Doubts from the beginning

Long before the birth of Muhammed (saw), controversy reigned among the early Christian sects about the crucifixion of jesus. Some of them did not believe that jesus was killed on the cross. One such sect was the
BASILIDIANS, who believed that someone else was substituted for jesus on the cross.
THE DOCETAE held that the crucifixion of Christ was apparent, not real
THE MACIONITE gospel (about A.C 138) denied that jesus was born and merely said he appeared in human form. These and many other sects were exterminated by the predecessors of the church of Rome. Their names appears only as heresies in the catechism of the Roman Catholic Church. They are considered heretical because they failed to survive the “stake”.

Verdict of Barnabas

This gospel of Barnabas supports the theory of substitution. The gospel was edited and translated into English from the Italian manuscript at the imperial library in Vienna by Lonsdale and Laura Regg. On page 25 of the gospel of Barnabas appears the list of the twelve apostles chosen by jesus and st. Barnabas is listed as one of the twelve. If one were to analyse the candidature of an apostle according to their merit as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles of the New Testament, then st. Barnabas ought to have been counted in the first three.

Babyosis, I even asked you the reason for your not quoting from the gospel of barnabas, because he was alive and witnesses jesus’ teachings and also according to the bible, Barnabas:

was an apostle (Acts 14v14), full of Holy Ghost (Act 11v24), Prophet (Acts 13v1), performers of miracles (Acts 15v21)

It is inconceivable that the gospel of such a great apostle should have been denied the honour of inclusion in the canon of the new testament. This gospel disagreed with the pre-conceived notions of the early Christian church and it was condemned by three church decrees
1. The decree of Western church 382 C.E
2. The decree of Innocent the First 465 C.E
3. The decree of the Council of Galasius 496 C.E.

The Christians are reluctant in accepting the Vienna manuscripts as authentic but in 478 christian era, relics of St. Barnabas with the gospwel on his breast were recovered from a sepulcher in Cyprus during the reign of emperor Zeno.

Blood for salvation
Christian world believe that salvation comes only through shedding of blood of jesus Christ. They say if only muslims would accept the redeeming blood of jesus and take him as their personal saviour, muslim would be saved. Muslims are being harassed everyday; in the public bus, on the street, in their respective homes, offices etc.

And answer supreme

Nothing the Muslims have to say to Christians than Allah’s shattering reply to the jewish boast in
Quran 4v157: and they say (in boast), ‘we killed jesus the son of mary, the apostle of God’, but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but it was made to appear to them so, and those who differ therein are full of doubts with no (certain) knowledge, but they follow only conjecture, for of a surety, they killed him not.

Demand for proof
When confronted with the extravagant and conflicting claims of the jews and the Christians to their exclusive rights to salvation, Allah commands us to demand for proof. He says in
Quran 2v11: And they say, ‘no one shall enter paradise unless he be a jew or christian’. These are their own desires. Say (O Muhammed SAW), ‘produce your proof if you are truthful.

And they have produced the only proof. We must not forget that the jews are in the dark, allegedly for the murder od jesus and we as muslims are constrained to defend them against the Christian charge. Whatever their sins of commission and omission, Allah exonerates them from the charge of murder. He says that
For of a surety, they killed him not.

Hope am making sense

no

@lafile.

thank you. let me now go to the second stage.

Where do we begin?

Firstly, it has been noted that none of the authors and disciples were around. That of Luke is very glaring in Luke 1v1…… He said he collected it from those that claimed to be eye witnesses. We will not take these as witnesses because just 24 hours to the scene

Mark 14v50: and they all forsook him and fled.

Around the table
While seated for the feast, jesus said in
Luke 22v21-23: behold the hand of him that betrayed me is with me on the table. And truly the son of man goeth, as it was determine but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed. And they began to enquire among themselves which of them it was that should do this thing.

The disciples showed no determination in discovering the traitor, they were more interested in finding out as to which of them should be counted as the greatest. The words of jesus had fallen on deaf ears. Though Peter and the others did make a show that in the event of danger, they would be prepared to go to prison for him, even unto death.

The overthrew of the temple was imminent, and a forerunner to the expulsion of the Romans. Jesus had failed to heed the warning of the Pharisees to curb the over-exuberance of his disciples as in
Luke 19v39: and some of the Pharisees from among the multitude said unto him, “master, rebuke thy disciples”.

He had miscalculated, now he must pay the price of failure

Jewish reasoning

The jewish leaders reasoned that this one man had almost brought the nation to destruction, therefore in
J[b]ohn 11v50: it is expedient for one man to die for the nation.[/b]

But with all the mass hysteria surrounding him, it was also not expedient to apprehend jesus in public. They waited for the opportunity of a clandestine arrest. As luck would have it, they found in Judas, a traitor who would sell his lord and master for 30 miserable pieces of silver.

Question 1

Since jesus came to die on the cross, it means that he is very aware of the contract. If so, why was judas named a traitor for the fact it has been arranged that he would die?

Preparation for jihad (policy change)
Jesus introduces the subject of defence
Luke 22v35-36: wh4en I sent you out without purse and script and shoes, lacked ye anything? And they said, ‘nothing’. Then said he unto them, ‘but now, he that hath no purse, let him take it and likewise his bag, and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.

The disciples were already armed. They had some foresight, they had not left Galilee with bare knuckles. They responsded,
Luke 22v38: …lord, behold, here are two swords, and he said unto them, ‘it is enough’.

Question 2

Why did he charge them to buy sword. Did I hear someone saying that one of his disciples that raised was rebuked? Well, am still coming to that but the question now, why did he charge them to buy sword?

In the open
He and his disciples could be sealed off quite easily early in the upper room in the city. He did not want to a sitting target for the jews. He would not give in without a fight. So he commanded them to the mount of olives.
Mathew 26v36: then cometh jesus with them unto a place called Gethsemane, and saith unot the disciples, ‘sit here while I go and pray yonder’.

A master tactician

Jesus deployed his forces as a master tactician in a manner that would bring credit to any officer. He places eight of the eleven disciples at the entrance to the courtyard commanding them:
…’sit ye here, while I go and pray yonder’.

Question 3

a. why did they all go to Gethsemane? To pray?
b. Could they not have prayed in the upper room?
Could they have gone to the temple of Solomon, a stone throw from where they were.
c. Why did he go with his disciples to pray when only him can do the prayer afterall they didn’t pray with him but watched.

Is prayer all that they wanted to do? No. they went to the garden so that they might be in a better position to defend themselves.

Mathew even made it known to us that he did not go alone but with
Mathew 26v37-38: and he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith he unto them, ‘tarry ye here and watch with me……

Question 4
Where is he taking Peter, john and james now? Further into the garden. To pray, no but to make inner line of defence. He had put eight at the gate and now three armed with swords to ‘wait and watch’, to guard and he alone prayed.

Summary of questions.

Question 1
Since jesus came to die on the cross, it means that he is very aware of the contract. If so, why was judas named a traitor for the fact it has been arranged that he would die?

Question 2
Why did he charge them to buy sword. Did I hear someone saying that one of his disciples that raised sword against the Romans was rebuked? Well, am still coming to that but the question now, why did he charge them to buy sword?

Question 3
a. why did they all go to Gethsemane
b. if they went there to pray, why didnt they pray together because i learnt that afterall they didn’t pray with him but watched (only him prayed).
c. Could they not have prayed in the upper room or put this way, why didnht they pray in the upper room, if its all about prayer?

Question 4
Why did he take them (Peter and James) further into the garden

like i said, in order to avoid muddling up the whole write up, ve decided to be asking questions at the end of every write up. when the questions are answered or not,i move to the next stage but will be highly appreciated if the questions are answered.

happy reading

babs787:


Verdict of Barnabas

This gospel of Barnabas supports the theory of substitution. The gospel was edited and translated into English from the Italian manuscript at the imperial library in Vienna by Lonsdale and Laura Regg. On page 25 of the gospel of Barnabas appears the list of the twelve apostles chosen by jesus and st. Barnabas is listed as one of the twelve. If one were to analyse the candidature of an apostle according to their merit as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles of the New Testament, then st. Barnabas ought to have been counted in the first three.

Babyosis, I even asked you the reason for your not quoting from the gospel of barnabas, because he was alive and witnesses jesus’ teachings and also according to the bible, Barnabas:

was an apostle (Acts 14v14), full of Holy Ghost (Act 11v24), Prophet (Acts 13v1), performers of miracles (Acts 15v21)

It is inconceivable that the gospel of such a great apostle should have been denied the honour of inclusion in the canon of the new testament. This gospel disagreed with the pre-conceived notions of the early Christian church and it was condemned by three church decrees
1. The decree of Western church 382 C.E
2. The decree of Innocent the First 465 C.E
3. The decree of the Council of Galasius 496 C.E.

The Christians are reluctant in accepting the Vienna manuscripts as authentic but in 478 christian era, relics of St. Barnabas with the gospwel on his breast were recovered from a sepulcher in Cyprus during the reign of emperor Zeno.

Just so you know, the Gospel of Barnabas is "considered by the majority of academics (including Christians and some Muslims) to be late and pseudepigraphical" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas). I honestly don't see how anyone can take the Gospel seriously. Carry on.

KAG:

Just so you know, the Gospel of Barnabas is "considered by the majority of academics (including Christians and some Muslims) to be late and pseudepigraphical" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas). I honestly don't see how anyone can take the Gospel seriously. Carry on.

Wait until he comes back with his anthem of "you ignored my questions!"

naijacutee:

I'm sick of posts like these. I'm not even going to bother reading it.

Lol.

thank God a self-confessed atheist debunked your nonsense predicated on that false document called the book of barnabas. At least you wont accuse us of "ignoring you".

Keep up your delusion. No serious person shld bother you with a response.

lol! even a self confessed atheist (who believes the sacred word of God, the bible is a collection of fables) says the 'Gospel of Barnabas' that you hold so dear is utterly senseless. Where you gon' run to babs?

@kag,

you nailed the authenticity of Gospel of barnabas, no qualm. i have said it that with reponse or no response, i will continue with the write up and my post will be based solely on biblical verses.

shahan, davidylan, babyosis, naijacutee and the rest,

welcome back, you disappeared in other threads only for you to resurrect here, very good.

funny set of people, you laid emphasis on the book of Barnabas but failed in reading the posts in which questions were thrown at you.

i never quoted the book of Barnabas for you to to accept or not, all i did was asking babyosis the reason for her not including the gospel but you all tactically avoided the issue.

i never asked question based on gospel of barnabas but yet you hypocrites after avoiding my questions, keep saying all sort of things.

like i told babyosis, i will only be quoting from your bible and not even from the quran but they avoided the issue cos it is the foundation of their faith and they wouldnt want any one to 'spoil their show' and expose their fraud.

i know for sure you would run simply because thats is where christianity lies. no crucifixion, no christianity.

i have not even written anything, you have started shivering.

Posted by: lafile  
Insert Quote
lol! even a self confessed atheist (who believes the sacred word of God, the bible is a collection of fables) says the 'Gospel of Barnabas' that you hold so dear is utterly senseless. Where you gon' run to babs?

i never said or rely on Gospel of Barnabas, all i did was asking babyosis the reason for her omission of the gospel in her post.

and i even told her that my write will be based on biblical verses. i used the gospel just to let you know that some books nailed the crucifixion of jesus even from your bible which i am going to be quoting from.

also, when i first posted the first post, i asked whether i was making sense,you said no and i continued with my write up ignoring that of the barnabas, reading through the write up, you would have seen that no single question was asked from the gospel but all from your bible

lafile, i could remember your biased post in one of your christian thread labelling babs a 'liar' but thank God gbade and barikade exposed her through some of my write ups.

keep it up.

Most times, i sit and wonder if we are really God' will. Should this be called religious debate?

Do you call it justice when a party is allowed to respond to questions and not being insulted while another party is being insulted for same?

Do you call it justice in which a party feel free to re-ask questions he deemed fit to ask a party when sufficent answers are not provided and instead of giving reasons or explaining more, the former party is being attacked verbally raining all sorts of insults on him while if same happens to the latter party, checkmating is not done?

Do you call that justice when questions are asked, a party avoided the questions claiming that have been 'ferreted' from the internet or whatever but the latter does not face similar.

You can imaging the level of injustice and hypocrisy?

Why do you have self-hatred for this guy's thread? Why not give him breathing space. From his post here, he never said anything on the gospel of barnabas but used it at the start of his thread on the notion that some people believed in the gospel whereas the questions he asked has been avoided pretending not to see them but giving audience to the opinion of KAG.

You have always claimed that you have been answering this guy/man's posts but looking closely at all his posts, most of your answers have been going in opposite direction but whenever he tries re-explaining and calling you back, you flare up and starts raining insults on him and calling him names.

why hiding under the cloak of KAG?
Here, KAG said he never believed in the gospel simply (maybe) it was not included as part of the bible, but you dont have to use his own response to attack him, thereby avoiding the thread. If you dont have answers to his questions, it will be better for you to leave the thread and let him be rather than making untenable excuses about KAG.

Naijacutee,
if you dont read, others will. It is a free world.

Peace

@combatant,

combatant:

Do you call it justice when a party is allowed to respond to questions and not being insulted while another party is being insulted for same?

Do you call it justice in which a party feel free to re-ask questions he deemed fit to ask a party when sufficent answers are not provided and instead of giving reasons or explaining more, the former party is being attacked verbally raining all sorts of insults on him while if same happens to the latter party, checkmating is not done?

Do you call that justice when questions are asked, a party avoided the questions claiming that have been 'ferreted' from the internet or whatever but the latter does not face similar.

You can imaging the level of injustice and hypocrisy?

I hope your Islamic polarization is not going to seal your lips very early on the Forum. I could not imagine the level of hypocrisy you're magically trumping up when clearly your blabber has more than insulted others. . . and even helped to curse himself - did you miss all that, mr. 1 post?

Meanwhile, I guess you took for granted that answers have been provided already to many of his questions (nevermind that they're not his, but those he got from skeptic websites). What has been his response? He has severally noised that his questions were "IGNORED" - another one of his lies. Sorry, but your 'rescue mission' hasn't helped him much.

combatant:

Why do you have self-hatred for this guy's thread? Why not give him breathing space. From his post here, he never said anything on the gospel of barnabas but used it at the start of his thread on the notion that some people believed in the gospel whereas the questions he asked has been avoided pretending not to see them but giving audience to the opinion of KAG.

Tsk! (Does this guy understand what he's saying?) If anyone has self-hatred it could be none other than the one who hated himself so much as to curse himself. If your problem is the 'Gospel or Barnabas', let us remind you that even MUSLIMS themselves consider it "pseudepigraphical" (immaterial, because false). When, on the other hand we make reference to the Hadiths, your brothers claim that they are "false hadiths" while still referring to them in their various posts.

combatant:

You have always claimed that you have been answering this guy/man's posts but looking closely at all his posts, most of your answers have been going in opposite direction but whenever he tries re-explaining and calling you back, you flare up and starts raining insults on him and calling him names.

Proves you haven't read through the answers yourself. Should we "ignore" you as well?

combatant:

why hiding under the cloak of KAG?

No one's hiding under KAG, whose post was simply pointing out what babs787 missed. Maybe at the right moment we shall reference some of Ali Dashti's works in querying Islam, yes?

combatant:

Here, KAG said he never believed in the gospel simply (maybe) it was not included as part of the bible, but you don't have to use his own response to attack him, thereby avoiding the thread. If you don't have answers to his questions, it will be better for you to leave the thread and let him be rather than making untenable excuses about KAG.

You miss the point - MUSLIMS also do not take the Gospel of Barnabas seriously because it is "pseudepigraphical".

@barikade


let me quickly answer you befoe i go on with my write up. like i have been saying and will continue, the curse will continue hanging on you till you answer those four questions.

I hope your Islamic polarization is not going to seal your lips very early on the Forum. I could not imagine the level of hypocrisy you're magically trumping up when clearly your blabber has more than insulted others. . . and even helped to curse himself - did you miss all that, mr. 1 post?

really, so babs started the insults, have you read the number of times, havila, mrpataki, davidylan, babyosis, shahan and lately you and gbade have been saying all sorts of bullshits. when i first came on board, i thought this is going to be a thread where religious will be thrashed out, i.e disagree in order to agree but i found out that reverse was the case. i even remembered when mrpataki accused me of insulting havila and tendered my apology but along the line in other threads, i learnt that most of you are fond of foul languages and to talking to people anyhow as if they are your kids, so babs made up his mind that, the measure you mete out will meted to you too.

now, to the issue of gospel of barnabas, if not that you are really blind, did i ask questions on the gospel? i only brought out the gospel as a result of the respect accorded to Barnabas in your bible and wondered why should the man of that high status be ignored, i also asked babyosis why it was not included but because of your pea sized brain, you misconstrued me.

so, having answered you, let me go on with the continuaton.

Jesus prays for rescue

Mathew 26v37-39: …. And he began to be sorrowful and very depressed. Then said he unto them,’my soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even unto death….’ And he went a little farther and fell on his face  and prayed saying, ‘ o my father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me nevertheless, not as I will but as thou wilt.

He wanted them to ‘wait and watch’, to keep guard! But every time he returns from his prayer, he found them asleep. As he himself said
Mathew 26v40: what, could ye not watch with me an hour.

                                               His agony

Luke 22v44: and being in an agony, he prayed more earnestly and his sweat was, it were, great drops of blood falling down to the ground.

Has anyone ever witnessed a man sweating blood? Is it possible for man to sweat blood under severe agony and duress?

Question 5
what was the prayer for to the extent of sweating blood since he came to die.

The children of Israel- the Jews because of their attempt to his life, it would be a sure proof for them and for their children till eternity that Jesus of Nazareth was an imposter, liar and a cheat. Their rejection of him would leave the door open for every-would be imposter to the claim of being the promised messiah of the Jews. And hence millions of his people would be led to perdition until the Day of Judgment.

The Jews had hit upon a quick and easy way of eliminating imposters, so they thought.

Were they not told in the Torah in
Deuteronomy 18v20: but the prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other Gods, even that prophet shall die.

Further in

Deuteronomy 21v23: his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

So if they succeeded in their attempt on his life, worse for him. If they failed then, they might consider his claim. It is for this reason that Jesus beseeched God so pathetically
Mathew 26v37-39: ….o my father if it be possible let this cup pass from me. Nevertheless not as I will but as thou wilt.

The above means God should remove his affliction and in the end, Jesus left it for God to decide.
 
                                Jesus unaware of heavenly contract

From the “call to arms” in the upper room, and the masterful deployment of forces at Gethsemane, and the blood-sweating prayer to the God of mercy for help, it appears that jesus knew nothing about the contract for his crucifixion.

                                      Jesus (pbuh) – his ordeal

Mathew 26v40: what could ye not watch with me for an hour.
Mark 14v39-40: and again, he (Jesus) went away and prayed, and spoke the same words. And when he returned, he found them asleep again (for their eyes were heavy), neither knew what to answer him.

St. mark bemoans that the disciples could give no excuse for their sleepiness. He records
Mark 14v40Z: neither knew what to answer him.
St. Luke, hazards a guess for this sleepy state of his disciples
Luke 22v45: and when he (Jesus) rose from prayer, and was come to his disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow.

Sleeping for sorrow!!!!

                                 God answered Jesus prayer

James 5v16: the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much
The master had also given us a very noble and holy conception of the father in heaven in our relationship with him in worship and prayer
Mathew 7v7-9: ask, it shall be given you, seek and ye shall find, knock and it shall be opened unto you, for every one that asked, receiveth, and he that seeketh findeth, and to him that knocked, it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if son ask bread, will give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will give him a serpent?

Here Jesus draws an analogy in the above verse between a loving human father and God. If man, the noblest of God’s handwork cannot be expected to behave like a sadist who would push a stone into the mouth of his hungry child when he cries for bread of give him a serpent when he asks for fish, then how can the Merciful God, the loving father in heaven do just that. Indeed, he would not. For we are told in the book of Hebrews that God heard his (Jesus) prayer
Hebrews 5v7: who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared.

Jesus pours out his heart to the only one that could save him from death and paul assures us that God Heard him in that he feared’.

What does it mean ‘God heard”. Is God deaf at anytime? No., we the Muslims, Christians, Jews believe that God almighty is an All Hearing God. He hears our very secret inner thoughts. Then what does it mean that God heard. It means that ‘God accepted’. We have beautiful examples in the bible of what happens when God hears the prayer of someone.
Abraham in his old age prayed for a son and God heard his prayer and Ishmael was born. Ishmael in Hebrew means ‘God heard’. ‘El’ means God and ‘shima’ means to hear.
Also Zechariah in his old age prayed for a son and God heard his prayer and John the Baptist was born. When the bible says that God heard prayer of someone, it means that God accepted the prayer and granted the request.

                                                      The result

The prayer of jesus materialized and God sent His angel from heaven with the assurance of help as in
Luke 22v43: and there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.

                                     Question 6

a. What did the angel of God came to strengthen him for?
b. Did he come to increase his doubts or fear?
c. To multiply his anxieties
d. Did the angel come to tell him that God had forsaken him in his disbelief?
God forbid!. The angel of God came to assure him that God was with him, that God was going to save him, or how else could one strengthened?
We are told again that he was destined to die. He was prepared from the ‘foundation of the world’ for a substitutionary sacrifice. If this was the scheme of God for the redemption of mankind, then obviously, he had made a wrong choice.

The Christians claim that he was ‘prepared’ that he was ‘conditioned’ for his ordeal and that in actual fact he had ‘volunteered’ for the great sacrifice. But this picture of the lamb of God led to the slaughter for the atonement of the sins of man is contradicted by what Jesus did according to the gospel narratives. The manner in which Jesus had deployed his disciples – eight at the gate and an inner line of defence, armed to the hilt – shows that Jesus was not prepared to be made a scapegoat for his followers. He had prepared to fight to the bitter end.

                                          summary of questions

Question 5
what was the prayer for to the extent of sweating blood since he came to die.

Question 6

a. What did the angel of God came to strengthen him for?
b. Did he come to increase his doubts or fear?
c. To multiply his anxieties
d. Did the angel come to tell him that God had forsaken him in his disbelief?

As a prelude,take a look at this which I had posted in another thread and you had read it and responded that you did not know Christ was indeed crucified.

[b]RECORDED IN THE TALMUD

The Talmud, which consists of Jewish traditions handed down orally from generation to generation, was organized by Rabbi Akiba before his death in 135 A.D. The writings in the Talmud embrace the legal, ritual and exegetical commentaries that have developed right down to contemporary times. In Sanhedrin 43a, reference to Jesus is found. "On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf. But since nothing was brought forward in his favor, he was hanged on the eve of the Passover."If Jesus had been stoned, his death would have been at the hands of the Jews. The fact he was crucified shows that the Romans intervened. The Talmud also speaks of five of Jesus' disciples and recounts their standing before judges who made individual decisions about each one, deciding that they should be executed. No deaths are recorded.

Other Talmud references to Jesus indicated that Jesus was "treated differently from others who led the people astray, for he was connected with royalty." These Talmud accounts were written long before the New Testament was assembled. They provide clear evidence that Jesus did live. The Talmud does not embrace Christ as a deity and would have no reason to sanction his existence. The Talmud also states that Jesus was 33 or 34 years old when he died. The risen Christ is the foundation of Christianity. But Christ would have to have lived and died before His resurrection could become an historical factor.




another non Christian source.

The second century Greek satirist Lucian, though speaking derisively of Jesus and the early Christians, does establish the worship of Christ within the first century of his death. "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day, the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account, You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods, alike, regarding them merely as common property."


[/b]

let us hear your best argument

@blabs787,

babs787:

@barikade

let me quickly answer you befoe i go on with my write up. like i have been saying and will continue, the curse will continue hanging on you till you answer those four questions.

You make for a good sport of laughter. No matter how you try to transfer your delusions and curses to anyone, they are not working. Proverbs 26:2 - "As the bird by wandering, as the swallow by flying, so the curse causeless shall not come." I just dey kampe and you will continue to sweat out all curses (787 of them) on yourself! Ride on.

babs787:

really, so babs started the insults, have you read the number of times, havila, mrpataki, davidylan, babyosis, shahan and lately you and gbade have been saying all sorts of bullshits. when i first came on board, i thought this is going to be a thread where religious will be thrashed out, i.e disagree in order to agree but i found out that reverse was the case. i even remembered when mrpataki accused me of insulting havila and tendered my apology but along the line in other threads, i learnt that most of you are fond of foul languages and to talking to people anyhow as if they are your kids, so babs made up his mind that, the measure you mete out will meted to you too.

How did I start out to engage you in discussions - with insults? How did I start out to engage other discussants like nuru - with insults? I often start out asking questions - is that the same as insults? That is why your hypocrisy is not worth the dust on the highway to Medina.

I went on to offer you a reasoned appeal in this link, where among other things, that you should face issues and desist from the usual cliche that your questions were "IGNORED". Since you're quite a stranger to manners, then let's see just how much your non-transferrable curses are eroding your civility.

babs787:

now, to the issue of gospel of barnabas, if not that you are really blind, did i ask questions on the gospel? i only brought out the gospel as a result of the respect accorded to Barnabas in your bible and wondered why should the man of that high status be ignored, i also asked babyosis why it was not included but because of your pea sized brain, you misconstrued me.

Let me help you with your jiga. You could have helped your case if you only wondered for a moment why other scholarly Muslims do not take the Gospel of Barnabas (GoB) seriously.

"The Gospel of Barnabas is a work purporting to be a depiction of the life of Jesus by his disciple Barnabas. The two earliest known manuscripts have been dated to the late sixteenth century, and are written respectively in Italian and in Spanish; although the Spanish version survives now only in an eighteenth century copy. . . In some, but not all, respects it conforms to the Islamic interpretation of Christian origins; and consequently its authorship and textual history remain the subject of continued controversy."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas

How you expect to pepper your cacophony with a controversial "pseudepigrapha" is beyond anyone's imagination, not to even mention that of the Muslims who don't take it serously. There are a few issues to help you think through why the GoB is a weak instrument for your argument:

(a) the document is only of recent date - late sixteenth century.

(b) the manuscripts that have survived are in Italian and Spanish - hardly the languages of the disciples in the first century.

(c) in some respects, the GoB conforms to Islamic interpretations of Christianity - which is hardly surprising from its 16th century date than any 1st century Christian document written by the true disciples of Jesus.

babs787:

so, having answered you, let me go on with the continuaton.

I'm not the one screaming about 'they "IGNORED" my questions' - and you can sort yourself out of your misconceptions about your GoB.

barikade,

can you please read the thread and see for yourself that no emphasis was laid on gospel of barnabas, i thought you are knowledgeable but couldnt understand simple sentences.na wa o, keep cursing yourself.

@babyosis

here she you go again, claiming that were 'ferreted' from the internet. na wa o

hope you know that six questions have so far been asked.

Now what is your sole evidence that Christ was not crucified,let us start from there and move on.
I don't mind you copying and pasting to answer me but do it with some commonsense and don't forget to give me that singular evidence you have.

very good question

since you wanted a quick response, let me help me

barely three hours on the cross, jesus was lifted and carried away by his secret friends nicodemus and another of his to his supulchre, he was washed and laid in the tomb (note he was not buried)

answer these questions

1. why did mary go to the tomb?
2. why was the stone removed and why were the winding sheets found unwind?
3. why did mary think jesus as a gardener? do resurrected bodies look like gardeners?
4. what does mary wanted to do with a decomposing body?
5. can she alone carry a dead body?
6. what was the sign of jonah


from here, we move on

swell weekend

@babs787,

babs787:

barikade,
can you please read the thread and see for yourself that no emphasis was laid on gospel of barnabas, i thought you are knowledgeable but couldnt understand simple sentences.na wa o, keep cursing yourself.

I am still laughing at your drivel - it's Friday and a good way to start the weekend. Nowhere did I curse myself, and I offered you Proverbs 26:2 to show that your curses upon yourself are non-transferrable. Again, I say - I just dey kampe!

Now, your latest concern about the GoB seems to have cooled off, abi? If not, make some more noise. How many times did you harp on it, claiming that you were only asking babyosisi a question about it? You forgot? Here, let me help you ~~

babs787:

now, to the issue of gospel of barnabas, if not that you are really blind, did i ask questions on the gospel? i only brought out the gospel as a result of the respect accorded to Barnabas in your bible and wondered why should the man of that high status be ignored, i also asked babyosis why it was not included but because of your pea sized brain, you misconstrued me.

Oga blabs787, what is the meaning of " I wondered why. . . I also asked babyosisi why it was not included"? They're your newest blabbers, abi? If they were not "questions" and you didn't need any answers, would you not have come back screaming your lullaby of "IGNORING" your questions? O ka re, local champ.

I've told you before, the worst you can do if you don't like the answers given to your questions is simply state that you disagree with them; not lying that they were "IGNORED"! Simple English does not mean the same thing as your noise.

since you wanted a quick response, let me help me

barely three hours on the cross, jesus was lifted and carried away by his secret friends nicodemus and another of his to his supulchre, he was washed and laid in the tomb (note he was not buried

[b]Now is this your best evidence that Christ was not crucified?
So from the above do you admit he was actually on the cross or not
And that his body ended up at a tomb and you're asking why it was "laid" in a tomb and not "buried" since perhaps living uncrucified folks are laid (^{as in laid to rest lol}) and dead ones are buried.
I need your answer.

Don't be in a hurry,there's no need for symptoms of ADHD when you want honest answers.
I pasted the historical facts earlier,would you rather I rephrased them in my own words,by the way the books were those were written can be verified,if you are in for a trip to the museum in Europe,let me know and I'll tell you where you can verify those

One thing you should know about me by now is that I do not make claims that cannot be verified
For every thing I've said about Islam I use the hadith and Koran and for any gospel claims,the bible's claim on crucifixion is supported by regular secular writers that have remained undisputed.
These works predate Muhammad by the way[/b]

@naijacutee,

naijacutee:

While you're answering that, here's a treat for you. This has nothing to do with Christianity, it was written by Muslims. Enjoy.

http://www.muslimhope.com/ForgeryOfTheGospelOfBarnabas.htm

Thanks for that link.

babs787:


since you wanted a quick response, let me help me

barely three hours on the cross, jesus was lifted and carried away by his secret friends nicodemus and another of his to his supulchre, he was washed and laid in the tomb (note he was not buried)

answer these questions

1. why did mary go to the tomb?
2. why was the stone removed and why were the winding sheets found unwind?
3. why did mary think jesus as a gardener? do resurrected bodies look like gardeners?
4. what does mary wanted to do with a decomposing body?
5. can she alone carry a dead body?
6. what was the sign of jonah
from here, we move on. swell weekend

aahmmm,
@All,
I think no serious minded person should take this guy blabs787 seriously. Somebody correctly perceived some evidence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in him. Apart from his Adedibu style of grammar, where is the sense?
You wanted to prove Jesus was not crucified; yet to support that, you stated (as above) that he spent only 3 hours on the cross after which he was carried to a sepulcher secretly.
He was laid in a tomb but was not buried. Are you really alright?
what's with all those purile questions? Na real wa o. Stop making a fool of yourself bro. "Let me help me", chei! this nairaland sef

@batu,

batu:

I think no serious minded person should take this guy blabs787 seriously. Somebody correctly perceived some evidence of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in him.

True talk.

batu:

He was laid in a tomb but was not buried. Are you really alright?

High fever, perhaps - from his non-transferrable 787 curses upon himself?

@barikade,

Comprehension is really your problem. in my post, i said why was his book not taken serious because of the way he was addressed and when i asked if my write up was making sense, lafile told me 'no' and i moved ahead not referring or laying emphasis on the book of Barnabas. na wa o elder barikade. The curse is really working


@banju,

welcome, You have decided to replace gbade.x.Lets keep watching with the curse hanging on you having cursed yourself. I sensed that you wanted to be noticed. Never mind, we will see as times goes on.

@naijacutee,

Read my post again, i never asked question on gospel of barnabas (read my first post and second post)

babyosis,

When I started the write up, I threw six questions and you told me that I should give you reasons in which i gave you part but here you are , telling me that I should be prepared to follow you to European Mesuem. hmmm, just relying on hearsay and historical proofs abi.

I know very sure if you had asked me questions and I gave you the above that you should go to Museum, I know for sure, you would have been saying all sort of things.

Now is this your best evidence that Christ was not crucified?
So from the above do you admit he was actually on the cross or not
And that his body ended up at a tomb and you're asking why it was "laid" in a tomb and not "buried" since perhaps living uncrucified folks are laid (as in laid to rest lol) and dead ones are buried.
I need your answer.

where in the above questions did i ask whether he was buried or laid? hmmmmmmmm

Don't be in a hurry,there's no need for symptoms of ADHD when you want honest answers.
I pasted the historical facts earlier,would you rather I rephrased them in my own words,by the way the books were those were written can be verified,if you are in for a trip to the museum in Europe,let me know and I'll tell you where you can verify those

So it is now symptoms of ADHD.hmmmmmmmmm, Christians. 'was jesus christ crucified' is really their foundation and no crucifixion, no christianity.

No need rephrasing anything here. You backed your claims with historical facts and am asking you questions based on those facts even from your bible but you tolod me that I should be prepared to follow you to European Museum. na wa o, Havent you read from your bible that none of his disciples or authors was there to witness the incident. Luke that wasnt an eye witness even said ', and they all forsook him and fled (luke 23v49)'
also , all his acquintances and the women who had followed him from Galille stood at a distance and saw these things (Luke 15v40-41)
, there were also many women there, looking on from afart, who had followed Jesus from Galilee (Mathew 27v55-56)

I never meant to rush you, I threw those questions at you when you demanded for reasons, but in the absence of that, I will forge ahead from where I stopped not minding whatever you people might be saying.

First evidence that he didnt die

Now, Jesus prayed to God and He heard his prayers by sending Holy Spirity to strenghtened him that God would never leave him to be killed and if you do not agree to that, how do you explain the word 'strenghtened'.

The jews demanded for his crucifixion. there are two types of crucifixtion, one with a fast death and the other with a slow lingering death. Jesus is supposed to have been crucificted (did u say crucifixion?) at the same time the two thieves were fixed to their crosses too. With all their rush and hurry, the Jews could not fix Jesus before Friday afternoon.

The jews and the Romans managed to have Jesus on the cross by the 6th hour i.e 12noon and by 9th hour (3pm), he had given up the ghost (very funny).

As much as they were in a hurry to get him up, now were they in a hurry to bring him down because of their Sabbath day
Deuteronomy 21v23: His body (any crucified person) shall not remain all nights upon the tree but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day (for he that is hanged is accursed of God), that thy land be not defiled which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

In order to beat the Sabbath day, they resorted to CRURIFRAGIUM - a situation in which the legs are broken. The crucifixion was a slow one but resorted to the above in order to make it faster. The Soldiers came, brake the legs of the first and the other malefactors but when they got to Jesus, 'he was dead already so they didnt brake his legs'. (John 19v38)

We are told that, 'and they brake not his legs' was in fulfilment of a prophesy (isaiah 34v20)

If the bones of a victim were to be protected from harm, then they could only be of a benefit if the person was ALIVE. For a person already, intact bones means nothing whether sawed or smashed into pieces

What clinical instrument was used to verify his death? Did anyone touch his body or felt his pulse before conducting and certifying him already dead? (mind you, vinegar that has been known to give stimulating effect was given to him in order to give him enough strenght)

Qestion on that at the end of the write up

We have been hearing stories of 'medically certified death' cases in which some have been coming back to life, making me wonder if it was resurrection or resuscitation. You may go through the old dailies or current ones for verification but here are just two examples out of very many ones.

1. Little girl who 'died' tells how she came back to life - Daily News 15/11/55
2. Back from the dead - After being thought dead for 2 days - Post 25/7/65

God works in a miraculous way. He inspired the Soldiers to think that the victim is already 'dead' so as not to break his legs and at the same time inspired another Soldier to lance him on the side with a spear ', and forthwith came there out blood and water (John 19v34).

Its a blessing of God that when the human body cannot endure further pain, agony etc, unconsciousness supervenes. But immobility, fatigue etc on the cross might have slowed down the blood circulation.

Also, in the Encyclopedia Biblia, under the word 'cross', column 960, we are assured that 'jesus was alive when the spear was thrust'. Blood and water coming out instantly is a sure evidence that Jesus was ALIVE.

Question

1. What clinical instrument was used in detecting and certifying him dead (because he wasnt touch nor his pulse felt)?

2. The instant coming out of blood and water showed that he was alive and if not, why the coming out of blood and water from dead body.

If you knocked out the above that 'still he died on the cross' by debunking my claims up, then I move to the next stage in the order questions were thrown at you.


Take care till babs comes your way.

@blabs787,

babs787:

Comprehension is really your problem.

As long as you keep disgracing your alma-mater (if you have any at all), we won't be surprised that you can't even understand your self.

babs787:

in my post, i said why was his book not taken serious because of the way he was addressed

How many times were you told that even Muslims who study the GoB don't even take it seriously, not to even mention the fact that it contradicts both the Qur'an and the Bible.

babs787:

and when i asked if my write up was making sense, lafile told me 'no'

That should be one more confirmation that you're a confused ADHD.

babs787:

and i moved ahead not referring or laying emphasis on the book of Barnabas. na wa o elder barikade.

Another one of your 787 lies. Tell us again if you have jiga in your eyes and can't see that after lafile's one-word response, you still came back with the same repetition on babyosisi. Check above - and come back lying/blabbing that you never "referred" to the GoB.

babs787:

The curse is really working

I know, blabs, I know - it is "really working" - on you! I'm so sorry that your curses are non-transferrable (though you wish so much they would); and even on weekends they're still working overtime on your mental state. E pe le.

uan no go kill me here o!

Adedibu style of grammer!

babyosisi:

As a prelude,take a look at this which I had posted in another thread and you had read it and responded that you did not know Christ was indeed crucified.

[b]RECORDED IN THE TALMUD

The Talmud, which consists of Jewish traditions handed down orally from generation to generation, was organized by Rabbi Akiba before his death in 135 A.D. The writings in the Talmud embrace the legal, ritual and exegetical commentaries that have developed right down to contemporary times. In Sanhedrin 43a, reference to Jesus is found. "On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf. But since nothing was brought forward in his favor, he was hanged on the eve of the Passover."If Jesus had been stoned, his death would have been at the hands of the Jews. The fact he was crucified shows that the Romans intervened. The Talmud also speaks of five of Jesus' disciples and recounts their standing before judges who made individual decisions about each one, deciding that they should be executed. No deaths are recorded.

I doubt the Yeshu(s) mentioned in the Talmud have anything to do with the Jesus of the Gospels. For one thing, the descriptions and deaths of the two differ significantly - in my opinion, stoning and hanging are different from crucifixion. Furthermore, I don't see how the disciples mentioned bear any similarity to the disciples mentioned in the Gospels. Remember, the names mentioned in the Talmud are: "Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah" (http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html)

Other Talmud references to Jesus indicated that Jesus was "treated differently from others who led the people astray, for he was connected with royalty."

Or the Government. In any case, so?

These Talmud accounts were written long before the New Testament was assembled. They provide clear evidence that Jesus did live. The Talmud does not embrace Christ as a deity and would have no reason to sanction his existence. The Talmud also states that Jesus was 33 or 34 years old when he died. The risen Christ is the foundation of Christianity. But Christ would have to have lived and died before His resurrection could become an historical factor.

I don't think I've come across the 33/34 years old thing. In any case, you'd have to stretch and twist a lot to state that the Talmud is evidence for Jesus of the Gospels.

another non Christian source.

The second century Greek satirist Lucian, though speaking derisively of Jesus and the early Christians, does establish the worship of Christ within the first century of his death. "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day, the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account, You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods, alike, regarding them merely as common property." [/b]

Lucian was writing centuries after Jesus could have died. He may or may not have been speaking about an historical fact (he, like several others, would have been going on the words of others).

let us hear your best argument

Carry on.

-

@topic,

It is really amusing for babs787 to start out with the 16th century 'Gospel of Barnabas' as "proof" that Jesus was not crucified, and then work his way backwards to the 1st century Barnabas of the Bible!

This chap has failed to realise that the 'Gospel of Barnabas' even contradicts the Qur'an as effectively as he supposes it does the Bible. No matter how many times it has already been mentioned, babs787 still hasn't seen the weakness in his argument that knowledgeable MUSLIMS do NOT even take this document seriously.