Posted by Ibn Anwar on January 28, 2010
Difficulties, Contradictions and Problems in the Crucifixion tale
by Ibn Anwar
“…but they killed him not, nor crucified him…”(Qur’an 4:157)
Jesus’ Crucifixion is the bedrock of mainstream Christianity. It is such an important foundation in Christianity that even sects that have departed from “Orthodoxy” such as Unitarianism and the Jehovah’s Witness have retained the crucifixion. Paul says, “And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain” (1 Cor. 15:14). Without crucifixion there is no resurrection. Because the preaching of Christianity is based on the resurrection it goes without saying that the crucifixion is equally significant and important which is why the official symbol in mainstream Christianity is the cross.
It is often claimed in Evangelical circles and by Christian missionaries that there is a consensus among scholars and historians both conservative and liberal that Jesus certainly died on the cross. This is misleading. There are scholars who argue that because there is such a paucity in early reliable historical records attesting to Jesus’ existence that must mean that he is a myth, a legend, a fiction. Granted that the circle of scholars of this persuasian is small in number that does not discount the fact that they exist. Tom Harpur who was professor of New Testament and New Testament Greek at Wycliffe(The Pagan Christ), Bruno Bauer (Critique of the Gospels and History of Their Origin), Earl Doherty(The Jesus Puzzle), Prof. G.A. Wells(The Historical Evidence for Jesus), Prof. Michael Martin(The Case Against Christianity) are some of the scholars who have questioned Jesus’ existence. Thus to continue claiming that all scholars both liberal and conservative agree on the crucifixion is untrue. Undoubtedly, a vast majority of scholars say the crucifixion happened, but not without serious qualification. They do not say it as a fact, but rather as a probable occurence. Historians involved in this area of study base their judgment on probabilities rather than conclusive historical data. Using the historical method scholars comb through available historical materials, assess them and thereafter produce what they think to be the most probable conclusion. Historians using the critical historical method do not recognise supernatural events because they are the least probable occurences which is why God cannot be in the equation hence discounting both resurrection and Jesus’ ascent to heaven as historical(at least according to the historical method). A person living 2000 years ago would be regarded as dead because it is highly improbable(or impossible) for a man to live that long. Because Jesus lived around 2000 years ago historians conclude that he must have died. This is of course according to the critical historical method. The real question that historians are interested in is how he died. And for this they look at the historical records surrounding the person Jesus. According to their perspective based on their research the most probable explanation or cause for Jesus’ death is the crucifixion. Thus many modern (non-Muslim) historians have no qualms over Jesus’ death itself not because they think that Jesus was factually and definitely crucified but because a man living 2000 years ago cannot still be alive. In this article we will be looking closely at some of those major data and sources used to propose that Jesus died by crucifixion. God willing, we will illustrate by proposing nine contentions(using historical and theological arguments) that the historical material employed are insufficient in proving the crucifixion and that Jesus certainly did not die the shameful death of a crucified man.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s), Jesus, Theology | Tagged: corruption, crucifixion, fake, false, Islam, Jesus, variances | 4 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on January 24, 2010
Christians lie to promote their religion
by Ibn Anwar
The activity of Christians promoting their faith through deceit all over the world is not something new to Muslims. We are well aware of the sly tactics employed by Evangelical and Christian missionaries in delivering the message of Christianity to the unbelievers. We know about the Christian Evangelical ship Logos that sails around the world making stops in third world countries like Indonesia and luring the people by giving them gifts in exchange for belief in Christ. How many times have you heard missionary propagandists like Christian Prince and Sam Shamoun throwing accusations of so called “Islamic taqiyyah” at Muslims saying that Islam teaches its followers to use deceit as one of the ways to deliver Islam. The word Taqiyyah comes from the root waqa which means to “to shield/protect oneself”. However, when Christian missionaries talk about Taqiyyah what they mean is that Muslims lie to spread their religion. In this article we will unequivocally show that Christians are the ones lie and deceive to spread their faith as taught by their Holy Bible(s).
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in "Saint" Paul of Tarsus, Christian Watch | Tagged: Bible lying, deceit, fake, lies, lying, missionary, Paul, taqiyyah | 3 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on January 22, 2010
Human Error or Divine Incompetence?
by Ibn Anwar
Can you imagine a book that claims to convey factual information and data making a terrible factual error in its first paragraph? Let’s say we have a book called “101 Facts on Animals” and in the first supposed fact it makes an UNFACTUAL claim. Would you be taking that book seriously anymore or will you consider chucking it in the bin and find other books instead? This is the predicament that Christians face when the claim is made that the Gospel according to Mark is divinely inspired or “god-breathed”. At the very beginning of the book and in the first chapter of Mark we have a truly irreconcilable textual error.
In the beginning was an error…..
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: alteration, Bible, corruption, falsehood, Gospel, Mark, Mark 12 | 12 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on September 6, 2009
A dialogue between Ibn Anwar and Polycarp
I am not quite sure who Mr. Polycarp is, but it does seem fairly certain that he is a Christian apologist. He first appeared on Unveiling-Chrisianity on the Trinity Challenge post where he simply posted a reference, that is, Matthew 28:19 in answer to Ibn Sa’ad’s challenge to produce a single verse that teaches the Trinity in the Bible(s). I in turn replied and directed him to an article I had written on Matthew 28:19. Thereafter, we had some very interesting exchanges that you may follow here. On August 16, he also comented on another article. The article is on Paul written by my friend Sami Zaatari the Muslim apologist. Naturally, I responded and that led to some further exchanges until finally Polycarp relented and asked for time out so he could gather his sources and provide much more meaningful rebuttals. I had no objection to it and opined that maybe he could even produce a whole thesis on the subject to which he said, “maybe I will!”. The thesis isn’t forthcoming, but of course one understands that thesis’ are time consuming and take a while to complete. So, we’ll give him the benefit of the doubt and give him at least 2 years to finish it. Neverheless, he has returned and produced the following response which is his latest.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in "Saint" Paul of Tarsus, Theology | 12 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on August 23, 2009
The many Christian canons
by Ibn Anwar
The word canon comes from the Greek kanna which accoding to Prof. Bleddyn J. Roberts means ” ‘reed’ or ‘cane’; which gives the idea of a measuring-rod, and it was first used in this sense when Athanasius applied it to the books of the NT.” [1] In the Biblical sense canon refers to a select number of books that are considered authoritative and divinely inspired, hence, their inclusion in a particular Bible volume. Many Christians, especially from the west are pretty much familiar with the 66 books canon - 39 books in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. The Protestants would be less familiar with the Catholic canon which consists 73 books containing 7 extra books. The so-called Deuterocanonical books are regarded as apocryphal(doubtful) by the Protestants, but the Catholics consider them canonical. One may think that the existence of different canons end at the Catholic-Protestant traditions. One would be very wrong to think that. As a matter of fact throughout Christian history there have been numerous different canons that differ from one another. In this article we shall have a glimpse at those many Christian canons. The main purpose of this article is to show that those Christians out there who want to talk about Qur’anic manuscripts burned by Uthman r.a. and try to undermine its credibility from that approach need to reconsider their tactic.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: Bible, Bible(s), books, canon, Christianity, corruption, New Testament, Old Testament | 3 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on August 22, 2009
The amazing Biblical treatment of women
by Ibn Anwar
Christian missionaries often accuse Islam of mistreating women. They claim that the Qur’an and the Sunnah teach that women are inferior and that this particular sex is oppressed by Allah and his Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. Na’udhubillah. In this article we will be comparing and contrasting the Biblical teachings on women versus those in Islam as found in the Qur’an and Sunnah.
Women presented as inferior at the very beginning
“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel. To the woman he said, “I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” (Genesis 3:12-13)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s), Islam, Theology | Tagged: Bible, chauvenism, Christianity and women, fair, Islam liberates, mistreatment of women, mysogenist, Qur'an, Sunnah, treatment, unfair, Women | 6 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on August 11, 2009
The teachings of Jesus and the Bible(s) that are not taught in your church
Why don’t Christians teach these things?
by Ibn Anwar
Google ‘Jesus is the prince of peace’ and millions of websites will appear on the search engine. Christians love to quote Isaiah 9:6 for Jesus and make him out to be the most peace loving being to have ever walked this earth. The teachings of Jesus are pure love and Christianity is love and the Bible is love. How many times have you heard this script? It is really unfortunate that the Christians who peddle these notions either do not really read their Bibles or even if they did they misunderstand or simply chuck them aside in favour of Church dogma. In this article we will look at samples of passages that are rarely taught in the Christian churches or missionary circles.
Christian polemic: The teachings of Jesus are based on love!
“If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple.” (Luke 14:26)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s), Jesus | Tagged: Bible, Christianity, death, dishonour, Jesus, parents, War | 10 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on August 9, 2009
The ‘ultimate’ sacrifice?
by Ibn Anwar
According to Christians the sacrifice that Jesus allegedly made on the cross at calvary is the ultimate sacrifice that absolves all sins. So for example we read the following declaration from a Christian based missionary website,
“The life of the sinner was under the sentence of death until Christ by the shedding of His blood in the death on the cross released and cleansed us of all sin (Eph. 1:7; 1 Peter 1:18-19; Rev. 1:5; 5:9). Christ bore the divine penalty and God is now free to forgive all sin and declare the believing sinner just in His sight (1 Peter 2:24; 3:18).” (source)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Jesus, Sin | 7 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on August 9, 2009
Possibly one of the best compilations of Christian goodness and love on the net
by Ibn Anwar
“The greater the sin, the greater the redemption.”
The following is a compilation of articles that I have written on beautiful Christian behaviour. The Christians must accept the standard set by their own ’sacred text’ that says, “Judge them by their fruits”.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s), Christian Watch, Current Issues, Sin | Tagged: arrested, christians, criminals, legal cases, molestation, rich, terrorism | 2 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on August 5, 2009
According to the Old Testament Jesus cannot be a saviour
by Ibn Anwar
According to Christians Jesus is a prince. He is the prince of peace. In the New Testament we read again and again that Jesus is called ‘the Son of Man’. In fact, that expression is mentioned for Jesus over 83 times throughout the New Testament. Consider the following verse,
“Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man in whom there is no help.” (Psalms 146:3)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Jesus, Theology | Tagged: God, Jesus, man, Psalms, salvation, saviour, Yeshua | 2 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on July 15, 2009
Is Luke true to historical facts?
by Ibn Anwar
First and foremost, it is necessary to point out that the Gospel of(or rather according to) Luke is an anonymous piece of literature. More information on this is given here. Many Christians that I have met consider the Gospel of Luke along with the other books of the New Testament as accurate historical texts with no errors. They are in other words truly inspired and inerrant. One can understand the sentiments involved. Christianity revolves around the Bible(s) and as such it is regarded as a revelation from God. It is regarded as ‘the Word of God’. Being the ‘Word of God’ it has to meet certain standards. One of which is of course accuracy of facts and information. There can be no error in the Bible text according to the Christian fundamentalist, for an error in it is tentamount to saying that God is in error. In this article I shall expose the fallacy of this belief by showing a clear error in the text. The question then is how can inspired writers get things wrong and are not corrected by the One inspiring them? This then brings us to the topic proper, Is Luke true to historical facts? Several weeks ago my Australian Paltalk friend 28abc invited me to a room on Paltalk called Kick Back Cafe Christians Answer Back Loud(or something to that effect) in the Christian section to have a dialogue with a ‘pastor’ there. I wasn’t doing anything much so I agreed. Upon arrival I raised my hand to take the microphone. I think I had to wait for close to half an hour before I actually reached it because the Christian admins were droning and complaining on and on about Muslims and Islam. Anyway, the moment I got the microphone(knowing I might get knocked off by an admin) I posed the question quickly to the room and specifically to the Pastor who had a blue nick name. As is often the case before I could finish my point one of the admins dotted me. People in the room complained including the non-Muslims. The pastor raised his hand and waited in line. One of the admins didn’t give the mic to him immediately after me, but instead grabbed it and started dissing Islam and saying that the room isn’t about Islam(and I didn’t even mention the word Islam). She then started talking about the crucifixion and how Jesus had died for our sins and we should accept that. It was only after close to half an hour of going off the tangent and diatribing that the microphone was finally given to the pastor. We strongly suspected that the question was a bit too difficult for him(the pastor) so the admin had to intervene and start pulling wool over people’s eyes so as to allow the good pastor to do some spur of the moment searches(maybe google?). But, whatever it was the pastor came on and tried to answer. What came from him was expected disappointment. Instead of actually explaining the discrepency he started talking about some guy who lived more than a hundred years ago who was once a skeptic and became a believer after studying the gospel of Luke meticulously and found that what contained therein are accurate to history. The person that he appealed to is a certain British archeologist whose name is Sir William Ramsay(not to be confused with the chemist who lived about the same time). The argument is that this archeologist took the gospel to task in trying to disprove it, but instead discovered that it matched with historical and archeological findings. In this article I will postulate the same point that I did in the room which the pastor tried to answer which I think was hardly satisfactory. I did not discover this problem on my own. It is not something new. This problem has troubled many a conservative scholar who has studied the gospel according to Luke as pointed out in People’s New Testament. In fact, this problem was recognised and spotted by the author of Izhar al-Haq over 100 years ago. I heartily recommend the book to anyone interested in Christian-Muslim dialogues. It is one of the early scholarly writings in the field by a Muslim hand.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: Bible, false, falsehood, historical inaccuracy, Jesus, Luke, Luke 2, Luke 2:1, Luke 2:2, Quirinius, Raymond Brown | 12 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on July 13, 2009
What exactly is the Bible?
by Ibn Anwar
Many people especially Christians themselves take for granted the Bible that they have in hand and use in their churches. If one were to ask a Christian how many Bibles there are, one would not be surprised to hear the answer that there is only one Bible that is called THE Bible. Many Christians that I have met were(probably still are) in fact under the impression that the Bible that they read(e.g. KJV) existed as it is 2000 years ago! That can’t be farther from the truth. The truth of the matter is that there is no such thing as THE Bible. There are Bibles and Bibles with each major and even minor church boasting its own kind.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: Bible, canon, manuscripts, scripture | 5 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on July 10, 2009
Unveiling Dr. James White
by Ibn Anwar
Very recently my article on God is not a man was posted on brother Zami Zaatari’s site muslim-responses.com. It got the attention of the notorious Sam Shamoun who then directed Dr. James White to it. As a result of that Dr. James White of the Alpha and Omega ministries produced a 20 minutes and 45 seconds long video response to the article(or to a fraction of the article). Before you watch Dr. White’s response you should first read the article in question. Click here to read the article. The following is the video response.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Jesus, Theology, Trinity | Tagged: Bible, Dr. James White, God is not a man, Jesus, rebuttal, Theology | 7 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on June 30, 2009
A trinity of verses deny God being a man
by Ibn Anwar
Is it just mere coincidence that there are exactly three verses in the entire Old Testament or Hebrew Bible that negates God being a man and on the other end of the spectrum there is the idea that God is three persons as Trinitarians hold? I do not think it is a mere coincidence that we have it as such. I do not think that it is mere coincidence that one of the three verses expressly denies that God is both man and the son of man both of which are respectively associated with Jesus. It goes without saying that these verses strongly indicate that the Trinity and the idea that God incarnated into the man Jesus are doctrines that are antithesis to God’s nature.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Jesus, Theology, Trinity | Tagged: 1 Samuel 15:29, Bible, Hosea 11:9, Jesus, man, Numbers 23:19, Son of God, son of Man | 8 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on June 29, 2009
Ripping the lies apart
by Ibn Anwar
The following is my responses to a recent visitor’s comment on this site who goes by the nick name Hate Muslims and Haman. His comment was posted under the Lord’s Prayer article by brother Mushafiq.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Islam | Tagged: critic, criticise, Islam, Muslim, Qur'an | 14 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on June 26, 2009
Michael Jackson who converted to Islam passed away today
Who doesn’t know Michael Jackson? His name echoes in every corner of the world. He was no doubt a colossal success(in entertainmet), but more importantly he was a human being. Let us remember that. But, even more important than that is that he was a MUSLIM! Yes, you heard me..he was MUSLIM! Let us hope and pray that he died upon the Shahadah and will be included amongst the believers. I would like to see him singing with the believers in Jannah. May Allah forgive him for his short comings and rest his soul.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: died, Michael Jackson, Mikaeel, Muslim, passed away | 3 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on June 17, 2009
Elohim. One or Plural?
by Ibn Anwar
(www.unveiling-christianity.com)
Assalamu’alaikum to the believers and Pax Vobiscum to the non-believers,
Reverend Tony Costa. It is a pleasure to read your thoughts on the Bible. I hope this will be the beginning of more constructive discussions to come. Let us now examine the points that you have mentioned.
The following is my response to Rev. Tony Costa’s comments that can be read at http://islamicarchives.wordpress.com/2009/05/19/elohim-is-not-always-plural/
Reverend Tony Costa said,
“The Hebrew word “elohim” is a third person masculine plural noun. It is grammatically always plural. It is used of the one true God Yahweh but when it is used of the true God “elohim” is generally followed by the singular verb. For instance Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God ["elohim"; plural noun] created ["bara"; singular]…”. “Elohim” is also used of false gods in the Old Testament, used of human judges and angels. The context is vital in the use of “elohim”. This noun is used of Yahweh more often than the other Hebrew words”el” and “eloah”.”
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: -im, -iym, Bible, Elohim, God, monotheism, one, plural, singular | 2 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on June 13, 2009
According to the Chumash (חומש) Islam is a fulfillment of God’s promise to Ishmael
by Ibn Anwar
Chumash is one of the terms used to describe the five books attributed to Moses. It is derived from the root chamesh which means five. More commonly they are known as the Torah or the Pentateuch. In this brief article we will be using the Stone’s Edition of the Chumash by Rabbi Nosson Scherman which has the main text of the five books together with selected commentaries from Rabbinic writings(in Hebrew and English) most prominent of which is Rabbi Rashi’s who is described as the “Father of Commentators” in the editor’s introduction.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: Bible, Chumash, Ishmael, Islam, Pentateuch, prophecy, Torah | 1 Comment »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on June 4, 2009
Is the Qur’an truly preserved as the Muslims claim?
by Ibn Anwar
It is We Who have sent down the Reminder (Qur’an) and We Who will preserve it. (al-Qur’an 15:9)
“Allah sent down(revealed) the Reminder(Qur’an) to the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. and preserved it thoroughly. Since its first revelation until now not one letter or word has disappeared or suffered alteration.” [1]
The above sums up the general attitude of Muslims towards the Qur’an. Billions have had the belief strongly embedded in their hearts and minds that the Qur’an since the time of the Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. have stood against the test of time and remain perfectly preserved in its pristine beauty, eloquence and grandeur. Is this attitutde a mere hallucination of the Muslims or is it grounded in sound understanding and evidence? There are those from outside the Muslim camp who maintain that our belief is nothing but a figment of our imagination (or something to that effect). Basically, they would argue that the Qur’an hasn’t been properly preserved and have been tampered with as a result of which there are “variants” in the Qur’anic material or manuscript evidence. This article aims at answering that line of argument and perhaps help reaffirm the Muslim position. In truth the impetus for this article is a short piece that I read several hours ago. A good brother by the name Army of Jesus is Islam directed me to the article and requested that I produce refutations. I thank the brother for bringing the article to my attention and I will try to fulfill his request in due course. The article in question can be read here http://islamoscope.wordpress.com/2009/02/08/variant-readings-are-they-all-the-same/
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | Tagged: Islam, Koran, preservation, preservation of Quran, Qur'an, variats | 32 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on June 3, 2009
Christian missionary: Allah is a moon god! You are worshipping a moon god! PAGANS!
by Ibn Anwar
I have met at least ten Christian missionaries who have brandished an accusing fingure saying that Allah the God that Muslims believe in is really a moon god. This idea or let’s call what it really is, a myth was postulated by a certain Robert Morey who’s arguments have been clinically or rather scholarly dissected at http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Sources/Allah/moongod.html . The expose’ was authored by MSM Saifullah, Mohd Elfie Nieshaem Juferi and Abdullah David. I think they have done an excellent job at presenting a sound rebuttal from an archeological standpoint bringing much clarity to the controversy. In this brief article of mine we shall not be going through the arguments proposed by Robert Morey and his cohorts. Rather we shall have a look at what the primary source of Islam says concerning the matter. Let the Qur’an speak for itself and we shall see whether the Muslims are worshipping a moon god or not.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Theology | Tagged: adonai, Allah, God's name, Islam, Jesus, Lord, moon god, name, the Bible, Yahweh, YHWH | 8 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on May 1, 2009
The Lord hardens the heart and misguides and misleads as He wishes
by Ibn Anwar
Many a time Christian missionaries accuse Muslims of believing in a God that misguides and misleads men as He wishes. They will then cite certain verses from the Qur’an that at a glance do seem to convey what they’re claiming such as the following verse,
“And We never sent a messenger save with the language of his folk, that he might make (the message) clear for them. Then Allah sendeth whom He will astray, and guideth whom He will. He is the Mighty, the Wise.”(14:4)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s), Theology | Tagged: Bible, calamity, deceit, deceive, evil, God, Jehovah, lie | 3 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on April 23, 2009
Jesus himself explicitly denies the crucifixion
Crucifixion Series(Part 2)
by Ibn Anwar
In this exposition we shall witness an account from the lips of Jesus himself that clearly discards his alleged crucifixion. We will prove from Jesus’ own words that he could not have possibly suffered at the hands of his enemies. Let us begin with the proof text for our premise namely Luke 13:33.
The context of Luke 13:33 starts at verse 31. It says that the Pharisees came to Jesus and warns him of an impending threat from Herod who supposedly wants him dead. In response to this warning Jesus responds,
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s), Jesus, sin and salvation | Tagged: crucifixion, Jesus, John, Luke 13:33 | 27 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on April 20, 2009
Is Isaiah 53 a prophecy concerning Jesus and his alleged crucifixion?
Crucifixion Series(Part 1)
by Ibn Anwar
Isaiah 53 is considered almost universally by Christians as a prophecy concerning the crucifixion of Jesus. They base their claim on verses applied to Jesus in the New Testament such as Matthew 8:17 that are taken from Isaiah 53. In this article we shall explore the chapter as analytically as possible and see whether the Christian claim has weight or not.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s), Jesus | Tagged: atonement, Bible, crucifixion, Isaiah 53, Jesus, Old Testament | 2 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on April 19, 2009
Possession by the Holy Spirit or what?
by Ibn Anwar
Millons of Christians like the Pentecostals believe that those empowered by the Holy Spirit are able to perform certain kinds of feats that may be deemed beyond that which is normal. Some of these things include speaking in tongues and performing miracles. The following are among some of the verses used by them to base their belief,
“And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;”(Mark 16:17)
“as the Spirit gives him utterance”(Acts 2:4)
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Christian Watch | Tagged: Bible Mark 16:17, miracle, speaking in tongues | 2 Comments »
Posted by Ibn Anwar on April 15, 2009
Luke and Paul. Friends or strangers?
by Ibn Anwar
Many Christians, especially the evangelicals believe that Luke who is supposed to be the author of both the Gospel According to Luke and Acts met Paul and travelled together with him as his companion. So for example, A.T. Robertson says that Luke was a “constant companion of Paul from Philippi on the return to Jerusalem on the 3rd tour till the 2 years in Rome at the close of the Acts”. One of the most common proof texts used to impart this idea is Colossians 4:14. It mentions a certaing “beloved physician”. Our first question would be who is this beloved physician mentioned? The passage itself does not divulge the identity of this mysterious individual. Secondly, was there only one physician in the entire geography? Their argument would make sense if Luke were the only physician in his time. But was he? Surely there must have been other physicians(that is if Luke was indeed a physician in the first place as per Church tradition) as well. As a matter of fact, the traditional notion that Luke was a physician is actually rejected today in Biblical scholarship as Emeritus Professor of Religion at Gettysburg College Edwin D. Freed notes, ” The traditional view that Luke was a physician and that his works contain a special medical vocabulary has been abandoned.” [1] Besides, most scholars today question the attribution of Colossians to Paul. They conclude that the epistle was not even written by Paul. The scholars who reject the epistle’s attribution to Paul postulate several strong points for their contention. One of the points contended is that in Colossians the uthor writes in long and extended complex Greek sentences(e.g.Colossians 1:3-8) which is a stark contrast to how Paul would normally write in hi undisputed letters.[2] Nevertheless, the real origin of the epistle continue to be hotly debated in academic circles. Some scholars argue that it was written by Paul, but alongside other hands. Some say that it is the product of the Pauline school tradition(and not from Paul). Which is it? The reason for all these divergent angles is because there is no solid evidence to substantiate its true origin. In other words it is highly doubtful. Like so many things in Christianity conjecture seems to be the ruler. Most scholars in critical scholarship however, are fairly certain that Paul did not write Colossians. Movin on, let’s carefully consider the following from Edwin D. Freed on hether Luke was Paul’s mate ,
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Bible(s) | 4 Comments »
Ibn Anwar
ibnsaad
