Who is the prophet in Deuteronomy 18:18?

[thaiv]

Hold up....The Bible is supposed to be "altered" and corrupt right? It has been claimed by many Muslims that this is so. Why trust the reading of Deut. 18:18 then? Oh ok I get it......

Its ok to take stuff from the Bible when it supposedly confirms something believed by an individual but of course its corrupted so one should not look at the rest that does not fit his premise.

Makes perfect sense.

Yes, I quoted myself. Nobody has responded to this...why?

 

[IronEagle]

Yes, I quoted myself. Nobody has responded to this...why?

b'coz if you read the thread, it is already been answered.

As-salamu 'ala man ettab'al Huda
(Peace upon he who follows the true guidance)

My friend, Nobel Quran mention that the "Injeel" is altered not vanished..
So we believe that the now aday bible has few of the true God's Word but not all

Actually We Muslims have no hesitation in acknowledging that in the Bible, there are three different kinds of witnessing recognizable without any need of specialized training. These are:

1. You will be able to recognize in the Bible what may be described as "The Word of God."

(a) I will raise them up a prophet . . . and I will put my words in ... and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." (Deuteronomy 18:18)
(b) I even, I am the Lord, and beside me there is no saviour." (Isaiah 43:11)
(c) "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the end of the earth: for I am God, and there is non else." (Isaiah 45:22)
Note the first person pronoun singular (highlighted in green) in the above references, and without any difficulty you will agree that the statements seem to have the sound of being GOD'S WORD.

2. You will also be able to discern what can be described as the "Words of a Prophet of God."

(a) "Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying Eli, Eli, lama sabachtani? . . ." (Matthew 27:46)
(b) "And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord:" (Mark 12:29)
(c) "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is God." (Mark 10:18).
Even a child will be able to affirm that: Jesus "cried" Jesus "answered" and Jesus "said" are the words of the one to whom they are attributed, i.e. the WORDS OF A PROPHET OF GOD.

3."Words of a Historian" : you will most readily observe that the bulk of the Bible is the records of eye witnessess or ear witnesses, or people writing from hearsay

* "And seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he, (JESUS) came, if haply he (JESUS) might find anything thereon: and when he (JESUS) came to it, (Jesus) found nothing but leaves . . ." (Mark 11:13)

The bulk of the Bible is a witnessing of this THIRD kind. These are the words of a third person. Note the underlined pronouns. They are not the Words of God or of His prophet, but the WORDS OF A HISTORIAN.

Now for the Muslim:
It is quite easy to distinguish the above types of evidence in Islam, because he also has them in his own faith. But of the followers of the different religions, he is the most fortunate in this that his various records are contained in separate Books!

ONE: The first kind — THE WORD OF GOD — is found in a Book called The Holy Qur’an.

TWO: The second kind — THE WORDS OF THE PROPHET OF GOD, (Muhummed, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are recorded in the Books of Tradition called The Hadith.

THREE: Evidence of the third kind abounds in different volume of Islamic history, written by some of high integrity and learning, and others of lesser trustworthiness, but the Muslim advisedly keeps his Books in separate volumes!
The Muslim keeps the above three types of evidence Jealously apart, in their proper gradations of authority. He never equates them. On the other hand, the "Holy Bible" contains a motley type of literature, which composes the embarrassing kind, the sordid, and the obscene — all under the same cover — A Christian is forced to concede equal spiritual import and authority to all, and is thus unfortunate in this regard.

I hope that clears the matter for u my friend

 

[crystalpc]

b'coz if you read the thread, it is already been answered.

And I asked when was the OT corrupted no one has answered that. When was it corrupted, what date???

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

And I asked when was the OT corrupted no one has answered that. When was it corrupted, what date???

I don't see NT proven corrupt either except a few cheap shots interpreting a few verses here and there out of the biblical context. There is no date that too...

 

[thaiv]

Seems to me like its a matter of picking and choosing what sounds good to one's ears.

 

[thaiv]

sry double post

 

[thaiv]

What basis is there for splitting up the Bible into categories and choosing what the word of God and the words of the prophets of God are?

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

The bulk of the Bible is a witnessing of this THIRD kind. These are the words of a third person. Note the underlined pronouns. They are not the Words of God or of His prophet, but the WORDS OF A HISTORIAN.

Not entirely correct. If you are, as shown above, ARE ABLE to seperate and discern what is from who, then I suggest you READ THE ENTIRE BIBLE to see that every group you have identified is equally distributed in the Bible. Furthermore, while you discredit the THIRD persons, (because they are simply third persons) you also forget that you are also dicrediting the indwelling HOLY SPIRIT of God they had. You also disregard that God uses HIS PEOPLE. My friend, God did not act on His plan as you assert according to the islamic doctrine you have learnt. You arrive this position by using islamic standards, while you accept it as truth, it doesn't make it so, nor it makes the Bible corrupt.

 

[crystalpc]

What basis is there for splitting up the Bible into categories and choosing what the word of God and the words of the prophets of God are?

There is none Thaiv, since scripture plainly tells us:

2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2Ti 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[IronEagle]

Seems to me like its a matter of picking and choosing what sounds good to one's ears.

No offence, but I see and hear majority of christians do the same (including my relatives). They say they don't completely follow the bible, because some parts makes sense, while others parts don't. Thus, they leave the parts that doesn't make sense to them.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

On the other hand, the "Holy Bible" contains a motley type of literature, which composes the embarrassing kind, the sordid, and the obscene — all under the same cover — A Christian is forced to concede equal spiritual import and authority to all, and is thus unfortunate in this regard.

I hope that clears the matter for u my friend

It only clears the islamic position and that doesn't make it is the hard fact or truth. It can be used for educational purposes. God inspired 40+ men from different generations and cultures and whatever he put in that Scripture is NOT there as an embarrassment, but for teaching reasons. Read For thinking God would not do such thing is limiting him in the first place, but we admit that islam have a different view and perception of God, which again doesn't make Him so.

2 Tim 3

14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

After this scripture, the parts you call sordid, embarrasing, obscene shows us that you like to lead the idea how God should be like. Aren't we all free to do so?

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

They say they don't completely follow the bible, because some parts makes sense, while others parts don't. Thus, they leave the parts that doesn't make sense to them.

First, application of Scripture to life is irrelevant to the topic we are talking about. Second, Tell THE MAJORITY CHRISTIANS (as we are minority I guess) to quit living a PC life, and that they are wrong to do.

 

[IronEagle]

And I asked when was the OT corrupted no one has answered that. When was it corrupted, what date???

Just a side note: OT is considered less corrupt than NT. As for NT, here is some info that might shed some light on this issue:

Allegations that the Vatican suppressed the publication of the scrolls were published in the 1990s, notably by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, whose book The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception contains a popularized version of speculations by Robert Eisenman that some scrolls actually describe the early Christian community, characterized as more fundamentalist and rigid than the one portrayed by the New Testament, and that the life of Jesus was deliberately mythicized by Paul, possibly a Roman agent who faked his "conversion" from Saul in order to undermine the influence of anti-Roman messianic cults in the region.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

I don't know the credibility of the following information, nonetheless, it is something to look into.

the modern bible is a blur, a lot of the things that we take as christian these days have incorrections which have links tied with other religions and religious symbols and events, ironically especially paganism, theres text from old pagan temples predating the bible of a celtic symbol of a cross symbolising a goddess, the cross itself is a pagan symbol which was adapted to be a christian one by the fact that they claim that jesus was crucified apon one (though it seems odd that the romans would have crucified someone apon a symbol they considered spiritual and the fact no historial can recollect anyone ever being crucified at this time as the romans burned people at the stakes when they were not feeding them to the lions) more curiouser is christmas which is actually another pagan holiday, the date of jesus's birth can be worked out but it isnt december 25th, its more likely to have been early january, this shows another attempt by the church to merge religions to tempt more people to convert, things such as the lamb, the fish, the holy trinity...

Source: http://xtcomputing.com/showthread.php?t=163&page=8&pp=10

 

[crystalpc]

I am still waiting to hear these specific dates.
Conclusion: If there are no specific dates then there must not have been any changes or corruption. Except in the minds of muslims.
If there were no changes, that means Islam is wrong, because it teaches another gospel.

 

[crystalpc]

Just a side note: OT is considered less corrupt than NT. As for NT, here is some info that might shed some light on this issue:


I don't know the credibility of the following information, nonetheless, it is something to look into.

give me a date!

 

[crystalpc]

Just a side note: OT is considered less corrupt than NT. As for NT, here is some info that might shed some light on this issue:
Just a side note: OT is considered less corrupt than NT. As for NT, here is some info that might shed some light on this issue:

Quote:

Allegations that the Vatican suppressed the publication of the scrolls were published in the 1990s, notably by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, whose book The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception contains a popularized version of speculations by Robert Eisenman that some scrolls actually describe the early Christian community, characterized as more fundamentalist and rigid than the one portrayed by the New Testament, and that the life of Jesus was deliberately mythicized by Paul, possibly a Roman agent who faked his "conversion" from Saul in order to undermine the influence of anti-Roman messianic cults in the region.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls

I don't know the credibility of the following information, nonetheless, it is something to look into.

This is exactly what I wanted to know! The second link is opinion.

 

[crystalpc]

Now if the old testament has not been corrupted, Muhammed waswrong!
If he was wrong about the Old Testament, then don't you think he might have been wrong about the New Testament too??

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

and that the life of Jesus was deliberately mythicized by Paul, possibly a Roman agent who faked his "conversion" from Saul in order to undermine the influence of anti-Roman messianic cults in the region.

Rome was powerful enough TO PERSECUTE ALL CHRISTIANS, ALL MESSIANICS, there was no need to have an agent TO START a new religion to undermine them, locating and terminating them would be enough as it had been done. Furthermore no Rome agent would die for the cause of a new religion he has been told to start by his own Emperor willingly.

 

[HumbleSiPilot77]

Also I am interested in the deliberate OMISSION of this statement when you have provided the paragraph about Paul.

Eisenman's own theories, themselves not always convincing, merely attempt to relate the career of James the Just and Paul to some of these documents.

 

[IronEagle]

Not to mention, you don't see things like crusifixion, trinity, and these other symbols of modern christianity, in ealry christian art. I always wonder why is that?

Second, Tell THE MAJORITY CHRISTIANS (as we are minority I guess) to quit living a PC life, and that they are wrong to do.

First, I don't what you mean by PC life, but I'm talking about modernism (specifically: sex, nudity, abortion, etc.)

Anyways, this is offtopic for this thread, I would like to discuss this next time on another thread. My time is up, ttyl.

Have a good day (or night)