[Sami-Zaatari]

salam all, as you all know common Christian argument is that Allah invented Christianity. they base this on the fact that Allah saved Jesus and made it appear that he died making the people think it was him, which then led to christianity, that he died for their sins, and rose on the 3rd day.

however so, as usual, the christians who use this argument have not checked the facts properly, and are being quite dishonest. this refutation crushes this distorted lie once and for all:

http://muslim-responses.com/Did_Allah_invent_Christianity/Did_Allah_invent_Christianity_

[Jake]

Truly I ask you, where does the text that you link to come from. If it is from your Quran, let me tell you that the texts of the bible are written partly by eye-witnesses who saw Jesus on the Cross. I recommend you to judge Christianity on base of the Bible and not the Quran, because the Quran was written 500 years later.

[Mohammad_Ali]

texts of the bible are written partly by eye-witnesses who saw Jesus on the Cross.

Really, that is your claim where is the proof to back it up. All the eye witnesses saw was a man resembling Jesus on the cross. How does that prove that it really was Jesus on the cross to begin with. Besides its a myth that the Bible was written by eye witnesses to start with. How you may ask? Well to start with your Bibles new testament is based of books and letters written by a number of authors - the most books are written by Paul of Tarsus. A man who NEVER MET JESUS AND WHO WAS NOT AN EYE WITNESS TO THE ALLEGED CRUCIFICTION.

The four gospels are attributed to four alleged apostles or disciples of Jesus

-The gospel according to Mark is attributed to Mark, interpreter of Peter. It further claimed that this is the same John Mark mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts:12:12;13:5,13;15:37,39), the epistles of Paul (Colossians 4:10;II Timothy 4:11; Philemon 24:1) and the first epistle of Peter (I Peter 5:13).

-The gospel according to Matthew was attributed to Matthew, a tax collector, (Matthew 9:9, 10:3) who became one of the twelve apostles (Matthew 10:3, Mark 3:18, Luke 6:15, Acts 1:13).

-The two-volumed Luke-Acts was attributed to Luke, a physician (Collosians 4:14) and one of companions of Paul (Collosians 4:10-14, Philemon 1: 23-24, II Timothy 4:11)

-The fourth gospel was supposed to have been written by John the son of Zebedee , a fisherman (Matthew 4:21), who, like Matthew, was one of the twelve apostles. (Matthew 10:2, Mark 3:17, 6:14, John 21:2, Acts 1:13).

These are your claims and the claims of your clergy but on simple scruitiny these attributions are far from truth.

To start with in history these gospels were not attributed to the authors your clergy claims they were, infact they were circulated anonymously. There is no explicit reference within the gospels themselves as to who their authors were. The gospels originally circulated as anonymous writings. The evidence for this is two-fold: anonymous quotes and the ancient practice of entitling works.

Prior to around 150 CE, any quotation from the gospels was always made anonymously. For example

I Clement (c. 96 CE):

I Clement 13
Let us remember what the Lord Jesus Christ said in one of his lessons on mildness and forbearance. "Be merciful", he told us, "that you may obtain mercy; forgive that you may be forgiven. What you do yourself, will be done to you ; what you give, will be given to you; as you judge, so you will be judged; as you show kindness, so it will be shown to you. Your portion will be weighed out for you in your own scales."

Similar sayings can be found in Mathew but not exact sayings. Whatever the case may be, note how the reference is merely to "what the Lord Jesus Christ said." No mention is made as to where or what documents the quotes were taken from. Next is Ignatius (d c.110). In his epistle to the Smyrnaeans he made a reference to the baptism of Jesus by John:

[I}Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 1
He was truly born of a virgin, was baptized by John, in order that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him

This is clearly a quotation taken out of Matthew 3:14-15 Note, again, that the source of that quote is not mentioned. It was with Justin Martyr (c 100-c 165), together with his near contemporary, Papias, that changes from anonymity start to take place. For in his works we find references to "Memoirs of the Apostles" as written documents recounting the acts and sayings of Jesus. Justin was also one of the first to use the term "gospel" to refer to these written documents.

The earliest attempt to give the names of the authors of some of the gospels came just before the middle of the second century. Prior to that these gospels you hold today were seen no different from the ones your church deems as apocryphical.

Let us see what a Biblical scholar, E.P. Sanders, Professor of Religion at Duke University has to say about this:

We do not know who wrote the gospels. They presently have headings "according to Matthew", "according to Mark", "according to Luke" and "according to John"...These men - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - really lived, but we do not know that they wrote gospels. Present evidence indicates that the gospels remained untitled until the second half of the second century...

It is unlikely that Christians knew the names of the authors for a period of hundred years or so, but did not mention them in any surviving literature (which is quite substantial). It is also intrinsically possible that the gospels originally were headed only "the gospel [good news] of Jesus Christ" or something of that sort, and did not give the names of their authors...

My judgment is that all the gospels were written anonymously and that the names were assigned after the year 150...
Sanders, The Historical Figure of Jesus: p63-66

ONe simple question there are hundreds of other gospels which your church regards as apocryphical - even though some of them contain details on the history of Jesus, my question is why did your church choose these set of books when its obvious that none of the books authors are known in the first place? You never had a complete Bible until it was mass printed in the 15th century by order fo King James - prior to that it was always the property of the church.

The Quran has always been with the people for there is no clergy in Islam - we all all equal before Allah Almighty.

So there you have it - you can't even claim that the gospels you have are written by eye witnesses to start with. With respect to the Quran, this book was memorised at the time of the Prophet and was copied down on paper by his closest Disciples who were with him and had served him - a copy of that Early manuscript is even today available at Topkapi Museum, Turkey. This book is teh only book which is memorised by millions of Muslim men, women and children and there has appeared not so much as a slight change in it since its revelation.

I recommend you to judge Christianity on base of the Bible and not the Quran

Define what you mean right here.. which Bible should we judge your religion by. Each church has its own set of books which they call a Bible with the number of books varying from 73, 66 to over 100 in some churches. Each of them vary on basis of doctrine. You cannot judge on a standard that is not uniform. To begin with you must prove which set of books should be taken as a base to judge upon to start with.

Its just like trying to judge a criminial based upon penal laws of INdia, Pakistan, Sudan, Spain etc each have their own laws which are similar and different. UNless your standards are uniform you cannot judge, I hope you understand this simple point!

[Zahid_Shaikh]

jazakallah, what a satisfactory answer borther Ali.

[Jenny]

Quote

Sami Zaatari (04.09.2007)

---

salam all, as you all know common Christian argument is that Allah invented Christianity. they base this on the fact that Allah saved Jesus and made it appear that he died making the people think it was him, which then led to christianity, that he died for their sins, and rose on the 3rd day.

however so, as usual, the christians who use this argument have not checked the facts properly, and are being quite dishonest. this refutation crushes this distorted lie once and for all:

http://muslim-responses.com/Did_Allah_invent_Christianity/Did_Allah_invent_Christianity_

It does not prove anything.This is nothing more but again story about Christianity according to Islam.