السبت، أبريل 01، 2006

The Bible in the Quran:…Why the Holy Bible is not a fake

The purpose of me starting to publish a blog was actually so I can talk about things I am passionate about. The Coptic persecution issue is such a topic. Of course once I started talking about it, many discussions ensued, mainly between me and Muslim guests. One of the points that kept coming up was the claim that the Holy Bible is a fake and so we Christians have been lead astray.

Although they say curiosity killed the cat, I can’t help being a curious person. So I set off looking into this claim, not because I actually doubted the veracity of the Holy Bible…but because I was curious to know where people would come up with this idea!! I thought about whether to publish what I found or not, finally deciding that because my faith and my Bible definitely qualify for “things I’m passionate about” status, and that I don’t intend any offence to anyone, nor do I intend to prove that “my religion is better than yours”…that I will publish it after all.

I have refered in my search to the following websites:
http://www.al-islam.com/arb/
http://www.equran.org/

and I focused on how Allah refers to the scriptures delivered before the Quran. None of the explanations are my own, rather they are "tafseer" (explanation) of such Muslim scholars as Al Tabari, Al Qurtobi, and Ibn Katheer (see first link above).

___________________________

Q1) Do you believe that the Quran is the unaltered word of Allah?

Q2) Do you abide by all the teachings of the Quran?

Q3) Do you believe that Allah is capable of protecting His Holy Books?

If you answered yes to any/all of the above please consider the following Quranic verses.

1) 4:136 O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and His Messenger, and the scripture which He hath sent to His Messenger and the scripture which He sent to those before (him). Any who denieth Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messenger., and the Day of Judgment, hath gone far, far astray.

Al Qortobi explains that the scripture sent before the Quran refers to all scripture given to previous prophets. AlTabari explicitly refers to these scriptures as the Torah and Injil.

******

2) 57:27 Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our apostles: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel; and We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him Compassion and Mercy

3) 5:46 And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah.

In 2) and 3) Allah clearly says that He gave Issa (Jesus) the Injil (the Gospels), to light the way for people and confirm al torah (Al Tabari)

******

4) 10:94 If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt.

In the explanation of Al Qortobi, he explains that those who read the books before thee are the Jews. This is corroborated by the explanation of Ibn Katheer and Tabari.

******

5) 29:46 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)."

AlTabari again explicitly says that the people of the book are the Jews and Christians.

******

6) 5 :43 But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) law before them?- therein is the (plain) command of Allah. yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith.

In AlTabari’s explanation he says that this means why the Jews would go to Mohammad and accept his judgment when they can find resolution in the book that I gave to them. So a clear admission that the Torah is the Book of God

******

7) 21:7 Before thee, also, the apostles We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: If ye realise this not, ask of those who possess the Message.

Those who possess the message or Ahl Althikr are the people of the Torah and Injil according to Al Tabari’s tafseer.

******

8) 10:37 This Qur'an is not such as can be produced by other than Allah. on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the worlds.
________________________________________

So, from the above we learn that:
• Allah gave Jesus and Moses the Torah and Injil (which constitute the Holy Bible)
• The Quran is a confirmation of what Allah has delivered beforehand (Torah and Injil)
• Allah advises Mohammad that if he is in doubt, he should refer to the people of the Book (torah and injil)
• Therefore Muslims must believe in the Torah and Injil as well as the Quran



Ok, now for another set of questions:

1) Was the Bible falsified before or after Islam/Quran?

If it was falsified before the coming of Islam, then no doubt Allah would have known that. Why is Allah telling Mohammad all these great things about it if it has been corrupted? Why refer him to books that He knows are false?

Whether before or after Islam and the Quran: if you claim that today’s Bible is false, surely you must have compared it with what you believe is an original. Where is the original unaltered copy that this claim is based upon??



2) What of the copies of the Holy Bible in museums al around the world from different eras in many languages?

If someone wanted to corrupt the Bible, wouldn’t that have been found out already by comparing the corrupt version with the older versions displayed or kept in many locations around the world? or have they all been corrupted too? and how is that feasible?


3) Who falsified the Bible, Christians or Jews?

The Holy Bible consists of the Old Testament which we the Christians share with the Jews, and the New Testament which belongs to the Christians only.

If the Christians wanted to alter the Bible, is it reasonable to believe that the Jewish scholars let it slide?? And the opposite is true, if the Jews wanted to corrupt the Torah, wouldn’t the Old Testament in the Christian Bible be different to the Torah today? Is it reasonable to believe that the Church let it slide?

Unless the Jews and Christians corrupted it together? But how does that make sense when the very essence of Christianity is the belief in Jesus Christ as the Messiah, which our Jewish brothers and sisters are still waiting for?

4) There have been many councils in the history if Christianity, to discuss and quell heresies and preserve the faith of the church. Wouldn't there have a council also to stop the falsification ofthe Bible?

Furthermore, when the church split into Orthodox and Catholic, it was mainly over the translation of ONE word in the creed....is it then reasonable to believe that a falsification of the Holy Bible would have gone unnoticed by either church??

5) Last but not least; how would God allow His word to be altered?

Did He not say in sura 10:64

10:64 For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present and in the Hereafter; no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity.

And in Matthew 24:35
Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

Surely God the Almighty would have protected His word from the hands of misguided men. Surely God keeps His promises.
*******************************************

Injil= Gospel in Arabic

65 Comments:

Blogger maged salamah said...

Wonderful post bent el neel I wish they read carefully.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Bent:
One nitpicking correction ;) and a modest suggestion
The first one is you mean veracity of the Bibile; voracity mean great hunger. Which is a nice slip of the tongue.
Also you'll want to elaborate a bit for the Moslem by the 1 word difference in the creed that led to the split between Coptic and Catholics. It had nothing to do with bible falsicication but the understanding of Jesus' dual natures

You should reference the Council of Chalodia of 451 AD. If you want I could link up the Catholic perspective while you link the Coptic perspective.
Then you can point out that Catholics permit Copts to receive communion and the other sacraments in case the Copt can't find their own church at a reasonable distance. Same goes for the Catholic, though I'll defer to you as to what the Coptic policy is.

O dunno if the Copts have written a book where we got the bible but in English, a priest calld Fr William Most did write such a book. While it answers the old Protestant charge (I think it was written in the 20-30s but it's still in print) I think the book can also apply to Moslem skepticism on the bible's inerrancy.

One last thing, we need to ask Moslem if the koran really is the unaltered word of God, why did he revoke the 10 commandments and allow such vices as false testimony, divorce, coveting a neigbour's property etc?

Great post!

xavier

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Egypeter said...

Excellent post Neferteeti!!

You concisely and articulately broke down that arguement. I never really quite understood that arguement but you definitley shed light on it, thanks.

Xavier:

The split of the Coptic Orthodox Church, which is the See of St. Mark th Evangelist, established in 42 AD was an unfortunate situation. Alexandria was one of the leaders in early Christian theology and produced an immense amount of Christian treasure in the first few centuries of Christianity. Treasures, like both, solitary and communal monastacism established by a Copt St. Anthony the Great. The Creed that all Apolstolic Churches recite today by St. Athanasius. And many many many Martyrs who shed their blood for their faith in Christ.

So the schism at the Council of Chalcedon in 451 AD has been, for the most part, diffused today. Father Tadros Malaty in "Introcution to the Coptic Orthodox Church" does an excellent job of explaining what happened. It can be viewed as a misunderstanding between the two sides. And it could also be viewed as the See of St. Mark in Alexandria, a church which had produced countless saints, refusing to place itself under the authority of the Pope of Rome. Regardless, many of those misunderstandings have been resolved and we are all One Body of Jesus Christ.

Again, great article Bent!

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Egypeter said...

Hehe..Bent.

I just try and find good Coptic blog and I've come across yours and Maged's! Big fan. Keep up the good work dear!

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Thanx everyone for your comments.

Xavier; thanks mate for the correction, lol...i am terrible with spelling!! Well, i'll blame that on being a scientist (sheepish smile)

But thanks for your valuable input.

RE: The Quran being the unaltered word of God:

I just wanted to focus on what the Quran says about the Bible, to illustrate to my Muslim guests that their own book acknowledges that the Bible is the word of God delivered before the Quran. I'm sure there'll be more to the discussion to come :)

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Egypter:
Many thanks for the update. I'm so happy that the theologians on both sides have been able to resolve the old misunderstanding even if we're not yet in full communion. I'll let the Holy spirit work on the mustard seed :)

Bent:
No worries English spelling driving me nuts to and I teach ESL :p
You're welcome for the input
I came across a French site that comapres the Bible and Koran and the person who wrote an article points out that it was only in the 11th century that Moslem imams declared that the Bible had been corripted before that Moslem held to the validity of the Old and New Testaments.
Lemme see if I can find it and provide the link for you.

Xavier

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

أزال أحد مشرفي المدونة هذا التعليق.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Bent:
Here are various links from the aforementioned site (in French):
Comparasions Jesus/Islam:
http://facealislam.free.fr/comparaison_coranbible.html

On the Bible:
http://facealislam.free.fr/etudebible.html
articles answering Moslem polemists:
http://facealislam.free.fr/reponsesauxmusulmans.html

Studies of islam (The second section- scroll down- has lots of articles on what the Koran says about the Bible)
http://facealislam.free.fr/etudecoran.html

Hope these links are helpful

xavier

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger ooze addai said...

Isn't the "beauty" of the Koran one of its chief "proofs" used by Muslims. They see its poetic nature as proof of divine inspiration.


I guess being an American convert to the Coptic church, I'n not too concerned by Muslim relious claims, I'm more worried about their justifying terrorism. If there religion or book/ gospel was so true, then they wouldn't need the sword to spread their message now would they?

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Addai:
Nice blog. Well, Protestants have a similar subjectivity vis-à-vis the Bible but that's insufficent grounds to believe its inerrancy.
From what I understand, the Koran also has some Aaric floating around since Arab as a written language didn't come about until some time later.
I'll differ to Arab/Copt/Amaric and Syriac speakers to guide us
xavier

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger DavidNic said...

To what Xavier said:

"Many thanks for the update. I'm so happy that the theologians on both sides have been able to resolve the old misunderstanding even if we're not yet in full communion. I'll let the Holy spirit work on the mustard seed :)"

A hearty Amen to that.

For more info on how we came to a common understanding. Here are some links.

http://sor.cua.edu/Ecumenism/RC.html
http://www.cnewa.org/ecc-bodypg-us.aspx?eccpageID=84&IndexView=toc

I for one love reading the joint declaration of Paul VI and Shenouda III. As well as the Dialogue Catholics have had with all Oriental Orthodox. To see the Churches say together, "We believe" and "We affirm" Just wonderful. Still a ways to go on some issues, but may the Holy Spirit guide us all.


Great post Neferteeti.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

First of all, I'd like to thank you nefeertit for taking the holy quran as a reference and Al Tabry as a description reference for Al Quran ….this a huge step for both of us that you can finally reach a common reference ..

Before going into my reply…I'd like to state these facts

Fact1: all Muslims must believe in Jesus, Mouses, Torah, Injil, and all the prophets and the messengers from God.

Fact2: Our Muslims belief concerning Jesus is a human being and a prophet Not God By any means.

Fact3: Our beliefs concerning torah and injil are the real and the original versions of these books that contain a full description of our prophet Mohamed.

Fact4: the word Islam Means: surrender and obey for Allah

The above facts cover the unity and the continuity of all religions and prophets.

Here comes my replies for each verse neferteet mentioned, each in separate post in English and arabic….all the descriptions from al tabary as nefeteeti referenced from the site that neferteeti used http://www.al-islam.com/arb/

****************************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refer to 4:136
See the above facts
************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refer to 57:27
Read the whole verse
"57:27 Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our apostles: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel; and We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him Compassion and Mercy. But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them: (We commanded) only the seeking for the Good Pleasure of Allah. But that they did not foster as they should have done. Yet we bestowed, on those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are rebellious transgressors."

As you can read from the whole verse that the bible has been modified and you can see it from the phrase in the same verse but that they did not foster as they should have done so that is an obvious clue for the falsification of the bible.

And here is the Arabic description according to al tabry:
يعني : الذين اتبعوا عيسى على منهاجه وشريعته { رأفة } وهو أشد الرحمة { ورحمة ورهبانية ابتدعوها } يقول : أحدثوها { ما كتبناها عليهم } يقول : ما افترضنا تلك الرهبانية عليهم { إلا ابتغاء رضوان الله } يقول : لكنهم ابتدعوها ابتغاء رضوان الله { فما رعوها حق رعايتها }

Nefeertit please if you want to take a phrase from al quran as a reference you should take the whole verse and read the entire sura.

*************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refer to 5:46
If you read the verse 5:46,5:47,5:48 you will know the real meaning

"5:48 To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah. It is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;"

According to al tabry:
Those verses are talking about laws in the different religions and he _al tabry_ states the meaning of the phrase " and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee" that God send Mohamed (PBUH) with Al Quran and the Quran confirms all the heavenly books that preceded it. And a watcher that put an end for the laws of this books and replaces it by the laws of Quran.

For those who can read Arabic, that is the description of Al Tabry in Arabic:
" في تأويل قوله تعالى : { فاحكم بينهم بما أنزل الله ولا تتبع أهواءهم عما جاءك من الحق } وهذا أمر من الله تعالى ذكره لنبيه محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم أن يحكم بين المحتكمين إليه من أهل الكتاب وسائر أهل الملل , بكتابه الذي أنزله إليه , وهو القرآن الذي خصه بشريعته . يقول تعالى ذكره : احكم يا محمد بين أهل الكتاب والمشركين بما أنزل إليك من كتابي وأحكامي , في كل ما احتكموا فيه إليك من الحدود والجروح والقود والنفوس , فارجم الزاني المحصن , واقتل النفس القاتلة بالنفس المقتولة ظلما , وافقأ العين بالعين , واجدع الأنف بالأنف , فإني أنزلت إليك القرآن مصدقا في ذلك ما بين يديه من الكتب , ومهيمنا عليه , رقيبا يقضي على ما قبله من سائر الكتب قبله ."
And in Al shazli tafseer "description":
and as a watcher over it…. That is, the Quran is a watcher over the books that preceded it. The Quran is like a witness to the errors and the upright in the previous books, in the sense that it was evidence to everything that had been falsified and everything that had been added and everything that had been deleted. That is because the wise Quran clarifies the general beliefs and the principles of worship and trade and ethics, whereas the previous books had been greatly deviated by the hands of sinners."

So as you see that is the second clue for the falsification of the bible in both descriptions


Note:
Please kindly read the whole sura to know the real story of Jesus not the fake stories do you have…believe me you will feel better after you read it.
***************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refer to 10:94

It seems neferteeti that you didn't read al tabry's description in that verse because here is the real description of the verse as al tabry:

The phrase " If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: means:

If you_ Mohamed(PBUH)_ are in doubt with what you have and revealed with so ask the sons of israil because they never argued about your prophecy because it is written in their books(injil and bible) as you are described in their books (injil and torah), so ask those who read the books like Abd Allah ibn Salem and others from those people who had faith and believe and those who lies and disbelieves (infidel) in you .

And here in Arabic translation as al tabary for sure:
" القول في تأويل قوله تعالى : { فإن كنت في شك مما أنزلنا إليك فاسأل الذين يقرءون الكتاب من قبلك } يقول تعالى ذكره لنبيه محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم : فإن كنت يا محمد في شك من حقيقة ما أخبرناك وأنزل إليك من أن بني إسرائيل لم يختلفوا في نبوتك قبل أن تبعث رسولا إلى خلقه , لأنهم يجدونك عندهم مكتوبا ويعرفونك بالصفة التي أنت بها موصوف في كتابهم في التوراة والإنجيل ; فاسأل الذين يقرءون الكتاب من قبلك من أهل التوراة والإنجيل كعبد الله بن سلام ونحوه من أهل الصدق والإيمان بك منهم دون أهل الكذب والكفر بك منهم"

So as you can see that is a clear clue of falsification of the bible and al torah for sure and as you see that is the description go Fact3 that I mentioned above.


***************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refers to 29:46
Here God talks to faithful Muslims to argue with the people of the book in a good words and with the supplication of God with proofs and evidences and
if those _Christians and Jew_ talks to you about their books whether it is true or false so answer them with: we believe in what we have and what you have because we_muslims_ are surrender to what God commands us with.

So it is a strong point against you because it dismissed all the claims and allegations that you said about the religious Muslims men and organizations here in Egypt with forcing, kidnapping and raping Christian girls in Egypt to wear veil and be Muslims….

You brought up the evidence of the innocence of Islam and Muslims from all what you Copts claim about us…
Another thing it doesn't proof the correction of the bible…

**********************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refer to 5 :43
Well as I see that in your explanation that you understood that the verse is talking about al torah not the bible but you took it as a reference for the truth of the bible….
So let's see what the tabary wrote in his description….
" But why do they come to thee for decision, when they have (their own) law before them?- therein is the (plain) command of Allah. yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith."

This verse talks about the law of the married adulterer is to the stoning and how the Jew can obey you if they have their own book that they admit that it is the book of truth and the book of God, they know the laws in the torah and they don't deny it although they leave my rules and laws and don't obey me even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith so if you have the stoning penalty in your bible that means that yours are true if not so that is a new clue for the bible falsification…

In Arabic:
" يعني تعالى ذكره : وكيف يحكمك هؤلاء اليهود يا محمد بينهم , فيرضون بك حكما بينهم , وعندهم التوراة التي أنزلتها على موسى , التي يقرون بها أنها حق وأنها كتابي الذي أنزلته على نبيي , وأن ما فيه من حكم فمن حكمي , يعلمون ذلك لا يتناكرونه , ولا يتدافعونه , ويعلمون أن حكمي فيها على الزاني المحصن الرجم , وهم مع علمهم بذلك { يتولون }أي يتركون الحكم به بعد العلم بحكمي فيه جراءة علي وعصيانا لي"


**********************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refer 21:7
This verse insures that Mohamed (PBUH) is a prophet not an angel like all the prophets before him and asks those who possess the Message.
ask of those who possess the Message. Al tabri said it might be the people of al injil and al torah and the strongest meaning is the people of al quran according to 15:9 :We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). so it might not be people of books who meant in 21:7 and if it meant you , it doesn't proof that your bible is not corrupted..
Arabic translation according to al tabri
" , قال : لما نزلت : { فاسألوا أهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون } قال علي : نحن أهل الذكر . 18473 - حدثني يونس , قال : أخبرنا ابن وهب , قال : قال ابن زيد , في قوله : { فاسألوا أهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون } قال : أهل القرآن , والذكر : القرآن . وقرأ : { إنا نحن نزلنا الذكر وإنا له لحافظون } 15 9 "


***************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Refer 10:37
This verse assures fact3 that I stated in my first post…we believe in the bible that comes with Jesus which contains a full description for Mohamed(PBUH).
So please neferteeti be honest and don't switch the meaning of al quran and paste the description of our great scientist al tabri as it is not to choose a word and leave the whole sentence..


****************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

The Bible in the Quran:…Why the Holy Bible is corrupted
Here is some of the verses that show that…some not all the verses we have in quran…..
I chose those because it is from the same sura that neferteeti used more in her post…sura 5



------
1) 5:15 O people of the Book! There hath come to you our Messenger, revealing to you much that ye used to hide in the Book, and passing over much (that is now unnecessary). There hath come to you from Allah a (new) light and a perspicuous Book,-

----
So that is a confirmation for hiding phrases from the book that talks about our prophet(PBUH) so that is a confirmation for your modification in the bible and the fact that I stated above in my post"Fact3"

______________________
2) They do blaspheme who say: "(Allah) is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah,- Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.

---------

So as you read those who say that Jesus the son of Mary is Allah/God so those are the unbelievers and infidel …….
____________________

3) 5:73 They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.

----------

Here in this verse it shows clearly , the status of those have the bible nowadays" the not corrected and false" who said the God is three and Jesus is the son of God….
So that is all some evidences from al quran for the falsification of the bible…


******************************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

Last but not least; how would God allow His word to be altered?


10:64 For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present and in the Hereafter; no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity

------
That bolded phrase means that God always keep his promises and God never changes what he said……
As you see here in this description :That's nothing has to do with the bible.


--------
It is only said in quran that God is saving the quran in
15:9 We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).

****************

أبريل 02, 2006  
Anonymous Sara said...

correction for a mistake in the comment that started

Refer to 10:94

It seems neferteeti that you didn't read al tabry's description in that verse because .....


If you_ Mohamed(PBUH)_ are in doubt with what you have and revealed with so ask the sons of israil because they never argued about your prophecy because it is written in their books(injil and bible) as you are described in their books (injil and torah), so ask those who read the books like Abd Allah ibn Salem and others from those people who had faith and believe NOT those who lies and disbelieves (infidel) in you .

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Sara:
Thanks for your contribution OK here are some of my questions that you'll need to explain in greater detail:

1) How can the Islamic Gabriel be the same one as in the Bible (Old and New Tesaments)? Gabriel in the New testament brings the Annunciation to which Mary responds with the Magnificat. By contrast, the Koranic Gabriel denies the Incarnation. So if Moslems claim that they must hold the Old and New testaments as equal to the Koran doesn't it follow that Moslems must accept the Incarnation, the Crucifixion and the Ressurection. If not, why not?


2) Other than some assertions in the Koran, what additional evidence is there that Jesus regarded himself as a mortal? In the New Testament he explicitly preached that he was God made flesh and came to fulfill the prophecies of the Old Testament.


3)Mohammed's denial of the Trinity is insufficent for Christains to repudiate it. So he denies it; so did a lot of Christian heretics and we ignore them. Since I don't regard Mohammed as a prophet what logical and reasonable non_Koranic arguments do you advance to prove that the Trinity is false?
4) I'd argue that sura 5,48 can be turned against Islam. Example: how did the Jews and Christians so corrupt the 10 commandments that God had to revoke them and authourize taquiyya, for example?

5) On what grounds do Moslem object to monasticism? Christians trace the origins of monasticiism to the 40 days Jesus spent in the desert before he began his preaching. In the East, St Anthony reestablished it and in the West: St Benedict for men and his twin sister St Scholastica for women
If Moslems hold that the New Testament is valid, then it follows that monasticism authorized by God.

6) Finally, you keep mentiong that islam is surrender to God's will. OK but how exactly do you surrender and and what happens to a Moslem afterwards? Catholics also surrender to God's will but still retain their freedom to act. They work with God in the unfolding of salvation.

xavier

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

David and Xavier:
Thanx for commenting guys. It's so nice to have input from our Catholic brothers, and like you I also pray wholeheartedly for the day when we are in full communion.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Sara:
Thanx for your comments. I read the context of the verses that you speak of...but if you go back to the point i'm making, I clearly said the following:
and I focused on how Allah refers to the scriptures delivered before the Quran

I am not interested in how the Quran views Jews and Christians at this point, just how their scripturres are viewed.

If you admit that the Bible (torah and injil) were given by God to His prophents, then they are the word of God. Then when He says I protect my word from alteration...that also applies to the Bible.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

The fact that there are verses in teh Quran that say Torah and Injil are God's word delivered to his prophets, then others saying that they're not and they've been fabricated, doesn't actually prove that they were fabricated...it only tell me that the Quran contradicts itself.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

As for your comment about me proving myself wrong about the Coptic issue:

1) I don't believe in the Quran. I only referenced it to show Muslims what their own book says about the Bible.

2) Whatever the Quran says, and however kind it orders Muslims to be to non Muslims: it doesn't mean that all Muslims are angels walking the earth and they never go against their religion's teachings.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

But the Monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them
As you can read from the whole verse that the bible has been modified and you can see it from the phrase in the same verse but that they did not foster as they should have done so that is an obvious clue for the falsification of the bible.


The verse says Monasticism was invented...not the Bible.

Monasticism doesn't exist in the Bible so you can't say we modified the Bible to include it. It is a practice St Anthony started when he sold his possessions and went to live in the desert, because he only desired to pray and communicate with God. I understand how something like monasticism which requires a high degree of spirituality and will power to forsake all that is worldly can be foreign to the Islamic teachings though.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Bottom line is this:
1) You can't prove the Bible was fabricated as you don't have a reference of the so called "original".

2) If you believe the Torah and Injil are the word of God, how do you explain God being so weak and unable to protect them from fabrication?

I wasn't taking verses out of context, and if one scholar contradicts another, that's not my fault...and if a Quranic verse contradicts another, that's certainly not my fault either.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Addai:
Good to see u here mate.

I'm more worried about their justifying terrorism.

Aren't we all? There indeed are Quranic verses that put the people of the book in very high regard, and call for tolerance. However, there are also Quranic verses that call for jihad and killing those who don't believe,...etc.

You'll have those who say those verses were for that time only and those who say violent verses "abrogated" peaceful verses.

Personally I couldn't care less where the truth is, as long as there are those who are oppressing, abusing and killing in the name of Islam...and those who want to lecture the innocent on the tolerance of Islam instead of working to eliminate fundamentalism.

I'll have to quote Wafaa Sultan again (sorry I love this quote) "You can believe in stones my friend, as long as you don't throw them at me"

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Xavier
Thanks for your comment regarding Monasticism. I apologose for leaving St Benedict out of my response. I'd love to learn more about him and his sister if you have a link i can refer to.

peace

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Addai
Sorry mate, i was just reading my response to you again and I wanted to clarify something...
when i said "aren't we all" i meant it as a statement not a question. I apologise if it made me sound rude :)

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Bent:
You're welcome. Try http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02467b.htm
for starters
Here's the Benedictine's website:
http://www.osb.org/
And it includes the Rule.

As for St Scholastica:
Here's a really brief sktech
http://www.catholic-forum.com/Saints/saints06.htm

I hope David pops by so he can add some more links.
Hope you find the links helpful :)


xavier

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Now for another point to Sara:

You say my post actually proves the innocence of Islam and the Quran from any wrongdoing to the Copts.

I say to you it is what you said that indeed condemns the Quran as a basis for hatred against Jews and Christians:

* 5:73 They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity


* They do blaspheme who say: "(Allah) is Christ the son of Mary."

Ummm, hate to break it to you but ALL Christians believe that Christ is the Son of God and in the Holy Trinity. So by definition, we are all blasphemers and so we are all condemned by the Quran. And so the likes of Bin Laden, al Zarqawi and Co have permission to go and fight the unbelievers where they find them. And so do those who abuse the Copts in Egypt.


* yet even after that, they would turn away. For they are not (really) People of Faith."

* and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee.

Again condemning all the people of the Book now, not just the Christians.

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Sara
Sorry, the more I read what you wrote the more I am baffled by the logic behind it.

The Quran is like a witness to the errors and the upright in the previous books, in the sense that it was evidence to everything that had been falsified and everything that had been added and everything that had been deleted

Does this mean you're saying the falsifying took place before Islam?

If so, how do you explain the following:

- If God protects X

and:
X= His word
X= Quran
X= Injil
X= Torah

Then how is it that God the Almighty, the All Knowing, the All Seeing couldn't stop a bunch of people from corrupting His word???

Why?
And I'll ask again: by whom?

If it was the Jews, the Christian church of the time, who faught many heresies would have stood up to them and put a stop to it.

If it was the Church, the Jewish Torah of today would contradict the one in the Christian Bible.

Is it logical that God couldn't stop the Christians or Jews from corrupting His word, so instead of punishing them, He just sent down a "new and improved" edition.

Besides, if the Jews and/or Christians were the ones who erred and sinned in corrupting the word of God, why send the improved version to the Arabs??

Think about it, if one of your kids makes a mistake with something...why would you give the correction to his/her sibling?

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Thanx for all the references Xavier :)

David is going to be publishing a series of posts on Coptic saints after Easter...and his idea prompted me to do the same for Catholic saints. I think my first post in that series will be about this great saint.

I'm really looking forward to it, i see this as a step (a small step maybe, but a step nontheless) on the road to bringing our great Apostolic churches together amd emphasising what we have in common
(and there's so much we have in common)

Thanx to Dave for the idea :)

أبريل 02, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Bent:
Very cool! When you post the article please send me a note and I'll post the link at my blog :D
What saints will you write about? Which Coptic saints have you recommended to David?
Yup, we have so much in common and happily we're working out the theological differences.

Sara:
Don't think we're ganging up on you.;) You're doing fine and we do appreciate your efforts. Please continue posting and we'll keep on debating. It's precisely this kind of peaceful engagement that's so necessary if Moslems want to demonstrate the reasonability and inerrancy of the Koran.
xavier

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger DavidNic said...

Speaking of Benedict and Scholastica, I wear their medals daily and do special prayers on their feast days for my twin sister.

Benedict and Scholastica were twins as well, and I pray they join us in our prayers for each other. I love the story about them about when St. Scholastica wanted Benedict to stay with her:

Their spiritual conversation went on and the hour grew late. The holy nun said to her brother, "Please do not leave me tonight; let us go on until morning talking about the delights of the spiritual life."

"Sister," he replied, "What are you saying? I simply cannot stay outside my cell."

When she heard her brother refuse her request, the holy woman joined her hands on the table, laid her head on them and began to pray. As she raised her head from the table, there were such brilliant flashes of lightning, such great peals of thunder and such a heavy downpour of rain that neither Benedict nor his brethren could stir across the threshold of the place where they had been seated. Sadly, he began to complain.

"May God forgive you, sister. What have you done?"

"Well, she answered, "I asked you and you would not listen; so I asked my God and He did listen. So now go off, if you can, leave me and return to your monastery."


I have to laugh when I think of all the times I have said to my sister (who is a very strong and forceful person) "Oh my, what have you done?"

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger ooze addai said...

quote
So it is a strong point against you because it dismissed all the claims and allegations that you said about the religious Muslims men and organizations here in Egypt with forcing, kidnapping and raping Christian girls in Egypt to wear veil and be Muslims….
quote


Well the problem with the persecution is not with the Koran. Because I know somewhere in it specificially mohammed instructs his people to treat "the people of the Book" (Jews and Christians) well.


The problem is with the Muslim version of Holy Tradition. I think the right term is "hadith", it corresponds to the kinds of Extra Biblical tradition we have in Orthodoxy and Catholicism. Anyway in one the later writings a mullah or some teacher claims there was a "hadith", edict by Mohammed that if Jews and Christians were to not convert or resist they should be forced. And that is the thing that Sharia law is based upon.

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger maged salamah said...

Sara,
You have to explain why Muhammad flip-flopped on the issue of Jesus. In the beginning, Muhammad wanted to flirt with Christians and Jews to get them on his side against the pagans so he said he believed in Jesus as a God. When he conquered his enemies, he did not need the Christians and Jews any more and indeed started to trash them and their religion. He also killed many of them. When confronted by the contradictions of his views about Jesus, Muhammad said that Allah decided to change his mind by giving him new verses. For example, in earlier Qur’anic verses, Jesus had the characteristics of a God then in later verses be became just a prophet. Now, here is my big question: Have you ever heard of a God who changes his mind and contradicts his verses? Also, what happened to Muhammad's claim that the Qu’ran was pre-written on a big wall in heaven? I think you really need to explain Allah's contradiction about Jesus
us.

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger maged salamah said...

I am sick and tired of Muslims who claim that the Bible was changed. Archeological evidence showed that the Bible neevr changed since it was first written in the first century. Muhammad was a liar for saying that and dimwits follow his lies.

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger Egypeter said...

The falsification of the Holy Bible arguement is a silly, childish and baseless arguement. Not one even worth having, really.

With that said, thanks Neferteeti and co. for the insight.

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Maged:
About 3 months ago, archeologists discovered the pool here Jesus performed the miracle of the washing of the sick. Not only did they locate it but were able to date it very accurately because on the steps they found 2 coins embedded with the effigy of the governor of the time.
Contrast that with the Wahbbis who've pretty much destroyed all the pre- and early Islamic site within the Arabian peninsula.
Deep down, if archeologist dug around those places, they'd discover a lot of relevations uncomfortable for Moslems
xavier

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger Egypeter said...

Xavier:

I think you bring up a great point. Check out this fascinating archeological article. It's in reference to what may be found if archeological research was conducted.

http://users.hubwest.com/prophet/islam/moongod.htm

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Egypter:
Thanks for the link. Personally I've never been convinced that Allah is the name of an Arab moon god. In fairnesss to the Moslems, they correctly identify Allah as God. Their error is to hypercorrect God's essense. They opposed the doctrine of the Trinity and felt that the Jewish doctrine of monothesism wasn't strict enough since it allowed the Christians to develop the Trinity from Jewish theology. Consequently, the Moslems exaggerated his oneness in determiment to the other qualities of the Godhead. Fr Richard Neuhaus wrote a very interesting article at his magazine www.firstthings.com on the fundamental differences between the Trinity and the Moslem concept of God's oneness

From what I generally understanding of the Semetic languges(Hebrew being the exception), Allah is the common word for God (like the Romance languages have the same word for God derived from Latin Deus)

xavier

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Hey everyone
this discussion is certainly getting more and more interesting.

Xavier:
I thought I'd write about the saints I have to come to know through my husband's family (he was raised Roman Catholic) like Padre Pio, St Antonio, St Sabastian, St Francis and St Augustine...and of course there's St Mary Mckillop (she's an Aussie saint :D)then go learn about others that I haven't heard of!!
As for Coptic Saints, I haven't actually recommended any to David, but if you're still around Dave, I suggest St Moses the black and St Bishoy.
Xavier, will sure let you know when I start. If you have any suggestions please feel free to email me on
nefert_80@yahoo.com.au


* Re this debate:

Everyone's contribution has been amazing and thank you all for your input.
It's always been my feeling that no matter what physical evidence exists for or against any faith, faith resides mainly in the heart and soul of a person. Having said that, I'm not against discussions like the ones I've been having with Muslim guests for a while.

These discussions have prompted me to research and learn more about my church, and also understand where the opposite point of view have come from and why. I look at this as an enriching learning experience...But at the end of the day, i know that nothing gives me peace like the knowledge that I am a child of the Saviour Jesus Christ, and that He is looking after my family and me.

OK enough of my ramblings, hope you all have a great night, and you too Sara if you're around. I may be away from the blog for a few days (hectic week at work coming up) but do keep the discussion going if you like.

Peace everyone :D

أبريل 03, 2006  
Blogger DavidNic said...

You must be reading my mind, I was researching Moses The Black for a post after Easter.

أبريل 04, 2006  
Blogger ooze addai said...

QUOTE
Thanks for the link. Personally I've never been convinced that Allah is the name of an Arab moon god.
QUOTE

Well Xavier beat me to it, but I might as well second his motions with the below post, that I already have typed out.

Actually the Arabic word Allah is just a derivation of the Aramaic word for God which is "Alah" which is almost completely identical (If Arabs say Allah fast the name sounds identical).

That was one of those little factoids I learned when I was with my former Assyrian Church

أبريل 05, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Ooze:
I've alwayd beeen fascainated by the close linguistic relations between the Semetic languages. Can you walk me through Semetic words that are just variations of the once unified language?
I'm thinking of simple words like peace, flower, man, wome, boy girl, hand, bull etc
I'm wondering if the Semetic languages parallel the IndoEuropean ones? That there was once protoSemetic language and then time separted them into the various languages and dialectal groups.

Thanks!
xavier

أبريل 05, 2006  
Blogger ooze addai said...

cool topic. Yeah I'm not actually good with languages but I am a great student of the history and background of such things.


My understanding is that basically all of the Semetic languages come from Akadian. That basically the language of Ur of the Chaldees. And of course that is the basis of why hebrew is related since Abraham came from there. I understand that language is a bit of a proto Aramaic. And I even believe that Arabic itself is consider a dialect of Syriac/ Aramaic (but this possibly fits more with the way the Romance languages evolved and developed from classical Latin).

Anyway if you are interested in such things I would recommend two books.


There is a bit of Tradition that comes from both Assyrian Church of the East as well as our sister church "The Syriac Church of Antioch".

anyway this Tradition of these Syriac Churches is that Semetic language is thee original language that all the other languages evolved out of with the Tower of Bable and so on.


And that Kind of testimony comes from two books. One Eastern Assyrian (Nestorian), the other Syriac Orthodox.

I will post some quotes and links for you when I find the right references

أبريل 05, 2006  
Blogger ooze addai said...

This is a Syriac Orthodox web site that is very useful for understanding the background of the language and people

http://www.aramnaharaim.org/english/aramean.htm


From "The book of the Bee"

"From Adam to the building of the tower, there was only one language, and that was Syriac. Some have said that it was Hebrew; but the Hebrews were not called by this name until after Abraham had crossed the river Euphrates and dwelt in Harrân; and from his crossing they were called Hebrews. It was grievous to Peleg that the tongues were confounded (or, that God had confounded the tongues of mankind) in his days, and he died; and his sons Serug and Nahor buried him in the town of Pâlgîn, which he built after his name."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/bb/bb24.htm


From Introduction of "Cave of Treasures"

"Where the writer lived is not known, but it is most probable that it was written in Edessa or Nisibis; in any case, it must have been written in Mesopotamia, and the writer was certainly a Syrian Jacobite who was proud of his native language. Thus, having spoken of the migration of his people to Shinar, he says, "They all sat down there, and from Adam until the present time they were all of one speech and one language. They all speak this language, that is to say, 'Suryâyâ' (Syriac), which is 'Ârâmâyâ' (Aramean), and this language is the king of all languages. Now, ancient writers have erred in that they said that Hebrew was the first [language], and in this matter they have mingled an ignorant mistake in their writing. For all the languages that are in the world are derived from Syriac, and all the languages in books are mingled with it" (page 132). And in another place he says that Pilate did right in writing the inscription which was p. 23 placed on the Cross in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew only, and that he did not add a translation of it in Syriac because no Syrian played any part in the crucifixion of our Lord (page 230). And he goes on to say that the Syrians had no hand in shedding the blood of Christ, because Abhgar, King of Edessa, wanted to go and take Jerusalem, and slay the Jews who had crucified Him.1 And, as Bezold pointed out, the name of Noah's wife, Haikal-bath-Nâmôs, and the names of several other women, appear to be of Syrian origin."

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/bct/bct03.htm

أبريل 05, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Ooze:
Thanks again for the links :)

أبريل 05, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

AA WAWB ..

Looks like I always join the party late .. but .. Late is better than Never : )))

I will start with a quote from this Post by Neferteeti :
“Although they say curiosity killed the cat, I can’t help being a curious person. So I set off looking into this claim, not because I actually doubted the veracity of the Holy Bible…but because I was curious to know where people would come up with this idea!!”

Neferteeti my dear .. want to know where people came up with this idea from ? Don’t go far and ask the Muslims .. just refer to the Bible Scholars and you will “see” …

أبريل 09, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

The links are to Christian sites that in fact praise and prove, not criticize and reject.

I will start with a valuable link posted by ooze addai :

“It is more or less a p. 2 Commentary on the Book of Genesis. That a version of this book existed in Greek is proved by the quotations given by Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis in Cyprus (born about A.D. 320, and died in 403 or 404), in his work on "Heresies" (chapter xxxix). The author claimed boldly that his work contains the revelations which were made to Moses by the command of God by the Archangel Michael, who is frequently described as the "Angel of the Face," The book is not wholly original, for it contains narratives and traditions derived from the works of earlier writers; and some of the legends appear to have been taken from early Babylonian sources. The Hebrew, or Aramean, original is lost, and the complete work is only found in Ethiopic, in which language it is known as "Kûfâlê," or "Sections." The Ethiopic translation was made from Greek.”

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/bct/bct03.htm


More ?

أبريل 09, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

Is The Bible True?

Who wrote the Bible? Is the Bible true? These are vital questions that deserve serious investigation and a serious response. The Bible isn’t just a “religious book” – it’s a collection of history books written by 40 authors over some 1,600 years. These writers came from all walks of life (from kings and warriors to fishermen and shepherds).

http://www.allaboutgod.com/is-the-bible-true.htm

أبريل 09, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

Bear in mind that the earliest versions of the Bible (the Peshitta, Italic and Old Latin Vulgate etc.) had the following verses: but the NIV (NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION) leaves them out! Isn't that a serious string of omissions? Obviously the translators of the NIV are ignoring the command in Deuteronomy 4:2. and the awesome warning in Revelation 22:18-19

• Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

• For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

أبريل 09, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

More Readings

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/intro.html

أبريل 09, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

From all of the above we conclude that :

- The currently existing bible is a mixture between all of the editing of those who were mentioned by the Bible Scholars above, however, the Quran adds to it that it also includes words of God.

- The original bible was revealed in Aramaic language which was the language of Jesus PBUH at that time where it is known that this language is among the dead languages which are not in use centuries ago. That of course is unlike the Arabic language which is perfectly in use to date and in which Quran is revealed.

- Hence, all the existing bibles are translations from the Greek edition found 300 y after Jesus PBUH, translated to Latin then to other languages where translations and editions are quite exposed to human input, hence, human error whether deliberate or non-deliberate. Let alone deliberate omissions.

- In the bible; Jesus PBUH prevents the additions and omissions to the book as this act does not retain the book, hence, it goes corrupt.

أبريل 09, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

In brief: Muslims agree with the Bible Scholars in the non preservation of the Bible in its original form, retained in one language without alterations and editing by historians and more, from the time of Jesus PBUH.

To add: Muslims believe in the Words of God revealed to Moses in Torah and to Jesus in the Gospel in their original editions which are lost and not existing in our day life, for which non-believing is incomplete faith just like the non-believing in Moses and Jesus as Prophets of Allah PBUT. (two MUST beliefs out of the five beliefs of Muslims)

أبريل 09, 2006  
Anonymous Muslim said...

Correction : Six beliefs .. not five beliefs as follows :

1- Almighty God (Allah in Proper noun)
2- His Angels
3- His Scriptures (Books)
4- His Messengers
5- The Day of Resurrection
6- The Divine Destiny

أبريل 11, 2006  
Blogger Sara said...

does any body here watched the national georaphic channal last sunday ???????

they viewed their exclusive documentary programm...
guess what is the documentary name???

GOSPEL OF JUDAS

what was amazing in that docummentary programm was the story that the biblical proffessors and academics said about the history of the bibles you have in your hands.....

it was a shocked stories...to know that a christian pope who is named alyanos i guess chose the four authorized bibles"mark, mathew, john and luke" because they were the most publicity bibles at 200AD ...guess what??? those bibles were chosen from more than 30 bibles that time...
the bible of judas was one of them...

more they consider that book as a bible refered to Judas...and the shock that the bible or the book was written by the copts in egypt called epistemics....and that bible of judas were written 200 years after Jesus (PBUH)...

what was a more shocking that all the acadimis and bible proffesors said :the all the four bibles of the disciples were documented after their death.....

all that and you talk about there is no corruption!!!!!

advise for all..
after watching the programm, go and read a wonderful story called " the da vinci code"....which was the best seller at 2003 and sold more than 30 million copies allover the world...

that story pushed a lot of priests to publish books defending the christinity!!!!!!!!!

last words...both..the programm of Gospel of JUdas and the story are non muslim sources..once a swizz chanel ..the other is an american author...

أبريل 12, 2006  
Blogger xavier said...

Sara:
Where to begin. The gospel of Judas is utter bullshit and is a fraud. It was refuted as far back as AD 185 by Iraneus in his book adversus haerses (against heresies) Further even among the Gnostics the gospel of Judas was considered fringe. The foremost biblical scholar has called it crap. If you're going to argue that the bible was altered, don't cite writings that were never, EVER accepted by Tradition, by the church since its earliest years and the church fathers.


Second the duh Vinci code is crap. Badly written and nauseatingly inaccurate crap too. You'll be interested to know that Dan Brown had to go to court to defend himself against plagarism. He won his case but during the trial we learnt that Dan Brown really didn't do the research it was his wife. Even then the errors both have made are particularly incredible. Further, the judge in his ruling pretty much skewered Dan Brown's claims as well as his talent. It makes for some really amusing reading.

Here are some websites that refute
the novel
On Opus dei, get a copy of John Allen's book as it's fairly balanced and provides a good intro. To find out more, here
and this blog by an Opus dei priest

When you've read the blogs/websites we'll continue the discussion

xavier

أبريل 13, 2006  
Blogger Bent El Neel said...

Sara, Xavier
Thanks guys,
Please see my response in a new post titled "Judas and Dan"

أبريل 14, 2006  
Anonymous غير معرف said...

although i havent read the bible completely but wat i hav understand by watever i have studied new testamnets of bible r perceptions of its authors(who belong to different profession and it shows in their writings as well) no exact wat Allah(swt) said so it can b changed whereas Quran is exactly wat Allah(swt) said nobody can even chande a dot of it.
This is wat i Feel and understand.
i m not saying that bible, torah, gospel is corrupted they say good to good and wrong to wrong as well.

فبراير 02, 2009  

إرسال تعليق

Links to this post:

إنشاء رابط

<< Home