A lack of Basic Knowledge of Christianty

Submitted by Amin Riaz (United Kingdom), Sep 10, 2011 at 05:24

It is your understanding that is lacking - plus you drew your own conclusions that were wrong.

1. Rejecting the Bible because Jesus did not write is not a reason to reject it. If we use this reasoning, then we should reject the Qur'an since Mohammed did not write it. He had a scribe. Since he was not literate, it was a scribe who wrote what he said. Mohammed could not check what he wrote for accuracy. Thus, the Qur'an should be rejected because Mohammed was incapable of "fact checking" what the scribe wrote. Furthermore using your criteria, biographies should be rejected if not written by the person. This is simply absurd.

Thats is not the reason for rejecting Bible. Main reason is believe in the Quran. This is so obvious that does not normally need to be pointed out. Subsequently the bible is:

A canon, altered, and has plenty of logical, numerical, theological, scientific, and historical errors.

2. The first Gospel was written as early as 70 AD, 40 years after Jesus' resurrection. It was written by the Apostle Matthew; who was with Jesus for his entire ministry. Your accusation of 100 years is incorrect. The writings of the Church Fathers from the First Century quote the Gospels which confirms that Matthews Gospel existed at this time.

There are SO many Christian sources that say this. Not me. As I said even little Guideon has this in into. They give it 70-100 margin. Dont side step this. Go an find out. If you wish then I will give you refeences.

3. Explain how "a fact of history is unreliable." This is illogical. Historical facts are reliable and thus does not make knowledge unreliable.

Which "Fact of History" - history is mostly based around unreliable evidence. Unless there is too large a body of evidence ... Plus each unique "HISTORICAL FACT" as you put it is on its own merit. Why did you ask this general question? You had a reason for it - But did not mention it.

4. The accusation of the Bible being changed is another unfounded Islamic accusation. Christianity began with preaching. Jesus preached his message and the Apostles preached what He taught them. As the Church grew and more came to believe in Jesus, His life and teachings were written down and shared and used for evangelizing and educating the faithful.

4 main gospels are ALL slightly different - enough that it matters. The book is inaccurate. Second you fail to understand why it being "canonical" make it so. These are Christianity's own evidence. The other side is Muslim believe stemming from the Quran and Hadith.

Hence you have simply repeated "Christian" mantra without giving a single reason. This is really pointless.

You ignore the criteria of how the Canon was compiled. This is your choice. You've already demonstrated that your logic is flawed.

How? it is simply not good enough to make such a statement - without back it up. You should have pointed it out. From what I have wrote previously.

5. Having scripture written by other Apostles that corroborates the same messages and beliefs actually strengthens the validity and reliability of the source.

They do not corroborate - they differ. For example the Gospel of Mark itself has several differing versions. Most trivial differences. But differences never the less. The book was a narration from St peter. it is majority view of "Western" scholars that the actual author is unknown. It is a 2nd century source that name Mark the Evangelist as its author.

Gospel of John - again its not the gospel but other sources that name the author. Gospel of Mathew drew from several sources including Mark. Again Gospel of Luke draws from Mark.

To assert that these were independent evidences is wrong - not even most Christian Bible Scholars hold that view. As demonstrated above it doesn't strengthen but weaken the evidence. One story with different accounts is worse off than One Story - One Account. Especially if the accounts borrow from each other and other unknown sources.

Paul didn't change dietary requirements. Peter had a vision that allowed him to eat meat from animals that have cloved feet. Jesus first miracle was turning water into wine. Jews drank wine. You are imposing the Islamic prohibitions onto Jesus. This is another mistake you make. You do not understand Jesus' mission. He did start with his fellow Jews but Jesus also performed miracles that benefited non-Jews. Furthermore, Jesus' Apostles preached His message of salvation to Jews as well as non-Jews. I would have you read Acts of the Apostles.

Again either you are not aware of basic Christianity or deliberately being partial with the truth. The wine mentioned even according to Christian does not refer to alcoholic drink. Thus Jesus never drank Alcohol. Second:

Peter had a vision that allowed him to eat meat from animals that have cloved feet.

So Jesus did not eat Pig meat - neither does Bible permit it. How does "visions" of peter alter religious law?

These prohibition were JEWISH. Not Islamic - You might have had either the good sense and honesty here. But you chose not to. Again this is really easy and basic to understand. Rather than give a good answer you chose to attack the basis of the argument with dishonesty. Unwise move.

St. Paul stated that all food is clean in his letter to the Romans 14:20. St. Paul said this due to ( Ephesians 2:14-15) that Jesus had abolished the Law with all its commandments and regulations.

Where as Jesus says:

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. ¹⁹ Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. ²⁰ For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven."

Matthew 5:17-20

So according to you a vision - that could have been from Satan to mislead - was authoritative enough to cancel hard law set by higher legislative authority. Try answering this rather than going down the road of:

"Oh you are imposing Islam" - when so not the the case.

7. Now you give me your opinion and not reliable facts when you say that you don't believe God crucified someone. This is contrary to Islam. Islam teaches that a man was crucified in Jesus' place. Islamic scholars have said the same thing, a person was crucified in Jesus' place.

Again dishonesty or you could not understand:

Muslim view of this is that Jesus was saved and a person of similar appearances was took. Responsiblity of crime committed is to the committer. I dont think "God" was crucifying anyone.

The above is what I wrote. It says responsibility of crucifixion is with the people who committed the act. This was in answer to your idiotic assertion that god was responsible. Plus it clearly say that another person was taken. So your new assertion false as well. Try at least to get basic sense of something right. And relay on those basis. Rather than falsifying what I said. It make you look silly when I point it out.

Water is in essence H20. But water can exist in three states.... gas, liquid, and solid. In each of these three states, it appears different. But at the core of its essence, it is still H20. God is God at His essence. God manifests to HIS creation as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Jesus instructed His Apostles to use this when baptizing a person.

Water is always in one state at a time. Unless it is three different sets of water placed in three different situation.

Again trinity of Christianity is 3 separate individuals. But according to Bible - if Jesus was calling some father and praying to him - It makes him of lesser authority. Second him manifestation in limited form from unlimited form of being God - or at least beyond human understanding - is a lesser quality. Again so is him being sacrificed and being killed by mere humans.

Holy ghost - you do not learn much about in Bible - Sketchy at best. But seems to at the besk and call of you main God.

9. I did not misqoute when I accused the Qur'an of error in the the aya that denies Jesus as the Son of God. You say it pertains to the Messiah. The Qur'an does refer to Jesus as the Messiah. I am referring to the denial of His divinity when using the name Jesus Christ. It is illogical for the Qur'an to refer to Jesus as the Messiah in one aya and deny it in another.

Again I answered this and again you chose to ignore it and re-assert your view. "Messiah" does not mean divine - not even to Christian Scholars. The divine aspect is separate an a Christian believe. As to Messiah he was.

It is illogical for the Qur'an to refer to Jesus as the Messiah in one aya and deny it in another.

This is OBVIOUSLY untrue. Not serious scholar uphold this. The "divinity" is denied not being the promised Messiah. Plus you did not even have the honesty to look this up. Yet reiterate the same view.

10. The aya denying Jesus as being Divine and yet using the word Christ is illogical and thus an error. The intended audience is Christians. Because it is intended for Christians, the erroneous use of Christ in His name and then denying His Divinity is valid. You can call the analogy anything you want but Christians would discern this as illogical.

Again you do not mention anything of what I said. Again reiterate the same view. I answered you this. You can call the analogy anything you want but Christians would discern this as illogical.

So why is this point just yous - and no actual scholar says it. Again where did i give an analogy that you allude to. You hold this view - and all you have done is repeated. And you have already expressed that you will continue to hold on to this falsehood - despite anything. Which in itself shows your attitude is not to listen, argue or converse - but it is to state your views. You have failed to answer to anything I wrote previously - yet re-iterated your views. A pointless exercise.

Go back and read the answer i gave you - understand What I said. Then see how you feel. Your "view" is so silly that any fair-minded scholar will laugh at you.

11. I quoted Peter's answer to Jesus when asked "Who do people say that I am?" The Qur'an uses the word "Christ" when denying Jesus' divinity. The Wiki links talk about the Messiah and Anointed. Christians understand Christ to mean not only the Messiah but also the Son of God as Peter confessed. This is an accepted Christian belief.

Yes and that is only and only Christian view - not the general meaning of the word. Messiah come from Jewish belief. Which Christianity later changed to suit its need. And added divinity. Jewish promise was the last Prophet to them and that was Jesus. After that there has been no claim of Prophethood from Jews. Last was Jesus - which Christians take as God.

What is the use of quoting Chrisitian beliefs at someone who you know is not Christians.

------------

If all you are going to do is deliberately or otherwise misquote, re-iterate your views and beliefs. Then not interested. If you want a PROPER debate then answer the above with honesty and understanding.

Else don't bother to waste your and my time.

Second - I have fairly good and in-depth understanding of Christian belief as i have studied the subject at SOAS.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".