Friday, 23 September 2016

Bible lost the plot !

How tall was Goliath ?? (bible loses the plot) !

And there came out from the camp of the Philistines a champion named Goliath of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span. (1 Samuel 17:4 Masoretic)


The Above verse from the masoretic text tells us Goliath was six cubits and a span? In other words Goliath was about nine feet, six inches. However the Septuagint  completely contradicts the Masoretic let's read below:

And there went forth a mighty man out of the army of the Philistines, Goliath, by name, out of Geth, his height was four cubits and a span. (1 Samuel 17:4 Septuagint )


So now we have a big problem the Septuagint tells us Goliath was four cubits and a span that's about six feet, six inches. And what's worse the Jewish historian Josephus describes Goliath as, “a man of vast bulk, for he was of four cubits and a span in tallness ???

We have another problem to deal with if we agree the Septuagint is correct and Goliath was 6 feet six inches tall how does one accept a six footer wearing a coat that weighs 125 pounds?

He wore a bronze helmet, and his bronze coat of mail weighed 125 pounds.
(1 Samuel 17:5)

In short  was Goliath 9 foot+ according to the Masoretic or was he 6 foot+ according to the Septuagint or just under 6 feet according to Josephus... You decide!!

Another blow SHAME SHAME!!

There is no grammatical error

Ok let's put your vain desires to rest...

So your saying there's a grammatical error..?? Right firstly we know you don't know Arabic your using a copy and paste that's fine I'll be gentle with you... I'll prove to you singular meaning is grammatically correct rather then dual.. Ok

First question ayuba what does rasool mean? Any idea it's ok if you don't know, as I'm happy to tell you:

Imam Fakhruddeen Raazi has explained the differences between a Rasool (prophet) and a Nabi (messenger). A Rasool is one who has performed miracles and has received a new Divine book. He establishes a new code of law (Shar'iah) and abrogates the previous code of law and book. He has also visibly seen the angel that comes with the Divine message, and the Rasool is commanded to invite the people towards the The deen 

A Nabi is one who is not given a new book, but rather establishes the book which was revealed to the Rasool before him. He does not abrogate the book and the code of law which was in vogue before him. He sees the angel in a dream or the Rasool of the time informs him that he has been chosen as a Nabi. (Tafseer Raazi V1 p3212, Mafaateehul Ghayb V23 p43)


So now that's we've established that Rasool means a Prophet who Is given a Divine Book from Allah Swt and Nabi means a Messenger who is not given a Book rather using the book given to the Rasool before him also preaching the same Message Worship One God. Also bear in mind a Rasool is also a Nabi but a Nabi who is not given a Divine book cannot be a Rasool

The Surah That you keep bragging about which you copied from scam shamoun only exposes you more.. Let's find out how

Moses Pbuh was a Rasool this makes him a Nabi also, Hower Harun Pbuh was a Nabi not a Rasool so we have only One Rasool thus the ayat will talk about a Single Rasool not dual since Harun Pbuh was not a Rasool. Had the ayat said Rasool in plural form then you could of said grammatical error but in this case the Quran has no Grammatical error and the working are perfect..

Consider the context in which this verse comes as Allah (swt) mentions in the preceding verses:
He (Mūsā) said, “My Lord, I fear that they will reject me. My heart gets straitened, and my tongue is not fluent; so send for Hārūn. Moreover, they have (leveled) a charge of offense against me, and I fear they will kill me;”He (Allah) said, “Never! (They will not be able to kill you.) So go, both of you, with Our signs. We are with you, listening (to the conversation you will have with him. [26:12-15]
We see that Prophet Musa (as) was reticent in going to Pharaoh and asked Allah (swt) to send Harun (as) with him. So it was a time of worry, concern, and anxiety as the weight of delivering the message was heavy for Musa. So the eloquence of the Qur’an displays to us that in that state of trial and test Allah (swt) guaranteed to Musa (as) that He was close to make firm the heart of Musa (as) and give him reassurance.
Allah (swt) then commands him in this ayat (26:16) “So go, both of you, to Pharaoh and say, ‘Indeed We are a messenger of the Lord of all the worlds”. The usage of ‘rasul’ in the singular indicates strength in this context more so than the dual. Allah (swt) also honors Musa and Harun (as) in using the genitive construction (mudaf wa mudaf ilayhi).

Another interpretation is given for the singular usage:
Imam al-Baydawi as well as other scholars of tafsir mention a number of benefits of this usage:

1. The singular usage emphasizes the strength of the brotherhood bond of Musa and Harun (as).

2. It signifies the unity and strength between the messenger and the message (ie risalah and
3.  It emphasizes that both Musa and Harun are messengers sent to Pharaoh. Both having God-given authority.

4. The erudite scholar Ibn Ashur mentions, “[singularizing ‘rasul’] points to both Musa and Harun being commanded with delivering the message even if individually” [Tahrir wa Tanweer]. Here the focus being the certainty of the message reaching.

5. The great scholar of tafsir al-Baqa`i says, “[The usage of the singular] points to their unity and oneness in opposition and agreement as if they were one person [nafsa wahida].”

As you can see the singular form is so powerful grammatically it destroys the whole error theory made up by you devil companions...

Shame on you all 

Will you Accept or reject ?

Will Christians accept or reject the very Jesus they are waiting for ?

For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Messiah,' and will deceive many. (Matthew 24:5)

For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.
(Matthew 24:24)


So the question regarding from the above passages And many more on the same line is, how would a Christians recognise Jesus?? What description do they have explicitly to recognise the true messiah, the Jesus of the bible??

One wonders where to starts from and what better place then the book of Revelations which is an apocalyptic book right? Let's find out what clues It has given to recognise Jesus ? Also we shall cite from the OT as well as other historical sources just for the records 


And in the midst of the lampstands one like a son of man, clothed with a long robe and with a golden sash around his chest. The hairs of his head were white, like white wool, like snow. His eyes were like a flame of fire,
(Revelation 1:13-14)

His feet were like burnished bronze, refined in a furnace, and his voice was like the roar of many waters.
(Revelation 1:15)

I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war.
(Revelations 19:11)

His eyes are a flame of fire, and on His head are many diadems; and He has a name written on Him which no one knows except Himself. He is clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of God.
(Revelations 19:12-13)

Coming out of his mouth is a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty.
(Revelations 19:15)

On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: king of kings and lord of lords. (Revelations 19:16)

“As I looked, thrones were placed, and the Ancient of Days took his seat; his clothing was white as snow, and the hair of his head like pure wool; his throne was fiery flames; its wheels were burning fire.
(Daniel 7:9)

I lifted up my eyes and looked, and behold, a man clothed in linen, with a belt of fine gold from Uphaz around his waist. His body was like beryl, his face like the appearance of lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the sound of a multitude. (Daniel 10:5-6)

(How about his hight?)

From a variety of sources we know that Jesus was small in stature; this in a time when the average male measured 5’1” and weighed 110 pounds.
The first century historian Josephus reports him being approximately 3 cubits tall (4 feet 6 inches).

The Gospel of Luke (19:3) describes Zaccheus’ attempt to see Jesus while he preached in a crowd: “And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and he could not for the crowd, because he was low of stature.” Luke may be referring to Zaccheus rather than Jesus, but the idea that Jesus was slight can be seen again in the Acts of John v. 90: “…I was afraid and cried out, and he, turning about, appeared as a man of small stature…”


My comment:

this is a joke right ? Can you actually BELIEVE that's the description of Jesus a messiah ?? 

His face like lightening?

His Eyes like flames of fire?

Hair on his head like white wool?

Sword coming out of his mouth?

Kings of kings written on his thigh?

His feet like burnished bronze?

His voice like a roar of many waters?

He will be a horse rider not donkey ?

His robe dripping in blood?

Short like a dwarf ( with all due respect to dwarfs )



Corruption as predicted!!

Corruption as Predicted !!!!

Moses predicts In Deuteronomy that the Jews will turn to corrupt, Yahweh testifies in Jeremiah that the Torah has been corrupted by the Scribes. 

We often get Christians refuting the notion the Torah is corrupt and blame Muslims for making up such stories? But what if he have proof from the bible I.e the Torah itself that's it's been corrupted then what? Well Moses a great Prophet in Judaism tells us in the very same bible that the Jews will eventually turn to corruption let's read below :


For I know your rebellion and your stubbornness; behold, while I am still alive with you today, you have been rebellious against the LORD; how much more, then, after my death?

Assemble before me all the elders of your tribes and all your officials, so that I can speak these words in their hearing and call the heavens and the earth to testify against them

For I know that after my death you are sure to become utterly corrupt and to turn from the way I have commanded you. In days to come, disaster will fall on you because you will do evil in the sight of the LORD and arouse his anger by what your hands have made (Deuteronomy 31:27-29)


Notice how Moses knew the attitudes of these rebellious people and predicted they will turn to corruption so he asked the leaders to place the Torah in the ark of Covenent for it will always be safe there, but even that has been gone the ark of the covenant it missing which means the original Torah is no longer with us.. So how does one verify what the Torah said during the time of Moses? The Jews are not trust worthy accordion to Moses,  even Yahweh  confess the Torah has been changed :

How can you say we are wise and have the Torah with us when the pen of the false scribes have changed it! (Jeremiah 8:8)

(A sample to this can be traced through different versions of Torah e.g )

And Nahor lived nine and seventy years, and begat Terah:
(Genesis 11:24 Samaritan Torah)

And Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah:
(Genesis 11:24 Masoretic Torah)

And Nachor lived a hundred and seventy-nine years, and begot Tharrha. 
(Genesis 11:24 Septuagint Torah)


Now if Christians believe all scriptures are God breathed and inspired then was Moses speaking the truth about Jews turning to Corruption! How about the Torah being distorted by false scribes.. I'll leave that to you 

Missing tablets

The missing tablets !!!!!!


We read in exodus 32:15-16 moses received the two tablets which had writings on both side?

how big were these tablets that Moses had?? Let's find out from Jewish sources!!

Tradition tells us that they were thick square blocks of stone, six handbreadths tall, six handbreadths wide, and three handbreadths deep. In modern measurements, that is about 18″ × 18″ × 9″. The sages of the Talmud demonstrate how tablets of this size—along with a few other relics—fit neatly into the Ark of the Covenant that Moses made as described in Exodus. Talmud, Bava Batra 14a.

From the above explanations which comes from rashis we are told the two tablets were very small that Moses carried with one hand exodus 32:15

Now coming to exodus 34:27 where god said write these words down, how does that answer the question where God said this bible you possess is a revelation from me.??? Was the entire Pentateuch written on two small tablets no bigger then a phone book??? 


Where are those tablets now?? The answer is missing they are missing we don't have them anymore... Infact Moses predicted after him the Jews will turn to corruption so he ordered the tablets be kept in the ark of the covenant, however this is missing !  

Moses commanded the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the LORD,
"Take this Book of the Law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God. There it will remain as a witness against you.
(Deuteronomy 31:25-26)

Naked Dilemma

Christian Dilemma!!!!  ( Naked on the cross )

Christians claim Jesus was crucified, yet they hide the condemned/culprits where crucified NAKED!!!!

If u say your saviour Jesus was crucified then you have to agree he was also naked to prove it historically ? But no Christians will agree Jesus was NAKED

But we read from the bible and other accounts he was NAKED?

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also his coat: now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. (John 19:23)

Pulpit Commentary 

 Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments, and made four parts, to every soldier a part. This shows that a quaternion of soldiers, and not the "whole band," had been told off for the infernal deed. Pilate knew now that there was no need of an army to keep the people from popular insurrection. The rest of the garrison were not far off, should they be required; moreover, the servants of the high priest were ready to act on an emergency; but John adds, And also the coat (the χιτών, the לְבּושׁ); the long vesture which clothed his whole person, reaching from the neck to the feet, and which, when removed, left the sacred body naked. 


Gills Exposition entire bible commentary

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus,.... The crucifixion of Christ was at the request and solicitation of the Jews, was ordered by the Roman governor, and performed by the Roman soldiers; the sinful men into whose hands Christ was to be delivered: 

took his garments; which they had stripped his body of, crucifying him naked; as what properly belonged to them, it being usual then, as now, for executioners to have the clothes of the persons they put to death; these were his inner garments: 

We read from the above bible verse and commentary Jesus was STRIPPED NAKED ON THE CROSS!!!

Below a few historical evidences showing crucifixion was done NAKED.

historical commentary says, “The replacement of Jesus’ own clothes for the walk to Golgotha was probably a concession to Jewish scruples about public nakedness (Jub. 3:30–31; cf. Gen 9:20–27). Crucifixion was normally naked, and in v. 35 Jesus’ clothes will again have been removed; m. Sanh. 6:3 specifies that the clothes should be removed only at the place of execution, not on the way there.”

commentary on the details of the life of Christ relays, “Even though Jesus has been flogged, Mark/Matt have Jesus dressed again before he sets out to the place of crucifixion. Normally the criminal, carrying the lateral beam of the cross behind his neck with his arms fastened to it, would go naked to the place of crucifixion, being scourged as he went. We know this from passing references in Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Roman Antiquities 7.69.2) and Valerius Maximus (Facta 1.7.4). Indeed, Josephus (Ant. 19.4.5; #270) reports that even Roman nobles involved in the assassination of Gaius Caligula had their clothes removed before being taken to the place of execution. -

Another commentator says, “To distribute the garments of Christ among the soldiers, the clothes had to be removed from Christ. Thus, Christ was crucified naked. The suffering was great at the crucifixion but so was the shame. No artist dares to picture Christ as naked—they put a loin cloth around Him for modesty. But Scripture indicates He was naked.”

Another says, “[T]he normal undergarment was either a tunic or a loincloth, and Jesus’ tunic was taken from him (v. 23; Brown 1970:902), it is perhaps more likely he was naked. Early Christian tradition is divided on the subject (cf. Brown 1994:2:953).”

Crucifixion in Smiths Bible Dictionary  

Crucifixion was used among the Egyptians, Ge 40:19 the Carthaginians, the Persians, Es 7:10 the Assyrians, Scythains, Indians, Germans, and from the earliest times among the Greeks and Romans. Whether this mode of execution was known to the ancient Jews is a matter of dispute. Probably the Jews borrowed it from the Romans. It was unanimously considered the most horrible form of death. Among the Romans the degradation was also a part of the infliction, and the punishment if applied to freemen was only used in the case of the vilest criminals. The one to be crucified was stripped naked of all his clothes, and then followed the most awful moment of all........etc..


Summary and Conclusion

Right now we have a very big dilemma to deal with...

( 1 ) If Christians really believe this man they call saviour was crucified and it's historical evident then they have to accept historically condemned ones where crucified NAKED!!! 

( 2 ) if Christians say Jesus wasn't naked even though your scriptures testify to it such as john 19:23 then we can't accept point 1 which is it's not historically accurate? And your rejecting what John said... Let's bear in mind mark and Matthew made up a lie to avoid embarrassment that Jesus had a loin covering his privates when it's false historically one is NAKED AND HUMILIATED!!!

Can you imagine your saviour hanging strip naked nothing on and everyone including the Mary's watching this man !!!! Even the thought of it makes you feel awkward.  

Take your pick Naked or Not....

What a fraud !!!!

John starts his gospel ripping off someone else's idea how nice!!

in the beginning was the word the word with god the word was god
(John 1:1) 


John blatantly plagiarised a Jewish  philosopher by the name of Philo.
Philo decades before John came up with this formula of logos. But what did his concept of logos really mean!! Let's find out 

I shall give you another testimony, my friends, from the Scriptures, that God begot before all creatures a Beginning, [who was] a certain rational power [proceeding] from Himself, who is called by the Holy Spirit, now the Glory of the Lord, now the Son, again Wisdom, again an Angel, then God, and then Lord and Logos
(Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, Chapter 61.)

Thus Philo saw God as only indirectly the Creator of the world: God is the author of the invisible, intelligible world which served as a model for the Logos. Philo says Moses called this archetypal heavenly power by various names: "the beginning, the image, and the sight of God." Following the views of Plato and the Stoics, Philo believed that

in all existing things there must be an active cause, and a passive subject; and that the active cause is the Logos of the universe, thoroughly unadulterated and thoroughly unmixed, superior to virtue and superior to science, superior even to abstract good and abstract beauty, while the passive subject is something inanimate and incapable of motion by any intrinsic power of its own, but having been set in motion, and fashioned, and endowed with life by the intellect, became transformed into that most perfect work, this world.

He gives the impression that he believed that the Logos functions like the Platonic "Soul of the World."


The Angel of the Lord, Revealer of God

Philo describes the Logos as the revealer of God symbolized in the Scripture by an angel of the Lord:

But to those souls which are still in the body He [God] must appear in the resemblance of the angels, though without changing His nature (for He is unchangeable), but merely implanting in those who behold Him an idea of His having another form, so that they fancy that it is His image, not an imitation of him, but the very archetypal appearance itself.

Referring to Gen. 31:13, Philo states: "We must understand this, that He [God] on that occasion took the place of an angel, as far as appearance went, without changing His own real nature." Philo claims that the angel who appeared to Hagar in Gen. 16:8 was "the word (Logos) of God." The Logos is the first-born and the eldest and chief of the angels:

And even if there be not as yet any one who is worthy to be called a son of God, nevertheless let him labor earnestly to be adorned according to his first-born Logos, the eldest of his angels, as the great archangel of many names, for he is called the Authority, and the name of God, and the Logos, and man according to God's image, and he who sees Israel. For which reason I was induced a little while ago to praise the principles of those who said, "We are all one man's sons." (Gen. 42:11). For even if we are not yet suitable to be called the sons of God, still we may deserve to be called the children of his eternal image, of his most sacred Logos; for the image of God is his most ancient Logos.

So Jesus wasn't really the logos according to the first thinkers!!

Fits In Perfectly

So this is what the Sovereign LORD says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who relies on it will never be stricken with panic. (Isaiah 28:16)

The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone;
(Psalm 118:22)

Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone
(1 Peter 2:7)


The Last Brick

“From Abu Huraira, (Allah be pleased with him): Allah’s messenger(SAW) said:
“Certainly my example and the example of prophets earlier than me is like the example of a palace most elegant and most beautiful constructed by a person except (that he left in it) a blank space for a brick in one of its corners and that made the people (who were) going around it wonder (at its marvellousness) and exclaimed (in perplexion): “Why not is this brick inlaid in here!” The Prophet(SAW) said, “I am that (corner’s last) brick and I am the last of the prophets”.
Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 1, p.501 & Sahih Muslim, Vol. 2, p.248
The above Hadith is also related by Hazrat Jabir bin Abdullah, (Allah be pleased with him,) and is included in Musnad Ahmad, Sahih Muslim and Jama-e-Tirmizi. Sahih Muslim’s narration ends with theses words:
“Said Allah’s messenger(SAW) “So I am in place of this brick; I came and so I completed the chain of the prophets”.
The above Hadith is also related by Hazrat Abi bin Kaab, (Allah be pleased with him,) as recorded in Musnad Ahmed and Tirmizi”.
“My example among the prophets has a likeness (in the sense) that a man constructed a palace most lovely and perfect and extremely elegant but left the place of one brick incomplete in it (for subsequent inlaying); then people went around the palace and wondered (on its excellence) and said, “Would that space for one brick be also filled up!” The holy Prophet(SAW) said, “I am in place of this brick among the prophets”.
(Musnad Ahmed, Vol.1, p.137 & Tirmizi, Vol.2, p.201)


Seems like the Samaritan Torah came first

Is the Samaritan Torah authentic Jesus seems to agree !

Christians boast they have the Torah which is untouched, prestige non corrupted blah blah blah !! Little did they know we have many versions of the Torah e.g :


Septuagint Torah for millions Greek Orthodox and eastern  orthodox speaking Christians?

Masoretic Torah for millions of English speaking Protestant Christians?

Samaritan Torah for a small remnant of northern Israelite tribe still worshipping at mount Gerizim  In Northern Israel?

Peshtitta Torah for today's Syriac speaking Christians?

Latin vulgate Torah read for centuries by the ancestors of today's Western Europeans 


Now that we've established that  many versions of the Torah exist the question is which is correct? Was Jesus aware of the difference in Torah between the Samaritans and Jews in His time. Well we find something very interesting in the book of John about Jesus and the Samaritan women found in John 4:7-42. 

The story of the woman at the well. Verse 20 reads (the woman speaking), So tell me, why is it that you Jews insist that Jerusalem is the only place of worship, while we Samaritans claim it is here at Mount Gerizim, where our ancestors worshiped?" Verse 21 'Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.'

Notice how the Samaritan women said her ancestors worshipped at Mount Gerezim. And this commandment is found in the Samaritan version of the Torah 

And when you have crossed the Jordan, set up these stones on MOUNT GERIZIM, as I command you today, and coat them with plaster........
(Deuteronomy 27:4 Samaritan text)

                                                       Compare to 

And when you have crossed the Jordan, set up these stones on Mount Ebal, as I command you today, and coat them with plaster.
(Deuteronomy 27:4 Masoretic text)


It seems clear that the Samaritan woman and her ancestors were using a different version of the Torah no wonder Jesus replied saying 

Jesus said to her, "Woman, believe me, the hour is coming when neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem will you worship the Father.'
(John 4:21)

There you have it the Samaritan Torah, is agreed upon by Jesus which tells us it cannot be ignored by Christians.... So now let us see what the Samaritan Torah tells us about Ishmael Pbuh 

He will be a FRUITFUL MAN; his hand will be with everyone and everyone's hand will be with him, and he will live among all his brothers."(Genesis 16:12 Samaritan text) 

                                                          Compare to 

He will be a wild donkey of a man; his hand will be against everyone and everyone's hand against him, and he will live in hostility toward all his brothers."
(Genesis 16:12 Masoretic text)


Do you see how the Samaritan uplifts Ishmael Pbuh whereas the Masoretic stoops low, and without a doubt it's clear Jesus was aware of the Samaritan Torah which only means he knew Ishmael Pbuh was a chosen fruitful man....

Jesus or Easu which one?

Christians claim Jesus was God how about Esau was he also God ?

Jesus said to him, "Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how can you say, 'Show us the Father '? (John 14:9)


Notice from the above statement which Christians use to prove Jesus was divine, that Jesus himself said whoever has seen him has seem the father?... Little did these Nasaras know that's Jacob also known as Israel, the son of Abraham Pbuh, who supposedly told his brother the some what same thing !!!!!! Let's read 


"No, please!" said Jacob. "If I have found favor in your eyes, accept this gift from me. For to see your face is like seeing the face of God, now that you have received me favorably. (Genesis 33:10)

Now the question is was Easu also God ?? That Jacob the father of Jews who are called children of isreal.. Make such a statement.... Let the reader decide what is meant by those statements 

Is the Torah Corrupted ?

Jeremiah 8:8

"'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? 

Read the context of Jeremiah 8 Start from verse 4 as the verses before talks about a completely different subject, 

Jeremiah verse 4 tells us

4 “Say to them, ‘This is what the Lord says:

The verses from 4 onwards tell us how Jerusalem  turned away and how the wicked people don't repent etc.. However when u get to verse 8  The Lord says something very interesting lets read

8 “How can you say, ‘We are    wise, and the law of the Lord is with us’? But behold, the lying pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.

So The Lord is confirming the law has been corrupted!! Isn't that sufficient proof, Or u want more??  

Commentary confirms the Torah was corrupted by false priests!!

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

The pen of the scribes is in vain - The deceitful pen of the scribes. They have written falsely, though they had the truth before them. It is too bold an assertion to say that "the Jews have never falsified the sacred oracles;" they have done it again and again. They have written falsities when they knew they were such.


Barnes' Notes on the Bible

The law of the Lord - The "Torah," or written law, the possession of which made the priests and prophets so boastfully exclaim, "We are wise."

Lo, certainly ... - Rather, Verily, lo! the lying pen "of the scribes" hath made it - the Law - into a lie. The mention of "scribes" in this place is a crucial point in the argument whether or not the Pentateuch or Torah is the old law-book of the Jews, or a fabrication which gradually grew up, but was not received as authoritative until after the return from the captivity. It is not until the time of Josiah 2 Chronicles 34:13 that "scribes" are mentioned except as political officers; here, however, they are students of the Torah. The Torah must have existed in writing before there could have been an order of men whose special business it was to study it; and therefore to explain this verse by saying that perhaps the scribes were writers of false prophecies written in imitation of the true, is to lose the whole gist of the passage. What the scribes turned into a lie was that Law of which they had just boasted that they were the possessors. Moreover, the scribes undeniably became possessed of preponderating influence during the exile: and on the return from Babylon were powerful enough to prevent the restoration of the kingly office. That there should be along with the priests and Levites men who devoted themselves to the study of the written Law, and who in the time of Josiah had acquired such influence as to be recognized as a distinct class - is just what we should expect from the rapid progress of learning, which began with Elisha's active management of the schools of the prophets, and culminated in the days of Hezekiah. Jeremiah's whole argument depends upon the fact that there were in his days men who claimed to be "wise" or "learned" men because of their study of the Pentateuch, and is entirely inconsistent with the assumptions that Jeremiah wrote the book of Deuteronomy, and that Ezra wrote parts of Exodus and the whole of Leviticus.

Now this is not what Jeremiah is saying from his own mouth, its what God has instructed him to say!!
God is aware the scribes have corrupted the law.

Just a few more passages to expose the bible 

☛ [Jer. 6:10] Behold, the word of the Lord is unto them a reproach, they have no delight in it.. From the least of them even unto the greatest of them, every one is given to covetousness, and FROM THE PROPHET EVENT UNTO THE PRIEST, EVERY ONE DEALS FALSELY. 

☛ [Jer 14:14] The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not neither have I commanded them, neither spoke unto them. 

☛ [Jer. 23:36] And the burden of the Lord shall you mention no more.. For you have perverted the words of the living God. 

☛ [Jer. 23:31] They use their tongues and say, "HE SAYS".

WAKE UP!!!!!!!


“How do you say: “We are wise, and the Torah of the Lord is with us? when, in fact, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie?” (Jeremiah 8:8 )


So let me get this clear, the Quran tells us Prophet Muhammed Pbuh is described in the Torah and gospel, and when we ask a Christian is Prophet Muhammed Pbuh mentioned in your Torah you say big NOOO...

Yet we find your own Prophet jeremiah is speaking what God told him and that is HOW CAN YOU SAY YOU HAVE THE TORAH WHEN THE SCRIBES HAVE FALSIFIED IT!! Thus we can say you don't have the original Torah

Shame on them for lying!

Shame on them for lying!

Seems like Christians are so desperate they will stoop on any level to to prove a false claim... Take for example this average lower level Christian by the name of Prince, since he doesn't have a clue of Arabic language nor does he want to educate himself, he turns to anti Muslim sites copying lies and making post like he's found something new?

He make a post where he wrote (copied) "will Jesus be the fuel of hell according to the Quran because Christians worship him....." Notice his wording it's not even his writing style it's obviously copied which he denied!  Also this is not. New lie he's Claimed to have "found" No it's already been tried by Christians missionaries and busted years also...

For the records I just want to inform you this was even recorded in the Seerah when Abdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ also made mention of this, In Shaa Allah we shall also address this firstly let's read the verse which Christians Mistranslate and explain it In Shaa Allah.

Surely you and what you worship besides Allah are the firewood of hell; to it you shall come. (Sura 21:98)

Let us see what the Arabic actually says in the verse 21:98.

اِنَّكُمۡ وَمَا تَعۡبُدُوۡنَ مِنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰهِ حَصَبُ جَهَـنَّمَؕ اَنۡـتُمۡ لَهَا وَارِدُوۡنَ‏ 

Surely you and what you worship besides Allah are the firewood of hell; to it you shall come. [Qur'ân 21:98]

The word "" translated as "what" in verse 21:98 is used to refer to things/objects and seldom would it refer to people. Otherwise, it would be "man" (i.e. who or whom). Thus Jesus(P) is not referred to in that verse. This verse would rather refer to idols worshipped by the pagan Arabs who lived in the time of Prophet Muhammad(P)

As you can see the text does not refer to Jesus Pbuh or people rather objects so this false claim Christians make has already lost its legs, now let's take out its entire root and completely annihilate this absurd claim made by desperate Christians.. Let's read the Seerah where this was already a topic which was explained, only if Christians actually read with their eye!

Here is its English translation:
Ibn Ishâq said:
The Apostle of God(P) sat one day, so I have heard, with al-Walîd Ibn al-Mughîrah in the mosque, and an-Nadr Ibn al-Harith came and sat with them in the assembly where some of Quraysh were. So the Apostle spoke but an-Nadr interrupted him. Then the Apostle spoke to him until he silenced him. Then he read to him and to the others: "Verily ye and what ye serve other than God is the fuel of hell. You will come to it. If these had been gods they would not have come to it, but all will be in it everlastingly. There is wailing and there they will not hear".
Ibn Ishâq said:
Then the Apostle of God(P) left and cAbdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ as-Sahmî came and sat down. al-Walîd said to him: "By God, an-Nadr could not stand up to the (grand)son of cAbdul-Muttalib just now and Muhammad alleged that we and what we worship among these deities of ours [mâ nacbudu min 'âlihatinâ hâdhihî] are fuel for hell". cAbdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ said: "If I had found him I would have refuted him. Ask Muhammad, "Is everything which is worshipped besides God in hell with those who worship it?' We worship the angels; the Jews worship Uzayr; and the Christians worship Jesus the Son of Mary." Al-Walîd and those with him in the assembly wondered at the words of cAbdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ and saw that he had argued convincingly. When the Apostle of God(P) heard of the speech of Ibn al-Zibicrâ, he said: "Everyone who appreciates being worshipped to the exclusion of God will be with those who worship him. They worship only devils and whom they have ordered to be worshipped." So God Almighty revealed concerning that "Those who have received kindness from us in the past will be removed far from it and will not hear its sound and they abide eternally in their heart's desire", i.e., Jesus Son of Mary and Uzayr and those rabbis and monks who have lived in obedience to God, whom the erring people worship as lords beside God. And He revealed concerning their assertion that they worship angels and that they are the daughters of God,"And they say the Merciful has chosen a son, (exalted be He above this); nay, they are but honored slaves, they do not speak before He speaks, and they carry out His commands", as far as the words, "and he of them who says, I am God as well as He, that one we shall repay with Hell. Thus do they repay the sinful ones." [1]
In the quotation above, the pagans of Makkah understood that verse 21:98 concerned them specifically as well as their idols (see how they stress: "what we worship among these deities of ours"- in Arabic: mâ nacbudu min 'âlihatinâ hâdhihi). No mention of deified humans was understood. However, the question of cAbdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ - even if it was out of the real scope of the verse - came as a relief for them especially after Prophet Muhammad(P) had silenced Ibn an-Nadr one of their best orators. When the Prophet(P) heard of cAbdullâh's objection, he brought an answer to his specific question, i.e., what about the humans that are worshipped? The answer was: if and only if their being worshipped pleased them, then they will meet the same fate as their worshippers - Hell. This saves Jesus(P), Mary(P), the Angels and whatever pious people who were later worshipped against their own consent.

Further evidence 

Moreover, many Qur'ânic commentaries such as those of al-Tabarî, al-Qurtubî and Ibn Kathîr mention this quotation of Sîrah concerning the following passage of Sûrat al-Zukhruf:
When (Jesus) the son of Mary is held up as an example, behold, thy people raise a clamor thereat (in ridicule)! And they say, "Are our gods best, or he?" This they set forth to thee, only by way of disputation: yea, they are a contentious people. He was no more than a servant: We granted Our favor to him, and We made him an example to the Children of Israel. And if it were Our Will, We could make angels from amongst you, succeeding each other on the earth. And (Jesus) shall be a Sign (for the coming of) the Hour (of Judgment): therefore have no doubt about the (Hour), but follow ye Me: this is a Straight Way. [Qur'ân 43:57-61]
Very interestingly, al-Qurtubî had the following to say in his tafsîr, while commenting on

Ibn cAbbâs said:
This verse refers to the argument between cAbdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ and the Prophet of God(P)concerning Jesus. The one who held the example [in the verse] is cAbdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ while he was still a pagan. This took place when Quraysh reported to him that Muhammad recites: "Verily ye and what ye serve other than God is the fuel of hell." [21:98]. He said: "If I had attended him, I would have replied to him." They asked him: "What would you say?" I would say: "The Christ is worshipped by the Christians and the Jews worship  Uzayr. Are they among the firewood of hell?" Then Quraysh wondered at his words and saw that he had argued convincingly and this is the meaning of yasiddûn [raise a clamour in ridicule]. So, God revealed: "Surely (as for) those for whom the good has already gone forth from Us, they shall be kept far off from it;" [21:101]
If Ibn al-Zibicrâ had pondered on verse 21:98, he wouldn't have objected to it because it makes mention of "what ye serve" and not "whom you serve" because the verse speaks about the idols and other things, and not about Jesus nor the angels even if they are worshipped.
Two things stand out from this quotation:
Firstly, the grammatical considerations that we made in the beginning of this article according to which only inanimate things are included in verse 21:98. Al-Qurtubî stands by this opinion when commenting on verse 43:57 as well as verse 21:98.

The scholars say that Jesus, Uzayr and the angels are not meant by verse 21:98 because "mâ" [i.e., "what"] refers to inanimate things and not to people. If the verse pointed to them, it would use "man" [i.e., "who" or "whom"] instead.

As-Sâbûnî in Mukhtasar Tafsîr Ibn Kathîr points out this argument too in the explanation of verse 43:58

Regarding His divine words: "This they set forth to thee, only by way of disputation: yea, they are a contentious people" means: they say so for the sake of argument while they know that their argument is not applicable to this verse since it refers to things only [i.e., in the Arabic language "mâ" is used to refer to things and God Almighty used "mâ" and not "man"] and so it is in His divine speech "Verily ye and what ye serve other than God is the fuel of hell." Moreover, this verse was addressed at Quraysh who were used to worship idols and they did not worship Jesus so that he could be included here. Therefore, their answer is no more than a fake argument in which they do not believe themselves.[4]
Secondly, it is implied that Abdullâh Ibn al-Zibi râ, the one who opposed the Prophet(P) about verse 21:98, became a Muslim. The reader may check entry number 4682 in al-Isâbah[5] by Ibn Hajar where we get the confirmation that Ibn al-Zibicrâ converted to Islam and praised the Prophet(P) with his poetry. If he knew that there were a contradiction in the Qur'ân concerning Jesus(P) and whether he would go to hell, would he believe in Muhammad(P)and convert to Islam?
In conclusion, it can said that there is no difference between the arguments of cAbdullâh Ibn al-Zibicrâ when he was a pagan and the Christian missionaries of this day. The verse 21:98 does not refer to Jesus(P) at all and neither does the Qur'ân say that Jesus(P) would be going to hell. Everything points to the fact that the missionaries' argument is hollow and that they are contentious indeed!
This issue is also discussed as a logical fallacy committed by the Quraysh.

The reader would also notice that the best tafsîr of the Qur'ân is Qur'ân itself (notice how 21:98 is explained using 43:57-58), i.e., al-Qur'ân yufassiru bacduhu bacdan (different parts of the Qur'ân explain each other). What is given in a general way in one place is discussed in detail in some other place in the Qur'ân. What is dealt with briefly at one place is expanded in some other place. Such an exegesis involves the use of Context & Internal Relationships.
Tafsir Islamic Studies Tafheem 

(21:98) (They will be told): "Verily you and the gods you worshipped beside Allah are the fuel of Hell. All of you are bound to arrive there.95
95. We learn from traditions that Abdullah bin Azzaara raised an objection in this connection, saying: According to this not only our deities but Prophets Jesus and Uzair (peace be upon them) and the Angels also will become fuel for Hell because they are also worshiped. The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied: Yes, everyone who would approve of his own worship instead of Allah’s will go to Hell along with those who worshiped him. He meant to say: There is no reason why Prophets Jesus and Uzair (peace be upon them) and the Angels should go to Hell because they never approved that they should be worshiped instead of Allah, and were not responsible for this. On the other hand, they taught people to worship Allah alone. Of course, those who tried to become deities and became partners in the shirk of others will certainly go to Hell along with their worshipers. Likewise those, who induced others to take deities other than Allah, will go to Hell. Satan comes under this category for he induces others to make deities. Thus it is Satan who is made the real deity whom they obey and commit shirk. Besides this, idols of stone and wood and other accessories of shirk will also be thrown into Hell along with the mushriks so that the latter should see that their deities were becoming a cause of the intensity of their torture of fire instead of becoming their intercessors.

 Ibn kathir Tafsir 

The Idolators and their gods are Fuel for Hell

Allah says to the people of Makkah, the idolators of the Quraysh and those who followed their religion of idol worship:
﴿إِنَّكُمْ وَمَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ حَصَبُ جَهَنَّمَ﴾
(Certainly you and that which you are worshipping now besides Allah, are (but) Hasab for Hell!). Ibn `Abbas said: "Kindling.'' This is like the Ayah:
﴿وَقُودُهَا النَّاسُ وَالْحِجَارَةُ﴾
(whose fuel is men and stones) ﴿66:6﴾. According to another report, Ibn `Abbas said:
﴿حَصَبُ جَهَنَّمَ﴾
(Hasab for Hell) means firewood in (the dialect of the people of) Zanjiyyah. Mujahid, `Ikrimah and Qatadah said: "Its fuel.'' Ad-Dahhak said: "The fuel of Hell means that which is thrown into it.'' This was also the view of others.
﴿أَنتُمْ لَهَا وَارِدُونَ﴾
((Surely) you will enter it.) means, you will go into it.
﴿لَوْ كَانَ هَـؤُلاءِ ءَالِهَةً مَّا وَرَدُوهَا﴾
(Had these been gods, they would not have entered there,) means, if these idols and false gods which you worshipped instead of Allah, had really been gods, they would not have entered the Hellfire.
﴿وَكُلٌّ فِيهَا خَـلِدُونَ﴾
(and all of them will abide therein forever.) means, the worshippers and the objects of their worship will all abide therein forever.
﴿لَهُمْ فِيهَا زَفِيرٌ﴾
(Therein they will be breathing out with deep sighs and roaring) This is like the Ayah:
﴿لَهُمْ فِيهَا زَفِيرٌ وَشَهِيقٌ﴾
(they will have (in the Fire), Zafir and Shahiq) ﴿11:106﴾. Zafir refers to their exhalation, and Shahiq refers to their inhalation.
﴿وَهُمْ فِيهَا لاَ يَسْمَعُونَ﴾
(and therein they will hear not.)

There you have Christian missionaries and roadside low lever followers like prince have been exposed,  

JazakhAllahu Khair many thanks to out brothers Muhammad Ghoniem & M S M Saifullah for this academic paper which I've used as my source.

It only takes one verse

It only takes one verse to prove you wrong!


I find it fascinating when Christians force people to believe in the bible?  I mean they love Scrutinising all other scriptures except for theirs? Think of it like this your out in the street minding your own business out pops a roadside evangelist who starts attacking your faith (belief) in the most vulgar way then calms down when he or she's preaches the bible? Telling you that's it's the word of God etc etc... HOW SICK!

This paper will bust their bogus fallacious claim that the gospels are God inspired and the absolute truth! Let's examine if the gospels which Christians preach passes the test of authenticity!

In order to find out if a scripture is the actual word of God or in the case of some Christians inspired by God one has to read through the entire text and with reason to understand if such was by God, everything will align with truth wether its historical or geographical or scientific. if it is from God the very words I.e written texts will be FREE FROM CORRUPTIONS, ERRORS, DISCREPANCIES etc... 


In the case of the gospels one doesn't have to read the entire book to find such problems. We will focus on the first 4 books the supposed original gospels Mark, Matthew, Luke and John the first chapter the first verse that's all....

The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;
(Mark 1:1)

The first verse from the first book of the gospel has a added part to it. The Son of God is later added it's not originally found in the earliest manuscripts ( see footnotes for the NIV) it's clear this is a lie.


This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham:
(Matthew 1:1)

The first verse from the second book of the gospel has an absurd statement, Jesus the Messiah the son of David? How could this be possible when Jesus never had a father so his genealogy could no way connect with the line of David according to Jewish customs or even genetically! It's clear this is a lie.


Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things that have been accomplished among us, (Luke 1:1)

The first verse from the third book of the gospel, acknowledges that many more narratives have been written about Jesus and if we carry on reading and finish the statement of Luke which finishes at verse 4 we read Luke himself is saying his narrative is better then any other gospels? Even Mark Luke and John's?  It's clear Luke was not inspired he only did what others did write his own version.


In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
(John 1:1)

The first verse from the forth gospel, a verse every bible thumper utters is probably the biggest deception John. This formula was first written by a jewish philosopher by the name of Philo decades before John wrote his piece. John ripped it off he plagiarised it from Philo and made it into his own. This is a clear cut deception by John


Now can you imagine you can discredit, prove the gospels Christians preach is not from God all from the very first verse of the first chapter! The first line of each book Proves its not the word of God, rather it's the word of man.

What a Shame!

Serpant or Satan?

And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the...