis states that Matthew and Luke independently copied
Mark for its narrative framework and independently added discourse material from
a non-extant sayings collection called Q. Much work has gone into the extent and
wording of Q, particularly since the discovery of the Gospel of Thomas which
attests to the sayings gospel genre. Holtzmann's1863 theory posited an Ur-Marcus
in the place of our Mark, with our Mark being a later revision. Some scholars
occasionally propose an unattested revision of Mark, a deutero-Mark, being the
base of what Matthew and Luke used. Streeter (1924) further refined the TwoSource Hypothesis into a Four-Source Hypothesis, with an M and an L being a
unique source to Matthew and Luke respectively, with Q and L combined into a
Proto-Luke before Luke added Mark. [1]
The Gospels were not handed down (person by person) through a chain of narrators.
The Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) are reliable because we can verify its
authenticity. Also, we know the reporters name whereas the Gospels are anonymous.
How do we know what Jesus (peace be upon him) said? (It is impossible to know
for certain whether the sentences attributed to Jesus (peace be upon him) in the NT
were actually uttered by him. This is because missionaries have no isnads to
trace Jesus's (peace be upon him) words back to him!)
What is isnad? Isnad is the chain of narration. The Christians have the matn (text)
of their scripture but no isnad (chain of narration). Hence it is impossible to trace
back the alleged words attributed to Jesus (peace be upon him) all the way back to
his mouth. How can it be known that the Christian material is not mixed with
falsehood when there is an absence of isnads and no verification checks in place
at all. Hence the believers in the NT are all following utter conjecture and
anonymous words whose source we cannot know and neither can we trace back
the words or verify them. [1]
The Christian 'hadth' is composed of matn (text) but no isnad (chain of narration).
Without isnad, as cAbdullah b. al-Mubarak said, anyone can claim anything saying
that it is coming from the authority. The authorities in the case of Christian 'hadth'
are the Apostles and later day Church Fathers. But how can one be sure that the
Christian 'hadth' is not mixed with falsehood without the proper isnad and its
verification? [2]
Most Greek-speaking authors heard these traditions in the Aramaic vernacular

and committed them to writing in Greek. None of these writings is dated prior to
the year 70 C.E.; there is not a single instance in these works where the author has
cited an authority for an event or maxim attributed to Jesus (peace be upon him) in
order that we might construct a chain of transmission. Furthermore, even their
works have not survived. Thousands of Greek manuscripts of the New Testament
were collected, but none of them is older than the fourth century C.E.; rather the
origin of most of them does not go beyond the period intervening between the 11th
and the 14th centuries.
Now take the second attribute of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) by which he stands
unique among all Prophets(pbut) and leaders of religion. Just as the Book
transmitted to him, amounts of his character have also been preserved to serve as a
beacon for us in all walks of life. From early childhood to the close of his life, a
large number of those who saw him, witnessed the events of his life and heard his
conversation, addresses, exhortations or warnings, had retained them in memory
and passed them onto their successors. Some of the research scholars believe that
the number of those who had passed on to the next generation eyewitness accounts
or reports of events that they had heard during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet
(pbuh) number a hundred thousand people. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself
dictated some commands and handed or dispatched them to certain people. These
were later bequeathed to the succeeding generations.
There were at least six Companions (pbut) who had recorded the Traditions of
the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and tested the authenticity of their records by reading
them out to the HolyProphet(pbuh). These writings were also inherited by
posterity. After the death of the Holy Prophet(pbuh), some fifty Companions (pbut)
undertook to collect accounts of the circumstances and incidents of the Prophet's
life and his holy utterances. The material gathered from this source also came into
the hands of those who later accomplished the task of collecting and compiling the
Traditions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh).
Besides, as I have mentioned earlier, the number of the Companions who
transmitted orally their knowledge of the Holy Prophet's character(pbuh) runs to
one hundred thousand, according to the estimate of some researchers. Little
wonder, when we take into account the fact that the Holy Prophet (pbuh)
performed his last Hajj, known as the Farewell Pilgrimage, in the company of one
hundred and forty thousand people! All these believers saw him at the time of Hajj,
learned from him the rituals of Hajj and listened to the addresses which the Holy
Prophet (pbuh) delivered during this last Pilgrimage. It is improbable that when
this assembly, who had attended such an important occasion as the Hajj, disperse
to their own homes, their friends, relations and fellow-citizens should not have
questioned them on the circumstances of their journey or failed to ascertain from
them the injunctions about Hajj. One can well judge from this, after the Holy
Prophet (pbuh) had departed from the world, how eagerly the people must have
questioned those who had seen him and listened to his speech, on the details of his
life, his sacred utterances, commands and instructions.
The procedure that had been adopted from the beginning regarding the traditions
bequeathed to the later generations by the illustrious Companions(pbut) was that
whoever ascribed an event or saying to the Holy Prophet(pbuh) had to state his
source and furnish a chain of evidence. In this way, the sources of a particular
tradition were traced through all connecting links back to the time of the
Holy Prophet(pbuh) in order to determine whether their connection with the person
of the Prophet of God (pbuh) was demonstrably true. If any links were found to be
missing in the chain of transmission, the authenticity of the tradition fell into
suspicion. When in the cast of a tradition, a complete line of evidence had been set
up to the time of the HolyProphet(pbuh), and even one of the reporters along the
line had been recognized as unreliable, the tradition was discarded. If you ponder
this a while, you will realize that circumstances relating to no other man in history
have been recorded with such rigorous scrutiny. It is the distinction
of Muhammed (pbuh) that no tradition ascribed to him has been accepted, save on
authority. And while looking for the authority of a tradition, it was not considered
sufficient to establish a chain of evidence up to the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh)
, but each one of the successive transmitters was carefully scrutinized as well so as
to determine his or her reliability. For this purpose, the circumstances of all the
reporters were thoroughly investigated and full-scale books were compiled. Setting
forth details as to who was trustworthy and who was not; what sort of character
and personality each of them had; whose memory was sound and whoseweak.
(Abul Ala Mawdudi, The Message of the Prophets Seerah, [1]
Here is good explanation of Luke 1:3 by brother Sami Zaatari:
Luke is not inspired by God nor receives any revelations from God, Luke simply
says that it will be good for him to also write an account of things that happened,
the things which are believed among the people. Also note Luke writes this Gospel
simply for a man named Theophilus so that he believes in these things. So
basically the Gospel of Luke was written addressed to one man, and simply a work
of collecting quotes, and information from eye-witness accounts.
There is nothing inspired in Luke, nor is anything revealed from God unto Luke,
Luke is simply making an account of how things happened. In fact the work Luke
does here is very similar to the works of Bukhari and Muslim in how they
collected and made volumes of hadiths. They collected sayings of the prophet
Muhammad from his companions and eye-witnesses, and also showed stories as
told by eye-witnesses and so on. This is exactly as the Gospel of Luke, the only
difference is that we do not call the hadiths the word of God, like Christians do
with the Gospel of LukeSo one must ask how in the world is the Gospel of Luke
an inspiration and revelation from God?
We dont know exactly who translated the Logia (words) of Jesus to the Gentile
community (Asia Minor, Rome, Greece, and Egypt). Jesus spoke Aramaic, not Greek.
The immediate followers of Jesus spoke Aramaic. So the sayings were translated from
Aramaic into Greek. The entire New Testament was composed in Greek.
Jesus taught his disciples as he moved about, and his words were first passed
around by word of mouth. The gospels portray Jesus as one who speaks, not as one
who writes. Jesus' native tongue was Aramaic. We do not know whether he could
speak Hebrew as well. His words have been preserved only in Greek, the original
language of all the surviving gospels. If Jesus could not speak Greek, we must
conclude that his exact words have been lost forever. (Robert W. Funk, The Five
Gospels, p. 1p. 3)
Jesus spoke Aramaic; therefore the general implication that arises is that his gospel
would be in Aramaic, which is very close to Arabic, the language of the Koran.
However, all the manuscripts of the present-day New Testament are
in Koine Greek. If Jesus spoke Aramaic, why are his gospels in Greek? Why are
there gospels in the plural when Jesus spoke of one gospel (Mark 10:29etc.)?
Which gospel is the "word of God" since they add or take away from each other
and even contradict each other? (Muhammad Asadi, Is the Bible Gods Word?)
Due to passage of time, the Logia (words) of Jesus were changed and distorted.
The Jesus Seminar confirms the sayings of Jesus are lost forever as the result of
translation.
Jesus wrote nothing, so far as we know. We do not know for certain that Jesus
could write; we are not even positive that he could read, in spite of suggestions in
the gospels that he could. His first followers were technically illiterate, so writing
did not become a part of the Christian movement until persons like Paul became
involved. Orality and memory Jesus taught his followers orally. He was a traveling
sage who traded in wisdom, the counterpart of the traveling merchant who traded
in soft and hard goods. Jesus taught his disciples as he moved about, and his words
were first passed around by word of mouth. The gospels portray Jesus as one who
speaks, not as one who writes. Jesus' disciples also responded to his teaching
orally: they repeated his most memorable words to one another and to outsiders.
They, too, adapted Jesus' words to new situations, improvising and inventing as the
occasion demanded. Transmitters of oral tradition do not ordinarily remember the
exact wording of the saying or parable they are attempting to quote. They normally
have no written records to which they can refer, and the versions they themselves
had heard varied from occasion to occasion. (Robert W. Funk, The Five Gospels, p.
1)
Some readers of this work will perhaps be surprised or embarrassed to learn that
certain of Jesus sayings, parables, or predictions of His destiny were not expressed
in the way we read them today, but were altered and adapted by those who
transmitted them to us. (Maurice Bucaille, The Bible The Quran and Science, p.
88)
There is hardly any record of his code of behavior. The books in the New
Testament do not even contain eye-witness accounts of his sayings and actions.
They were written by people who derived their knowledge second-hand. These
records are not comprehensive. Everything which Jesus said and did which has not
been recorded has been lost forever. (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet
of Islam, p. 195)
The Gospels were written by people more interested in a living Lord present in
their midst than in Jesus the historical man from Nazareth. Many scholars now
hold that much of what is placed on the lips of Jesus in the Gospels was put there
by Gospel writers (just as the writers of Hellenistic history placed speeches on the
lips of famous persons). It is really the understanding that Gospels are faith
documents that has led to what is called the quest for the historical Jesus.
(Bonnie Thurston, Women in the New Testament, p. 63)
It is difficult to know whether the words or sayings attributed to Jesus are written
exactly as he spoke them. (St. Joseph Medium Size Edition, p.23)
His pure and true words were adulterated and mixed with legend (David
Benjamin, Muhammad in the Bible, p. 84)
Some of the events in the early mission of Jesus] were not strictly true but were
added to the story of Jesus by the early Christians to express their faith in him as a
Messiah." [London Daily Mail, page 12, 15/July/1984]
Only 16% of all events whereby Jesus was the principal actor are historically
accurate and only 18% of the Jesus sayingsprimarily parables and aphorismsare historically accurate [1]
Mark contains the earliest words of Jesus, so Matthew and Luke changed the sayings
for their own purpose. The NT manuscripts are not identical.
There was little hesitation in reshaping materials to exclude whatever did not suit
the particular editors point of view, or in substituting other formulae of his own
composition and expanding or abridging after his own pleasure. The proof of this,
for contemporary New Testament scholars and even the attentive lay student, can
be seen in the somewhat cavalier way in which both Matthew and Luke treat the
Gospel of Mark (which both, quite obviously, had before them as they compiled
their own); they leave material out, make changes, and add to it at will.
ElainePagels, author of Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas, reminds us
that what survived as orthodox Christianity did so by suppressing and forcibly
eliminating a lot of other material. (Tom Harper, The Pagan Christ, p. 142)
Thus Gospels were produced which clearly reflected the conception of the
practical needs of the community for which they were written. In them the
traditional material was used, but these was no hesitation in altering it or making
additions to it, or in leaving out what did not suit the writers purpose.
(T.G. Tuncker: The History of the Christians in the Light of Modern Knowledge, p.
320)
There is naturally much more manuscript variation in the gospel sayings than in
the narrative sections, since it was the sayings that were repeatedly reinterpreted.
Such variants are to be expected in any text which existed only as different
manuscripts for many hundreds of years before it could be printed in the form of
thousands of identical copies; for every single manuscript is the artifact of an
individual scribe, who could introduce errors or what heor his patron or his
particular religious communitytook for improvements. (G.A. Wells, The Jesus
Myth, p. 4)
"There is considerable manuscript variation in what Jesus says on divorce, and
whether Luke has a doctrine of the atonement depends on which manuscripts of
his account of the Last Supper are to be taken as giving the original reading...The
International Greek NT's apparatus of Luke provides what the Birmingham
theologian D. Parker reckons to be "upwards of 30,000 variants for that Gospel, so
that we have, for example, 81 in the Lord's Prayer." He adds:
"We do not possess the Greek New Testament. What we have is a mass of
manuscripts, of which only about three hundred date from before A.D. 800. A
mere thirty-four of these are older than A.D. 400, of which only four were at any
time complete. All these differ, and all at one time or another had authority as the
known text." [ D. Parker, 'Scripture is Tradition', Theology, 94 [1991], p. 12. Cf.
P.M. Head's article 'Christology and Textual Transmission: Reverential Alterations
in the Synoptic Gospels' (Novum Testamentum, 35 [1993], p. 111). [1]
The immediate disciples of Jesus were the 12 apostles who preserved the Logia
(words) of Jesus. Eventually, the Logia passed to the Gentile Christians, the followers
of Paul.
As the Pauline Church grew more established, it became increasingly hostile to the
followers of Jesus. It aligned itself more and more with the rulers of the Roman
Empire, and the persecution which to begin with had been directed at all who
called themselves Christians, now began to fall mainly on those who affirmed the
Divine Unity. Attempts began to be made to change their beliefs and forcefully to
remove those who refused to do so, together with the books they used. Most of the
early martyrs were Unitarians. The more the doctrine of Trinity became accepted,
the more its adherents opposed those who affirmed the Divine Unity.
(Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition)
From the time Jesus left earth to the second half of the Second Century, there was
a struggle between two factions. One was what one might call Pauline Christianity
and the other Judeo-Christianity. It was only very slowly that the first supplanted
the second, and Pauline Christianity triumphed over Judeo-Christianity.
(Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, The Quran, and Science, p. 70)
The Roman Catholic Church destroyed the Hebrew gospels of the Ebionites,
eradicating the original sayings of Jesus. Only the four Gospels were accepted and the
rest were destroyed as forgeries. How do we know the Gospels are not also forgeries?
The reason why the Church selected these Gospels is because they were favored by
the Church fathers Origen, Clement, andIranaeus.
In 325 A.D., the famous Council of Nicea was held. The doctrine of the Trinity
was declared to be the official doctrine of the Pauline Church, and one of the
consequences of this decision was that out of the three hundred or so Gospels
extant at that time, four were chosen as the official Gospels of the Church. The
remaining Gospels, including the Gospel of Barnabas, were ordered to be
destroyed completely. It was also decided that all Gospels written in Hebrew
should be destroyed. An edict was issued stating that would found in possession
of anunauthorised Gospel would be put to death.
According to one source, there were at least 270 versions of the Gospel at this
time, while another states there were as many as 4,000 different Gospels... It was
decided that all the Gospels remaining under the table should be burned... It
became a capital offence to possess an unauthorised Gospel. As a result, over a
million Christians were killed in the years following the Council's decisions. This
was how Athanasius tried to achieve unity among the Christians Unfortunately,
books like The Travels and Teachings of the Apostles were destroyed by the
Pauline Church, once it had adopted the doctrine of Trinity, in its attempts to
eliminate any record which contradicted this dogma. Therefore, much that was
known about Barnabas and the early Christians has been lost. (Jesus Prophet of
Islam)
Here is exactly what happened, the powerhouse of fraud was Rome. The Pauline
Christians copied the Logia from the Jewish Christians, and then destroyed their
churches (synagogues). Similarly, the Pauline Church borrowed from the pagans, and
then destroyed the evidence!
Christianity began as a cult with almost wholly Pagan origins and motivations in
the first century, and by the fourth it had utterly turned its back on Paganism and
repudiated very hint of. . . connection with it, loading it with contempt from that
day to this (Tom Harper, The Pagan Christ, pp. 51)
The Christian writers not only introduced new doctrines, legends, miracles and
so forth most of which we can trace to antecedent Pagan sources but they took
pains to destroy the Pagan records and so obliterate the evidence of their own
dishonesty. (Edward Carpenter, Pagan & Christian Creeds, p. 205)
The author Lloyd Graham explains:
The destruction of all evidence of Christianitys Gnostic and pagan source was
the first work. It was the evangelists themselves who started it, in Antioch, as
stated in Acts. Speaking of just such things the Emperor Julian said he would deal
with them more at length, when we begin to explore the monsterous deeds and
fraudulent machinations of the evangelists. And of their followers, Edward
Carpenter wrote thus: they took special pains to destroy the pagan records and
so obliterate the evidence of their own dishonesty. By order of the Church the
books of the Gnostic Basilides were burned, likewise Porphyrys thirty-six
volumes. Pope Gregory VII burned the Apollo library filled with ancient lore.
Emperor Theodosius had 27,000 schools of the Mysteries papyrus scrolls burned
because they contained the doctrinal basis of the Gospels. By offering rich rewards
Ptolemy Philadelphus gathered 270,000 ancient documents; these too were burned
for the same reason. As someone has said, the early Christians heated their baths
with the Ancient Wisdom. And what knowledge they may have contained! (Lloyd
Graham,Deceptions and Myths of the Bible, pp. 443-444)
The early Church tried to destroy the parallels by book burning, assassination, and
other fraud. Now if Christianity were true, the Christians wouldnt have any reason to
destroy the pagan documents, they obliterated the evidence to COVER UP the fraud.
The Resurrection Hoax:

By Abdullah Kareem
The resurrection of Jesus is a hoax because Mark, the earliest gospel, never contained
the story. The resurrection passages were later added to Mark, and his gospel was
changed by Matthew and Luke, the Gospel writers are anonymous. It was necessary
for Matthew and Luke to change Mark according to their own understanding, they
also relied upon the Q source. Regarding the Gospel of John, its completely different
and draws upon ambiguous sources. The oldest manuscripts of the New Testament are
Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, both of these Greek manuscripts have no ending for
Mark!
Mark is the first gospel to be written:
A central working hypothesis of this book and one of the most widely held
findings in modem New Testament study is that Mark was the first canonical
Gospel to be composed and that the authors of Matthew and Luke (and possibly
John) used Mark's Gospel as a written source. (Randal Helms, Gospel Fictions, p.
23)
Mark was the first writer to record the crucifixion, yet he was NOT an eye-witness!
The author of Mark, the earliest of the narrative gospels, was not an eyewitness:
he is reporting information conveyed to him by a third person or persons,
who themselves were quite possible not eye-witnesses (Robert Walter Funk, The
Jesus Seminar: The Acts of Jesus, p. 4)
Here is what Christian scholar Mack Burton says:
There is no reference to Jesus death as a crucifixion in the pre-Markan Jesus
material (Who Wrote the New Testament? p. 87)
This means the Gospel writers fabricated the resurrection story. The legend of Jesus
resurrection developed over a period of time. This explains why Paul, the earliest
Christian writer, never records the Gospel version. Paul only says Jesus was crucified
for the sins of mankind and he rose from the dead, which does not explain
anything.
Paul asserts that Jesus was crucified, yet he fails to mention any details which would
later be recorded in the gospels.
We must keep in mind that Paul knew nothing of an event called the ascension that
was separate or different from Jesus' resurrection. Paul's writings contain no hint of
the two-stage process that would develop later, where resurrection brought Jesus
from the grave back to life and ascension then took Jesus from earth to heaven.
Paul's proclamation was that God had raised Jesus into God's very life. That was
Easter for Paul. For Paul there were no empty tombs, no disappearance from
the grave of the physical body, no physical resurrection, no physical
appearances of a Christ who would eat fish, offer his wounds for inspection, or rise
physically into the sky after an appropriate length of time. None of these ideas can
be found in reading Paul. For Paul the body of Jesus who died was perishable,
weak, physical. The Jesus who was raised was clothed by the raising God with a
body fit for God's kingdom. It was imperishable, glorified, and spiritual. (John
Shelby Spong, Resurrection: Myth or Reality, p. 241)
The most striking feature of the early documents is that they do not set Jesus life
in a specific historical situation. There is no Galilean ministry, and there are no
parables, no miracles, no Passion in Jerusalem, no indication of time, place of
attendant circumstances at all. The words Calvary, Bethlehem, Nazareth, and
Galilee never appear in the early epistles, and the wordJerusalem is never used
there in connection with Jesus (Doherty, pp. 68, 73). Instead, Jesus figures as a
basically supernatural personage who took the likeness of man, emptied then
of his supernatural powers Phil 2:7. (G.A. Wells, Can We Trust the New
Testament? p. 3)
Pauls account of Jesus resurrection contradicts the Gospels:
The first thing we need to force into our minds is that when Paul wrote these
words, there were no such things as written Gospels. This means that the
accounts of Jesus resurrection so familiar to us, as told by these Gospel writers,
were by and large unknown to Paul and to Pauls readers (Resurrection: Myth or
Reality?, p. 48)
For Paul there were no empty tombs, no disappearance from the grave of the
physical body, no physical resurrection, no physical appearances of a Christ who
would eat fish, offer his wounds for inspection, or rise physically into the sky after
an appropriate length of time. None of these ideas can be found in reading Paul.
For Paul the body of Jesus who died was perishable, weak, physical. The Jesus
who was raised was clothed by the raising God with a body fit for God's kingdom.
It was imperishable, glorified, and spiritual. (ibid, p. 241)
What does this mean? The resurrection accounts in the four Gospels contradict the
testimony of Paul. Hence, Paul contradicts the Gospels on a simple event which is
supposed to be the foundation of Christian religion.
If Paul is the first writer, then he must be relaying the earliest tradition, yet the
Gospels, written many decades later, record an entirely different story. This certainly
proves that the resurrection was fabricated in the oral tradition, because theres not a
single reference to the resurrection by historians like Philo Judaeus, and the testimony
of Josephus is wholly agreed to be a forgery.
Paul contradicts the Gospels:
'For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died
for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on
the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas,
then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than 500 brethren at one time, most
of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to
James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared
also to me.' 1 Corinthians 15:3-9
There are several problems with this passage.
(1). There was no third day prophecy in the Old Testament. [1]
(2). There is no evidence that five-hundred people saw Jesus [2]
(3). Paul says Jesus first appeared to Peter, yet the Gospels say Jesus first appeared to
women! (Matt 28:1)
(4). Peter disbelieved that Jesus was alive (resurrected).
(5). Paul implies that Judas did not hang himself, he was still alive (contradicts Matt.
27:5).
(6). Paul describes the body of Jesus to be spiritual (1Cor 15:42). Yet the Gospels say
Jesus was physical.
Mark does not have the resurrection:
All things considered, then, Mark does not begin his story of Jesus very
satisfactorily. Indeed, within two or three decades of Mark's completion, there
were at least two, and perhaps three, different writers (or Christian groups) who
felt the need to produce an expanded and corrected version. Viewed from their
perspective, the Gospel of Mark has some major shortcomings: It contains no birth
narrative; it implies that Jesus, a repentant sinner, became the Son of God only at
his baptism; it recounts no resurrection appearances; and it ends with the very
unsatisfactory notion that the women who found the Empty Tomb were too afraid
to speak to anyone about it. (Randal Helms, Gospel Fictions, p. 34)
Almost all contemporary New Testament textual critics have concluded
that neither the longer or shorter endings were originally part of Marks
Gospel, though the evidence of the early church fathers above shows that the
longer ending had become accepted tradition. The United Bible Societies' 4th
edition of the Greek New Testament (1993) rates the omission of verses 9-20 from
the original Markan manuscript as "certain." For this reason, many modern Bibles
decline to print the longer ending of Mark together with the rest of the gospel, but,
because of its historical importance and prominence, it is often included as a
footnote or an appendix alongside the shorter ending. [1]
The Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus do not record the resurrection:
Matthew 16:2 f. is omitted, Mark ends at 16:8, Luke 22:43 f., John 5:4 and
the Pericope de adultera are omitted. The doxology of Romans comes after
16:23. Hebrews follow immediately after II Thessalonians. [2]
The Longer Ending of Mark is preserved in the Byzantine texts, which are
interpolated. The Anglican scholars Westcott and Hort discredited the Byzantine
(KJV) text. Yet, the oldest Greek manuscripts do not have the longer ending. The
Alexandrian (NIV) omits the longer ending (Aleph and B). The Anglican scholars
Westcott and Hort attest the Byzantine text was conflated in the 4 th century.
There are no Byzantine manuscripts before the fourth century when Lucian of
Syria conflated the various readings and produced what became the Byzantine or
Traditional Text. We know this is true because we have no Byzantine readings
before the middle of the fourth century, but we do have Alexandrian and Western
readings. Therefore, any second century reading which supports the third or fourth
century readings of the Alexandrian line are considered important and are offered
as proof that these textual lines are more original than the Byzantine line.
However, if a reading is found in these very same manuscripts which agrees with
the fourth century Byzantine reading, it is considered unimportant
and unconsequential. [1]
In Antioch the early form was polished stylistically, edited ecclesiastically, and
expanded devotionally. This was the origin of what is called the Koine text, later to
become the Byzantine Imperial text. Forth century tradition called it the text of
Lucian. [2]
Hort characterized the Byzantine text as 'late, conflated, heavily edited and revised',
whereas Hort extolled the Alexandrian text as 'pure, primitive, carefully corrected, and
neutral.
The Gospels are clear that no one witnessed Jesus resurrection. It was seen by NO
ONE.
Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them
with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which
had seen him after he wasrisen. (Mark 16:14)
It was Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other
women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles. And their
words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. (Luke 24:10-11)
The Greek and Roman historians

Very few Christians know that Gentile historians NEVER mentioned the resurrection
of Jesus. The Jewish philosopher Philo (50 CE) absolutely makes no reference to
Jesus crucifixion. The Christians are embarrassed that Philo lived during Jesus
lifetime and never mentioned his resurrection.
After the departure of Jesus, his teachings spread to North Africa and Egypt, but he
was not popular or widely known.
The following writers do not mention Jesus resurrection:
Philo-Judaeus
Martial
Arrian
Appian
Theon of Smyrna
Lucanus
Aulus Gellius
Seneca
Plutarch
Apollonius
Epictetus
Silius Italicus
Ptolemy
We challenge Christians to prove his resurrection. None of these writers mentioned
Jesus resurrection.
Q7: Does the Noble Quran in Verse 19:33

confirm Jesus' crucifixion?
A7: Here is what Noble Verse 19:33 states: "So peace is upon me [Jesus] the day I
was born, the day that I die, and the day that I shall be raised up to life." Trinitarian
Christians believe that Jesus was GOD Himself, or part of GOD, came to earth, was
crucified on the cross to purify our sins and then raised from death back to life and
went up to heaven until he will come back again to this earth. The Noble Quran does
not in anyway support this theory!. We Muslims believe that Jesus was born from a
Noble Virgin; Mary the Virgin, preached the word of GOD to the people of Israel,
raised to Allah Almighty alive (even though he might have been put on the cross, but
never actually died), will come back to earth again to fight the army of Satan and then
die a natural death and then be raised again back to life from death as we all do in the
Day of Judgement. Some Muslim scholars say that Jesus not being crucified in Noble
Verse 4:157 means that he was put on the cross but didn't die, and others say that it
means that he was not put on the cross itself and never died either. There are some
Christian sects such as the Basilidans, the Docetateand the Marcionite do not believe
that Jesus was put on the cross.
Either way, it doesn't really matter whether he was put on the cross or not. The more
important point is that Jesus never died according to Islam. There is a similar Verse
to 19:33 in the Noble Quran that was mentioned to another Messenger of GOD: "So
peace on him [Yahya, or John the Baptist] the day he was born, the day that he dies,
and the day that he will be raised up to life! (The Noble Quran, 19:15)" This Noble
Verse (19:15) is similar to 19:33, where it does not at all state that any Messenger of
GOD was crucified or will die twice!. The reason why no Messenger of GOD will
ever die twice is because Allah Almighty said clearly in His Noble Book that every
soul He creates (this includes all of His Messengers and Prophets even Jesus) shall
taste death once; "Nor will they [all humans who end up in heaven] there taste death,
except the first death; and He will preserve them from the penalty of the blazing fire.
(The Noble Quran, 44:56)"
Please visit Did Jesus get crucified according to Islam? to see how Jesus never died.

Psalm 116

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Psalm 116

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Psalm 116, 117 and 118 indisputably prove that Jesus Christ

never got crucified:

Psalm 116, 117 and 118:

A Summary of Psalm 91:

3. Christ will then not have any fear in him (Psalm

11. Important Note: Psalm 91 is speaking as a

me. (See Psalm 91:3, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 15 below)

watched the crucifixion of the doomed person.

9 If you make the Most High your dwelling even the

be delivered and honored (Psalm 91:15, Isaiah

(b)- Psalm 117-118:

2 Let Israel say: "His love endures forever."

In regards to Psalm 118:22, we it clearly referenced in the New Testament in the

1. Written by mysterious men.

And, it is also an indisputable fact that the Bible:

1. Is filled with ample contradictions, man's alterations, corruption, and false

Hebrews 5:7-8 confirm Islam's claim about Jesus never got

The Chapter of Hebrews 5, and emphasis

Chapter Psalm 91 clearly and indisputably

Notice how satan referred to Psalm 91 regarding the protection of Jesus.

Let us now take a look at Psalm 91:

refuge; his faithfulness will be your shield and rampart.

and the serpent.

Christ's call will be HEARD, and he will be delivered and

So how do we explain this contradiction

The Suffering Servant of Isaiah

Written by Abdullah Smith

Christians ignore the historical background of Isaiah 53 to claim that

Here is the prophecy:

The actual prophecy begins at Isaiah 52:13:

See, my servant will act wisely; he will be raised and lifted

Who is the Servant spoken here? The Bible identifies Israel:

"But you, O Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen,

"But now listen, O Jacob, my servant, Israel, whom I have

For the sake of Jacob my servant, of Israel my chosen, I

Therefore, the description cannot apply to him, but applies to Israel.

Just as there were many who were appalled at him his

This description speaks of Israels disfigured face, by affliction and

Israel is swallowed up: now shall they be among

The splendor of Israel was extinguished; their form was marred

The next verse says:

so will he sprinkle many nations, and kings will shut their

The description refers to Israel:

And your fame spread among the nations on account of your

Hebrew; Septuagint so will many nations marvel at him [1]

They all condemned him as worthy of death. Then some began

Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged,

Silius Italicus (Spain)

The scholar Muhammad Ataur-Raheem says:

Jesus was glorified and praised by all:

The next verse says:

The Bible refers to Israel as sheep to be slaughtered.

Israel did not open his mouth:

Jesus made the prophecy fail by opening his mouth.

The next verse says:

By oppression and judgment he was taken away. And who can

Israel was politically oppressed by Babylon king Nebuchadrezzar,

The Gentiles slaughtered the lamb that was assigned a grave

Also, the following verse matches Israel with Isaiah 53:9

God answered the prayer of Jesus:

During the days of Jesus' life on earth, he offered up prayers and

The verse signifies the restoration of Israel, or the resurrection.

The Suffering Servant of Isaiah

The Septuagint Version