« first day (709 days earlier)      last day (2953 days later) » 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 23:00

12:01 AM
@JonEricson the last thing I edited that was controversial was a question, and the mods here have said in the past to edit questions with a firm hand and answers with a lighter one. Nonetheless, my question edit to remove disparaging language (and a whole lot of irrelevant stuff) didn't measure up.
5
A: What do we want to do with answers that aren't very useful and don't show their work?

Jon EricsonJudge answers on their own. Such answers should either be: Downvoted with a score of -3 or less (so that they are greyed out) with explanatory comments. or Annotated with a post notice. or Deleted.

Despite this ^^^, I've been seeing "who cares, there's another answer with more votes" when raising issues with an answer.
 
@MonicaCellio This is why I'm reluctant about proposing rules.
 
@JonEricson the only rules come from SE; all else is guidelines. But, absent a compelling case to the contrary, we should act in accordance with our guidelines, and, specifically, moderators should do so when asked to. Note that there can be reasons not to, but they should be brought up if so.
 
@MonicaCellio I do not believe that you understand the community guidelines. Certainly your interpretation of them has drifted more than the guidelines themselves.
 
12:44 AM
@MonicaCellio I just looked over the list of top editors. I assumed my lead in that category was insurmountable for a long time after I stopped actively reading the site. I'm sure my lead in votes is not long either. ;-)
 
@JonEricson do you know if that includes retags? I've done rather a few of those. (I know retags don't count for editing badges, but that doesn't necessarily affect this.)
 
@MonicaCellio This shows 499 revisions and includes retaggs. The other view shows 388. So I'm guessing it does not count retags.
 
@JonEricson ah, ok. (And so I'm not one edit away from Copy Editor, either. :-) )
 
 
3 hours later…
Dan
3:50 AM
Hi @Soldarnal
@JonEricson even Shog9 seems to think that calling other religions 'false' is not being nice
 
Hey @Dan
 
Dan
@Soldarnal how've ya been?
 
You all write a lot. It's impossible to keep up. :)
@Dan Pretty good, but pretty busy too. I've a year long project at work that's supposed to finish up at the end of this month, so been working pretty hard on that.
 
Dan
@JonEricson not to mention, Shog9 essentially says that postmodern relativism is our site worldview in that post. I'm just trying to be consistent with what s/he said
 
I'm also preparing for a Bible study I lead in the fall. I'm excited; we're looking at essentially a biblical theology of God's dwelling place. But it's a lot of work putting together even the reading curriculum.
How've you been, @Dan? Are you taking any classes this fall?
 
Dan
4:04 AM
@Soldarnal very cool!
I am teaching Greek 1 at my church right now, have about 11 students which is bigger than I expected
some of them are interested in iconography so it will be fun teaching a few variations of the Greek alphabet for a change
 
@Dan Nice, I wish I had a class to go to near me. I suppose there are a number of seminaries nearby, though. I could probably find a night class if I really was motivated.
 
Dan
@Soldarnal no classes this fall (not taking, just teaching), but I will take an advanced Koine Greek course in the spring
@Soldarnal Koine Greek is not an extremely hard language - German is harder
 
@Dan I'm halfway through Mounce's beginners book. It's been helpful even knowing a little bit.
 
Dan
It can of course become infinitely complex depending how deep into linguistics, philology, earlier and later forms of the language, etc. - but Koine itself isn't too bad
 
I've only done nouns, though, so far.
 
Dan
4:08 AM
@Soldarnal great! I am teaching this course with Mounce's BBG text
@Soldarnal that's how I am teaching this class, which is new for me (I did not learn this way nor did I use Mounce as a text)
but as I have several adult learners who have been out of school for awhile - the online resources seemed an incentive to choose Mounce
 
@Dan Yeah, his online stuff was the reason I picked his book
I'd really like to learn the Hebrew alphabet too, so I could at least read the words even if I don't know what they mean.
 
Dan
@Soldarnal I learned introductory Hebrew with Bartelt's book, but I have not interacted enough with other books to be able to say if it is better
I CAN say that I like Van Pelt's Aramaic book far better than the one I used, but it assumes you know Biblical Hebrew already
 
@Dan Is your church associated with a particular nationality?
(I hope that's not a weird question)
 
Dan
@Soldarnal not weird at all
 
I just normally hear of the "Greek Orthodox" or "Russian Orthodox" church. Wondering if those retain their nationality in the US, or if it's called the "American Orthodox Church" here or some such
 
Dan
4:15 AM
(confusion of Church and nationalism)
 
@Dan Huh, that's real interesting
 
Dan
But Communism sort of exacerbated the issue, as well as the breakup of Yugoslavia
This was all very recent, in the past few decades
And Orthodox tend to take their time
With a 2000+ year old Church, they know that some fixes take centuries
;)
 
@Dan Yeah, I have friends just got back from Serbia; fascinating and dreadful to learn about the history there
 
Dan
My church was formerly a Romanian parish, and still many ethnic Romanians are here
But our geographic area has one of the highest densities of Orthodox churches in the nation, so we have lots of Eastern Europeans in the area
We know many folks who have witnessed brutal rapes, tortures, pregnant women being ripped open, etc.
Very sad
 
Yeah; harrowing stuff
 
Dan
4:24 AM
And several members of our church, including one who is Lebanese, come from homes where their parents or close family were martyred for their faith in Muslim countries
there is much more consciousness of what is happening in the global church outside of America
 
(Totally off topic, but I'm wondering if this user is James B. Jordan.)
 
Dan
the key difference is that in Orthodoxy, we all consider each other to be Orthodox
We are not 'denominations'
Just different jurisdictions
 
@Dan Is there one diocese that rules (them all)?
 
Dan
@Soldarnal not officially no
 
@Dan But de facto? Is that what your statement implies?
 
Dan
4:35 AM
technically the Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople, but as he bows to a Muslim leader, many do not accept his authority
@Soldarnal officially we are autocephalous
@Soldarnal what is your spiritual identity?
 
@Dan I congregate with an EFCA church
 
I grew up evangelical (in an EFCA church), attended a Missionary Alliance church while at school, helped plant a Vineyard church out of school, but now I'm back in an evangelical free church again
@Dan Yep
 
Dan
@Soldarnal very cool. I took a missions course through TEDS, good school
 
@Dan Yeah, I grew up right near TEDS. So a lot of their professors were members of our church.
 
Dan
4:46 AM
@Soldarnal where at near Deerfield?
 
Did you have Harold Netland by chance?
 
Dan
@Soldarnal no
adjunct faculty I believe
 
@Dan Libertyville
 
Dan
offsite course
 
Gotcha
 
Dan
4:48 AM
@Soldarnal ok yes very cool
 
@Dan Are you familiar with the area? Do I remember right you're from NW Indiana?
 
Dan
@Soldarnal yes, and that is correct
 
@Dan Anyway, don't know if that answers your question about my "spiritual identity", but seemed like that was what you were asking. :)
 
Dan
@Soldarnal yes yes it does
I don't usually ask what religion people are because many consider themselves spiritual but not religious
Religion seems to be a bad word in America
I'm I'm pretty sure someone is Protestant I will often ask what 'faith tribe' they identify with
This avoids the non-denominational / missional / post-denominational / organic rants :)
 
@Dan Funny the things we can boast in... :(
 
Dan
5:03 AM
@Soldarnal us Orthodox aren't much better
this is human nature
@Soldarnal I must go to bed
But I have enjoyed getting to know you a little better
 
@Dan Have a good one
Same here
 
Dan
@Soldarnal you also
 
 
2 hours later…
7:33 AM
@Soldarnal I was wondering exactly that myself: someone flagged the double answer. Do you feel competent to decide if they should be merged? If not, perhaps we should ask Mike Bull?
 
 
1 hour later…
8:52 AM
I hope our increased traffic recently is here to stay, and I hope it translates into more users and questions over time:
No doubt it will mean more poor quality contributions too, but as more of us get the 'delete' button, we'll be prepared for that :)
 
9:13 AM
Good morning @Islam
 
@JackDouglas Good day
 
@Islam the dba joke now would be to say "Good CURRENT_TIMESTAMP" :)
@Islam I'm interested to read what answers you get to this
 
@JackDouglas Well you can as well answer it
but the answer has to be from the Islamic perspective
 
@Islam no I can't, but I'll read what others write eagerly: it's a subject that interests me
 
@JackDouglas Which subject?
 
9:20 AM
@Islam the spread of religion 'by the sword'
 
@MonicaCellio Here is a link for Muslim exegesis of the Bible : brill.com/muslim-exegesis-bible-medieval-cairo
 
The crusades were in essence 'un-Christian'
 
@JackDouglas It was not spread of religion by sword
Those were conquest but religion was not spread by forcible conversions
the link above answers the question
 
@Islam is this wrong then?
A forced conversion is the religious conversion or acceptance of a philosophy against the will of the subject, often with the threatened consequence of earthly penalties or harm. These consequences range from job loss and social isolation to incarceration, torture or death. Christianity End of Roman empire Forced conversion was a major way for the Christianization of the Roman Empire. In 392 Emperor Theodosius I decreed that Christianity was the only legal religion of the Roman Empire, and forbidding pagan practices by law: It is Our will that all the peoples who are ruled by the admi...
(you can edit it to improve it if it is)
I deleted that because it didn't seem to answer my question and I don't want to have a long spammy conversation in here. If we can keep it short and to the point it would be OK I think…
 
9:37 AM
@JackDouglas the wiki article is funny , its showing as if one can convert people like how we convert wav files to mp3 files
Most of the article on Islamic conversions is clearly slander
 
Well no-one seriously believes Wikipedia isn't subject to bias
But if you have reliable sources you should be able to challenge the content or at least balance it?
 
@JackDouglas Anyways have you read the Quran? this is must before understanding the Islamic history
 
@Islam until recently I had an English 'translation' on my bookshelf (we were renting from our curate who is doing mission work in the Far East, and part of the deal was we had to look after his library, several tonnes of books!). I dipped into it once or twice but never got going. If someone asked me about the Bible, I would probably advise them to read something manageable first, like Mark or John: is there a similar chunk of the Quran that is profitable to read alone?
(not you btw, in your case I'd advice you to re-read Romans, especially chapter 9!)
 
@Islam No, sir, it does not. Whether you are intentionally saying this to deceive those who aren't paying attention to the exact words or context or whether you are just really confused is hard to judge, but your statements do a disservice to your own religion by representing it under false pretenses.
If that is not your intent, then you should reverse your statement. We've been over this to the point where you admitted a similar statement of mine was correct. So why keep pushing people towards a misunderstanding?
The so called gospel that Muslims believe in is a theoretical one that you believe existed and was lost. It is NOT equivalent to the extant gospels and other NT writings held as Scripture by Christians. As such Islam does not share a gospel in common with Christians. They both use the same word "gospel" but they refer to different texts.
 
9:52 AM
@JackDouglas quran.com/19
@JackDouglas use the Muhsin khan translation, that explains the context too
 
@Islam In fact after contradicting me, you proceed to contradict yourself. That final statement has some truth because Muslims reject the Christian gospel texts. Now please stop playing word games and spreading misunderstanding. It doesn't become you and it makes it harder -- not easier -- to have interfaith dialogue when you won't even be honest about your own beliefs.
 
@Caleb No I am not contradicting myself, Muslims do believe the Gospels
and the Torah as scriptures
@Caleb Islam does share the gospels and Torah , rather it is one of the 6 articles of faith in Islam, no Muslim is a Muslim if he does not believe in the Torah and Gospel
1 min ago, by Islam
Ideally if NT is included in the Bible then Quran should also be included in it as the FT (Final Testament). Muslims consider convenient to carry only the FT like how many Christians would only carry the NT.
It was just a historical issue that Christians happened to bind their Gospels with the OT.
Muslim didn't , not because they reject it.
So only because we dont bind our quran with the OT does not mean we reject it
I think it is a dishonesty on part of christians to bind the NT together with OT and naming it as Bible. Jews would certainly take a strong exception to this act.
 
@Islam According to Wikipedia, Muslims accept the psalms, but I took this to mean that you don't, was I right? I'm just wondering how closely your views represent Islam as a whole…
 
@Islam You don't bind them together because you do not believe in the extant copies of the text. That is the issue here. The thing you say you "believe in" or "don't reject" is not the same thing that Christians and Jews have in hand and believe in.
:11209677 The act of publishing it means little in itself except that it is indicative of a specif set of beliefs about it: specifically the fact that we encourage people to read, study and learn and believe it, including holding it to be inerrant in its extant form and accurately passed down to us. These beliefs are entirely different from what Islam says about any text prior to the Qur'an.
 
10:07 AM
@JackDouglas why are you deleting my posts?
 
@Islam @Islam, respect for the Biblical Texts is necessary on BH.SE: you don't have to believe them but you have to treat them with respect
To be clear: it is OK to say: "I think the Torah is inspired but the NT is not"
(though it's not clear what you mean by 'Torah')
 
@JackDouglas I did not disrespect the texts at all , infact I argued that Muslims believe in Torah and Gospels
and you dont want to hear that
 
@Islam I don't mind hearing it in a different room :)
 
@Islam Yes you did actually, but @JackDouglas I'm going to disagree, either this back and forth is off topic or it isn't. I don't think censoring half of it works. If we should stop, nuke my last rebuttal as well and we'll move on.
 
@JackDouglas So why are Calebs message also not deleted?
 
10:11 AM
@Islam It is also OK for you to believe that you did not disrespect the texts, as long as you understand that I will use my judgement in here to base my mod decisions on…
@Islam which disrespected the Biblical Texts?
 
@JackDouglas I ask the same question to you , which o my statements disrespected the biblical texts?
 
@Islam the ones I delete of course: you can read them still can't you?
suggesting it is 'dishonest' to bind them together is disrespectful
 
@JackDouglas They are clearly not disrespectful
 
2 mins ago, by Jack Douglas
@Islam It is also OK for you to believe that you did not disrespect the texts, as long as you understand that I will use my judgement in here to base my mod decisions on…
There are lots of actions open to mods to 'correct' what is perceived as unwelcome behaviour: deleting chat messages is one (perhaps one you are not used to?), but I prefer not to jump straight to a ban if possible.
 
@Islam You said it was dishonest and polemical for Christians to include what they do in their Canon. And the way you said it was disrespectful, although to be fair I'm also accusing you of dishonesty in your representation of your own views so I think either we need to not have this debate here or let both of our views stand.
:11209822 In that sentence you are using a nonsense definition of "dishonest". That's a word game, not a rational argument. If you want to carry on an ongoing discussion, you'll need to use standard definitions of words that we agree on.
 
10:17 AM
deleting my posts can also be disrespectful
 
I will, however, get tired of deleting your messages and ban you from the room unless you stop doing what I perceive as disrespecting the texts
@Islam of course, but you have other means to complain if you think you have grounds
 
Ok I need to move now
Bye
 
 
2 hours later…
12:06 PM
0
Q: A specific example of the doctrine question

bmarguliesConsider How would Elisha plowing with 12 oxen have been understood at the time of writing?. The OP asked, as I see it, specifically for a cultural, anthropological, or, perhaps, literary reading. Mike Bull provides a length Christian exegesis, and, when challenged in a comment, asserts that th...

 
 
1 hour later…
1:07 PM
I don't see how this message was disrespectful.
 
1:17 PM
@MonicaCellio I deleted the whole series of 3 messages: do you think that was heavy-handed? (or do you mean just the one you link to was OK the others less so?)
 
1:50 PM
@JackDouglas I meant that the one I linked to seems fine to me (not the others).
 
@MonicaCellio OK, thanks. I still think it was (not to me but to the site), but either way I'm comfortable deleting the whole series of comments if the majority were genuinely offensive: I did that rather than flag them or otherwise ban Ali because I was trying to help him contextualise his 'appropriateness' and he has shown willing before.
 
@JackDouglas I ask this sincerely, not snarkily: if somebody else made a trio of comments, you agreed with one, and they all got deleted for the reason you gave, would you feel that was appropriate? I'm not talking about a big 50-message exchange that requires sifting; I'm talking about what happened here.
 
@MonicaCellio Yes, I think so, of course I'm not consciously applying double standards. Also of course, I take into account history and my knowledge of a poster's MO if I have any. I was very keen to get Ali's attention and make the general point that he needs to concern himself with what is appropriate in each specific room. If you scroll back you'll see I deleted one prior message, deleting 3 in a row was making a somewhat 'louder' point.
A chat ban would have followed soon afterwards as I indicated.
 
@JackDouglas yes, continuing something after being legitimately told to stop would be different. That's where bans come in.
@JackDouglas this room has hosted a lot of inter/intra-religious discussion, and I believe the qeustion of what Muslims count as scripture came up before he came in. So it's not clear that it was all off-topic, though there were some tone issues (on both sides, though not equally).
 
@MonicaCellio yes, and I drew his attention to the discussion
 
2:05 PM
If you're going to say that the Muslim interpretation of Christian scripture is off-topic, then you also have to say that discussions of any "X interpretataion of Y's scripture" is, or explain the difference, no?
 
I didn't say anything was off-topic, did I?
 
Mind, I'm not personally interested in a long discussion of Islam, but I'm also not very interested in some of the other long discussions that happen here. Meh - the room is made of people.
@JackDouglas oh I'm sorry; I thought either you or Caleb did.
 
I mean if there was a very long discussion that was totally unrelated to main, we would ask them to 'get a room'
but like you say, there is plenty of general chat in here too
@MonicaCellio I wasn't listening to Caleb: that was one of the problems :(
 
Right, and I think people have "gotten a room" on their own a few times. The volume here isn't generally so high as to call for that, but if so people'll do it.
@JackDouglas ah.
 
It might interest you to know that I like Ali and admire his courage: I really want him to learn to fit in here…
 
2:08 PM
Anyway, the volume in here is usually fine, conversations meander, some of it's interesting and some of it's not (scroll scroll scroll :-) ), but we need to have the same general tolerances no matter which not-really-germane conversation it is.
@JackDouglas thank you for saying that. The first part ("I like Ali") is not what I had guessed. And regardless of likes, yes we want our users to learn to fit in.
 
@MonicaCellio I'm also planning to read the section of the Quran he recommended: although I suspect he has actually not chosen the best section for me personally, which I'll feed back at some point
 
@JackDouglas The chapter I linked you is Surah Marayam , which may be relevant for a christian to read
quran.com/19 here do read the Muhsin Khan translation which explains the verses and gives context too
you need to tick the relevant checkmark
 
2:25 PM
@Islam I, too, would like a straight answer to the question Caleb has asked several times. Christians hold the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John to be Scripture. With a simple yes or no, does Muslim doctrine agree that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John AS WE HAVE THEM NOW are Scripture?
 
@FrankLuke Yes
 
I phrase it this way because I have had several Muslim friends in the past. They all agreed that the Gospels Christians read are not Scripture. They said the Injeel (the true Gospel) was lost.
And the writings of Paul, Acts of the Apostles, General Epistles, and Revelation?
 
@FrankLuke No Pauline sayings are not scripture at all
@FrankLuke From the above link you should know that the scriptures are being misinterpreted , not necessarily corrupted
 
@Islam Thank you for your straight answers. Now, what of the Jewish Scriptures? I know Islam holds the books of Moses and Psalms of David, but what of the books of History and Prophets? Ecclesiastes, Job, Isaiah, Samuel, Chronicles, Daniel, the others in the Jewish canon?
 
although the above link applies to torah, I dont see why It cant apply to gospels
@FrankLuke There is a hadith where a Jew comes to prophet Muhammad pbuh for ruling from their book, and he did not say "torah is corrupted", So the least we can say that what ever books were included in the cannon at the time of prophet Muhammad pbuh are are accepted scriptures
The problem always was of misinterpretation
 
2:38 PM
I am not here to discuss corruption, misinterpretation, etc. I am trying to determine the extent of the canon that Muslims accept.
 
in Discussion about Islam's view of Judaism and assorted extended discussions, Mar 1 at 4:36, by Ali
yesterday, by Ali
Bukhari (Vol.8. Hadith No. 809): “Narrated Ibn Umar (RA): A Jew and a Jewess were brought to Allah’s Apostle (S) on a charge of committing illegal sexual intercourse. The Prophet asked them: ‘What is the legal punishment (for this sin) in your Book (Torah)?’
 
@Islam This article states that according to Muslim scholars, only the 5 books of Moses, the Psalms of David, and the (lost) Injeel are accepted.
From the link: "Although many lay Muslims believe the Injil refers to the entire New Testament, scholars have pointed out that it refers not to the New Testament but to an original Gospel, written by God (Arabic الله Allah), which was given to Jesus.[7]"
^7. Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary, Appendix: On the Injil
 
@FrankLuke of course pauline sayings are not gospels
 
@Islam You have answered re Paul. Now I am trying to determine your beliefs about the Gospels as they relate to Muslim scholarship. However, you haven't answered about the other books in the Christian NT beyond Paul and the Gospels.
Also from the wiki article: Therefore, according to Muslim belief, the Gospel was the message that Jesus, being divinely inspired, preached to the Children of Israel. The current canonical Gospels, in the belief of Muslim scholars, are not divinely revealed but rather are documents of the life of Jesus, as written by various contemporaries, disciples and companions.
These Gospels, in Muslim belief, contain portions of the teachings of Jesus, but neither represent nor contain the original Gospel, which has been corrupted and/or lost, which was a single book written not by a human but by God.[8]
8. Encyclopaedia of Islam, Injil
(Emphasis added)
Do you agree or disagree with Muslim scholarship according to Abdullah Yusif Ali and the Encyclopedia of Islam? The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are not divinely revealed. That is what they say. That matches the testimony of my Muslim friends.
 
@FrankLuke Yes , they are not even preserved in their original language
even christians dont believe that gospels are divinely revealed
 
2:47 PM
@Islam So you say they are Scripture but not divinely revealed? An interesting distinction.
 
While Quran is the verbatim word of God , Mark, Luke etc are scriptures written by humans with full possibility of them erring
 
@Islam Patently false. We do indeed hold the Gospels to be divinely revealed.
 
@FrankLuke No I have read many scholarly views who dont believe gospel to be divine verbatim word of God.
 
@Islam You need to look up the Christian doctrine of Inspiration of Scriptures. We do hold all of the New Testament to be inspired. That is, it is the word of God revealed to men who recorded it as he wanted it said.
 
its neither a revelation , but ahistorical account
 
2:51 PM
See verbal plenary inspiration of the Bible.
"Inspiration establishes that the Bible is a divine product. In other words, Scripture is divinely inspired in that God actively worked through the process and had his hand in the outcome of what Scripture would say. Inspired Scripture is simply written revelation. "Scripture is not only man's word, but also, and equally God's word, spoken through man's lips or written with man's pen" (J.I. Packer, The Origin of the Bible, p. 31)."
(If I bolded for emphasis, I would bold the whole thing which counteracts the purpose.)
 
I am aware of Ehrman and the way he mishandles Scripture and the historical method.
 
the above summarizes his book
he gives clear detailed evidences that gospel is not a revealed text
 
He may say that they are not. HOWEVER orthodox Christians, which he is far from, hold them to be divinely inspired.
@Islam And if I pointed you to some Christian scholars who take his "evidences" and demolish them, would you read them?
 
@FrankLuke I have read them long back (>5 yrs)
 
2:57 PM
Daniel Baird Wallace (born 1952) is professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Theological Seminary. He is also the founder and executive director of the Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts, the purpose of which is digitizing all known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament via digital photographs. Wallace was born June 5, 1952, in California. He earned his B.A.(1975) from Biola University, and his Th.M.(1979) and Ph.D.(1995) in New Testament studies from Dallas Theological Seminary. He also pursued postdoctoral studies in a variety of places, including in Cambridge at Ty...
In his chapter of the recent book, Contending with Christianity's Critics takes on Ehrman's claims.
 
@FrankLuke Ya there are many such people , its their bread and butter
@FrankLuke for the sincere it is clear where the truth lies
 
@Islam The same can be said for Ehrman, John Dominic Crossen, and others. It's all the evidence.
@Islam I agree. And I sincerely conclude the truth is clearly the opposite to Ehrman's biggest claims.
 
So now we are coming to an interesting thing here.
 
To include Quran on BH?
 
3:02 PM
You are on record, in this very chat, as saying that the problem is one of misinterpretation, not one of corruption, per se.
However, the men you are quoting hold that, Ehrman, holds that the Gospels we have are corrupted.
Which is it?
 
misinterpretation of gospels
and corruption of the bible
 
So it's both?
 
by adding pauline teachings to it
 
No, just the Gospels for now. Ehrman holds that what we have is corrupted.
Do you agree with the man you are using to support your argument?
 
@FrankLuke if it is misinterpreted its as bad as being corrupted virtually
 
3:05 PM
@Islam Not virtually. Literally. Do you agree with your quoted source that the Gospels we have are textually corrupted and we cannot get to the original words of Jesus? Yes or no.
 
@FrankLuke No I just gave you an example that bible scholars also hold the view that its not divenely revealed
 
@Islam So they are not textually corrupted beyond recovery?
Your source says otherwise.
@Islam And I have told you that Ehrman is not orthodox.
 
@FrankLuke These questions are complicated to give a single yes or no. But for all practical purposes it is corrupted chiefly by translation
multiple translations
 
@Islam Let's stick with the topic at hand.
 
@FrankLuke Are we discussing on a topic?
 
3:09 PM
@Islam We have been. The topic of what do Muslim scholars consider to be Scriptural.
You then made a distinction between Scriptural and divinely revealed.
That MMLJ (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are Scripture but not divinely revealed.
And I am trying to pin you down on some things. I want clear, direct answers, and these distinctions keep coming up. I am honestly not sure if you are being intentionally misdirective or what.
 
Gospels : Scripture yes , divinely revealed : Yes (at the time of Jesus) . Now : Due to translations and human (pauline) writings , corrupted
 
MMLJ, at the time of Jesus, were divinely revealed. Interesting. Just a few minutes ago, I asked this very question, and you said they were not divinely revealed.
 
One thing we believe is that Quran is the filter for the Bible what ever matches with the Quran is accepted
 
You even said they are not revelation but a historical account.
23 mins ago, by Islam
its neither a revelation , but ahistorical account
26 mins ago, by Islam
even christians dont believe that gospels are divinely revealed
 
@FrankLuke yes now the revelation has reduced to a historical account, but it does contain parts of the revelation
@FrankLuke You need to quote the entire context, I meant the gospels which you have it now
 
3:14 PM
"While Quran is the verbatim word of God , Mark, Luke etc are scriptures written by humans with full possibility of them erring"
That says nothing about them being translated.
27 mins ago, by Islam
While Quran is the verbatim word of God , Mark, Luke etc are scriptures written by humans with full possibility of them erring
 
So the approach is to not see the scriptures in terms of books , but individual verses needs to examined with the Quran
@FrankLuke All my statements hold valid
 
27 minutes ago, you said they were not divinely revealed, they were written by human beings. Nothing about translation. Now you say they were revealed when they were written but have been mistranslated.
 
there is no contradiction in them if you care to understand them
 
@Islam And P implies not P.
 
@FrankLuke No you are completely misquoting me
 
3:18 PM
Let's take this slowly. Please allow a little time for this.
@Islam I am quoting you directly in response to my questions.
 
I did not say they were revelaed when they were written
I said gospels are revelations to Jesus and was with him
at that time
 
Let me quote these things.
31 mins ago, by Islam
While Quran is the verbatim word of God , Mark, Luke etc are scriptures written by humans with full possibility of them erring
 
so yes the gospels were indeed revelation to Jesus
 
Let me finish. I want to lay these out so we can conclude some things.
 
@FrankLuke You are really playing mischief by trying to show contradiction in what I am saying
 
3:20 PM
10 mins ago, by Frank Luke
That MMLJ (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are Scripture but not divinely revealed.
To that you replied.
10 mins ago, by Islam
Gospels : Scripture yes , divinely revealed : Yes (at the time of Jesus) . Now : Due to translations and human (pauline) writings , corrupted
@Islam I am trying to understand you.
 
yes
 
How can the Gospels be both divinely revealed and not divinely revealed at the time of writing?
 
@FrankLuke I clearly explained they were divinely revealed at the time of Jesus
why are you placing "at the time of writing" in my mouth?
 
@Islam Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were divinely revealed at the time of Jesus? Yet, they were also "written by humans with full possibility of them erring"?
 
@FrankLuke Yes this is correct
 
3:24 PM
@Islam Because they were written after Jesus.
 
But at the time of Jesus there was no Mark, Mathew etc
 
@Islam How can this be?
 
Thats why I say take the scripture at the lowest granular level
not in terms of books
 
@Islam So are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John divinely revealed?
15 mins ago, by Islam
Gospels : Scripture yes , divinely revealed : Yes (at the time of Jesus) . Now : Due to translations and human (pauline) writings , corrupted
Or are they (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), the writings of men?
38 mins ago, by Islam
While Quran is the verbatim word of God , Mark, Luke etc are scriptures written by humans with full possibility of them erring
The first quote from you was in response to my statement: "[Muslims believe] That MMLJ (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) are Scripture but not divinely revealed."
When I asked:
4 mins ago, by Frank Luke
@Islam Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were divinely revealed at the time of Jesus? Yet, they were also "written by humans with full possibility of them erring"?
 
@FrankLuke To summarize : Muslims believe the Gospels (at time of Jesus ) are an article of Islamic faith
Dont try to play mischief with the discourse
 
3:30 PM
@Islam Then give straight answers. I am not playing with the discourse.
 
@FrankLuke Muslims believe the Gospels (at time of Jesus ) are an article of Islamic faith
 
@Islam But this is the Injeel and not Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, correct?
 
@FrankLuke No Injeel can include verses from the MMLJ
@FrankLuke MMLJ are just names for human convinience
Need to go for now , @FrankLuke have you read the Quran?
 
@Islam Parts. One of my friends gave me a very large edition. I no longer have it, though.
We were moving and everything was on the chopping block to not make the move. Quran, Book of Mormon, several things didn't make the cut. But they weren't destroyed. I took them to a used book store.
@Caleb Word games continued. He does not view Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as divinely revealed as Christians do.
 
4:15 PM
@FrankLuke But did you read it?
 
4:35 PM
@Islam As I said, parts of it. But that was a very long time ago.
 
5:03 PM
@FrankLuke That is my understanding too: thanks for your patience trying to clarify that. iiuc the same understanding is to be applied to the Pentateuch and Psalms
or rather the same result: the extant texts are not 'inspired' as they stand
1
Q: What we really mean when we talk about doctrine in questions

DanRichard expressed a guideline for questions as follows: Questions are on topic if they are focused on the text, rather than things to which the text may apply.... Questions that seem to be seeking to apply the Bible are off-topic. However, he also said that the essence of his guideline is t...

@Dan this is a very helpful contribution, thank you
@Dan I note that you do not mention answers anywhere in that post, am I right to assume that is intentional?
 
@Dan It's one thing to say that other religions are "false" and a whole 'nother thing to say my religions is "true". ;-) In a postmodern setting, I'm right and you're right. In a modern setting, s/and/or/g. (At least as I define "postmodern". ;)
 
5:24 PM
1
Q: What we really mean when we talk about doctrine in questions

DanRichard expressed a guideline for questions as follows: Questions are on topic if they are focused on the text, rather than things to which the text may apply.... Questions that seem to be seeking to apply the Bible are off-topic. However, he also said that the essence of his guideline is t...

 
@JackDouglas You're welcome. That is my understanding as well. And the books outside that number are not.
 
Dan
5:49 PM
@JackDouglas yes, it is my understanding that the tools for answers are primarily comments, votes, and edits only in egregious cases
@JonEricson true, and I don't have as much beef with that as I do when people say things like "the false Gospel of Thomas"
But as Shog9 pointed out, this is not a unique site guideline issue - it is a 'be nice' sitewide policy issue
My argument is that a certain extent of NPOV is necessary in order to 'be nice'
 
@Islam It should be noted that Ehrman is not a Christian anymore. Money quote from the article: 'Today, Ehrman describes himself as a "happy agnostic."'
The article is from 2009, however, Ehrman's beliefs had changed long before then.
While you never said he is a Christian Bible scholar, if his views of the NT are admissable that it is not divinely inspired, then that of nonMuslim, Koranic scholars who do not believe it is inspired should weigh the same as his.
 
6:14 PM
Actually, the implication of the conversation was that Ehrman is a Christian.
3 hours ago, by Islam
even christians dont believe that gospels are divinely revealed
I replied:
3 hours ago, by Frank Luke
@Islam Patently false. We do indeed hold the Gospels to be divinely revealed.
3 hours ago, by Islam
@FrankLuke No I have read many scholarly views who dont believe gospel to be divine verbatim word of God.
You then gave Ehrman as an example.
3 hours ago, by Islam
:11213951 http://archive.org/details/Prof.BartEhrman-MisquotingJesus
A link discussing Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus.
3 hours ago, by Islam
he gives clear detailed evidences that gospel is not a revealed text
Now, you claimed some Christians did not believe the Gospels to be divinely revealed and sourced Ehrman as an example. Ehrman is not a Christian and does not claim to be.
 
6:41 PM
@Islam And Reza is Muslim. He is certainly not a Christian scholar and Christian scholars is where you had taken the conversation.
 
@FrankLuke Just in case you're unfamiliar with this guy, he is... Not very good at acquiring new information in areas where he considers himself an expert. Don't want to discourage you from chatting, but do be aware that it can be like talking to a wall.
@Dan Not necessarily NPOV, but a certain amount of tact is necessary - see above ^^^. A recognition - evident in the writing itself - that what you hold to be true is vehemently disputed by others.
 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 23:00

« first day (709 days earlier)      last day (2953 days later) »