Authored by Quennel Gale edited and enlarged by Sam Shamoun
Here we will investigate Osama's theories about who the real authors of the Bible were. He claims that the NIV mentions about the Bible not being the true word of God. However after reading this and looking at his allegations, you will see just how false his arguments really are.
Just who were the real authors of the Bible?
In this article, we will see actual quotes from the commentary of the NIV Bible; one of the most used Bibles among the Christian population world wide.
Before each Gospel in the New Testament, the NIV Bible has a commentary or an introductory section (which is few pages long) that talks a little bit about the history of that particular Chapter.
Let us examine these historical facts to see whether or not it is mature for Christians to really take every single word in all of the Gospels as the True Word of GOD Almighty. Please don't forget to read the conclusion section regarding what Allah Almighty says about those who try to corrupt the Bible in the Noble Quran.
We will examine Osama's claim about the Bible being corrupt and whether the NIV actually says what he claims. We will look at these commentaries as well as expose his silly idea of Bible corruption. He says that we shouldn't take the Bible as the full word of God. However this is the same thing the NIV commentators also do. After reading this article you will see that all Muslim claims to biblical corruption, including those by Osama are very reliant on misquotes.
From: R. Mercer To: truthspeaks@answering-christianity.com Subject: I Totally Agree Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2001 13:41:57 -0700
"What credibility does Christianity have when it scriptures are littered with such dangerous and obvious forgeries?"
You summed it up very well on your web page. That is my question entirely. Just what are we to believe? If forgeries have been proven to exist in the Bible, then how many more must there be? What about the chapters and verses we all guide our whole life/styles by? Are they forgeries, too?
This verse in Mark 16:17-18, has always bothered me. I have, and still do believe the rest of that passage (laying on of hands, healing the sick,...), so how can that part of the passage be true when the serpent part is forged?
I know the part on drinking any poison says "IF", but the part on taking up serpents says "SHALL", which has always been a problem for me to believe. Imagine us all being forced to take up serpents in order to serve God.
On the other hand, if this was forged, then that creates an even bigger concern for me. Not knowing what text in our Bible is authentic and what is not.
Thanks for letting me take up so much of your time. Like I said before, this passage always bothered me, probably more so than any other.
Thanks, once again. Good Day.
For one thing when you check out the name on Osama's page of his alleged Christian, you find out that you can't email him. We wonder why? Is Osama telling us that he isn't man enough to put a person's email to verify his claim along with allowing us to show both sides of the argument? It seems like this is the case. This information about Mark 16 is answered thoroughly in down in this paper.
That is fine, however the NIV commentary is the same throughout all NIV bibles. But we also appeal to both the NIV Study bible and the NIV Living Insights Bible, which came a year later.
NIV The Living Insights Study Bible Charles R. Swindoll Copyright 1996 by Zondervan Corporation ISBN 0-310-91882-0 | The NIV Study Bible, 10th Anniversary Edition Kenneth Barker. Copyright 1995: Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids, MI 49530, USA ISBN: 0-310-92589-4. |
Here we see that the NIV publishers and authors look at the Bible as God's own revelation and not corrupted as Osama says that they claim!!!
OPERATING FROM THE CONVICTION THAT THE BIBLE IS THE INSPIRED AND WHOLLY RELIABLE WORD OF GOD, the translators wanted to faithfully reproduce what the original Scripture writers wrote, in language that people could read and understand without difficulty. They were - and are - committed to the AUTHORITY AND INFALLIBILITY OF THE BIBLE. The NIV has become the bestselling translation of the Bible, with more than 100 million copies in print. (NIV ONLINE LETTER)
Not only is Osama a liar but he slanders the NIV committe by claiming that their version of the bible proves that God's word is corrupted!! The NIV committe continues by saying:
zondervan... a trusted evangelical publisher committed to communicating GOD'S REVELATION as accurately and reliably as possible. (NIV ONLINE LETTER)
Again we see that the NIV takes the bible as God's revelation, despite the evil and satanic slander of Osama Abdallah. He is such a loser who has to resort to outright lies to prove his point to desperate Muslims. Now lets look at the NIV preface which is present in all their bibles, here are some excerpts which throughly refute Osama Abdallah:
Since Osama believes that the original name of God is Allah, and he appeals to the NIV to prove his points on bible corruption, lets let the NIV answer his bogus claims:
See!! LORD, not Allah. Now lets let NIV conclude with this:
That sums it all. Osama's lie about the NIV claiming that the Bible is corrupt is a utterly false and has nothing to stand on other than his usual misquotes. We presented this information to Osama over and over and he has avoided it everytime, not even given a response as to how can the bible be corrupt according to the NIV, when they claim in the preface that it is the wholly inspired word of God. In order to fool his reader, Osama must constantly use the fallacy of exclusion by quoting parts here and there and eliminating other important material.
Exposing Osama's intentional slander
In this section Osama begins his assault on the New Testament.
OSAMA'S FALLACY: IF THE BOOK WASN'T WRITTEN BY THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR ONLY IT'S NOT GOD'S WORD.
If you notice throughout his paper, Osama has established a logically flawed argument due to the fact that he believes that if the author doesn't give his name or if it isn't written by the author it isn't the word of God. However Osama has nothing to base this conclusion on since he is using his opinion as a final standard to build his argument. Therefore since he has not shown any Biblical reference to prove his point, his whole argument is based on "MY OWN OPINION".
We have asked Osama over and over to show us where it is a explict rule that all the authors of the names of the book should write it. He has yet to produce this proof. He knows the difficulty of his position therefore he must ignore our challenge and then proceed with his usual slander.
"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"
&So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?
Osama attempts to interpolates his idea after posting part of the quote of the NIV. He then makes a unprovable accusation about the New testament not even being documented until 150 years later. Since he claims that the NIV proves this lets see what the NIV's Commentary on Mark says about these matters.
According to the NIV, the unanimous testimony to the authorship of this book was based on very important evidence from trusted traditions. Osama leaves this quotation out of his paper to give his reader the impression that the NIV agrees that Mark was corrupted. The NIV says that Mark preserved the material accurately, not corruptedly and hence the reason why Mark wouldn't write his name down as the author, but yet this gospel is attributed to him, is because of the fact that it comes from the preaching of Peter. Anybody who is able to view the entire quote will easily see that Mark was a scribe who documented the preaching of Peter muc like Muhammad's follwers did with the Quran. Documentation 150-300 years? NIV debunks this:
Osama has just ignored this part dealing with Mark. The NIV Living Insights Bible dates Mark's Gospel to 50 a.d.!!! Far from being 150-300 years after the events! The NIV Study Bible helps concur with this:
Osama is deriving his information about the Gospel's authorship from outdated sources from the late 1800's. Notice that the NIV says no such thing as he claim. Also look at his defense, "what ever Christian you talk too"? So he is basing his whole information on hearsay!! This is not only hilarious but is the fallacy of appealing to dubious and unknown authority. We wonder what Christian did he ask this question? A Muslim Christian? Hilarious!!!
"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"
This quote raises a very serious issue here. First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel". Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it. The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying.
Osama again is interpolating the NIV commentary verse by claiming that "John Mark was the Sole author of this Gospel" Then he rambles on about how Christian cults use posionous snakes in their worship. He is so desperate to prove his idea of Bible corruption until he has to resort to using christian cults which he sees on the X-Files to debunk Christianity!! Maybe we should relieve his folly and tell him that serpents in the Bible doesn't always refer to literal snakes, but devils also.
We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful. The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc... It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man. Let alone considering it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.
Again, more interpolation by Osama. He claims that Mark's ending proves that the Gospel wasn't written by its original authors. However that isn't what his quote says at all. It says
The NIV calls the writing Mark's Gospel!! It said it probably ended here, not that it is proven that it ended at 16:8. Osama is guilty of trying to make the NIV commentary apply to all the Gospels when it gives only a probability that Mark's Gospel ended. However, historical textual evidence illustrates that Mark’s Gospel is two-fold in ending with both an abridged and unabridged versions. Read:
History has shown that Mark has both a short as well as an unabrigdged ending. Most authorities have Mark 16:9-20. It is only "SOME" who mark it as doubtful. Most means more than Some. That is whay the NIV said that the ending:
They were aware that most MSS have this verse and it would be incorrect to claim that this verse was a later insertion! Osama's whole evidence was based on probable evidence. If he wanted to prove that Mark 16:9-20 was clearly a later addition, surely he could've furnished a NIV quote that explicitly says "THIS GOSPEL DEFINITELY ENDED AT VERSE 8 AND THE REST IS A LATER INSERTION". However his quote says nothing about this issue, aince it speaks of it only being probable. Why? Because it is historically known that there are two endings to Mark amongst the extant MSS, a long and short one. Mark is known as the Abridged Gospel, and the shorter ending is an abridgement of this abridged Gospel as we will see just a little later. Furthermore, the doctrines taught in these disputed passages are established in other undisputed passages of the Gospels. But let's see what the NIV says about Mark before dealing with Mark 16:9:
Hence, even before we reach the 16th chapter the NIV emphatically affirms that Jesus died and bore our sins, demonstrating that the NIV translators believe in the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ and the authenticity of the Bible. We have just cited evidence that Mark 16:9-20 is found in most of thee MSS and exposed Osama's evidence as doubtful since it is based only on probability and not on hard core evidence. So we now turn to a range of scripture references that Scholars have shown to be related to Mark 16:9-20. These references from undisputed passages establish the teaching of Mark's longer ending:
There are tons of references that demonstrate the fact of Mark's Gospel being based on the authentic Gospel of Jesus Christ as shown in the other undisputed passages of the canonical Gospels. Notice that Osama didn't bother to even look at any scripture cross references.
Really Osama? Lets see what the NIV says concerning whether Mark is the Word of God:
According to the NIV Study bible, Mark gave the people in Rome "THE LIFE OF JESUS", whom the NIV calls "OUR LORD"!! If Mark was corrupted why would they say this? They would say that it wasn't the life of Jesus, nor woudl they call Jesus THEIR LORD if they didn't believe in the authenticity and inspiration of Bible!! Here is more information:
The NIV says exactly the opposite of what Osama is trying to convey to his reader!!! See it for yourself; Mark, according the NIV was not only inspired, but he was under the inspiration of the HOLY GHOST! So Much for Osama proving that the Gospel of Mark isn't the word of God according to the NIV!
"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside
the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the
author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page
1643)"
So based on some conclusion, you're willing to die for defending the idea that the Book
of Acts was the True Word of GOD Almighty? If the book was inspired by GOD Almighty, then
how come it wasn't mentioned in the book itself to help us filter it out from the many
other "Satanic false books"? Are we sure that this book too is not a man-made
Satanic book?
After all, its just a conclusion, isn't it??
Look at the quote closely, it says EVIDENCE IN AND OUTSIDE THE SCRIPTURE ITSELF LED TO THE CONCLUSION OF LUKE'S AUTHORSHIP. Osama then makes a weak argument saying that this was just a mere conclusion. He then asks if this isn't just a man-made Satanic book. Maybe he forgot to see that the EVIDENCE showed that it wasn't a man made book. As for his idea about the book not being inspired by God Almighty I challenge him to show us one reference where it says that God personally wrote the Quran. All he has is Muhammad’s claim that God spoke to him. Is this evidence Osama? Let’s expose him for misquoting the NIV again:
Notice that Osama has argued elsewhere that the Bible doesn't have extra biblical evidence to support it but yet when this evidence is shown, including evidence from within the text itself, Osama has to resort to a sudden case of forgetfulness along with misquotes to prove his case. This shows us that his stance from the NIV is so weak that it is simply pathetic. Here we furnish as evidence the comments of Sir William Ramsey. Ramsey, considered one of the world's greatest archaeologists, believed that the New Testament (particularly the books of Luke and Acts) were second-century forgeries. He spent thirty years digging in Asia Minor in order to produce evidence proving that Luke-Acts was nothing more than a lie. At the conclusion of his long journey however, he was compelled to admit that the New Testament was a first-century compilation and that the Holy Bible is historically reliable. This fact led to his conversion and embracing of the very faith he once believed to be a hoax. Dr. Ramsey stated:
Ramsey further said:
"Luke is unsurpassed in respects of its trustworthiness." (Josh McDowell, The Best of Josh Mcdowell: A Ready Defense, pp. 108-109)
Osama shouldn't have a problem with Mr. Ramsey since he used him as a reference in his "History of Man's Corruption of the Bible". Again we see that he is only good at misquoting authors, making them say the exact opposite of what they really claim.
The Gospel of Luke:
"The author's name does not appear in the book, but much unmistakable evidence points to Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1529)"
Again, we don't know for sure whether it was Luke or not who wrote the "Gospel of Luke" since his name doesn't appear in the Book. The Gospel itself seems to be a compromising one to the Word of GOD. Let us look at the following:
Again Osama misquotes the NIV since this is what it actually says:
How explicit can you get? Here are more quotes from the NIV:
We wonder what was Osama's excuse for eliminating the rest of this information on his site? Again where does the NIV explicitly say that this book wasn't God's word and that it is corrupted? Osama has yet to provide us with any detailed proof.
"Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, (Luke 1:3)"
Few problems with this Gospel from the quote above:
1- The author was not inspired, and knew for sure that he was not inspired by GOD Almighty to write the Book since he didn't mention about any divine inspiration, and he said "...since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning..." Where do we see GOD's inspiration in this?
2- The author wrote it for the purpose of "his most excellent Theophilus." Since when we compromise GOD Almighty and document His Holy Words for the purpose of other higher (in rank) human beings?
I say it again, I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!
Also, beside, what evidence are they talking about?! The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus. So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering as the True Living Word of GOD.
Osama seems confused since he thinks that Luke writing for Theophilus somehow entails a compromise on the part of Luke. Luke was writing with the purpose and intention of convincing Theophilus of the truth of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Osama conveniently stops in the middle of a sentence, as seen in his citation of Luke 1:3. Now let us read this in context:
On his page about Bible corruption, OSAMA MAKES A SLIP AND ADMITS THAT LUKE WAS THE AUTHOR!! READ HIS COMMENTS:
"It seemed good to me (Luke) also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, (Luke 1:3)"
If you consider the Bible the word of GOD, well, it is quite obvious that Luke decided to write his Gospel because he wanted to please the president or the leader at that time Theophilus. This however has several problems: (1) It compromises GOD because there is a biger purpose than GOD to write the Gospel, (2) It shows that Luke wouldn't have written his Gospel if it wasn't for that leader, and (3) Luke was not inpired when he wrote his Gospel because he said that he decided to write it after he had full understanding of it, which means that he wrote it with his own human words and thoughts and not GOD's. (http://www.answering-christianity.com/sake.htm)
Notice that here he claims that the reason why Luke's Gospel isn't inspired is BECAUSE IT WAS WRITTEN BY LUKE!!! Yet, in this article he claims that he doesn't even know who the real author is!! Does Osama suffer from amnesia or epilepsy? Even the NIV states clearly that Luke wrote the Gospel of Luke, basing their view on careful scholarly investigation of the evidences:
Osama also argues from silence when he claims that Luke never claimed that he was inspired. Luke never DENIED he was inspired either, sow hat does this prove? Absolutely nothing. When we look at how the first Christians viewed Luke’s Gospel, we discover that they both KNEW and AFFIRMED that it was an inspired revelation from God:
Paul quotes Deuteronomy 25:4 AND LUKE 10:7:
Here, Paul calls Luke’s Gospel Scripture and places it on the same level of Moses’ writings! Additional evidence that Paul is citing Luke's Gospel can be seen from a comparison of the Greek:
1 Timothy 5:18 - ... axios ho ergates tou misthou autou.
So much for Osama’s denial of Luke’s inspiration! Osama continues:
Since Osama agrees that the NIV focuses on historical information, we will turn to it for the dating of this Gospel, as opposed to basing our arguments on what some hypothetical Christian may say. (It is obvious that Osama is making things up again since he doesn’t even bother to name who these Christians are, which shows that he has never talked to them). Here is what the NIV commentary says:
The two most commonly suggested periods for dating the Gospel of Luke are: (1) A.D. 59-63, and (2) the 70s or the 80s. (NIV Study bible, Commentary on Luke, pg. 1529)
It is clear that Osama simply picks and chooses what he likes from the NIV since he completely ignores what the NIV says about the dating of these gospels. No NIV quote claims that the gospels date some 150-300 years after Christ. Osama knows that the NIV statements do not support his case, and simply decides to invent claims to look good to his readers. Osama continues:
Luke 1:3
Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it
seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,
The following is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625b.htm
http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625a.htm
If Theophilus existed in either the 2nd or the 4th centuries then how could the writer of this gospel be the same Luke who is supposed to be with Jesus in the 1st century.
Maybe he lived to about 200 years.. :)
Osama thinks that he can debunk the Bible because there were persons named Theophilus that came some 200-400 years after Jesus. The Catholic Encyclopedia mentions a second century Bishop named Theophilus:
The other Theophilus was the Patriarch of Alexandria in 385-412 AD. (source- http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14625a.htm)
You can even go here and see the entries for both these Theophiluses- http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/t.htm
Osama erroneously seeks to link the Theophilus of Luke’s Gospel with these two Christian figures of the second and fourth centuries solely because they have the same name! What Osama failed to tell his readers is that Theophilus is a common Greek name, just like Steve is a common name in English. My elementary school is named Theophilus. Osama obviously knows nothing about Christian history!
It should be noted that Osama originally sought to link Luke’s Theophilus with the fourth century Patriarch. After being informed of this mistake, Osama later changed his information and tried to link Luke’s Theophilus with the Theophilus of 177 A.D. This shows just how deceitful Osama truly is. Instead of simply acknowledging his mistake, he sought all the more harder to find any evidence which he thought would place Luke’s Gospel in the second century. However his own words contradict the fact that Theophilus of AD. 177 was the one Luke was writing to. Read what he says:
Osama claimed that Luke was writing to a president or leader named Theophilus, contradicting his assertion above that the Theophilus mentioned in the third Gospel is actually a second century Bishop!!! So who is Theophilus really? A leader in the first century, a second century Bishop or a fourth century Patriarch?
"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)"
So because the guy was supposedly "well known (which we don't really know that for sure anyway)"
, then would that give us the right to consider his words as the Words of GOD Almighty?! I am sorry, but I don't really see the logic behind this! The Book of Hebrews is one of the highly used Books among Christians. I hear references from it a lot when listening to Christians preaching. Yet, no one really knows who wrote it!. This is quite ironic, because Christians use such highly doubtful books in their teachings as if they were the True Living Words of GOD Almighty. I don't care what you call this, but I call it blasphemy, because it is the most rediculous insult to GOD Almighty and His Holy Words that I have ever seen.I just hope you see the real cheap quality in the religion of Christianity, with all my respect due to every Christian reader.
Again your quote DOESN'T SAY THAT HEBREWS IS CORRUPTED. Until you show me that this quote does then I care less about how you interpret it. This only exposes your silly neophyte knowledge of Christian history. We quote the NIV regarding the authorship of Hebrews in order to demonstrate that Osama's assertions that this translation claims that the Bible is corrupt is an outright lie:
Although seperated from them at the time of writing, this writer knew them and looked forward to the day whent heyw would be brought together again. Yet nowhere in the letter did he bother to give his name. WE WISH HE HAD! That would have saved thousands of hours for scholars and teachers and preachers who have for years attempted to solve this mystery.
Some thing are worth intense study, and other things, although they may be interesting and thought-provoking, are not worth the time. AN IN-DEPTH INVESTIGATION OF THE AUTHORSHIP OF HEBREWS IS ONE OF THE THINGS NOT WORTH MORE OF OUR TIME. The most important thing to remember is that THIS BOOK HAS BEEN INSPIRED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT AND PRESERVED AS PART OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES. NO MATTER WHO PENNED THE WORDS, GOD HAS GIVEN US THIS MESSAGE AND PROTECTED IT THROUGH THE CENTURIES. (NIV Insights Bible, Commentary on Hebrews pg. 1330)
Osama basically tries to use the NIV’s statement that they wished the author had written his name as propaganda against the Holy Scriptures! Note the following from the NIV Study Bible:
According to the NIV, Christ is God's Final revelation to humankind. This eliminates any need for the Quran. Since Osama is quoting the NIV with authority, he must accept the fact that according to this source Osama believes in a false book!! Read what the NIV Study Bible says in the footnotes dealing with Christ:
The NIV’s explicit testimony to the Deity of Christ exposes Islam as a fraud, as well as exposing Osama's misapplication of the NIV notes. To drive it home read what the NIV says about Hebrews 1:5-14:
Not only does the NIV state that this book is inspired by God and is protected by the Almighty himself through the ages, it affirm that Jesus is both God and is distinguished from God the Father!! Osama claims that Hebrews is doubtful even though his best piece of evidence, the NIV, says just the opposite!!! When I posed this same argument against Osama, he responded:
So everyone had the same copy.
If it is irrelevant, then why does the Quran even bother to mention it? As for the Quran, Islamic history proves that it wasn't documented on the spot. I can show you tons of references to prove my point if you want. And as for educated Muslims, many were killed in the battlefields that resulted in a loss of great portions of the Quran. Want references I can post that too. So basically, we are to believe that the Quran was copied down because you said it was? Again no proof. Osama continues by saying:
The materials from which the Quran was compiled were scattered everywhere. It wasn't arranged in any order nor put into one book until after Muhammad died. Basically it was left to men's judgment to decide what went in and what went out. There were sharp disagreements as to what was supposed to be included. Yet, Muslims like to judge the Bible harshly based on a criteria that can so easily be used against the Quran with even greater force and weight. Notice that Osama doesn't provide any credible source to back up his claim. Do Muslims really expect us to simply accept their claims for the Quran without providing any evidence for us to examine, all the while demanding that we provide proofs galore for Christianity? I don’t think so.
Nonsense. No Hadiths exist to prove this assertion, and ignorant peasants don’t qualify as scholars. Memorization was common in Near Eastern cultures but none of this makes them scholars. Muhammad may have had a good memory (even though this is doubtful, see http://answering-islam.org/Green/forgot.htm), yet he was still basically ignorant and illiterate.
Again Osama furnishes nothing more than vain comments. When he finally ran out of answers he tried to refer me to his site, which we are attempting to systematically debunk, as this article exposing Osama’s misquotations of the NIV hopefully shows.
"The author is the apostle John, 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' (13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20,24). He was prominent in the early church but is not mentioned by name in this Gospel--which would be natural if he wrote it, but hard to explain otherwise.
(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1588)"They claimed that it was John who wrote the Gospel, but yet, his name was not signed on his Gospel! How is it possible for us to be absolutely sure that it was indeed John who wrote the so called "Gospel of John" when "his name is not mentioned in this Gospel" so we can then take it as a 100% True Error-free Word of GOD Almighty?
Osama seeks to undermine the NIV’s claim that the Apostle John wrote the fourth Gospel solely because John didn’t sign it! Do note what the NIV says regarding the omission of John’s name:
The NIV says that IT IS NATURAL FOR JOHN TO NOT MENTION HIS NAME IF HE DID WRITE THE GOSPEL!! Again, note what the NIV says:
Osama also overlooked the very first sentence in his own quote which explicitly says:
The evidence is as explicit as one can find verifying the authorship of the apostle John!! Osama's evidence of bible corruption is nothing more than the usual misquotation and intentional misrepresentation found among common Islamic propaganda against the bible. Both the NIV Study and Living Insights Bible mention the apostle John as the author of the beloved fourth gospel. We find it very unusual for Osama Abdallah to try and disprove the authenticity of the Bible for the sake of bringing people to Islam. The Quran and the Muslim traditions clearly affirm the purity and preservation of the Holy Bible.
Finally, note what the first Muslim biographer said regarding the authorship of the fourth Gospel:
"The Munahhemana (God bless and preserve him!) in Syriac is Muhammad; in Greek he is the paraclete." (Ibn Ishaq, Life Of Muhammad, trans. Alfred Guillaume [Oxford University Press, Karachi], pp. 103-104; bold and capital emphasis ours)
The preceding Gospel citation is taken from John 15:23-16:1. Please notice that Ishaq doesn’t say that this particular Gospel is inauthentic or corrupt. Apparently, the first Muslims weren’t as sharp as Osama since they had no problem admitting that John authored the fourth Gospel, even though he never signed his name!
Before we start on the analysis of Paul's Books, we must first know that Paul who's Books are believed to be inspired by GOD Almighty Himself and who is a disciple of Jesus peace be upon him never actually met Jesus in person. Jesus had 12 disciples when he was on earth. Paul was not one of them!. Paul much later after the disappearance of Jesus came and claimed that Jesus came to him and ordered him to be his disciple. Paul is really taken on faith only and not on proofs. He could be well be another smart deceiver who made his way into the world of the current corrupted Bible (sorry if I offended you).
Osama is apparently blatantly ignorant of what Islamic history and Muhammad think about Paul. Read this from the earliest Islamic accounts:
"Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple AND PAUL WITH HIM, (PAUL BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS AND WAS NOT A DISCIPLE) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage and Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas.'" (Ibid. p. 653)
Muhammad himself said that Jesus was commissioned by God to send the disciples into the world. And yet Paul happens to be one of those who assisted the Apostle Peter in carrying out Jesus’ great commission!! Notice that Ibn Ishaq predates the most credible Hadiths by over 125 years. According to Muhammad, Jesus said that this is a thing his followers must do. Interestingly, other Muslim sources confirm the above statement from Ishaq:
Amazingly, Bukhari, the most authentic Hadith collection in Islam, even quotes one of Paul's letters and attributes the saying to God!:
The Prophet said, "ALLAH SAID, 'I have prepared for My righteous slaves (such excellent things) as no eye has ever seen, nor an ear has ever heard nor a human heart can ever think of.'" (Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 93, Number 589)
According to this Hadith, Muhammad purportedly claims that Allah uttered the above words. Compare what Allah is supposed to have revealed to Muhammad with what Paul says in his first letter to the Corinthians:
Paul paraphrases the following citation from Isaiah:
Hence, according to the Hadith the one that inspired Paul's saying, which Muhammad alludes to in virtually identical language, is none other than God! Notice that “Allah” has taken Paul's quote and slightly modified it, and both contexts refer to the rewards that God has in store for true believers. Since Osama considers Paul to be a deceiver, we must conclude that Muhammad and his god Allah are also deceivers since they quote Paul!!! Muslims hate this quote since it undermines their thinking about Paul.
This basically means that Muslims have no basis to object to Paul's writings since Muhammad, Ibn Ishaq and al-Bukhari attribute Paul's work to God, implying that Paul was a legitimate representative of Christ's teachings. The only way for Osama to avoid the significance of these early Islamic traditions is to deny the traditions completely, as well as intentionally ignore Muhammad. This would make him an apostate. Osama then goes on to post links about Paul being a liar based on the opinions of so-called Christian scholars. However, since when do theologians and so-called Christians hold greater authority for Osama than Muhammad, Allah, and the Islamic traditions? We will leave that for Osama to answer for us.
"The writer of this letter was the apostle Paul (see 1:1). No voice from the early church was ever raised against his authorship.
(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1705)"Sweet. But notice how in this Book, we see the actual author himself, and in the ones above, we see nothing but conclusions. If GOD was the actual inspirer of all of these Books, then He wouldn't put us in the agony of making some conclusions to figure out His Words. Is GOD the author of confusion?
Notice how Osama claims that God isn't the author of confusion, but yet his own words seem to be utterly confused. He says that we see the author himself (whatever that means) but yet we see nothing but conclusions. Would he rather have assumptions instead of conclusions? Again he knows that the NIV is saying just the opposite of what his paper is saying and therefore when it comes to quotes that he can't copy out of context he must resort to intentionally misinterpreting them. Then and only then, in his twisted logic, is he able to prove that the Bible is corrupt. Remember that earlier he called into question the materials since Christians were basing their points on assumptions. And yet when they provide hard evidence to base their conclusions on, this is still not good enough! Hypocrisy is the word that comes to mind.
Is Paul GOD Himself? No Christian believes in that. Paul fought with Saint Peter and accused him of being "clearly in the wrong" (Galatians: 2:11-12), and had a huge argument with Saint Barnabas (Acts 15:36-39).
The reason why we take Paul's words as the very words of God is because Jesus, the Apostles, supernatural miracles and even Muhammad himself provide irrefutable evidence thatt Paul was commissioned to spread God’s truth. Lets look at the scriptures mentioned by Osama:
If Osama is agreeing with Peter then he is also agreeing with Peter’s racism and hypocrisy since Paul was correcting Peter for being hypocritical before both the Jews and Gentiles. We know that Allah loves to lie and mislead but that doesn't mean that followers of Yahweh God, such as Paul, have to do likewise!
Do you see anywhere in this passage which suggests that Paul’s and Barnabas’ dispute was theological solely because Barnabas left with John Mark and Paul with Silas? In what way does this passage undermine Paul’s credibility when the very passages prior to this one demonstrate that Paul had the approval of Christ’s true followers?
Paul himself admitted before that he wasn't always inspired by GOD Almighty himself (1 Corinthians 7:25-30).
And since Paul never met Jesus in person, and only claimed that Jesus came to him in person then there is always the possibility of him being untruthful. Since Paul never performed any miracles to help us believe his claim of Prophet hood, then his claim about him being GOD's apostle is just as good as me for instance claiming to be GOD's apostle.
Oops!! Okay, now we see that Paul didn't perform miracles? Therefore he isn't a prophet? It is obvious that Osama has not read or understood the Bible since he commits several mistakes here. First, inspiration doesn’t apply to everything that Paul or the others said or did. It refers to the proclaiming of the God’s truths, i.e. the preaching and writing of the Gospel.
Second, Osama hasn’t read 1 Corinthians carefully since Paul wasn’t denying inspiration at all. Paul is addressing the question of whether virgins should remain unmarried, something that Christ never addressed while on earth. Being Christ's spokesperson Paul could speak on issues not addressed by the Lord Jesus during his earthly ministry. In this passage, Paul is giving a suggestion that a person can choose to follow, but was not required to do so.
This leads us to our second point, namely that Paul was clearly aware that both his preaching and his writings were given by inspiration of God:
"If anybody thinks he is a prophet or spiritually gifted, let him acknowledge that what I AM WRITING to you IS THE LORD’S COMMAND. If he ignores this, he himself will be ignored." 1 Corinthians 14:37-38
These passages make it quite clear that Paul believed that his writings were the very revealed words of God. This can be further seen from what Paul writes elsewhere:
"And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, BUT AS IT ACTUALLY IS, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe." 1 Thessalonians 2:13
"Finally, brothers, we instructed you how to live in order to please God, as in fact you are living. Now we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus to do this more and more. For you know what instructions we gave you BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE LORD JESUS… Therefore, he who rejects THIS INSTRUCTION does not reject man BUT GOD, who gives you his Holy Spirit." 1 Thessalonians 4:1-2, 8
"But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth. He called you to this through our gospel, that you might share in the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth OR BY LETTER FROM US." 2 Thessalonians 2:13-15
It becomes quite evident that Paul believed that he was speaking and writing God’s Word by divine inspiration. Third, the Holy Bible provides several examples of Paul performing miracles:
"I will not venture to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me in leading the Gentiles to obey God by what I have said and done - by the power of signs and miracles, through the power of the Spirit. So from Jerusalem all the way around to Illyricum, I have fully proclaimed the gospel of Christ." Romans 15:18-19
"I have made a full of myself, but you drove me to it. I ought to have been commended by you, for I m not least inferior to the 'super-apostles,' even though I am nothing. The things that mark an apostle - signs, wonders and miracles - were done among you with great perseverance." 2 Corinthians 12:11-12
“Does God then give you the Spirit and work miracles among you by your doing the works of the law or by your believing what you heard?” Galatians 3:5
Paul even had power over demons and poison by God’s sovereign grace:
"God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured AND THE EVIL SPIRITS LEFT THEM. Some Jews who went around driving out evil spirits tried to invoke the name of the Lord Jesus over those who were demon-possessed. They would say, 'In the name of Jesus, whom Paul preaches, I command you to come out.' Seven sons of Sceva, a Jewish chief priest, were doing this. [One day] the evil spirit answered them, 'Jesus I know, and I know about Paul, but who are you?' Then the man who had the evil spirit jumped on them and overpowered them all. He gave them such a beating that they ran out of the house naked and bleeding. When this became known to the Jews and Greeks living in Ephesus, they were all seized with fear, and the name of the Lord Jesus was held in high honor." Acts 19:11-16
"Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand. When the islanders saw the snake hanging from his hand, they said to each other, 'This man must be a murderer; for though he escaped from the sea, Justice has not allowed him to live.' But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects. The people expected him to swell up or suddenly fall dead, but after waiting a long time and seeing nothing unusual happen to him, they changed their minds and said he was a god. There was an estate nearby that belonged to Publius, the chief official of the island. He welcomed us to his home and for three days entertained us hospitably. His father was sick in bed, suffering from fever and dysentery. Paul went in to see him and, after prayer, placed his hands on him and healed him. When this had happened, the rest of the sick on the island came and were cured." Acts 28:3-9
This again shows that Osama hasn’t read the Bible carefully. Finally and even more amazing is that Muhammad fails Osama’s own criteria since the former performed no miracles. Hence, if Osama’s logic were true then this would also make Muhammad a false apostle.
Muhammad and Miracles
Say those without knowledge:
“Why speaketh not Allah unto us? or why cometh not unto us a Sign?”
So said the people before them words of similar import. Their hearts
are alike. We have indeed made clear the Signs unto any people who hold
firmly to Faith (in their hearts). S. 2:118
Even IF thou wert to bring
to the People of the Book all the Signs (together), they would not
follow thy Qibla; nor art thou going to follow their Qibla; nor indeed
will they follow each other's Qibla. If thou after the knowledge hath
reached thee, Wert to follow their (vain) desires,- then wert thou Indeed
(clearly) in the wrong. S. 2:145
They say:
“Why is not a Sign sent down to him from his Lord!” Say: “Allah
hath certainly power to send down a Sign: but most of them understand
not.” S. 6:37
They swear their strongest
oaths by Allah, that if a (special) sign came to them, by it they would
believe. Say: “Certainly (all) Signs are in the power of Allah: but
what will make you (Muslims) realize that (even) if (special) signs
came, they will not believe.”? S. 6:109
‘Abdallah ‘Abd al-Fadi comments:
From the Quran:
And the Unbelievers say:
“Why is not a sign sent down to him from his Lord?” But thou
art truly a warner, and to every people a guide. 13:7
The Unbelievers say:
“Why is not a Sign sent down to him from his Lord?” Say: “Truly
Allah leaveth, to stray, whom He will; But He guideth to Himself those
who turn to Him in penitence,-” S. 13:27
And We refrain from
sending the Signs, only because the men of former generations treated
them as false: We sent the She-camel to the Thamüd - a visible Sign-,
but they treated her wrongfully: We only send the Signs by way of frightening
(and warning from evil). S. 17:59
Muhammad Asad comments on S.
17:59:
“… This highly elliptic
sentence has a fundamental bearing on the purport of the Qur’an as a
whole. In many places the Qur’an stresses the fact that the Prophet
Muhammad, despite his being the last and greatest of God’s apostles,
was not empowered to perform miracles similar to those with which
the earlier prophets are said to have reinforced their verbal messages.
His only miracle was and is the Qur’an itself-
a message perfect in its lucidity and ethical comprehensiveness, destined
for all times and all stages of human development, addressed not merely
to the feelings but also to the minds of men, open to everyone, whatever
his race or social environment, and bound to remain unchanged forever.
Since the earlier prophets invariably appealed to their own community
and their own time alone, their teachings were, of necessity, circumscribed
by the social and intellectual conditions of that particular community
and time; and since the people to whom they addressed themselves ha
not yet reached the stage of independent thinking, those prophets stood
in need of symbolic portents or miracles (see
surah 6, note 94) in order to make the people concerned realize
the inner truth of their mission.
The message of the Qur’an, on the other hand, was revealed at a time
when mankind (and, in particular, that pat of it which inhabited the
regions marked by the earlier, Judeo-Christian religious development)
had reached a degree of maturity which henceforth enabled it to grasp
an ideology as such without the aid of those persuasive portents
and miraculous demonstrations which in the past, as the above verse
points out, only too often gave rise to new, grave misconceptions.”
(Asad, The Meaning of the Qur’an, pp. 427-428, n. 71)
That Asad’s explanation is
rather forced is seen by the fact that it was the People of the Book
and the pagans that demanded Muhammad to perform miracles to prove his
prophethood. Hence, maturity had nothing to do with it since in every
age man expects supernatural verification from one claiming to speak
on God’s behalf.
They say: “We shall not
believe in thee, until thou cause a spring to gush forth for us from
the earth, Or (until) thou have a garden of date trees and vines, and
cause rivers to gush forth in their midst, carrying abundant water;
Or thou cause the sky to fall in pieces, as thou sayest (will happen),
against us; or thou bring Allah and the angels before (us) face to face:
Or thou have a house adorned with gold, or thou mount a ladder right
into the skies. No, we shall not even believe in thy mounting until
thou send down to us a book that we could read.”
Say: “Glory to my Lord! Am I aught but a man,- a messenger?”
S. 17:90-93
Asad on 17:93:
“… A reply to this demand
of believers is found in verse 7 of
Al-An’am, revealed-according to Suyuti- shortly after the present
surah. But the allusion to this and the preceding ‘conditions’
is not merely historical: it illustrates a widely prreviewent, psychologically
contradictory attitude of the mind- a strange mixture of
prima-facie scepticism and primitive credulity which makes belief
in a prophetic message dependent on the prophet’s ‘performing miracles’
(cf. 6:37 and 109 and 7:203). Since the ONLY miracle granted by God
to Muhammad is the Qur’an itself
(see the first part of verse 59 of this
surah, as well as note 71 above), he is bidden, in the next passage,
to declare that these demands are irrelevant and, by implications, frivolous.”
(Ibid., p. 433, n. 109 bold emphasis ours)
But (now), when the Truth
has come to them from Ourselves, they say, “Why are not (Signs) sent
to him, like those which were sent to Moses?” Do they not then reject
(the Signs) which were formerly sent to Moses?
They say: “Two kinds of sorcery, each assisting the other!” And they
say: “For us, we reject all (such things)!” S. 28:48
Nay, here are Signs self-evident
in the hearts of those endowed with knowledge: and none but the unjust
reject Our Signs. Ye they say: “Why are not Signs sent down to him
from his Lord?” Say: “The signs are indeed with Allah: and I am
indeed a clear Warner.” And is it not enough for them that we have
sent down to thee the Book which is rehearsed to them?
Verily, in it is Mercy and a Reminder to those who believe. S. 29:49-51
Al-Fadi quotes al-Baidawi’s
commentary on the above passage:
Muslim Faruq Sherif notes:
“Apart from its assertion
of its inimitability and its reference to the Prophet’s ascension (if
taken literally), the Qur’an does not attribute any miracles to the
Prophet… Muhammad was often challenged by the pagans to produce miracles;
his reply was that God makes miracles appear when he wills, but that
the miracles which were performed by the prophets in the past were powerless
to convince the people, who treated them as lies and sorcery.
“The pagans’ persistent
challenge embarrassed the Prophet who, reciting the Qur’an, always laid
emphasis on the miracles bestowed by Allah not only on Moses and Jesus
but also lesser figures such as Salih and Solomon. If, asked the pagans,
Allah empowered Moses to dry the sea, and Jesus to bring the dead back
to life, why did He not send down a miraculous sign to confirm Muhammad
such as by enabling him to cause a spring to gush forth from a rock,
by giving him a well-watered orchard, or a house adorned with gold,
or a treasure, by sending angels to accompany him on earth, by exempting
him from the necessity of eating and walking in the market, by permitting
him to mount to heaven and bring back a written confirmation of his
mission, or by causing a piece of the sky to fall upon the unbelievers
and crush them? (XVII. 92-95, XX.133)
“To all this the Prophet’s
answer was: I am only a man and a warner; signs are in Allah’s hands,
and those which were revealed to the former generations did not make
them less intransigent…
“Accordingly Muhammad declared
that his unquestionable miracle was the revelation of the Qur’an.
Nevertheless the pagans’ questions troubled his mind, and his bewilderment
brought reproaches from Allah: ‘In case you are in doubt as to what
We have revealed to you,’ says the Qur’an in X.94, ‘perhaps you feel
inclined to suppress a part of what has been revealed to you, being
distressed at heart lest they say why has not a treasure been sent down
to him or why an angel has not come with him; but you are only a warner'’(XI.14).
‘If you find their aversion hard to bear, seek if you can a tunnel in
the earth or a ladder to the sky by which you may bring them a sign’
(VI.35). (Sherif, A Guide to the Contents of the Qur’an
[Garnet Publishing Limited; UK 1995], pp. 62, 63)
Muslim Akbarally Meherally
quotes Huston Smith with approval:
“Huston Smith was a professor
of Philosophy at Washington University. He writes in his book,
The Religions of Man:
In an age charged with supernaturalism, when miracles were accepted as the stock-in-trade of the most ordinary saint, Muhammed refused to traffic with human weakness and credulity. To miracle-hungry idolaters seeking signs and portents he cut the issue clean: ‘God has not sent me to work wonders; He has sent me to preach to you. My Lord be praised! Am I more than a man sent as an apostle? From the first to the last he resisted every impulse to glamorize his own person… ‘I am only a preacher of God’s words, the bringer of God’s message to mankind.’ If signs be sought, let them not be of Muhammed’s greatness but of God’s, and for these one need only open one’s eyes… Only one miracle is claimed, that of the Koran itself. That he by his own devices could have produced such truth-this was the one naturalistic hypothesis he could not accept.
(Meherally,
Understanding the Bible through Koranic messages
[A.M. Trust P.O. Box 82584, Burnaby, B.C. Canada, 1989], p. 99)
What of the reports in the
hadith where we are told that Muhammad actually performed many miracles?
Norm Geisler and Abdul Saleeb respond:
“There are many reasons
for questioning the authenticity of these stories. Critics have observed
the following.
First, none of them are
recorded in the Qur’an. In fact, they are in general contrary to the
whole spirit of the Muhammad of the Qur’an, who repeatedly refused to
do these very kinds of things for unbelievers who challenged him (3:181-84;
4:153; 6:8-9).
Second, these alleged miracles
follow the same pattern as the apocryphal miracles of Christ from a
century or two after his death. They are a legendary embellishment of
people removed from the original events. They do not come from contemporary
eye-witnesses of the events.
Osama continues:
Paul could just as well be another Benny Hyne, except that Benny Hyne performed miracles (that are fake of course), but Paul never performed anything.
I hope you see how confusing the Bible really is. Its books are believed today from conclusions only as you've seen above, and it is only to be believed by blind faith. Blind faith is not the way to believe in GOD Almighty's Words, because GOD is not the author of confusion.
For one thing, what does Benny Hinn have to do with Paul? Also how does Osama know that these miracles are fake? Has he inspected them himself? No. He just assumes and doesn't provide any evidence for his claims, like he says about Paul. Why should we accept what he says then? Paul did perform miracles. He healed a demoniac girl as well as knocked off a poisonous snake without being harmed. Muhammad himself said Jesus commissioned Paul. So what is his problem with Paul?
"Paul is acknowledged as the author both by the letter itself (1:1-2; 16:21) and by the early church fathers. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1734)
Again, we see in here that Paul was the actual author without any confusion.
But again, why must we take every single word that Paul spoke especially during his conversations with others as Words of GOD Almighty?!
Is Paul GOD Himself? No Christian believes in that. Paul fought with Saint Peter and accused him of being "clearly in the wrong" (Galatians: 2:11-12), and had a huge argument with Saint Barnabas (Acts 15:36-39).
Did GOD favor Paul over Barnabas and Peter and inspired him the words while he was fighting with them? I don't think so!.
Basically this is just a repeat of the above argument. We've already shown that Osama’s arguments do nothing to undermine Paul’s credibility. In fact, after Paul’s dispute with Peter, the latter was humble enough to admit and write:
Noted Evangelical Scholar Douglas J. Moo comments:
It should be noted that this is also an "NIV" source which refutes the absurd idea of Paul's words as being uninspired. Osama is obviously running out of ideas and must result to "poisoning the well" against the beloved Apostle Paul.
And since Paul never met Jesus in person, and only claimed that Jesus came to him in person then there is always the possibility of him being untruthful. Since Paul never performed any miracles to help us believe his claim of Prophet hood, then his claim about him being GOD's apostle is just as good as me for instance claiming to be GOD's apostle.
We've already discussed verse this passage. But lets turn this same argument against Muhammad. He claimed to have met Gabriel as well as allegedly reporting what Jesus said to the Jews. Muhammad couldn't prove either one. He never met Jesus neither did he speak Hebrew nor Aramaic, so how could he know exactly what Jesus said?
The Quran claims:
In another passage the Qur'an again states explicitly that Muhammad had a definite vision:
Another verse states clearly that the vision was given by Allah himself:
The confident manner in which Muhammad claimed that he had at least two definite visions strongly suggests that he really did see a strange being on the horizon. He described the second vision in these words:
Muslims vehemently claim that it was the angel Gabriel who came to Muhammad, yet the Qur'an only once refers to Jibril as the medium of the revelation (Surah 2.97) while stating elsewhere that it came down with the Ruhul-Amin, the Faithful Spirit (Surah 26.193). The identification of Gabriel as the Qur'anic messenger is significantly only made in a very late passage of the Qur'an after Muhammad had many dealings with Jews and Christians. This spirit never identified himself as Gabriel when Muhammad first met him. Nor do we find an explicit connection between the spirit and Gabriel. Also since the name Gabriel came in a very late passage of the Quran, this shows that Muhammad wasn’t at all certain about the identity of this spirit. He had to be around the Jews and Christians before finally deciding that Gabriel must have also been involved in the sending down of the “revelation.” A telling story indeed.
This explains why Muhammad thought he was demon possessed, or influenced by demons; the Quran in many places reads like typical Arabic poetry. Note also the following embarrassing hadith:
'Aisha said that the Prophet said to her "O 'Aisha' This is Gabriel and he sends his (greetings) salutations to you." 'Aisha said, "Salutations ... and addressing the Prophet SHE SAID, "YOU SEE WHAT I DON'T SEE."
This is very important for the reader to recognize. Muhammad saw a spirit which nobody else saw. This again is precarious because in order to believe that Gabriel came we would have to accept only the testimony of Muhammad. It’s one thing to be visited by an angel and you are by yourself. But to claim that an angel entered a room without anybody else besides yourself seeing him is another story. Muhammad was hallucinating or he was bewitched into seeing things that weren’t there. In either case, why should we accept his testimony about Allah? You can’t even verify that Gabriel was present. Even Muhammad’s companions didn’t see him, which leaves him as a single witness. Ironically, this is the same thing that Osama says about Paul.
Other people recognize "Gabriel" as a person they knew.
I got the news that Gabriel came to the Prophet while Um Salama was present. Gabriel started talking (to the Prophet and then left. The Prophet said to Um Salama, "(Do you know) who it was?" (or a similar question). She said, "It was Dihya (a handsome person amongst the companions of the Prophet )." Later on Um Salama said, "By Allah! I thought HE WAS NONE BUT DIHYA, till I heard the Prophet talking about Gabriel in his sermon.” .....
Very strange indeed. If we take Muhammad’s testimony seriously, we are left with the conclusion that Muhammad’s Gabriel was none other than a man whom Um Salama said was “Dihya” and happened to be Muhammad’s companion!!! Why didn’t she recognize Gabriel? The 3 wise men recognized the angel and didn’t mistake his identity. However Muhammad thought that his own companion was Gabriel!!! Since nobody else thought it was Gabriel, but recognized him as a known friend, this shows us that Muhammad was bewitched into believing that Dihya was Gabriel, or that he was hallucinating like the little kid on the move "The Sixth Sense". Either way he should be given an Oscar for the best acting job ever, since he fooled millions of Muslims into following his claim, including Osama who demands proof for Paul!!
"Paul is the author of this letter (see 1:1; 10:1). It is stamped with his style and it contains more autobiographical material than any of his other writings. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1762)"
Osama has no qualms with the NIV here, and seemingly agrees that Paul wrote this book. The rest is just a repeat from the above.
We are not certain whether or not Paul is the actual author of this Book, since he didn't stamp his name on it as he did with his other ones. Notice that some of the 19th century scholars doubted this Book to be the True Word of GOD Almighty.
How can it be the Word of GOD Almighty anyway, even if Paul wrote it? Let us look at this conversation that took place: "I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ....(Galatians 1:6)" Again, why take every single word that Paul spoke especially during his conversations with others as Words of GOD Almighty?!
The rest of Osama's argument is a repeat from above. Osama mistakenly claims that Paul didn’t stamp his name on this book. This is an amazing claim seeing that just earlier he quoted this book to cast doubt on Paul’s credibility due to his dispute with Peter! It is obvious that Osama hasn’t read the book since if he did he would have found:
“Listen! I, PAUL, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you at all!” Galatians 5:2
All Osama can do here is appeal to some 19th century scholars, individuals he doesn’t even bother naming since he has obviously never read their works, in order to cast doubts the authenticity of this authorship.
Regarding Galatians 1:6, this exposes Osama’s naivete regarding biblical inspiration. But instead of educating him on the subject, we will simply apply his criteria to the Quran to see if it passes:
It doesn't take a genius to see that this truly can't be from Allah. Osama complains about says "Paul's greetings" etc, but says nothing about Surah 1! Will Osama be consistent and say that this Surah isn't from God? He would have to if he were honest and consistent.
Take another look at the highlighted parts. Since Muslims believe that the Quran is the speech of Allah, this means that Allah is worshipping either himself or is worshipping some other Allah and seeking the guidance of this other god to show him the straight path!
If Osama denies this then he must admit that the Quran isn't totally from Allah, and concde the fact that parts of it originate from men. Here are more examples showing that the Quran is not completely from Allah:
We must wonder whether if Allah is coming down because Muhammad’s Lord commanded him? And if so, is there another god that we don't know about? If Osama claims that this isn't Allah coming down at the command of another god, then to use his methodology consistently we must conclude that Allah didn’t author these parts but someone else did. These passages are either the words of men or angels, which would debunk the Islamic idea that the Quran is the speech of Allah alone. Again:
The question that has to be answered is if this is Allah who is speaking then who is the Lord that he serves? If it is the angels or Muhammad speaking, then the Quran cannot be considered 100% the word of God. Using Osama's method this is exactly what we find.
Other passages that are either nonsensical or have no value and practical application include:
Does this mean that entering backdoors is a sin? What about the following verses:
O ye who believe! Enter not the Prophet's houses,- until leave is given you,- for a meal, (and then) not (so early as) to wait for its preparation: but when ye are invited, enter; and when ye have taken your meal, disperse, without seeking familiar talk. Such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet: he is ashamed to dismiss you, but Allah is not ashamed (to tell you) the truth. And when ye ask (his ladies) for anything ye want, ask them from before a screen: that makes for greater purity for your hearts and for theirs. Nor is it right for you that ye should annoy Allah's Messenger, or that ye should marry his widows after him at any time. Truly such a thing is in Allah's sight an enormity. S. 33:53
What does this have to do with people today and why even bother “revealing” these instructions? And these:
Of their goods, take alms, that so thou mightest purify and sanctify them; and pray on their behalf. Verily thy prayers are a source of security for them: And Allah is One Who heareth and knoweth. S. 9:103
O ye who believe! When ye consult the Messenger in private, spend something in charity before your private consultation. That will be best for you, and most conducive to purity (of conduct). But if ye find not (the wherewithal), Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. S. 58:12
It seems that Allah really went out of his way to insure that Muhammad got rich! In the words of Osama, why take every single word of the Quran, especially regarding instances in Muhammad’s life which have no practical value for us today, as Words of GOD Almighty?!
"The author identifies himself as Paul (1:1; 3:1; cf. 3:7, 13; 4:1; 6:19-20). Some have taken the absence of the usual personal greetings and the verbal similarity of many parts to Colossians, among other reasons, as grounds for doubting authorship by the apostle Paul. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1790)"
Again, we are not certain that it was indeed Paul who wrote this Book. And even if Paul was the one who wrote it, how are we to be certain that he was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself? No where in this Book we see a statement saying that this Book was inspired by GOD Almighty. Christians made that assumption on their own, just like they made the assumption that it was Paul himself who wrote it.
We already presented evidence demonstrating that Paul was an inspired Apostle, so we won’t bother repeating ourselves. We would simply like to know why does Paul have to mention in every book that he is inspired? Is this some rule we don't know about Osama?
Since Osama demands such a statement from Ephesians, we issue the following challenge. Provide verses from the Quran that claims that ALL OF IT IS FROM ALLAH AND THAT ALL 114 SURAHS WERE SENT DOWN FROM ALLAH TO MUHAMMAD. I'll be waiting.
"Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,
To the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus."
This Book was a letter written by a person. He sent it to Paul and in it he greets the saints of Ephesus.
If the Book was sent to Paul, the author clearly would've said it. Paul identified himself as an apostle and said that the book WAS TO THE SAINTS IN EPHESUS NOT TO PAUL. Osama doesn't even understand the Greek usage which shows that Paul was sending this letter to someone else. He lies and claims that somebody else sent it to Paul. So who sent it to Paul Osama? Surely you know right? Or is this just another one of your bright ideas?
"Dear Mike, John and Sam,
My greetings to all of your classmates...."
Neither Mike, nor John nor Sam would have written the letter!. It would be a third party person who wrote it.
I say it again, I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!
Osama erroneously assumes that since Paul writes in the third person this cannot really be the Apostle who is writing this. If this is the case that third person usage points to someone else, then Allah cannot be the author of the Quran since he too uses the third person!
Then will Allah say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Recount My favour to thee and to thy mother. Behold! I strengthened thee with the holy spirit, so that thou didst speak to the people in childhood and in maturity. Behold! I taught thee the Book and Wisdom, the Law and the Gospel and behold! thou makest out of clay, as it were, the figure of a bird, by My leave, and thou breathest into it and it becometh a bird by My leave, and thou healest those born blind, and the lepers, by My leave. And behold! thou bringest forth the dead by My leave. And behold! I did restrain the Children of Israel from (violence to) thee when thou didst show them the clear Signs, and the unbelievers among them said: 'This is nothing but evident magic.' S. 5:110
And behold! Allah will say: "O Jesus the son of Mary! Didst thou say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in derogation of Allah'?" He will say: "Glory to Thee! never could I say what I had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, thou wouldst indeed have known it. Thou knowest what is in my heart, Thou I know not what is in Thine. For Thou knowest in full all that is hidden. S. 5:116
Perhaps Osama can explain to us why he still believes in the Quran in light of these facts.
Furthermore, if Osama really knew anything he would have known that the Greek word for Greetings which is used in the Bible is Aspasmos, which isn't present here at all. Neither does the word Dear (Greek- Agapetos) appear in this passage. Therefore, his theory that Ephesians mentioning Paul in the third person after a greeting proves that Paul didn’t author it is blatantly false.
The rest is just a repeat about Benny Hinn.
"The early church was unanimous in its testimony that Philippians was written by the apostle Paul (see 1:1). Internally the letter reveals the stamp of genuineness. The many personal references of the author fit what we know of Paul from other NT books. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1803)"
Again, it was assumed that this book was written by Paul himself. No one knows for sure whether it was Paul or somebody else. The New Testament wasn't even documented until 150-300 years after the disappearance of Jesus peace be upon him. If we're going to assume that Books that look appealing to us as the True Word of GOD Almighty, then we are committing a great crime against GOD Almighty and His Holy Words. No where in this Book we see a statement saying that it was inspired by GOD Almighty Himself.
Again Osama says the exact opposite of the NIV! It is the unanimous testimony of the earliest eyewitnesses, not just an assumption. Do you see assumption in the NIV quote? No.
"Paul and Timothy, servants of Christ Jesus,
To all the saints in Christ Jesus at Philippi...."
The person was writing to Paul and Timothy and he gave his greetings to the saints of Philippi.
Again, it is like writing the following:
"Dear Mike, John and Sam,
My greetings to all of your classmates...."
Neither Mike, nor John nor Sam would have written the letter!. It would be a third party person who wrote it.
Is this what the Word of GOD should be like? full of doubts and written by third party people?
We've already exposed Osama's lack of knowledge about Greek. There is no word for greetings or dear present in the text and is therefore not an example of 3rd person use.
Since Osama claims to follow the NIV why does he deny that Paul wrote this when the NIV claims that the early Church unanimously held to Pauline authorship? Did he promote himself to the NIV committee now? Surely not since he can't even get the simple Greek words of the greetings correct. The rest of Osama's argument is the same repetitious post dealing with Benny Hinn, etc. He uses the same arguments against Colossians and 1 and 2 Thessalonians, even though the NIV attributes Pauline authorship to all these books. Since he claims that the NIV is truthful, we must believe the NIV over his assertions.
"Four times the author identifies himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8).....In the third century, however, an African bishop named Dionysius compared the language, style and thought of the Apocalypse (Revelation) with that of the other writings of John and decided that the book could not been written by the apostle of John. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1922)"
Again, we don't know who wrote the Book of Revelation. It is certainly highly doubtful that it was written by Apostle John. So are you now going to consider the other John's words as the Words and Inspirations of GOD Almighty?
Osama continues his fanciful argument by appealing to a dubious authority. Let us look at the quote closely to expose his gross misunderstanding:
At the beginning of his quote it EXPLICTEDLY SAYS THAT THE AUTHOR IDENTIFIES HIMSELF AS JOHN. So what does Osama's argument stem from? Read:
Anyone who reads this closely sees immediately that Osama bases his whole argument on what Dionysius claimed. So his whole theory about Revelation being corrupted is based on what Dionysius decided. This doesn't constitute as proof whatsoever, since this is just the opinion of one person. Who are we supposed to believe? John, who wrote his name 4 times or some bishop which came approximately 200 years after John? Its funny how Osama argues that the Bible isn't current and yet appeals to a bishop who lived in the 3rd century!
Now, notice the author in the Book of Revelation does identify himself as John, but he has a complete different language and style of writing from the other books, which created much uncertainty about its validity in the Church.
Again Osama continues his argument based on some little known African Bishop who lived nearly 2 centuries later. He must think they we are so stupid to believe that a human can only write in one style of writing for all his life. Maybe Osama didn't attend college. If he did he would know that writing styles are based upon the situation that is being addressed. For example, when you write a business proposal you would use a different language and style compared to writing a love letter. As for his quotes let us look at them closely:
"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)"
Isn't it hilarious that he uses this as proof about John being corrupted when infact HIS EARLIEST IDENTIFICATION OF REVELATION NOT BEING CORRECT ALSO STEMS FROM A SO-CALLED CHURCH FATHER 200 YEARS LATER!! So, if he uses this method to prove John false, we can also prove his argument false by the same measure.
My questions here are: Who wrote the Books? And is or is not Saint John supposed to identify himself in his books? And where are his books that have his name on them?
This is a mere assumption. Again, I challenged Osama to show us a single Bible verse where it is mandatory for the writer to give his name. He has yet to produce a single verse to prove this!! So basically he is assuming something he has yet to prove. .
A day is like unto a thousand years to God, so basically using God's timing we have only been waiting 2 days. How can Osama argue about the Bible when he doesn't even know anything about it? In fact the Book of Revelation never said those people who lived in that time would see it, Osama has invented a straw man and then proceeds on to refute it.
The fight of Ezekiel 38 and 39 occurs before the Tribulation. Gog and Mag still exist since this is the modern country of Russia! Russia didn't collapse from a war silly! This has yet to take place. As for Osama's idiocy regarding the shape of the earth, this is a dumb argument since the 4 corners of the earth means from all sides of the earth and has nothing to do with the shape of the earth. Since he claims that the size of the earth proves that the Bible is false, he must reject the Quran. Osama may claim that S. 31:29 and 39:5 indicate that the earth is spherical, a fact not known until over 400 years ago. What Osama forgets to mention is that both the Quran and early Muslim sources actually claim that the earth is flat!:
"O you servants of Mine who have attained to faith! Behold! wide is Mine earth.…" S. 50:7
"Have we not made the earth as a bed and the mountains as pegs." S. 78:6-7 (Al-Hillali-Khan)
"…And the earth how it is spread." S. 88:20
So since the Quran says that the earth was spread out like a carpet, we must ask Osama:
At first these verses would simply seem to be allegorical statements, not to be taken literally. Yet, upon reading the works of the earliest Muslim commentators, it becomes quite evident that Muhammad believed in a flat earth! Al-Jalalan, one of Islam's premiere commentators, in his Tafsir, p. 509, states:
Al-Tabari cites the following tradition on the authority of Wahb:
Wahb's claim that there are seven earths completely agrees with both the statement from al-Kisa'i, Tales of the Prophets-Qisas al-anbiya found above as well as with the following Quranic verse:
Al Baidawi comments:
In the book, Behind The Veil: Unmasking Islam, we are told:
Islam and Science: Religious Orthodoxy and the Battle for Rationality by Parvez Hoodbhoy: **** (Page 49)
"…The Sheikh (Abdul Aziz Ibn Baz) authored ... a book in Arabic entitled Jiryan Al-Shams Wa Al-Qammar Wa-Sukoon Al-Arz. This translates into Motion of the Sun and Moon, and Stationarity of the Earth... In an earlier book, he had threatened dissenters with the dire fatwa or takfir (disbelief), but did not repeat the threat in the newer version."
"The earth is flat. Whoever claims it is round is an atheist deserving of punishment." Yousef M. Ibrahim, "Muslim Edicts take on New Force", The New York Times, February 12, 1995, p. A-14.
That is a well-known religious edict, or fatwa, issued two years ago by Sheik Abdel-Aziz ibn Baaz, the supreme religious authority of Saudi Arabia. The blind theologian's status gives his fatwas great weight, though his opinions have often raised eyebrows or embarrassed worldly Saudis… Also cited by Sagan "The Demon-haunted World", Carl Sagan, Ballantine, ISBN 0-345-40946-9, p. 325. I quote (as fair use): "In 1993, the supreme religious authority of Saudi Arabia, Sheik Abdel-Aziz ibn Baaz, issued a edict, or fatwah, "declaring that the world is flat. Anyone of the round persuasion does not believe in God and should be punished."
Hence, we see that Muslims both of the past and present affirm that the Quran clearly teaches that the earth is flat.
Finally, the fact that the earth is a sphere is not something new since the Holy Bible already taught this centuries before the Quran was ever written:
"When he established the heavens, I was there, when he drew a circle (khug) on the face of the deep." Proverbs 8:27
"It is he who sits above the circle (khug) of the earth, and its inhabitants are like grasshoppers; who stretches out the heavens like a curtain and spreads them like a tent to live in." Isaiah 40:22
Again, Dr. Morris' comments on these last three passages:
And,
Scientists also tell us that the universe is expanding. Hence, the statement in Isaiah 40:22 that God stretches out the heavens is not far off from what scientists today tell us about the universe.
Dr. Henry Morris notes:
"He (God) stretches out the north over empty space. He suspends the earth over nothing." Job 26:7
As far as we can tell Job could have only known this by revelation from God. Dr. Henry Morris, president of Institute for Creation Research, comments:
"as far as the east is from the west, so far he removes our transgressions from us." Psalm 103:12
Dr. Morris claims:
"The wind blows to the south, and goes around to the north; round and round goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they continue to flow." Ecclesiastes 1:6-7
Dr. Morris indicates:
Dr. Morris also comments on the statement in verse 7 on streams running into the sea:
The final biblical passage affirming that the earth is a sphere as well as rotating on its axis includes:
Dr. Morris observes:
Osama continues:
Really? If we believe your misinterpretations yeah right? However you have just proven that your own pagan prophet Muhammad copied from a big hoax. Read Rev. 13:11-2:
Here we see information about the Beast of the Earth. Now did the Quran copy this from a so-called big hoax? Yes:
Therefore using Osama's logic we must conclude that the Quran is a big hoax too!!!
Exposing Osama's intentional slander of the Old Testament
So in reality, the book of Genesis had been tampered with by man. It had been corrupted. It is dangerous to consider all of it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty, because by doing so, we are running into the risk of committing a crime against Him since we are claiming that He spoke words that He never spoke.
Actually the NIV doesn't say what Osama claims. It only says that th