promisechuks:

Please name one man you know that was born out of a virgin without intercourse.

If you can answer that then it will be nullified to being a criteria.

Bear in mind that Adam and Eve were not born of a woman, but were the first people God created.

Only Prophet Jesus pbuh

I will rephrase. Being created without intercourse is not a criteria.

The very fact that Jesus pbuh was given birth, and came out as little helpless small baby is enough to refute the claim that Jesus pbuh is God. It is utter blasphemy to claim that God came out of a women like all people, it is utter blasphemy to claim God came out crying and screaming and being helpless and weak. Such nonsense is insulting to God; this itself is enough to prove Jesus pbuh is not God. How can you claim that God came out of a woman? Are you mad? Are you insane? How can you insult God in such a manner, you Christians should be ashamed of yourselves for ascribing such rubbish to God.

nasiayam:

The very fact that Jesus pbuh was given birth, and came out as little helpless small baby is enough to refute the claim that Jesus pbuh is God. It is utter blasphemy to claim that God came out of a women like all people, it is utter blasphemy to claim God came out crying and screaming and being helpless and weak. Such nonsense is insulting to God; this itself is enough to prove Jesus pbuh is not God. How can you claim that God came out of a woman? Are you mad? Are you insane? How can you insult God in such a manner, you Christians should be ashamed of yourselves for ascribing such rubbish to God.

God knew it, but he had to do it for the love he has for you.

God knew that it will only take his death as a man on the cross to liberate us that's why he came as a man(humanity) and as a son to him(divinity) in the person named Jesus.

Though, you saw it as an insult as any person who has not met with the power that resurrected jesus from the dead would see it.

God had no other option than to do it that way for the "who he is"

promisechuks:

God knew it, but he had to do it for the love he has for you.

God knew that it will only take his death as a man on the cross to liberate us that's why he came as a man(humanity) and as a son to him(divinity) in the person named Jesus.

Though, you saw it as an insult as any person who has not met with the power that resurrected jesus from the dead would see it.

God had no other option than to do it that way for the "who he is"

Blaspheming God.
-2 seek forgiveness

nasiayam:


Blaspheming God.
-2 seek forgiveness

Not blaspheming!

I am letting you know what God did for you, my earnest desire is to make you understand what God, through his love, did for you through jesus.

See, don't be deceived!
Jesus is more than a prophet.

See, God is all-powerful, but I once asked like what you may be asking "why must God have come in the likeness of man, to die for our sins that was caused by adam?" But, see something you don't know.

God coming in the likeness of man, to redeem man is the only way to prove himself a God of Justice, otherwise will be injustice and a sin unto himself, because man(adam) lost it, ma(God, through christ as a sinless man) has to recovered.

If you can't understand how much God loves you, you will find it difficult to understand.

promisechuks:

Not blaspheming!

I am letting you know what God did for you, my earnest desire is to make you understand what God, through his love, did for you through jesus.

See, don't be deceived!
Jesus is more than a prophet.

See, God is all-powerful, but I once asked like what you may be asking "why must God have come in the likeness of man, to die for our sins that was caused by adam?" But, see something you don't know.

God coming in the likeness of man, to redeem man is the only way to prove himself a God of Justice, otherwise will be injustice and a sin unto himself, because man(adam) lost it, ma(God, through christ as a sinless man) has to recovered.

If you can't understand how much God loves you, you will find it difficult to understand.

God is not a man. Jesus pbuh is a Prophet sent to the lost sheep of Israel.

nasiayam:

God is not a man. Jesus pbuh is a Prophet sent to the lost sheep of Israel.

God is not a man, but to carry out his purpose for man, he needed to make of himself an incarnate son of himself in the likeness of man, and the man was named jesus.

Eye-opening questions;
To do what for them?
Why were they lost?
Did jesus later recovered them?
How did he recovered them?

promisechuks:

Where is this one from?

Who told you such?

Don't be deceived, nothing was added in the early translation.

In fact, what do you about translation?

Our(ALL) translated versions are all meaning the same thing with different/broken down words for easy understanding.

That's why we have; easy to read version, amplified version, KJ and many others

These bibles were all gotten from the dead sea scrolls, ancient hebrew and aramaic texts, masocretic texts and latin vulgate.

When the bible was compiled, a number of these texts were discarded for various reasons. The NT was contained almost exclusively in the greek and latin texts (for some reason no hebrew man wrote any surviving text). The more ancient greek texts do not contain some of these verses.

CoolUsername:


These bibles were all gotten from the dead sea scrolls, ancient hebrew and aramaic texts, masocretic texts and latin vulgate.

When the bible was compiled, a number of these texts were discarded for various reasons. The NT was contained almost exclusively in the greek and latin texts (for some reason no hebrew man wrote any surviving text). The more ancient greek texts do not contain some of these verses.

You ask for the genuinty of Bible, but here is the genuinty of bible over quran.

BIBLE VS QUARAN

Some believe the Bible has been corrupted over time. It isn't true and here is how we know it isn't.

The last books of the New Testament were written by about 100 A.D. by the apostle John who was still alive at that time.

We have over 5300 partial or complete manuscripts of the New Testament penned prior to fourth century A.D.

Though not assembled into what we now know as the New Testament until 300 A.D., those canonical writings of Jesus' apostles were being read all over the known world.


Though it is disputed by some Messianic Jews, the New Testament manuscripts were originally written in Koine` Greek and then copied by early Christians into every language known to the world.


Our major manuscripts are in Greek, yes, but we also have important early manuscripts in
Latin, Syriac, Aramaic, Hebrew, and several other lesser-known languages.


We have one small piece of the Gospel of John, found on the Egyptian island of Elephantine, that is early enough to be a piece of the original.

It is impossible to support any kind of later corrupting when we have those 5300 early manuscripts that prove otherwise. In fact, because of this breadth of early manuscript support, textual scholars have concluded -- that for all practical
purposes -- we have the original documents
themselves.

For a claim of tampering to be seriously considered, one would have to show that scribes from Syria, Babylonia, Galatia, Asia, India, Rome, Egypt, Greece, Carthage, Tarshish and Macedonia -- to name a few -- all made the same mistake, at the same time, for the same doctrinal purpose. An utterly ridiculous idea.


We have similar textual support for the authenticity of the Old Testament. Until a few years ago, the earliest documents we had for the Old Testament were later copies of a 70 B.C. Septuigent in Greek and a Massoretic Text in Hebrew that could be positively dated to the ninth century A.D..


However, with manuscript discoveries at Qumran made in the late 1940's (the Isaiah scroll, the book of Daniel, the book of Jubilees, the Temple scrolls, etc. etc.), some of which could be dated to the third
century B.C.. Internal evidence within one Daniel scroll dates it at 350 B.C. As a result, we can now
state with some certainty that there has been no tampering with the canonical Old Testament
manuscripts between 300 B.C. and 900 A.D..


Despite the span of over a thousand years, the canonical manuscripts are virtually identical !!!!
To suggest there was tampering to the Old Testament documents prior to 300 B.C. shows a
misunderstanding of Israelite scribal methodology and of their reverence for the Scriptures.


First of all, biblical scrolls were written on the inside only to prevent any smudging or smearing that might lead to a misreading of the text. When being copied -- besides many parallel readings -- the copy was compared with the original in every way humanly possible.


The words in each column were counted and then the letters. The first, last, and middle letter and word in each column had to be identical to the original. If the number of words or the number of
letters of the copy differed from the original, the copy was destroyed. Then they counted the words and letters in the whole document.


They divided the document into quarters and into eighths. The first, last and middle letter in each section had to be the same. The number of words
and the number of letters in each section had to be the same. The middle word and the middle letter
in each section had to be the same, and they had to be the same for the whole document.


If not, the copy was destroyed. Not corrected, but
destroyed!

Since there is absolutely no textual or historic evidence that the Old Testament was ever corrupted, any claim of editing must have been
made by those religious authorities who didn't like what the Old Testament taught. There are some who claim late-dating for Old Testament prophets, but that claim is unfounded, as well. The books of Moses, originally penned in the 15th century B.C. contain Egyptian words and idioms that fell out of usage a few centuries later. When the Hebrews entered Canaan, Canaanite words appeared in
Scripture, when in contact with the Assyrians, Assyrian words appeared in Scripture.



During the Babylonian captivity, when Daniel and Ezekiel were written, Babylonian words and
Babylonian idioms appeared in Scripture. So rest assured, these canonical books were contemporary books, written when the prophets claimed they were, and they remain unchanged to this day.


Ellis Skolfield
http://www.ellisskolfield.com


Please visit Ellis Skolfield's site for
much more, particularly in regard to
Islam in bible prophecy.


The following is not a part of the
above paper.


THE QURAN AND ABROGATION

Let's take a look at the textual integrity of the Quran, by comparison, as bequeathed to us by
the Quran and Hadith themselves.

Though the Quran has a short 23 year history, it is so self-contradictory that a whopping 71, out of only 114 suras, require
abrogation.

In stark contrast the bible spans a period from Moses in about 1446 BC, to the book of Revelation,
written around the end of the first century. Over that period mankind developed from desert dwelling nomads, to advanced nations that could follow religious law, as well as secular laws of kings and emperors.


It is important to note that parts of the Old Testament are purely historical record, that in no way imply God's tacit approval, of what was recorded of those events.

These portions simply chronicle events that took place. In spite of it's near 1600 year history, and the large volume of prophets, and legions of witnesses,
God's Word requires no abrogation.


It should be apparent that the Quran’s voluminous abrogation, required for a record of recitations of an illiterate, that were collected over the brief span of just 23 years, demonstrates not divine revelation, but the changing whims of it's author.


A good example is the convenient "revelation" that
allowed Muhammad to take his stepson's wife (Sura 33:37).

The Al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh - the abrogator and the abrogated - is the Arabic language book that details what is abrogated by what.

Good video at this address:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=6Kox5XNuyb8


According to Muhammad: Quran 2:106 None of Our
revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or
similar : Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?


Not abrogated..... just........ substituted....... for something better!

Later suras abrogate those that occur earlier.

Suras like:
8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them


Comprise the "better" "substitute" for the verses waaaay back in sura 2:
2:256 Let there be no compulsion in religion:...


It would seem Muhammad knew what a mess it was:
Surah 16:101 When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what He reveals
(in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them understand not.


It also seems Muhammad suspected he would be viewed as a fraud.


Please visit IslamReview.com for more on abrogation.
Another video on abrogation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=Ye5pPXrBl7g


A video detailing some specific verses: http://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=JtUhb_9rp9A
More on "Naskh" http://
www.youtube.com/watch?
v=Mvbkzewoyao


For much more on the textual history of the Quran please read "Islam Reviewed" by former Muslim
M. Ali, published by Fish House Ministries, and available in PDF at EllisSkolfield.com, or in HTML at
BeholdTheBeast.com

It wasn't until after 632 that a standardized text began to be compiled from inscriptions on palm
leaves, stones, and memories of reciters that survived the battle of Aqraba.


Once compiled, the Quran was subsequently collected up, and all but a preferred version burned,
on two separate occasions. Once under Abu Bakr and again under Khalif Uthman.


Islam is the inevitable result of a tangled web of deception. Please visit TheReligionOfPeace.com.

The Quran could never be made "better", whether through abrogation or otherwise. In fact it is a terminally repetitive, and self- contradicting record, of recitations of an illiterate 7th century false
prophet, that is THE EXACT OPPOSITE of the revelation of God through Jesus Christ.


Perhaps the most violent thing Jesus did was overturn the tables of the moneychangers. The polar opposite of the way Muhammad is revealed through the Quran and the Hadith.


Muhammad rejected ALL of the New Testament disciples and apostles, that walked and talked with Jesus, and he rejected the WHOLE SUBJECT of the New Testament, which is the new covenant that we
are given through Jesus Christ. 2Corinthians 13:1 This [is] the third [time] I am coming to you. In the
mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be
established.


No surprise that Muhammad was alone.


Islam is the only anti-another- religion religion.

Islam is antichrist.
1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the
Father and the Son. 23 Whosoever denieth the Son,
the same hath not the Father: [(but) he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also].


The full text of the First Epistle of John, from the same version the famous Islamic sophist Ahmed
Deedat used (KJV), is available at IslamAndTheTruth.com.


Why not read it for yourself and see if you agree with Deedat about it "confirming Muhammad"?


Hope this gives you a good answer.

[quote author=promisechuks post=42936926][/quote]

Your pagan rhetoric is trash.

Do christians believe enough to drink poison or will they admit additions ?

Man up and swig back some strychnine

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/pastor-jamie-coots-snake-handling-tv-preacher-dies-viper-bite-article-1.1616382

Preacher dead from snake preaching. Was he not the believer he thought he was. Daunting question

bxcode:
Reprobate mind.
The bible is not a magic book..

Lmao.
It has talking snakes and donkeys.
A story about one man killing an army with a donkey's jawbone.
It talks about witches, wizards, black magic.
There is sacrifice upon sacrifice.
Incredible stories that defy belief.. even promises readers they will be able to do the same tricks...



and it is not a magic book?

The oldest copies of the Gospel of Mark, the Sinaitic and Vatican, end at Mark 16:8. A note in the New International Version of the Bible states: "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20." Verses 9 to 20 appear to have been added later by an unknown Christian forger. The addition was quoted in the writings of Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the second or third century.



DO CHRISTIANS AGREE IT'S A FORGERY?

The foregoing verse is such an obvious forgery that:

This verse is now universally recognized as being a later "insertion" of the Church and all recent versions of the Bible, such as the Revised Standard Version the New Revised Standard Version, the New American Standard Bible, the New English Bible, the Phillips Modern English Bible ...etc. have all unceremoniously expunged this verse from their pages. Why is this? The scripture translator Benjamin Wilson gives the following explanation for this action in his "Emphatic Diaglott." Mr. Wilson says:

"This text concerning the heavenly witness is not contained in any Greek manuscript which was written earlier than the fifteenth century. It is not cited by any of the ecclesiastical writers; not by any of early Latin fathers even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have lead them to appeal to it's authority. It is therefore evidently spurious."

Others, such as the late Dr. Herbert W. Armstrong argued that this verse was added to the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible during the heat of the controversy between Rome, Arius, and God's people. Whatever the reason, this verse is now universally recognized as an insertion and discarded. . .

What credibility does Christianity have when it scriptures are littered with such dangerous and obvious forgeries?

nasiayam:

The very fact that Jesus pbuh was given birth, and came out as little helpless small baby is enough to refute the claim that Jesus pbuh is God. It is utter blasphemy to claim that God came out of a women like all people, it is utter blasphemy to claim God came out crying and screaming and being helpless and weak. Such nonsense is insulting to God; this itself is enough to prove Jesus pbuh is not God. How can you claim that God came out of a woman? Are you mad? Are you insane? How can you insult God in such a manner, you Christians should be ashamed of yourselves for ascribing such rubbish to God.

Umm stfu bro

Does any christian have anything to say about the forgery or willing to swill poison

xerxesII:


Umm stfu bro

Why so mad Brah?

Annunaki2,malvisguy212 and truthman2012 are d only true Christians we have here,I know they won't Runaway from this simple test.over to three of u,show dis people day Jesus is truly Lord and Saviour,please shame johnydon22 for me

sonOfLucifer:

Lmao.
It has talking snakes and donkeys.
A story about one man killing an army with a donkey's jawbone.
It talks about witches, wizards, black magic.
There is sacrifice upon sacrifice.
Incredible stories that defy belief.. even promises readers they will be able to do the same tricks...



and it is not a magic book?

Yes it's not magic book

lllllllllllll:
they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."
Mark 16:18

If the Christian here really believers, make videos of yourself snake handling, drinking rat poison, and healing the sick in hospital. Great chance to prove how right you are. Failure to do so will lead me to believe you not true believers. Call the international media when at hospitals healing the sick. The onus is on you,

This thread sounds like when satan told Jesus to cast Himself down because angels will come according to God's Promise but His reply (and mine to you) was:

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Matthew 4:7

Op, I fear you were motivated by the same personality

nasiayam:
What credibility does Christianity have when it scriptures are littered with such dangerous and obvious forgeries?

Visit this:
https://www.nairaland.com/2935365/mark-16-9-20-debate-rests

Scholar8200:
This thread sounds like when satan told Jesus to cast Himself down because angels will come according to God's Promise but His reply (and mine to you) was:

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Matthew 4:7

Op, I fear you were motivated by the same personality

Actually thread sounds like christians scare to drink poison or admit fake verses

nasiayam:


Actually thread sounds like christians scare to drink poison or admit fake verses

Matthew 4:6,7
6 and saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

That passage is not for us to go up and down proving we are Christians by drinking poison even the disciples and the early church did not do that! Were they called Christians at Antioch for drinking poison?

But here is what it means:

3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. 4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. 5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. 6 Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.

Acts 28:3-6

You know not what manner of spirit you are of!

lllllllllllll:
they will pick up serpents, and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover."
Mark 16:18

If the Christian here really believers, make videos of yourself snake handling, drinking rat poison, and healing the sick in hospital. Great chance to prove how right you are. Failure to do so will lead me to believe you not true believers. Call the international media when at hospitals healing the sick. The onus is on you,

you lack knowledge of God word, the verse is not a command for All christians, it is a promised of protection, a similar event happened with apostle paul, paul did not purposely take up serpent, is was an unexpected accident, and God miraculously protected His servant as He had promised!

Deliberately taken up serpent and drinking poisoning water is against God command, the scripture made this clear. What you are doing here, is EXACTLY what satan did In Matthew 4:5-6, he TEMPT Jesus to throw himself down from the mountain if Jesus was the son of God, satan even promised Jesus protection, but what did Jesus say ? I will give you the answer Jesus gave satan;

Matthew 4:10 Then saith Jesus unto him, GET THE HENCE , SATAN: for it is written, Thou shalt
worship the Lord thy God, and him only
shalt thou serve.

Scholar8200:


Matthew 4:6,7
6 and saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

That passage is not for us to go up and down proving we are Christians by drinking poison even the disciples and the early church did not do that! Were they called Christians at Antioch for drinking poison?

But here is what it means:

3 And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand. 4 And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live. 5 And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm. 6 Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.

Acts 28:3-6

You know not what manner of spirit you are of!

honestly bro, the devil has really fool this people. The verse the op quote was misquote by satan in the book of psalm, this atheists are following the footsteps of their father the devil.

Psalms 91
91:10 There shall no evil befall thee,
neither shall any plague come nigh thy
dwelling.
91:11 For he shall give his angels charge
over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
91:12 They shall bear thee up in their
hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a
stone.
91:13 Thou shalt tread upon the lion and
adder: the young lion and the dragon
shalt thou trample under feet.
91:14 Because he hath set his love upon
me, therefore will I deliver him: I will set
him on high, because he hath known my
name.
91:15 He shall call upon me, and I will
answer him: I will be with him in trouble;
I will deliver him, and honour him.
91:16 With long life will I satisfy him, and
shew him my salvation.