Bible Debate (ATTN: searching_soul)

[NewMuslim]

:salam2: wa barakatuh wa rahmatallah
This discussion was started in the "Christmas" thread, but it was closed since it got too off topic. So, let's continue this debate in this thread. I'll post my last post here, also...

Written years afterwards, yet all in agreement. It wasn't expected back then that the writers of such scripts would always give their real names. It was commonplace to sign things with the names of real apostles. It wasn't necessarily intended to be deceitful. Who do you believe about the choosing of the books? Also online, I've read that the books not chosen had authors just too far removed from the actual time and place of the events. How would we know what was in them if they were burned, by the way? It doesn't change the fact that the books we have left are considered by some scholars to contain no real contradictions on closer inspection.

...Not all of the books not chosen were burned, such as the Apocalypse of Peter and the Gospel of Barnabas (which say that Jesus didn't die on the cross and mentions the Shahadah, respectively).

Looking at this from a secular-historian point of view, Constantine and a group of Romans put together the Bible and the "Nicea Creed". This was called the "Council of Nicea".

Also, the Gospel of John (seen by many Christians as the best of them) has some contradictions upon which Matthew, Luke, and Mark all agree with. And all of the Gospels contradict each other, from major things to minor things (minor such as what Jesus said when he died).

Look at this site for some of them:
http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...adictions.html

The Apocalypse of Peter was wirtten before 64 A.D., the death date of Peter. The Gospel of Barnabas was written (as some believe) by Paul's close companion, Barnabas. Meanwhile, the Gospels were all written in 2nd Century A.D., very far from the average lifespan today not to mention back 2,000 years ago when not washing the hands was thought to be healthy.

When it comes to not signing your real name to what you wrote: It isn't a real issue nowadays who wrote books (like Ghostwriters using Tom Clancy's name in books that seem to be written by Tom Clancy). But when it comes to the Gospels, it's a MAJOR issue. If the Apostles didn't write it, then how would they know how Jesus lived His life? I can't write an accurate biography/sayings/teachings of a man 100+ years after his death!

 

[searching soul]

Haha, whoops, sorry, I was off in the Lounge doing another one (thought it seemed out of place for a Christian to start a thread like this in the Islamic Discussion forum). I've answered your last post over there. http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?p=24134#post24134 I could copy and paste my post to here and delete it, or do you want to delete this one?

 

[searching soul]

I see you've gone, so I've posted my reply here as well. Couldn't delete my thread though. Moderators: Would you delete that version if you want to get rid of one, please? Thank you.
Aaaaaaaanyway...


Not all agree that the gospels contradict each other. See here:
http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties_6.htm

As for the one you mention specifically: http://www.carm.org/diff/Mark15_34.htm
I personally see also another way this can be interpreted.

Scientists are returning to the idea that not washing hands to such an extent is healthy. As with the eating of raw meat, we in most societies have lost our immunity to cope with what would otherwise be healthier for us. Our hygiene levels have produced generations with far more allergies than before and much weaker immune systems. People's average shorter life spans back then would be due in part to the lack of medical knowledge to treat problems we don't see as serious. However, the lack of social care for the poor and relatively extreme stresses of living at that time would have contributed considerably, so individuals who had superior diets (often superior to the standard Western diet) and lifestyles could have bucked the trend. Paul, for one, was born to a privileged family, and being a devout Jew during that time, would have grown up with a happy medium as far as hygiene goes. Not to mention the wonders that being an early apostle of God could do for your expected lifespan. :wink: Anyway, I will do more research into the opinions of when the gospels were written, and may get back to you on that. Here is one person's arguments for their being written within the first century AD: http://www.carm.org/evidence/written_after.htm (Sorry, but this site does seem to cover everything. It's hard to resist that level of convenience. :tongue

How did the writers of the gospels know how Jesus lived His life? Hehe, Christian preachers too might say that in debate! Whether due to loyal reporting and recording from earlier disciples or divine revelation, they appear to have done it remarkably well, in many people's opinion.

 

[samiha]

Assalamu alaykum.

To make things easier... I will have to delete searching soul 's last thread and then sence this really isn't an 'Islamic' discussion... move this to the lounge. I hope nobody minds this arrangement.

 

[searching soul]

That's fine with me, Samiha. Sorry for the trouble. I'm not usually such a nuisance in a single day.

 

[NewMuslim]

I see you've gone, so I've posted my reply here as well. Couldn't delete my thread though. Moderators: Would you delete that version if you want to get rid of one, please? Thank you.
Aaaaaaaanyway...


Not all agree that the gospels contradict each other. See here:
http://www.carm.org/bible_difficulties_6.htm

That, my friend, is called "Cafeteria Christianity" (I.E. "pick-and-choose"). Some parts Matt Slick takes as literal, while some parts he doesn't. How is he to know what parts to take literally and not literally when others take it literally?

Such as the Catholic Church taking one verse literally, while the Orthodox Churches take it as a metaphor. Who is right? There's no way to find out...

As for the one you mention specifically: http://www.carm.org/diff/Mark15_34.htm
I personally see also another way this can be interpreted.

Slick basically takes one Gospel verse and overules it over all the others. Even if it were Luke, then that would mean that the Gospel of Matthew is false since it was written before Luke and has a different statement made by Jesus.

http://www.carm.org/evidence/written_after.htm (Sorry, but this site does seem to cover everything. It's hard to resist that level of convenience. :tongue

lol, I went to that site a LOT when I was a Christian; it's convient but the arguments aren't too good (other Christians confirm this)...

Anyways, Slick directs us to another article of his stating that Matthew was the first written Gospel, but yet Matthew "took some things from Mark". How is this possible if Mark was written after Matthew...WAY after Matthew?

Slick also states in the article that all the Gospels but John are NOT eyewitness accounts. Doesn't this support my argument about me writing a book about what a man said/taught/did even though I never met him?

Obviously if Matthew wasn't an eyewitness account, it wasn't written by Matthew (because Matthew was an Apostle).

The writer of the gospel of John was obviously an eyewitness of the events of Christ's life since he speaks from a perspective of having been there during many of the events of Jesus' ministry and displays a good knowledge of Israeli geography and customs.

How does this prove that John wrote the Gospel of John (the only valid one since it was the only eyewitness account according to Slick)? Any historian would know the geography and culture of Israel.

Also, I can speak from a perspective of being with someone, also (even though I wasn't). For example, let's say you just went to a funeral.

"I accompanied searching_soul to the funeral of her aunt and she was crying before she prayed. She then said to the people 'I loved this women' and ran away".

Obviously I made this up, but it could pass as me writing it as an eyewitness if people 1,900 years ahead of the time of me writing this read it without any background knowledge.

How did the writers of the gospels know how Jesus lived His life? Hehe, Christian preachers too might say that in debate! Whether due to loyal reporting and recording from earlier disciples or divine revelation, they appear to have done it remarkably well, in many people's opinion.

The above argument applies.

Also, I'll direct you to this site: http://answering-christianity.com ; it's a great site that basically answers Christianity and its minister and also anti-Islam people on the web. People such as Sam Shamoun (of Answering Islam) and Matt Slick (of the Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry).

 

[NewMuslim]

Assalamu alaykum.

To make things easier... I will have to delete searching soul 's last thread and then sence this really isn't an 'Islamic' discussion... move this to the lounge. I hope nobody minds this arrangement.

That's fine. I should've checked searching-soul's thread before I made my own...

 

[NewMuslim]

:salam2:
I was debating someone else and thought I should post the arguments I used here...

Assalamu Alaykum (peace be upon you)
Youtube is stopping me from posting in the comments section, so I'll continue it here (if you don't mind)...

Even IF the argument I said about the whole kingdom and generation stuff is false, there's no denying this one (and it is VERY clear...)

Mark 13:


2 - "Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
3 - As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately,
4 - "Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?"

...

10 - And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. (note that some translators translate this as "people"; either way it works)

...

24 - "But in those days, following that distress, " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light;
25 the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'
26 - "At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.
27 - And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

...


29 - Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it is near, right at the door.
30 - I tell you the truth, this generation [5] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
31 - Heaven and earth will pass away...

Next argument from http://www.answering-christianity.com/jesus_false_prophecies.htm...


"Note on Foot Note #5: The NIV Bible translators had put the word "race" in their foot note, while the original translations don't have that word! They have "generation":

"Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done. (From the King James Version Bible, Mark 13:30)"

"Verily I say to you, that this generation may not pass away till all these things may come to pass; (Young's Literal Translation, Mark 13:30)"

None of these older and more original translations have foot notes for this verse."

Another undeniable one...
I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God." (From the NIV Bible, Luke 9:23-27)"


If you don't mind, I'll send this to the other people who posted responses for your video so that they can know and use these arguments Insha'Allah (God-Willing).

Wa alaykum salam (and peace be upon you)

 

[searching soul]

NewMuslim, I’m very sorry I haven’t replied sooner. I wanted to read some of your link and think over it all before replying, and I haven’t had as much time as I’d like, what with exams, finding a new job etc. Also had a crisis of confidence about being involved in this thread at all. I’ve been busy re-evaluating my beliefs and have at least concluded that I’m the wrong person to be having this discussion with you. There are many people more knowledgeable and authoritative than me about the subject, and all I can do is quote some people who, at the end of the day, may or may not genuinely fall into that category. While most of the arguments made in answering_Christianity.com aren’t don’t prove anything significant about the Bible in my opinion, there are two pages whose information I’m still looking in to and cross-referencing. It seems to me that I’ll never know the truth that way, comparing arguments and interpretations. There’s just a never-ending stream of argument and counter-argument. Instead, I’m basing my ultimate decision on a) which documents appear to have had the least possible incentive for lying, b) which belief system seems backed up by my own personal experience and that of others, and c) which belief system makes the most philosophical sense to me. These are relatively subjective, but they’re the best I’ve got. But as for the specific points you make.

That, my friend, is called "Cafeteria Christianity" (I.E. "pick-and-choose"). Some parts Matt Slick takes as literal, while some parts he doesn't. How is he to know what parts to take literally and not literally when others take it literally?

Such as the Catholic Church taking one verse literally, while the Orthodox Churches take it as a metaphor. Who is right? There's no way to find out...

Who doesn't take some parts literally and others not? I challenge anyone to read the Bible either entirely literally or entirely figuratively. We can be as sure as it's wise to be sure of anything that there is figurative language in there, for example, as I've heard one minister point out, "the Bible... says God is a rock. That does not mean that God is made of granite." How could you not read God claiming to be a rock figuratively? We can also be sure that some parts are literal, as the Bible describes events that secular historians agree actually happened as it says they did, such as the various changes of leadership in Rome. Not everything is so clear-cut, but we know that the Bible uses both methods of getting messages across, so it doesn't make sense to criticise people who try to interpret various parts as either one or the other. I can't imagine any adult not doing this. It is obviously advisable to not do so according to which verses you'd prefer to be literal or otherwise, as Mr. Slick points out several times in the course of the site. Instead, all the evidence available should be considered in deciding which is likely in each case. In my opinion, if the evidence isn't very conclusive, we shouldn't just anchor ourselves stubbornly to the interpretation we think somewhat more likely for the sake of making a decision. The understanding of the underlying principles expressed are usually the same whether taken literally or not.

Also, don't some Muslims believe that the descriptions of Paradise in the Koran are literal and others that they're figurative while taking most of it literally?

There’s a fundamental difference between the two religions, which might be making the ambiguity of much of the Bible seem a major weakness. That is that the vast majority of Bible-believers (again, Catholics are the only exception I can think of about this, and it’s because they believe many, many more writings to be divinely inspired than the Bible) don’t believe that the main goal of Christianity is to change people’s physical behaviour, whereas Islam appears to put great importance on the correct interpretation and implementation of God’s will for this. When someone’s spiritual dynamics change, their outward behaviour will adjust to suit it, i.e. someone who truly believes the whole message about themselves and God will naturally alter their behaviour to that which they think God wants. However, if they fail to God’s ideal for external behaviour, those that taught them won’t feel they’ve failed their principle mission. The existence of so many Christian denominations that for the most part consider each other to be of the same religion and promoting the same cause is another result of this peculiarity of Christianity. Accurate interpretation of actually very few of the total doctrines in the Bible is considered to be vital. Not because it’s a ‘softer’ religion to follow, but because humans can’t ‘earn’ status of being deserving when they’re fundamentally not, so the process and challenge of getting a relationship with God through deciphering His word by yourself is worth the large risk that many decisions won’t be those that fuller understanding of God would lead you to make.

Slick basically takes one Gospel verse and overules it over all the others. Even if it were Luke, then that would mean that the Gospel of Matthew is false since it was written before Luke and has a different statement made by Jesus.

I disagree. Perhaps it's not expressed as clearly as it could be, but what he does is integrate all the verses, not overrule any. In my opinion, it isn’t proved that the verses don’t contradict each other, but neither can we prove that they do. It comes down to whether their original writers each meant that their quotation was the last thing Jesus said. It’s tempting to infer that from each of them, as we like to think the last words mentioned of someone in whom we’re extremely interested are the last spoken. What I believe Mr. Slick implies is that each gospel mentions parts of the story that others don’t. I also think it’s only really useful to discuss the interpretation of the words in their original language, which I can’t find and don’t speak. While the translations I’ve seen make it tempting to think that the last words mentioned in each book are the last spoken, it may be that in the early readers wouldn’t have jumped to this conclusion. Perhaps the writers of each gospel knew only as much as they each told about some things. It's also widely thought that the later gospel writers were likely familiar with the earlier gospels, hence the varying focus and themes.

Even IF the argument I said about the whole kingdom and generation stuff is false, there's no denying this one (and it is VERY clear...)

Mark 13:


2 - "Do you see all these great buildings?" replied Jesus. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."
3 - As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately,
4 - "Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?"

...

10 - And the gospel must first be preached to all nations. (note that some translators translate this as "people"; either way it works)

...

24 - "But in those days, following that distress, " 'the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light;
25 the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'
26 - "At that time men will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory.
27 - And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

...


29 - Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it is near, right at the door.
30 - I tell you the truth, this generation [5] will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.
31 - Heaven and earth will pass away...

Next argument from http://www.answering-christianity.co...prophecies.htm...

Most scholars believe that this verse refers to the distruction of the Jewish temple in 70 A.D. The events described are not those of Judgement Day. Here's an indepth discussion of the verse from another forum:
http://www.gcts.edu/ockenga/semlink/bb/viewtopic.php?id=874

"Note on Foot Note #5: The NIV Bible translators had put the word "race" in their foot note, while the original translations don't have that word! They have "generation":

"Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done. (From the King James Version Bible, Mark 13:30)"

"Verily I say to you, that this generation may not pass away till all these things may come to pass; (Young's Literal Translation, Mark 13:30)"

None of these older and more original translations have foot notes for this verse."

Older translations aren't necessarily more accurate. Our understanding of the various dialects and customs has increased since the time of the KJV, so I'd trust modern ones more. Ideally I'd like to speak Hebrew and Greek for myself though; translations are just that. Anyway, see the above web address for perspectives on that verse.

I want to thank you for the discussion, for your time and information. You’ve certainly give me food for thought and I’ll continue to seek answers. I don’t think I’ll be around here very much for a while. Just don’t have the time for Internet forums anymore. I will offer my take on any further comments you make in this thread, however. I just don't think I'm qualified to represent Bible believers the way I've come across as doing so far. For one thing, my faith is not even founded in Biblical inerrancy. It's a probability to me, but believing differently wouldn't terribly upset or convert me. Instead I recommend you find fully educated and qualified Christian apologists, as I've been doing. I'm not at all morally comfortable with setting my self up as the face of Christianity on a public forum. Highly likely I'll misrepresent it, as I've inadvertently done already on here.

 

[NewMuslim]

As Salaamu Alaykum
Thank you for your post. Hopefully, you're re-evaluating your beliefs according to your own thinking?

The Qur'an says that we should verify all things we hear with all of our senses. Meaning, we shouldn't just accept what others say without carefully evaluating the matter.

This debate (Insha'Allah) won't go on anymore, since it was wrong for me to debate in the first place. Allah (SWT) guides whom He wills, so debating will do nothing but waste time.

I hope that you find Islam, but only Allah (SWT) has the final say on that matter. I just hope that no Muslims lose faith because of the ending of this debate (because of leaving your objections open).

My last word of advise to you: don't accept anything said from a Muslim or a Christian or anybody unless you yourself verify it VERY carefully. You must think for yourself, and use reason. If a man tells you that Jesus is God, verify it yourself and don't accept what he says!

Allah (SWT) says this in the Qur'an. Also, the 4 Imams (leaders) of the 4 Sunni Madhabs of Islam (Schools of Thought) have said to not accept anything they say unless you rigorously verify it.

If you verify everything you hear and if you read the Qur'an to soak in it's message (listen also to Arabic recitations of the Qur'an at http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/quran/ while also being able to read the Qur'an online). Go to http://freequran.com and click on "New Muslims gift" to recieve a whole set of books on Islam, including the Abdullah Yusuf Ali English translation of it.

May Allah (SWT) guide you to the straight path. Ameen.

 

[Praise2Allah]

Salam alaikom (peace be unto you). If the Bible we have today is Gods word, then, it shouldnt have any mistakes.. Well there are hundreds. How can anyone explain that?


"It is mentioned in Ezra, Ch. No.2, Verse No.1, and Nehemiah, Ch. No.7, Verse No.6, the context that… ‘When the people returned from exile, from Babylon, when king Nebucheldeser of Babylon, when he released the men from Israel, they came back from captivity’ - and the list of the people are given. The list is given in Ezra, Ch. No.2, Verse No.2 to 63, and Nehemiah Ch. No.7, Verse No.7 up to 65; the list is given with the names as well as number of people released. In these 60 Verses there are no less than 18 times - the name is exactly the same but the number is different. There are no less than 18 contradictions in less than 60 Verses, of these two Chapters. This is the list - I don’t have time to run through the list - There are no less than 18 different contradictions in less than 60 Verses. Further it is mentioned in Ezra, Ch. No.2 Verse No.64 that… ‘The total congregation, if you add up… if you add up, it comes to 42,360.’ And if you read in Nehemiah, Ch. No.7, Verse No.66, there also the total is the same 42,360. But if you add up all these verses - which I had to do my homework - this is the list of Ezra… this is the list of Nehemiah. Ezra Ch. No 2, Nehemiah Ch. No 7 - If you add up - I had to do my homework…if you add up, Ezra Ch. No. 2 - It does not come to 42,360 - it comes to 29,818. And if you add up Nehemiah, Ch. No. 7, even then it does not come to 42,360 - It comes to 31,089. The author of the Bible, presumed to be ‘Almighty God’, does not know simple addition. If you give this problem, even to a person who has passed elementary school, he will be able to get the right answer.

. ****** It is mentioned in the 2nd Kings, Chapter No.8, Verse No.26, it says that… ‘Ahezia… that Ahezia, he was 22 years old, when he began to reign.’ ******2nd Chronicles, Chapter No. 22, Verse No. 2, says that… ‘He was 42 years old, when he began to reign. ******Was he 22 years old, or was he 42 years old? - Mathematical contradiction. ******Further more, in 2nd Chronicles, Chapter No. 21, Verse No. 20, it says that… ‘Joaram, the father of Ahezia, he reigned at the age of 32 - and he reigned for 8 years, and he died at the age of 40. *****Immediately… Ahezia became the next ruler at the age of 42. ****** Father died at the age of 40 - Immediately son takes over, who is at the age of 42. ******How can a son, be two years older than the father?’ ******Believe me even... even in Hollywood, you will not be able to produce it. ******" Dr Zakir Naik famous Muslim debater with Dr William Cambel in there debate Bible and Quran in the light of Science. I suggest you all watch it, it is on u tube.

 

[mahdi]

There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, "That is from Allah," but it is not from Allah. It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!
there is no need to debate with the christians , because among them are people who invent a lie aginst allah, god tells not to dispute with the people of the book, . And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): but say, "We believe in the revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; Our Allah and your Allah is one; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)."
always try to to tell them the goodness of islam, but don't yell them about their corrubted book, just show the right path,

 

[Praise2Allah]

In the first five books of the Bible - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy - there are more than 700 statements which prove not only that God is NOT the Author of these books, but that EVEN Moses himself had no hand in them. Open these books at random and you will see:


"And the Lord said unto him, Away, get thee down..."
"And Moses said unto the Lord, the people cannot come..."
"And the Lord said unto Moses, Go on before the people..."
"And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying..."
"And the Lord said unto Moses, Get down, charge the..."


It is manifest and apparent that these are NEITHER the Words of God NOR of Moses. They indicate the voice of a third person writing from hearsay.

MOSES WROTE HIS OWN OBITUARY?

Could Moses had been a contributor to his own obituary before his demise? Did the Jews write their own obituaries? "So Moses ... DIED ... And he (God Almighty) BURIED HIM (Moses) ... he was 120 years old when he DIED ... And there arose not a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses ..." (Deut. 34:5-10). We will analyze the rest of the Old Testament presently from other angles.

Does this make sence? Moses peace be upon him writing "so Moses died..." can you imagine!! "And there arose not a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses ". Moses is writing this? Who are you kiding? Not me.

As for the Gospels:

"EARLY TRADITION ASCRIBED THIS GOSPEL TO THE APOSTLE MATTHEW, BUT SCHOLARS NOWADAYS ALMOST ALL REJECT THIS VIEW."

(the Gospels translated into modern English by J.B Phillips)

Why does he say this?

Because look at what scholars say the writer of the Gospel of Matthew if he was Matthew did:

"HE (Matthew) HAS USED MARK'S GOSPEL FREELY," (J.B Phillips in the Gospels translated into modern English) which in the language of the school-teacher - "has been copying WHOLESALE from Mark!"


Isaiah 37 and 2 Kings 19 are identical word for word. Yet they have been attributed to two different authors, centuries apart, whom the Christians claim have been inspired by God.
Who is copying whom? Who is stealing from whom? The 32 renowned Bible scholars of the RSV say that the author of the Book of Kings is "UNKNOWN!"

If u dont believe me that they are identical, here see for urselfhttp://www.ahmed-deedat.co.za/Books/books/itbgw/32.gif

Unkown author! So as far as technicality is conserned this guy could have even been a Hindu or an Athiest.

Not only that but they continue:

In the RSV by "Collins," invaluable notes* on "The Books of the Bible" are to be found at the back of their production on page 59 we start with "GENESIS" - the first book of the Bible. The scholars say about its "AUTHOR": "One of the 'five books of Moses'." Note the words "five books of Moses" are written in inverted commas - "." This is a subtle way of admitting that this is what people say - that it is the book of Moses, that Moses was its author, but we (the 32 scholars) who are better informed, do not subscribe to that tittle-tattel.

The next four books, "EXODUS, LEVITICUS, NUMBERS and DEUTERONOMY": AUTHOR? "Generally credited to Moses." This is the same category as the book of Genesis.

Who is the author of the book of "JOSHUA?" Answer: "Major part credited to Joshua."

NOT ALL! MAJOR PART.


Who is the author of the book of "JUDGES?" Answer: "Possibly Samuel."

Possibly.

Who is the author of "RUTH" Answer: "Not definitely known" AND

Who is the author of:
1ST SAMUEL?...................................... Answer: "Unknown"
2ND SAMUEL....................................... Answer: "Unknown"
1ST KING?.......................................... Answer: "Unknown"
2ND KING?......................................... Answer: "Unknown"


Why on earth am I to believe that this is a book from God? You dont even know who wrote it!

 

[searching soul]

As Salaamu Alaykum
Thank you for your post. Hopefully, you're re-evaluating your beliefs according to your own thinking?

The Qur'an says that we should verify all things we hear with all of our senses. Meaning, we shouldn't just accept what others say without carefully evaluating the matter.

This debate (Insha'Allah) won't go on anymore, since it was wrong for me to debate in the first place. Allah (SWT) guides whom He wills, so debating will do nothing but waste time.

I hope that you find Islam, but only Allah (SWT) has the final say on that matter. I just hope that no Muslims lose faith because of the ending of this debate (because of leaving your objections open).

My last word of advise to you: don't accept anything said from a Muslim or a Christian or anybody unless you yourself verify it VERY carefully. You must think for yourself, and use reason. If a man tells you that Jesus is God, verify it yourself and don't accept what he says!

Allah (SWT) says this in the Qur'an. Also, the 4 Imams (leaders) of the 4 Sunni Madhabs of Islam (Schools of Thought) have said to not accept anything they say unless you rigorously verify it.

If you verify everything you hear and if you read the Qur'an to soak in it's message (listen also to Arabic recitations of the Qur'an at http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/quran/ while also being able to read the Qur'an online). Go to http://freequran.com and click on "New Muslims gift" to recieve a whole set of books on Islam, including the Abdullah Yusuf Ali English translation of it.

May Allah (SWT) guide you to the straight path. Ameen.

Thank you for all your advice and comments. I agree with everything in this post.

A little update: My school has begun monitoring the computers for non-academic activities, so I'll have even less time to spend educating myself online. However, I will hopefully soon be visiting a church I haven't been to before, whose regulars appear to be very devout and serious about the Bible. They seem like the best people to be asking the kind of questions I have. I'll ask them why they have chosen the beliefs they have and I'll put my specific queries and doubts to their ministers. I also would like to visit a Mosque for the same reasons, although I don't know how to go about doing that. When is an appropriate time to seek one-to-one conversations with an Imam? Should I just phone ahead and ask? Any advice for such a meeting would be appreciated. I'm afraid I don't know much about the finer details of Islamic culture.

I also may simply ask God for guidance. Thus far I have been of the position that if God doesn't want to save me with the truth, and if I lack whatever quality may be necessary to do that, then it's not my place to 'change God's mind' about the issue. I should go it alone. Yet, how do I know that my asking isn't all He's waiting for? The Truth seems like a very small needle to be found in a very large haystack, which my mind just isn't large enough to permeate. The only thing larger than the haystack, I suppose, is God.

 

[loveislam1]

Mashallah
Searching Soul hello!
You can simply call the mosque to speak with an imam, there is no real protocall per say, I am sure he will just want to set up an appt time with you

May ALLAH subhana wa ta'ala answer your quest for the truth....asking with sincerity is really the best thing to do, why would Allah subhana wa ta'ala deny anyone the truth that willfully admits he is in need of guidance? May ALLAH subhana wa ta'ala reward you with guidance, may HE remove any doubt in your heart and instead fill it with wisdom and understanding ameen.:tti_sister: