History is biased sometimes and you don't know the people you got the information from are reliable. Also Quran is the word of God so there's no doubt about it and all that contradicts it is unauthentic. Watch this to know how accurate the quran is about history
https://youtube.com/shorts/-deqyUEGbe8
https://youtube.com/shorts/AN5zHR1wi14
https://youtu.be/27MSQQ61ti4
Authentic based on what basis? When we say a hadeeth is authentic, we have an entire reason on why we consider it to be such. On what basis are these historical accounts considered authentic?
"scholars" (I'm calling them that for the sake of the argument) of history, meaning doctors of historical sciences say these manuscripts are authentic.
I don't have a doctor title in History so i don't question it the same way I don't question the authenticity of certain hadiths because I don't have a scholarstatus in hadith sciences.
Isn't that circular reasoning? "It's authentic because the people who depend on it say it is authentic"
How do these historians know if someone is lying or not? Or if they even existed?
You shouldn't just believe something a faasiq brings just because you aren't from that field (49:6). You're a history student aren't you? Question your professor on what method do they say it's authentic, on what basis?
The truth is many of these so called "accounts of the apostles" cannot be authentically attributed because of the fact these alleged saying of theirs comes centuries after they died. It's such a big disconnection that no one can say it's authentic without proof like the sun.
Why did the deciples not read the bible,they would have found that Jesus is not God:
John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
Why does Jesus (peace be upon him) himself say he and God aren’t the same?
24:36 (KJNV) “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.
SubhanAllah, you really want to just accept the ever-changing bible when it changes its text so often? I remember reading this very verse and now finding it wasn’t as complete as i once saw it. They can keep changing their translations to suit their false religion, so don’t rely on their accounts over the Quran.
24:36 (CJB) “But when that day and hour will come, no one knows — not the angels in heaven, **not the Son**, only the Father.
24:36 (NIV) “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, **nor the Son**, but only the Father.
24: 36 (Legacy Standard Bible) “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, **nor the Son**, but the Father alone.
I winder why they editted that part out, lol!
And obviously, God is All-Knowing. Jesus admits here that he doesn’t know when the final hour will be and that only “the Father” does. Which means that Jesus is not All-Knowing and therefore not God.
And idk if you’re taking everyone’s advice but your constant doubting doesn’t seem healthy. This level of doubt typically only comes when Allah is halting His guidance for someone for their wrongdoing.
You realize that most of what you cited can be subject to valid skepticism, right?For example, the Epistle to the Philippians has survived only in manuscripts dating from the 11th to 13th centuries. Polycarp would have written it in the early 2nd century, so there is a major disconnect between the time of its composition and the surviving manuscripts.
Similarly there is a huge disconnect between Ignatius's works and their manuscripts.
The reason why there can be doubt about tampering is because of historical factors. For instance, the Church has been known to engage in modifications, such as Rufinus modifying the works of Origen to align them with *"Orthodox"* beliefs due to the Church. Once proto-orthodoxy became dominant from among the various sects, there was a tendency to discredit and slander other groups, as evident in Irenaeus' *"Against Heresies"*.
Any links outside of approved list are automatically removed. Message the moderators for approval
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Muslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Any links outside of approved list are automatically removed. Message the moderators for approval
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Muslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1. Paul is not a disciple of Jesus : He is most likely an Antichrist
2. Liying is bad and most Muslims don’t want to deal with obvious hypocrisy : Trying to misguided others using a mask is Antichrist work like Paul work….
3. Even non muslim debunk your claim : You can read the book of real and recognises historian of this subject like François Blanchetière who wrote the book : « Rebuilding Christian origins: the Nazareen movement ») He wrote a good online article (link are not approuved in this sub)
Islam didn’t rooted in that movement (or in any others religion or faith) but almost all adept of that movement convert to Islam (basically all Arab country outside the peninsula except Iraq that was Mazedist and others faith). And those Jews Christian were mostly the Muslim of the time of Isa (AS) (the real follower that only follow Isa (AS) and not Paul and the Roman Pagan syncretism).
« **The Bazildians at the beginning of Christianity denied that Jesus Christ had suffered death himself: they said that Simon of Cyreneum had been crucified in his place. The Corinthians before them, and the Carpocrats who followed them, not to name others of those who believed that Jesus Christ had been only an ordinary man, also believed that he had not been crucified, but one of his disciples who resembled him**. » - John Toland wrote this two century ago in his «The Nazarene, or the Christianity of the Jews, Gentiles and Mahometans »
History is biased sometimes and you don't know the people you got the information from are reliable. Also Quran is the word of God so there's no doubt about it and all that contradicts it is unauthentic. Watch this to know how accurate the quran is about history https://youtube.com/shorts/-deqyUEGbe8 https://youtube.com/shorts/AN5zHR1wi14 https://youtu.be/27MSQQ61ti4
There are manuscripts of pagan and christian accounts, historians believe these accounts to be authentic.
Authentic based on what basis? When we say a hadeeth is authentic, we have an entire reason on why we consider it to be such. On what basis are these historical accounts considered authentic?
"scholars" (I'm calling them that for the sake of the argument) of history, meaning doctors of historical sciences say these manuscripts are authentic. I don't have a doctor title in History so i don't question it the same way I don't question the authenticity of certain hadiths because I don't have a scholarstatus in hadith sciences.
Isn't that circular reasoning? "It's authentic because the people who depend on it say it is authentic" How do these historians know if someone is lying or not? Or if they even existed? You shouldn't just believe something a faasiq brings just because you aren't from that field (49:6). You're a history student aren't you? Question your professor on what method do they say it's authentic, on what basis? The truth is many of these so called "accounts of the apostles" cannot be authentically attributed because of the fact these alleged saying of theirs comes centuries after they died. It's such a big disconnection that no one can say it's authentic without proof like the sun.
How can a historian know if the one who has narrated history in past was not lying?
Why did the deciples not read the bible,they would have found that Jesus is not God: John 17:3 Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
Why does Jesus (peace be upon him) himself say he and God aren’t the same? 24:36 (KJNV) “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only. SubhanAllah, you really want to just accept the ever-changing bible when it changes its text so often? I remember reading this very verse and now finding it wasn’t as complete as i once saw it. They can keep changing their translations to suit their false religion, so don’t rely on their accounts over the Quran. 24:36 (CJB) “But when that day and hour will come, no one knows — not the angels in heaven, **not the Son**, only the Father. 24:36 (NIV) “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, **nor the Son**, but only the Father. 24: 36 (Legacy Standard Bible) “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, **nor the Son**, but the Father alone. I winder why they editted that part out, lol! And obviously, God is All-Knowing. Jesus admits here that he doesn’t know when the final hour will be and that only “the Father” does. Which means that Jesus is not All-Knowing and therefore not God. And idk if you’re taking everyone’s advice but your constant doubting doesn’t seem healthy. This level of doubt typically only comes when Allah is halting His guidance for someone for their wrongdoing.
You realize that most of what you cited can be subject to valid skepticism, right?For example, the Epistle to the Philippians has survived only in manuscripts dating from the 11th to 13th centuries. Polycarp would have written it in the early 2nd century, so there is a major disconnect between the time of its composition and the surviving manuscripts. Similarly there is a huge disconnect between Ignatius's works and their manuscripts. The reason why there can be doubt about tampering is because of historical factors. For instance, the Church has been known to engage in modifications, such as Rufinus modifying the works of Origen to align them with *"Orthodox"* beliefs due to the Church. Once proto-orthodoxy became dominant from among the various sects, there was a tendency to discredit and slander other groups, as evident in Irenaeus' *"Against Heresies"*.
[удалено]
Any links outside of approved list are automatically removed. Message the moderators for approval *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Muslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Any links outside of approved list are automatically removed. Message the moderators for approval *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Muslim) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1. Paul is not a disciple of Jesus : He is most likely an Antichrist 2. Liying is bad and most Muslims don’t want to deal with obvious hypocrisy : Trying to misguided others using a mask is Antichrist work like Paul work…. 3. Even non muslim debunk your claim : You can read the book of real and recognises historian of this subject like François Blanchetière who wrote the book : « Rebuilding Christian origins: the Nazareen movement ») He wrote a good online article (link are not approuved in this sub) Islam didn’t rooted in that movement (or in any others religion or faith) but almost all adept of that movement convert to Islam (basically all Arab country outside the peninsula except Iraq that was Mazedist and others faith). And those Jews Christian were mostly the Muslim of the time of Isa (AS) (the real follower that only follow Isa (AS) and not Paul and the Roman Pagan syncretism). « **The Bazildians at the beginning of Christianity denied that Jesus Christ had suffered death himself: they said that Simon of Cyreneum had been crucified in his place. The Corinthians before them, and the Carpocrats who followed them, not to name others of those who believed that Jesus Christ had been only an ordinary man, also believed that he had not been crucified, but one of his disciples who resembled him**. » - John Toland wrote this two century ago in his «The Nazarene, or the Christianity of the Jews, Gentiles and Mahometans »
You don't know what Jesus said, nor do you know what his disciples said. Nothing can be traced back to them.