Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Why Did Allah Corrupt the Gospel?

The Qur'an affirms the inspiration (3:3-4), preservation (7:157; 18:27), and authority of the Gospel (5:47, 68). Yet our Muslim friends tell us that the Gospel has been corrupted. Here we may start to wonder who corrupted it. According to the Qur'an, Jesus never died by crucifixion (4:157-158). According to the Bible, Jesus died by crucifixion (e.g., Matthew 17:22-23; 27:50; etc.). Who corrupted the portion of the Gospel that reports Jesus' death on the cross? Interestingly, Islam teaches that Allah corrupted the Gospel by tricking and deceiving people into believing that Jesus died on the cross. But why would Allah corrupt his own revelation?

7 comments:

RG said...

About a year ago I decided to acquaint myself with the Koran. It amused me and nauseated me all at the same time.

The one thing that really struck me as totally weird was that, I had barely read for 5 minutes when I started noticing that allah continuously refers to himself in the plural context. "We", "us", etc, etc.

"We"? "us"? Shoot, that sounds pretty trinitarian to me! In the Bible, in Genesis, Elohim says, "Let US make man in our own image." Gee, I just have to wonder, ya don't s'pose mo was reading his Bible when he decided to distort his own version of it??? Hmmmm!!!!

So there it is, right under their noses--their own 'false' prophet refers to his 'unitarian' god in the plural form. Proof positive that the koran is a vile deception and a fraud!!!!!

Truth be told, mohammed distorted and plagiarized everything he wrote in the koran. Most of it comes directly from the Bible, a distorted product of mohammed's demented, demonic imaginations.

bazza31 said...

Thank you David and rest of the team for opening the eyes of the world to this ghastly cult! Lets face it, if not for sites like these and your shows, few would be hearing the truth! I was raised in the Greek Orthodox Church and always heard that Mohammad was and is an antichrist! I didn't fear because of the distance from Muslim countries. Now I see the real danger! Never understood why a Muslim could never give me a straight answer to simple questions regarding their "faith".

bazza31 said...

Cont..
Now I know and understand the deceptive nature of this cult! The evil one will stop at nothing to destroy any soul fighting for salvation! May The Lord bless you for your works!! Greetings from Australia!

Jonas ola said...

Shalom...

@RG- actually the plural used for Allah in the quran applies to the form of Majesty that Allah have. I've asked my muslim friends about this several years ago. & I can accept that. But for us Christians, plurals for God in the Bible (esp OT) literally means plural,i.e trinitarian, becoz there's no 'plural for majesty' in original Hebrew language... So by this we can assure that God is multipersonal in One essence...

Good job mr David & Sam. Honestly everytime I've watched your programs, all u've said echoed in my brain for a whole day long..! Thank God for people like you all. Keep preaching the truth, brothers...

Greetings from Malaysia...

Ghoendtua said...

who is more noble: the Prophrts or Israel..?

Abdur Rahman said...

The person who was crusified was not jesus...His apperance was made to be like JESUS(p.b.u.h),because he had came to arrest jesus, for progating about true god, ALLAH.....The person who was crusified was a jew...it was a punishment for him, for trying to crusify jesus.....JESUS(p.b.u.h) IS ALIVE AND WILL RETURN AND UNITE ALL TRUE BELIVERS OF ALLAH AND HIS MESSANGER, PROPHET MUHAMMAD (salllahu-alli-was-sallam)

Tim said...

RG: I have always thought the same thing - I read the Koran the first time (what a chore) twenty or thirty years ago - essentially a bunch of moosh, especially because it is not chronologically arranged - perhaps to confuse ordinary people from being impowered to understand what its saying and why. But Islamic Legal Scholars have to know the context and so the chronology in order to determine Sharia law. You can find a chronology arranged Koran at the politicalislam.com site along with annotations of what is occuring along with it.

In regard to the use of the 1st person plural. This might be a function of the limitations of the English language. Some languages have a high formal personal pronoun - what the English themselves call "the royal 'we'." There is a famous Japanese novel from the first decade of the 20th century called "I am a cat" - its a fictional autobiography of a cat, and it makes fun of cats famous 'indifference' to anything going around him - in this case a somewhate arrogant cat that makes condescending observation of the humans around him. The title "I am a Cat" is not properly translated into English, because the first person pronoun used in Japanese is one that is only available to members of Japan's royal family. In the case of England's royal family the king's pronouncements might use the term "we" instead of "I" especially in the King's speech at the opening of parliament. So it may be that the term "we" is translated from "first person formal" in Arabic to "first person plural" in English to capture the sense of formality in it. But yeah, it sure makes it look like in English that its the trinity dictating the koran. Incidentally you might notice that English has problems with personal pronouns in general. French, German, Italian and Latin have informal intimate pronouns in regard to 2nd person. In the latin languages it generally begins with "t" such as tu (as in tu es belle = you are beautiful), the plural/formal the 2nd person (plural) is vous (vous etes beaux). I could be wrong, but I think the way one distinguishes between "I like you" and "I love you" is to tu (t') instead of vous. The use of formal vs informal changing the meaning of love (aime). And we know from Shakespeare that English used to have and make use of thee thou, thy,. But somehow, and quite soon afterwords, English moved the formal/plural "you" into double duty: formal and informal, singular and plural 2nd person. I think this has something to do with cold stiff English culture that maybe came with calvinism or maybe with just snobish pretension. So my relatives in Texas, when I was very young, made liberal use of "you-all" for 2nd person plural to distinguish from "you" as 2nd person singular. (But is was all informal). Now when I go to Texas they often use "you-all" for 2nd person singular and are now using "all-you-all" for 2nd person plural. Maybe by the time I die, I'll be hearing "all all-you-all." and so the long term trend continues.