Islamic Archives

Home » Posts tagged 'Bible'

Tag Archives: Bible

Relationship between the Synoptic Gospels

Screenshot from 2018-03-25 08-48-47.png

Answering Objections to the Name of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in Song of Songs 5:16

Taken from here:

Muhammad in Bible.pngWhen dealing with the fact that  Bible passage in the Song of Songs or  Shir haShirim 5:16  שיר השירים  ה:טז in Hebrew  where the word “Machamadim” מַחֲמַדִּים is clearly shown, christian apologists like James White in his debate with Br. Zakir Hussain titled “Is Muhammed Prophesied in the Bible?” typically respond that it can not refer to Prophet Muhammad (p) based on the following arguments:

  1. The context of the  whole Song of Solomon is about human love or  human sexual desire.
  2. The word is in adjective form and can be found in other places in the Bible.
  3. The word is in plural form

White even boldly claim that this is the weakest argument the muslims have on finding prophet Muhammad in the Bible.


Let us have a closer look if these arguments are valid.



[John 8:56] “My Day” does it refer to the Plains of Mamre or in the Future? (Differences in Biblical Commentaries)

Many Christians try to show the divinity of Christ, by equating him with the figure in Genesis 18 , ANGEL OF THE LORD. They refer to John 8:56 “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad.”, and in particular the wording “MY DAY“. Let us examine the different interpretations of Biblical commentors on this issue:

BLUE = Future
RED=Plains of Mamre

To conclude here, you will see that the MAJORITY of commentaries are referring to a FUTURE observance of Christ, as opposed to Jesus coming down in human form, in Genesis 18.

But as usual in John 8:57 , the Jews twisted the words of  Jesus and the Trinitarian Christians are gullible enough to accept their reasoning. In the next post we will see how commentators have understood the Jews were in-fact twisting or misinterpreting what Jesus was saying.


Deliberate Mistranslation in the New International Version (NIV)

A very well-researched and written article. I have REDED the parts I found especially interesting. Original article: (

The New International Version of the Bible, or NIV, was first published in 1978. Since then, it has become one of the most popular English Bible translations, and almost certainly the most popular one among Evangelical Christians. It is also one of the worst translations for anyone who is seriously interested in what the Bible says. Its translators are conservative Evangelical Christians who are committed to certain theological doctrines as well as to the inerrancy of the Bible, as is implied in its prefaces:

From the beginning the translators have been united in their commitment to the authority and infallibility of the Bible as God’s Word in written form. (TNIV, 2005)

Our work as translators is motivated by our conviction that the Bible is God’s Word in written form. (NIV, 2011)


Catholics Not Allowed to Read the Bible, all the way up to the 1970s

Taken from here:

We’ve interviewed dozens of older Catholics, and ex Catholics, including those who now go to Evangelical Churches, to try to gain an understanding of the charge that Catholics weren’t allowed to read their Bibles in the 1930’s – 1970’s.

It is true that earlier in this century, in some Catholic circles, people were not encouraged to read their Bibles. This discouragement was a mistake. The Church does not claim that these types of mistakes have not been made.

[CNN] Half of New Testament FORGED, Bible scholar says

(CNN) – A frail man sits in chains inside a dank, cold prison cell. He has escaped death before but now realizes that his execution is drawing near.

“I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come,” the man –the Apostle Paul – says in the Bible’s 2 Timothy. “I have fought the good fight. I have finished the race. I have kept the faith.”

The passage is one of the most dramatic scenes in the New Testament. Paul, the most prolific New Testament author, is saying goodbye from a Roman prison cell before being beheaded. His goodbye veers from loneliness to defiance and, finally, to joy.

There’s one just one problem – Paul didn’t write those words. In fact, virtually half the New Testament was written by impostors taking on the names of apostles like Paul. At least according to Bart D. Ehrman, a renowned biblical scholar, who makes the charges in his new book “Forged.”


Biblical Ignorance leads to Snake-Related Deaths

Mark 16:18 English Standard Version (ESV)

18 they will pick up serpents with their hands; and if they drink any deadly poison, it will not hurt them; they will lay their hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

If only they knew the last 12 verses of Mark are a fabrication.

News Articles below of deaths below:

“Thou Shall Commit Adultery” orders the Bible

According to a misprinted Bible ( , but I’m sure some were overjoyed at the command  🙂


94% of Biblical Manuscripts come from the 9th century and Onwards


94% of our surviving Greek manuscripts of the New Testament date from after the ninth Christian century.   That is 800 years (years!) after the so-called originals.

[HUFFPOST] Why Christians Were Denied Access to Their Bible for 1,000 Years?

Taken from here:

The Council of Nicaea called by the Emperor Constantine met in 325 C.E. to establish a unified Catholic Church. At that point no universally sanctioned Scriptures or Christian Bible existed. Various churches and officials adopted different texts and gospels. That’s why the Council of Hippo sanctioned 27 books for the New Testament in 393 C.E. Four years later the Council of Cartage confirmed the same 27 books as the authoritative Scriptures of the Church.

Wouldn’t you assume that the newly established Church would want its devotees to immerse themselves in the sanctioned New Testament, especially since the Church went to great lengths to eliminate competing Gospels? And wouldn’t the best way of spreading the “good news” be to ensure that every Christian had direct access to the Bible?

That’s not what happened. The Church actually discouraged the populace from reading the Bible on their own — a policy that intensified through the Middle Ages and later, with the addition of a prohibition forbidding translation of the Bible into native languages.


%d bloggers like this: