Introduction:



We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted and unreliable and is
mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption! "`How can you say, "We [the
Jews] are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the
scribes has handled it falsely?' (From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer: "How can you say, 'We are
wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes
has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
In either translation, we clearly see that the Jews had so much corrupted the Bible with their man-made cultural laws, that they had turned the Bible into a lie!

See Also Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering of the Law (Bible) after his death.


The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted. The Book of Jeremiah which came approximately 826 years after did indeed confirm this corruption.

Deuteronomy 4:2 clearly declares that the Bible is corrupt! Also, what does the Noble Quran say about the Bible's Law!


Christians are often quick to tell you that their modern-day "Bible" (different quantity of books and gospels, and different quantity of verses exist between bibles) is the "true living word of God." This is despite the fact that whatever bible we're confronted with, we can easily find countless contradictions between verses and contradictions even with history! Not only that, but ironically, even the Bible's own theologians admit that the bible is corrupt and was written by "mysterious" people. Not only that, but they also declare that the bible(s) contain fictions, fairy tales and fables:


The Bible's "original manuscripts had been lost" according to the Christian scholars and theologians:


Some Christians decided to respond to many of the Bible's contradictions. They named their site "101 Clear Contradictions in the Bible." Ironically, their own quotes below refute them! For example, you can do a search on this text in their site: "Confirmation of this type of copyist error is found in various pagan writers

as well." Even those Christian scholars admit with their own typed words by their own fingers that the Bible does indeed contain "copyist error(s)", and they lowered their Holy Scripture to the level of a pagan book through their comparison. My question is then, how can it be the word of GOD when it contains Satanic "copyist errors"?


The Original manuscript don't even exist according to the bible's own theologians!


"Christians readily admit, however, that there have been 'scribal errors' in the copies of the Old and New Testament. It is beyond the capability of anyone to avoid any and every slip of the pen in copying page after page from any book, sacred or secular. Yet we may be sure that the original manuscript (better known as autograph) of each book of the Bible, being directly inspired by God, was free from all error. Those originals, however, because of the early date of their inception no longer exist."


"Because we are dealing with accounts which were written thousands of years ago,


we would not expect to have the originals in our possession today, as they would have disintegrated long ago. We are therefore dependent on the copies taken from copies of those originals, which were in turn continually copied out over a period of centuries. Those who did the copying were prone to making two types of scribal errors. One concerned the spelling of proper names, and the other had to do with numbers."


"Most Christians will affirm that the Bible is our rule of faith and practice. It is a little self contradictory to stand in the pulpit and say the word of God is inspired, when in his heart the pastor knows he is not referring to any book here on this earth that people can hold in their hands and believe. He really should say what he believes -that the word of God WAS inspired at one time but we no longer have it, so the best we can do is hope we have a close approximation of what God probably meant to tell us." (http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/transinsp.html)


"It also seems a bit inconsistent to say he believes the originals were inspired, when he has never seen them, they never were together in one single book and they no longer exist anyway. How does he know they were inspired? He accepts this by faith. Yet he seems to lack the faith to actually believe that God could do exactly what He said He would do with His words. God said He would preserve them and that heaven and earth would pass away but His words would not pass away." (http://www.geocities.com/brandplucked/transinsp.html)


Yet, this same person writes:


"How Old Was Ahaziah, 22 or 42?


This is an apparent contradiction that frequently is thrown in the face of Christians who believe we have an inspired Bible. Many Atheist, Islam and Bible debunker sites bring up this example. Sad to say, most of the “Christian” apologetic sites which promote the new bible versions cave in here and say the number 42 is a copyist error.

Here is a typical response by those Christians who use and promote the modern versions. This one comes from Techtonics Apologetics. This “defender of the faith” answers: “ Was Ahaziah forty-two or twenty-two (per 2 Kings 8:26) when he ascended the throne? More likely 22, and 2 Chronicles has been hit by a copyist error. See our foundational essay on copyist errors for general background. In favor of the "22" reading in 2 Chronicles: The 2 Kings reading; some LXX and Syriac manuscripts.


This typical Christian response is not limited to this one example, but in many objections brought up by the infidels or the curious, this same rote answer is given. There is a copyist error. There is a typo in God’s book. The skeptics laugh and the modern version proponent looks like a fool.


2 Chronicles 22:2 tells us that Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign. The Hebrew texts, plus Wycliffe 1395,Coverdale 1535, Bishop's Bible 1568, Geneva Bible 1599, the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, Douay 1950, the Spanish Reina Valera 1960, Italian Diodati 1602, NKJV, RSV, NRSV, the Jewish translations of 1917 and 1936, the 1998 Complete Jewish Bible, Hebrew Names Bible, Rotherham's Emphasized Bible, Webster's 1833 translation, the New English Bible 1970, the New Jerusalem, KJV 21st Century, and the Third Millenium Bible all say Ahaziah was 42 years old when he began to reign.


The inspired Hebrew text clearly says Ahaziah was 42 years old. The masoretic scribes were very scrupulous in copying their sacred trust. No word or number was written from memory but each word was carefully checked before he recopied it. The copies were checked and checked again and if there were a single error, the whole was discarded and and new one begun


My Response:


How do you know that the above references (written by ordinary men) that you used in proving that Ahaziah was 42 years old are correct when the original manuscripts had been lost? What makes you be so sure that Ahaziah was indeed 42 years old and not 22 or any other age? You said the Christians make themselves look like "fools" when they attempt to answer away the apparent and irrefutable errors in the Bible. Didn't you too just make an utter fool out of yourself too?


Face it and admit it! The Bible's overwhelming errors and corruptions are unanswerable! The Bible is corrupt no matter how you try to decorate it.


The authors of the sites in the quotes above admit that the entire Bible is NOT perfect, and contains man's corruption or alteration in it. They also admit that the original manuscripts that came from GOD Almighty are lost. I'd like to comment on their points of the type of errors that exist in the Bible today:

- There is no evidence that the errors are only limited to spelling of proper names and numbers. They're only assuming this and are using it as fact. And even if this was true, then as they openly admitted, this takes away the Bible's perfection. The reader must remember that the Christians' entire polytheist trinity paganism comes solely from conclusions and interpretations! There is not ONE SINGLE claim or hard evidence in the Bible about GOD Almighty being 3, or that Jesus is our Creator. Jesus who ran away from King Herod to Egypt, and who begged GOD Almighty for Mercy and prostrated his face down to the ground before Him on the night of crucifixion can not be the Creator of the Universe. The trinitarian pagans would happily try to convince you that trinity is right from their corrupted book, while at the same time, they openly admit that there are errors and man's alterations that exist in the Bible, and the original manuscripts had been lost. If the original manuscripts had been lost, then what makes you be so sure that trinity is the correct conclusion?


- According to the Bible's theologians, no one even knows who wrote the copies that they're referring to. In other words, we don't even know if these people were anointed from GOD Almighty or not, because we don't have any evidence that the letters found that make up the Bible today were officially written by men.


Exposing the New Testament's historical


corruptions


The Gospel of Mark:


Note: This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament!


"Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1488)"


So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark?


(http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2016:9-20;&version=31;)


The above text reads: "The most reliable early manuscript and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20."

Now my concern to this corruption and 'answer-the-problem-away' statement is that what are those so-called "reliable early manuscript(s)" and who are the "ancient witnesses"?


According to the early Christians' manuscripts, Jesus never got crucified, and trinity is a lie. The so-called "gospel of Mark", along with all of the "gospels" of the NT, were written by third-party narration, as clearly demonstrated and shown in the sections below. People wrote on the tongue of Jesus' Disciples those books. They are neither original nor are the Pure Word of GOD Almighty.


If the "gospel of Mark" was indeed Divine and


from GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't have this


corruption, that they're admitting above, in it.


I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!


Further regarding this Gospel, we read the following commentary about Mark 16:9-20:


"Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes, page 1528)"


This quote raises a very serious issue here. First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel". Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it. The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying.


Removing Mark 16:9-20 is quite appreciated by me personally (to be quite honest with you), because it prevents people from dying from snake bites. But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains.


We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful. The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc... It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man. Let alone considering it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.


If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16:9-20, then who did? And how can you prove the ownership of the other person? Let alone proving that it was GOD Almighty's Revelation. And as we saw in the first quote above, we don't even know that John Mark was indeed the one who wrote the so called "Gospel of Mark".

To say the least in our case here, we now have enough evidence to discard the entire Gospel of Mark from the Bible, because you can't take bits and pieces of it and say some of it belongs to him and some of it doesn't! Let alone considering the entire corrupted Gospel as the True Living Word of GOD Almighty, which is a complete blasphemy.


Please visit A dangerous forgery was inserted at the end of the so-called "Gospel of Mark".


A dangerous forgery was inserted at the end of the so-called "Gospel of Mark"


By Abdul Haleem


One of the "endings" of Mark - the one translated in the King James Bible and other English translations of the Bible - contains the following passage:


Believers will be given these signs of power: . . .if they pick up snakes or drink any poison, they will not be harmed . . . . Mark 16:17-18 (Today's English Version). Emphasis added.


This passage has spawned development of Christian cults who handle venomous snakes and drink strychnine as "tests of faith":


Snake Handling Sects: George Went Hensley, a Church of God pastor founded a Pentecostal religious group in 1909 which is now called Church of God with Signs Following. Adult members occasionally practice what they call "preaching the signs": the drinking of strychnine or other poison, and exposing themselves to be bitten by poisonous snakes. They allow their natural defenses to battle the poison; they do not seek medical attention. Their belief is that if they have sufficient faith, they will not die or be permanently harmed by the poison. This belief is based on a Biblical passage: Mark 16:17-18:


"And these signs will accompany those who believe. In my name...they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all;..." (NIV)


Hensley interpreted this passage as a command to believers to use these methods to test their faith. It is interesting that this passage is believed by many to be a forgery, not written by the author who wrote the rest of the Gospel of Mark.


By the start of World War II, these practices had become widespread throughout the Church of God, although only engaged in by a small minority of its members. The church interpreted these tests of faith to be one more indication of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit in the last days before Christ's second coming. Motivated by some deaths and near deaths, the practice was denounced by the Assembly of the Church of God in 1928. However, some congregations left the denomination and continued their snake handling practices.

The State of Tennessee banned the practice and suppressed the group after the death of member Lewis Ford in 1945. Hensley himself died of snakebite in Florida in 1955 in his mid-70's. After two additional deaths from drinking poison, and other near deaths, court cases led to a decision by the Tennessee Supreme Court to uphold the state's ban. Independent congregations of "signs people" are still found from Florida to West Virginia and west to Ohio. J.G. Melton estimates that between 50 to 100 "signs" congregations exist with a total of several thousand members. People have continued to die in Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, and West Virginia at the rate of about 5 a decade. Many believers handle snakes, but few are bitten.


A second church: Original Pentecostal Church of God also believes in testing themselves with poisonous snakes. However they do not "tempt God" by bringing snakes into their services. Members have been known to pick up poisonous snakes and risk being bitten when they come across them in the wild.


 emphasis partially added.


These bizarre practices are all based on proven forgery:


The oldest copies of the Gospel of Mark, the Sinaitic and Vatican, end at Mark 16:8. A note in the New International Version of the Bible states: "The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20." Verses 9 to 20 appear to have been added later by an unknown Christian forger. The addition was quoted in the writings of Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the second or third century.


 emphasis added.


The insertion and continued translation of such an obvious and dangerous forgery in the Bible should come as no surprise. In order to boast their flimsy claims that God is a "Trinity," many Christians continue to quote another proven forgery, 1 John 5:7, which purports to say:


"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."


The foregoing verse is such an obvious forgery that:


[T]his verse is now universally recognized as being a later "insertion" of the Church and all recent versions of the Bible, such as the Revised Standard Version the New Revised Standard Version, the New American Standard Bible, the New English Bible, the Phillips Modern English Bible ...etc. have all unceremoniously expunged this verse from their pages. Why is this? The scripture translator Benjamin Wilson gives the following explanation for this action in his "Emphatic Diaglott." Mr. Wilson says:


"This text concerning the heavenly witness is not contained in any Greek manuscript which was written earlier than the fifteenth century. It is not cited by any of the ecclesiastical writers; not by any of early Latin fathers even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have lead them to appeal to it's authority. It is therefore evidently spurious."

Others, such as the late Dr. Herbert W. Armstrong argued that this verse was added to the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible during the heat of the controversy between Rome, Arius, and God's people. Whatever the reason, this verse is now universally recognized as an insertion and discarded. . . .


Yet despite unanimous agreement of scholars that the verse is a forgery, it continues to be reprinted in the King James Version of the Bible - along with Mark 16:17-18 and continues to be quoted by Christian evangelists.


What credibility does Christianity have when it scriptures are littered with such dangerous and obvious forgeries?


The Book of Acts:


"Although the author does not name himself, evidence outside the Scriptures and inferences from the book itself lead to the conclusion that the author was Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1643)"


So based on some conclusion, you're willing to die for defending the idea that the Book of Acts was the True Word of GOD Almighty? If the book was inspired by GOD Almighty, then how come it wasn't mentioned in the book itself to help us filter it out from the many other "Satanic false books"? Are we sure that this book too is not a man-made Satanic book?


After all, its just a conclusio n, isn't it?


Beside, what evidence are they talking about?! The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus. So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering it as the True Living Word of GOD.


The Gospel of Luke:


There is a serious forgery about Jesus' "resurrection on the third day" claiming that it was foretold in the OT when it wasn't! Let us look at Luke 24:44-48 from the NIV Bible:


Luke 24


44 He said to them, "This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms."


45 Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures.


46 He told them, "This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day,


47 and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.


48 You are witnesses of these things.

Luke 24:44-48 says that it is written in the Law of Moses (i.e., the Torah) that Jesus will die and resurrect on the third day. Where in the entire Old Testament (not just in the 5 books of Moses that make up the Law of Moses or the Torah) do you have that?! Show me one Old Testament verse that prophesized about Jesus' third day resurrection?


In fact, in my article Answering Isaiah 53, I clearly proved that the Old Testament actually confirms the Noble Quran's claims about Jesus never got crucified! Let alone dying and resurrecting on the third day!


Anyway, Let us see what the NIV Bible's theologians said about this book:


"The author's name does not appear in the book, but much unmistakable evidence points to Luke. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1529)"


Again, we don't know for sure whether it was Luke or not who wrote the "Gospel of Luke" since his name doesn't appear in the Book. The Gospel itself seems to be a compromising one to the Word of GOD. Let us look at the following:


"Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, (Luke 1:3)"


Few problems with this Gospel from the quote above:


1- The author was not inspired, and knew for sure that he was not inspired by GOD Almighty to write the Book since he didn't mention about any divine inspiration, and he said "...since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning..." Where do we see GOD's inspiration in this?


2- The author wrote it for the purpose of "his most excellent Theophilus." Since when we compromise GOD Almighty and document His Holy Words for the purpose of other higher (in rank) human beings?


I say it again, I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty!


Also, beside, what evidence are they talking about?! The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus. So unless the Book/Gospel was signed by its author, there is no way we would know for sure that it was indeed his book from the first place, let alone considering as the True Living Word of GOD.


Further from brother Vipor Poison; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:


Luke 1:3


Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it

seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus,


The following is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:


http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625b.htm


http://newadvent.org/cathen/14625a.htm


If Theophilus existed in either the 2nd or the 4th centuries then how could the writer of this gospel be the same Luke who is supposed to be with Jesus in the 1st century.


Maybe he lived to about 200 years.. :)


From brother Amir AbdulRahim; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:


The subject of Mankind's Corruption of the Bible has interested me greatly, and I have taken a closer look at this subject. Its seems it's not only your site that brings this subject up, but a couple of Christian sites too.


For example, an article in the Catholic Encyclopaedia that you mentioned in regard to the 'Theophilus' mentioned in Luke's Gospel (from your Just Who Are The Real Authors Of The Bible? article) testifies to this fact (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14530a.htm):


"IV. TRANSMISSION OF THE TEXT


No book of ancient times has come down to us exactly as it left the hands of its author-- all have been in some way altered. The material conditions under which a book was spread before the invention of printing (1440), the little care of the copyists, correctors, and glossators for the text, so different from the desire of accuracy exhibited to-day, explain sufficiently the divergences we find between various manuscripts of the same work. To these causes may be added, in regard to the Scriptures, exegetical difficulties and dogmatical controversies. To exempt the sacred writings from ordinary conditions a very special providence would have been necessary, and it has not been the will of God to exercise this providence."


Lets just go through that again - "No book of ancient times has come down to us exactly as it left the hands of its author--all have been in some way altered." All have been in some way altered! In view of this blatant admission, how can anyone expect me, or any muslim, to follow an impure book?


When you compare this to the great lengths taken to preserve the original Qur'an, there's no contest!

The Book of Hebrews:


"The writer of this letter does not identify himself, but he was obviously well known to the original recipients. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1856)"


So because the guy was supposedly "well known (which we don't really know that for sure anyway)", then would that give us the right to consider his words as the Words of GOD Almighty?! I am sorry, but I don't really see the logic behind this! The Book of Hebrews is one of the highly used Books among Christians. I hear references from it a lot when listening to Christians preaching. Yet, no one really knows who wrote it!. This is quite ironic, because Christians use such highly doubtful books in their teachings as if they were the True Living Words of GOD Almighty. I don't care what you call this, but I call it blasphemy, because it is the most ridiculous insult to GOD Almighty and His Holy Words that I have ever seen.


I just hope you see the real cheap quality in the religion of Christianity, with all my respect due to every Christian reader.


The Gospel of John:


"The author is the apostle John, 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' (13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20,24). He was prominent in the early church but is not mentioned by name in this Gospel--which would be natural if he wrote it, but hard to explain otherwise. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1588)"


They claimed that it was John who wrote the Gospel, but yet, his name was not signed on his Gospel! How is it possible for us to be absolutely sure that it was indeed John who wrote the so called "Gospel of John" when "his name is not mentioned in this Gospel" so we can then take it as a 100% True Error-free Word of GOD Almighty?


When one reads this gospel, he would immediately notice that it was not written by John himself. Let us look at the following verses from the gospel:


"And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:19)"


"John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: but there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:26)"


"For John was not yet cast into prison. (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:24)"


etc...


Whoever wrote the gospel, was he appointed or inspired by GOD Almighty? If yes, then who is that man? It can't be John for it is quite obvious from the above verses and many more throughout the gospel that John wasn't the original author. One has to be ridiculously biased and blind in faith to deny that.


So now, what about these most popular verses:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (From the King James Version Bible, John 1:1)"


"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. (From the King James Version Bible, John 3:16)"


These verses were obviously written by mysterious men and not by any of Jesus' original disciples. Therefore, it is blasphemy to consider such verses as Divine and to try to prove Jesus is the Creator of the Universe through them. The lie of trinity was born between the years of 150 to 300. It is quite possible and highly probable that some church wrote the so-called "Gospel of John" from excerpts that they found. Notice that there are 24,000 "letters" or papers found that were not included in today's New Testament, which means that the excerpts that were used for writing the "Gospel of John" and all of the other books and gospels of the NT are highly doubtful and contain no proof what so ever that they were written by any of Jesus' original disciples. The Gospel of John was written about John but not by the original "Saint John". Big difference and big corruption! You can't consider such rubbish as GOD Almighty's Divine Holy Words.


The Gospel of 1 John:


"....Unlike most NT letters, 1 John does not tell us who its author is. The earliest identification of him comes from the church fathers...(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1904)"


"The letter is difficult to date with precision....(From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1905)"


This is really ironic! with all respect due to Christians. If the Book's author is not for sure known, then why assume that it was Saint John who wrote it?


The lie of 1 John 5:7. This verse was later discovered to be a Satanic lie. The Roman Catholic Theologians don't believe in it, and it doesn't exist in their Bibles.


1.2.2.5 1 John 5:7


The only verses in the whole Bible that explicitly ties God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit in one "Triune" being is the verse of 1 John 5:7


"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."


This is the type of clear, decisive, and to-the-point verse I have been asking for. However, as I would later find out, this verse is now universally recognized as being a

later "insertion" of the Church and all recent versions of the Bible, such as the Revised Standard Version the New Revised Standard Version, the New American Standard Bible, the New English Bible, the Phillips Modern English Bible ...etc. have all unceremoniously expunged this verse from their pages. Why is this? The scripture translator Benjamin Wilson gives the following explanation for this action in his "Emphatic Diaglott." Mr. Wilson says:


"This text concerning the heavenly witness is not contained in any Greek manuscript which was written earlier than the fifteenth century. It is not cited by any of the ecclesiastical writers; not by any of early Latin fathers even when the subjects upon which they treated would naturally have lead them to appeal to it's authority. It is therefore evidently spurious."


Others, such as the late Dr. Herbert W. Armstrong argued that this verse was added to the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible during the heat of the controversy between Rome, Arius, and God's people. Whatever the reason, this verse is now universally recognized as an insertion and discarded. Since the Bible contains no verses validating a "Trinity" therefore, centuries after the departure of Jesus, God chose to inspire someone to insert this verse in order to clarify the true nature of God as being a "Trinity." Notice how mankind was being inspired as to how to "clarify" the Bible centuries after the departure of Jesus (pbuh). People continued to put words in the mouths of Jesus, his disciples, and even God himself with no reservations whatsoever. They were being "inspired" (see chapter two).


If these people were being "inspired" by God, I wondered, then why did they need to put these words into other people's mouths (in our example, in the mouth of John). Why did they not just openly say "God inspired me and I will add a chapter to the Bible in my name"? Also, why did God need to wait till after the departure of Jesus to "inspire" his "true" nature? Why not let Jesus (pbuh) say it himself?


The great luminary of Western literature, Mr. Edward Gibbon, explains the reason for the discardal of this verse from the pages of the Bible with the following words:


"Of all the manuscripts now extant, above fourscore in number, some of which are more than 1200 years old, the orthodox copies of the Vatican, of the Complutensian editors, of Robert Stephens are becoming invisible; and the two manuscripts of Dublin and Berlin are unworthy to form an exception...In the eleventh and twelfth centuries, the Bibles were corrected by LanFrank, Archbishop of Canterbury, and by Nicholas, a cardinal and librarian of the Roman church, secundum Ortodoxam fidem. Notwithstanding these corrections, the passage is still wanting in twenty-five Latin manuscripts, the oldest and fairest; two qualities seldom united, except in manuscripts....The three witnesses have been established in our Greek Testaments by the prudence of Erasmus; the honest bigotry of the Complutensian editors; the typographical fraud, or error, of Robert Stephens in the placing of a crotchet and the deliberate falsehood, or strange misapprehension, of Theodore Beza."


"Decline and fall of the Roman Empire," IV, Gibbon, p. 418.


Edward Gibbon was defended in his findings by his contemporary, the brilliant British scholar Richard Porson who also proceeded to publish devastatingly


conclusive proof that the verse of 1 John 5:7 was only first inserted by the Church into the Bible in the year 400C.E.(Secrets of Mount Sinai, James Bentley, pp. 30-33).


Regarding Porson's most devastating proof, Mr. Gibbon later said


"His structures are founded in argument, enriched with learning, and enlivened with wit, and his adversary neither deserves nor finds any quarter at his hands. The evidence of the three heavenly witnesses would now be rejected in any court of justice; but prejudice is blind, authority is deaf, and our vulgar Bibles will ever be polluted by this spurious text."


To which Mr. Bentley responds:


"In fact, they are not. No modern Bible now contains the interpolation."


Mr. Bentley, however, is mistaken. Indeed, just as Mr. Gibbon had predicted, the simple fact that the most learned scholars of Christianity now unanimously recognize this verse to be a later interpolation of the Church has not prevented the preservation of this fabricated text in our modern Bibles. To this day, the Bible in the hands of the majority of Christians, the "King James" Bible, still unhesitantly includes this verse as the "inspired" word of God without so much as a footnote to inform the reader that all scholars of Christianity of note unanimously recognize it as a later fabrication.


Peake's Commentary on the Bible says


"The famous interpolation after 'three witnesses' is not printed even in RSVn, and rightly. It cites the heavenly testimony of the Father, the logos, and the Holy Spirit, but is never used in the early Trinitarian controversies. No respectable Greek MS contains it. Appearing first in a late 4th-cent. Latin text, it entered the Vulgate and finally the NT of Erasmus."


It was only the horrors of the great inquisitions which held back Sir Isaac Newton from openly revealing these facts to all:


"In all the vehement universal and lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time and both before and long enough after it, the text of the 'three in heaven' was never once thought of. It is now in everybody's mouth and accounted the main text for the business and would assuredly have been so too with them, had it been in their books… Let them make good sense of it who are able. For my part I can make none. If it be said that we are not to determine what is scripture and what not by our private judgments, I confess it in places not controverted, but in disputed places I love to take up with what I can best understand. It is the temper of the hot and superstitious part of mankind in matters of religion ever to be fond of mysteries, and for that reason to like best what they understand least. Such men may use the Apostle John as they please, but I have that honor for him as to believe that he wrote good sense and therefore take that to be his which is the best"

Jesus, Prophet of Islam, Muhammad Ata' Ur-Rahim, p. 156

According to Newton, this verse first appeared for in the third edition of Erasmus's (1466-1536) New Testament.


For all of the above reasons, we find that when thirty two biblical scholars backed by fifty cooperating Christian denominations got together to compile the Revised Standard Version of the Bible based upon the most ancient Biblical manuscripts available to them today, they made some very extensive changes. Among these changes was the unceremonious discardal of the verse of 1 John 5:7 as the fabricated insertion that it is. For more on the compilation of the RSV Bible, please read the preface of any modern copy of that Bible.


Such comparatively unimportant matters as the description of Jesus (pbuh) riding an ass (or was it a "colt", or was it an "ass and a colt"? see point 42 in the table of section 2.2) into Jerusalem are spoken about in great details since they are the fulfillment of a prophesy. For instance, in Mark 11:2-10 we read:


"And saith unto them, Go your way into the village over against you: and as soon as ye be entered into it, ye shall find a colt tied, whereon never man sat; loose him, and bring [him]. And if any man say unto you, Why do ye this? say ye that the Lord hath need of him; and straightway he will send him hither. And they went their way, and found the colt tied by the door without in a place where two ways met; and they loose him And certain of them that stood there said unto them, What do ye, loosing the colt? And they said unto them even as Jesus had commanded: and they let them go And they brought the colt to Jesus, and cast their garments on him; and he sat upon him. And many spread their garments in the way: and others cut down branches off the trees, and strawed [them] in the way And they that went before, and they that followed, cried, saying, Hosanna; Blessed [is] he that cometh in the name of the Lord: Blessed [be] the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest."


Also see Luke 19:30-38 which has a similar detailed description of this occurrence. On the other hand, the Bible is completely free of any description of the "Trinity" which is supposedly a description of the very nature of the one who rode this ass, who is claimed to be the only son of God, and who allegedly died for the sins of all of mankind. I found myself asking the question: If every aspect of Christian faith is described in such detail such that even the description of this ass is so vividly depicted for us, then why is the same not true for the description of the "Trinity"? Sadly, however, it is a question for which there is no logical answer.


The same case where no author is really known exists in the Gospels of 2 and 3 John.


The Book of Revelation:


"Four times the author identifies himself as John (1:1,4,9; 22:8) ..... In the third


century, however, an African bishop named Dionysius compared the language, style and thought of the Apocalypse (Revelation) with that of the other writings of John and decided that the book could not been written by the apostle of John. He suggested that the author was a certain John the Presbyter, whose name appears elsewhere in


ancient writings. Although many today follow Dionysius in his view of authorship, the external evidence seems overwhelmingly supportive of the traditional view. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 1922)"


Again, we don't know who wrote the Book of Revelation. It is certainly highly doubtful that it was written by Apostle John. The Theologians and Historians of the NIV Bible seem to agree with the invalidity of this book from the above quote. So are you now going to consider the other John's words as the Words and Inspirations of GOD Almighty?


As we see, the style of writing in the book of Revelation is different from the books that are believed to be from John which are the Gospel of John, 1 John, 2 John and 3 John. The book of Revelation's style seems to be closer to John the Presbyter's writings. This man is known in ancient writings. There are also many Christian theologians today that hold the same view about the falsety of the book of Revelation.


Isn't this sufficient enough to prove that the book is doubtful?


Notice that in the sections of "Gospel of John" and "Gospels of 1, 2 & 3 John" above, the author did not identify himself and it was ASSUMED without actual proofs that it was Saint John who wrote them. Notice how they said that if he were to identify himself, then it would be hard for them to explain it.


Now, notice the author in the Book of Revelation does identify himself as John, but he has a complete different language and style of writing from the other books, which created much uncertainty about its validity in the Church.


My questions here are: Who wrote the Books? And is or is not Saint John supposed to identify himself in his books? And where are his books that have his name on them?


Again, keep in mind that the NT was not even documented on paper until 150 to 300 years after Jesus (depending on what Christian you talk to). So the dating is way too long for us to be assuming books to belong to certain people. Let alone considering their nonsense (contents) as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty.


The Book of Revelation is a very important, probably the most important Book in the Bible today, because it has prophecies in it of what Christians believe is for our future today, even though it has nothing to do with our current world. It talks about Jesus soon (1800 to 2000 years ago) will return (Revelation 22:7). I don't know how soon is 2000 years to the Bible. All the people that this book was told to had died.


It also talks about the great battle of Gog and Magog fighting the righteous; "and will go out to deceive the nations in the four corners of the earth [The earth DOES NOT have four corners and no the earth is not a square or rectangle. It is round almost like an egg!!]--Gog and Magog--to gather them for battle. In number they are like the sand on the seashore. (From the NIV Bible, Revelation 20:8)"


The thing that we need to notice here beside the grave error about the shape of the earth in this false book (sorry to say that), is that the Gog and Magog existed


before. Gog, the chief prince of Meshech and Tubal (Ezekiel 39:1), is the name of the leader and Magog is the name of his nation (Ezekiel 38 and 39). The Gog and Magog army had already been defeated and the Noble Quran confirms their story. There had been historical discoveries that perfectly match the Noble Quran's claims regarding the Gog and Magog, such as the discovery of the "Iron Gates", and other literature that mentions the Gog and Magog army and location. There is even historical documentation about them which matches the Noble Quran in London, England.


Jesus claiming to be the "Alpha and the Omega":


Jesus the "Alpha and Omega". Not only this quote doesn't prove Jesus as GOD, but it was also written in a book that is unreliable in later bibles. In the original Bibles, the quote doesn't even exist!!


Question : In the Book of Revelation we find the verse, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty" (Revelation 1:8). But what do you do with Revelation 22:13, which appears to be Jesus speaking (see verse 16), when he says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end"? Doesn't the command by Matthew's Jesus to, "Go therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19) show the existence of a triune deity.


Answer: Despite the distinctiveness with which God and Jesus are regarded in the New Testament some Christians are under the misconception that God and Jesus form two-thirds of a triune deity. Partial responsibility for this error is due to the New Testament writers, who use a number of designations for Jesus, which are the same as those given to God in the Jewish Bible and in the New Testament. The resulting confusion as to whether certain New Testament passages refer to God or to Jesus helped to produce the belief in a triune god.


That Jesus, who is considered by the New Testament writers to be the link between God and creation, is called by some of the same designations that are applied to God is understandable. After all, the New Testament writers believed that God had conferred a tremendous amount of power upon this angelic being, so why not, as well, some of His names, which express certain facets of His being? But it is nevertheless clear that although the God of the New Testament interacts with the world He created solely through His "firstborn" (Colossians 1:15-17), the latter is still subservient to God. Because of the exalted yet subservient position in which they envision Jesus, the New Testament writers do not believe it compromises God's status to apply some of His names to Jesus (cf. Ephesians 1:21, Philippians 2:9, Hebrews 1:4). The use of common names is not intended to indicate that Jesus is of one substance with God.


Perhaps, if "the Alpha and the Omega" in Revelations 22:13 is actually a reference to Jesus it stems from the New Testament belief that the pre-incarnate Jesus was the first thing created by God. What is significant is not so much the use of this name as the fact that whenever the relationship between God and Jesus is treated, the New Testament writers always describe God as superior to Jesus.


In any case, in verse 12 the subject of verse 13 ("the Alpha and the Omega") says he

is "coming quickly." Since Jesus has not come "quickly" this is either false prophecy or the text is not speaking about Jesus.


Even if Prophet Jesus peace be upon him claimed to be the "Alpha and Omega", which by the way, this claim is only found in the book of Revelation in the entire NT, it still wouldn't prove that he is the Creator of the Universe. Unlike the other Books and Gospels that contain repeated/similar quotes from Jesus in them that can be found in multiple Books/Gospels, this quote in Revelation 1:8 can not be found any where else in the Bible! In the "The book of Revelation is an unreliable book according to the NIV Bible's Theologians" section below, you will see how the NIV Bible's Theologians believe that the book is an invalid one.


But anyway, let's assume that Jesus peace be upon him did say this claim: that he is the beginning and the end. This still doesn't prove anything because GOD Almighty has no beginning and no end! Yes, Jesus peace be upon him will come back to fight the devil and end all evil on earth, which makes him the END. And yes, when Jesus peace be upon him comes back to earth, his coming will be the BEGINNING of the end of all evil on earth. So Jesus during the end times can be indeed the BEGINNING and the END.


But like I said, GOD Almighty most certainly has no beginning, and He most certainly has no End! So any statement with a "begin" and "end" in it can not be applied at all to GOD Almighty! So therefore, Jesus peace be upon him did not claim to be the Creator of the Universe in Revelation 1:8.


It is a common Christian answer to say "We support Israel because it is God's promised land to the Jews, and He will prevail them against the army of Gog and Magog who seems to be mainly an Islamic army today." They mostly rely on the Book of Revelation from the Bible to support this claim.


The story of the Gog and Magog army attacking the Jews exists in both the Book of Ezekiel and the Book of Revelation in the Bible. The Book of Ezekiel which came literally thousands of years before the Book of Revelation predicted the attack and defeat of the army of Gog and Magog.


The Noble Quran (The Muslims' Holy Scripture) talks about the army of Gog and Magog in details and explains the events that ALREADY took place. As I mentioned above, there had been historical discoveries that perfectly match the Noble Quran's claims regarding the Gog and Magog, such as the discovery of the "Iron Gates", and other literature that mentions the Gog and Magog army and location.


The lie (sorry to say that) of the Book of Revelation, however, also predicts the coming of the army of Gog and Magog. But as I said, the army of Gog and Magog were ALREADY predicted in the Bible thousands of years before the Book of Revelation.


So, the prediction in the Book of Revelation proves that the writer of the book, lacked a great deal of knowledge about history, because as I said, the event of the Gog and Magog battle (i.e., the battle of Armageddon) already happened!

The point is that the Book of Revelation, however, like most of the Bible today seems to be nothing but a big hoax (sorry to say that). It is very doubtful, but yet ironically, very important to the Christians of today.


Would you honestly deep inside yourself call nonsense of this kind the True Living Words of GOD Almighty, especially after knowing that very important early Christian resources thought "the book could not been written by the apostle of John"?


The Books of Paul:


Before we start on the analysis of Paul's Books, we must first know that Paul who's Books are believed to be inspired by GOD Almighty Himself and who is a disciple of Jesus peace be upon him never actually met Jesus in person. Jesus had 12 disciples when he was on earth. Paul was not one of them!. Paul much later after the disappearance of Jesus came and claimed that Jesus came to him and ordered him to be his disciple. Paul is really taken on faith only and not on proofs. He could be well be another smart deceiver who made his way into the world of the current corrupted Bible (sorry if I offended you).


Exposing Paul's Lies


The Noble Quran on Paul and his likes:


"Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:"This is from God," to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (The Noble Quran, 2:79)"


"Who can be more wicked than one who inventeth a lie against God, or saith, "I have received inspiration," when he hath received none, or (again) who saith, "I can reveal the like of what God hath revealed"? If thou couldst but see how the wicked (do fare) in the flood of confusion at death! - the angels stretch forth their hands, (saying),"Yield up your souls: this day shall ye receive your reward,- a penalty of shame, for that ye used to tell lies against God, and scornfully to reject of His signs!" (The Noble Quran, 6:93)"


Simple yet devastating proof about Paul was NEVER inspired by the Holy Spirit!


Again and again Paul has proven himself, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that he was no more than a false prophet and one of history's biggest liars! In the past, we have written ample articles that thoroughly exposed this fraud prophet and charlatan and destroyed his credibility.


In this brief yet powerful article, we will see irrefutable proof about this liar never was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Let us first look at what Paul said and then compare them to Jesus' commands:

1 Corinthians 7:25-28


25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy.


26 Because of the present crisis, I think that it is good for you to remain as you are.


27 Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife.


28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.


There are few important points to mention:


- Paul never met Jesus in person while Jesus was on earth. Paul became a "prophet" by claiming that Jesus appeared to him on his way to Damascus.


- The Jewish Law allows for a man to divorce his wife if she is not pleasing to him. Matthew 19:8, below, further confirms that.


- Paul was a Jew, and from his writings he seemed to be very knowledgeable about the Jewish Law.


4- Paul, who never met Jesus, was obviously unaware of the fact that Jesus forbade divorce between the husband and the wife, except in the case of adultery!


Paul's words 1 Corinthians 7:27 exposed him to be a liar, because if the Holy Spirit was truly inspiring him, then he would not have uttered such statement! Paul, the Jew, was talking about divorce in general and loosely (with no specifics and no conditions). Yes, the Jewish Law allows divorce between ordinary couples, but Jesus forbade it! In Christianity, divorce between ordinary couples, whom neither one of them committed any major sin against the other, is strictly forbidden, and Paul's general advise for his followers to not seek a divorce makes it clear that he was ignorant of what Jesus. The Holy Spirit would've inspired Paul to be speak only about the folks who's spouses have cheated on them to not get divorced from them, which I have no idea how this would've helped his followers anyway! Paul was rather speaking in general terms - in the two parts of 1 Corinthians 7:27:


- Are you married? Do not seek a divorce.


- Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife.


Paul clearly wasn't speaking about adultery here! The verse is too loose and too general! The two parts of 1 Corinthians 7:27, when put together, are clearly speaking in general terms and to all people in general. And again, I have no idea how Paul's advise about not getting a divorce, especially in the case of adultery, would've helped his followers anyway!!??

What man or woman can live with an adulterous spouse???


And why should they not divorce when Jesus allowed


them???


Let us now look at what Jesus said:


Matthew 19:1-12


"1. When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the


region of Judea to


the other side of the Jordan.


2. Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.


3. Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?"


4. "Haven't you read," he (Jesus) replied, "that at the beginning the Creator `made them male and female,'


5. and said, `For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' ?


6. So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."


7. "Why then," they asked, "did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?"


8. Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.


9. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."


10. The disciples said to him, "If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry."


11. Jesus replied, "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given.


12. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it."


Matthew 5:31-32


31 "It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'


32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.


There is no question that Paul was unaware of this law by Jesus, and if he truly was inspired by the Holy Spirit, then the latter would not have deceived him like that!


Are you married, then its a bad idea to seek a divorce??? Please, give me a break!!

1 Corinthians 7:27 Are you married? Do not seek a divorce. Are you unmarried? Do not look for a wife.


Paul clearly was speaking in general terms here, since the Jewish Law allows for divorce for any reason, and he clearly HAD NO IDEA about Jesus' Law on divorce! He hadn't even a clue!


What saves the Bible followers?


Perhaps one of the worst and most serious contradictions that exist in the Bible is this one, because it is about Salvation!


What saves the Bible followers?


Righteousness alone?


" "But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself. "Again, when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and does evil, and I put a stumbling block before him, he will die. Since you did not warn him, he will die for his sin. The righteous things he did will not be remembered, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. But if you do warn the righteous man not to sin and he does not sin, HE WILL SURELY LIVE because he took warning, and you will have saved yourself." (From the NIV Bible, Ezekiel 3:19-21)"


Jesus?


"that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life. "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. (From the NIV Bible, John 3:15-17)"


"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (From the NIV Bible, John 14:5-7)"


The points of this section and the and other related verses from the Bible are too many and too lengthy. I've separated them into a separate article. Please visit: Jesus GUARANTEED Paradise to all non-trinitarians.


Is murdering innocent people allowed or not?


Thou Shalt not murder:


One of the Bible's 10 basic Pillars, the ten commandments, says: "Thou shalt not murder. (Exodus 20:13)." Yet, we see GOD Almighty supposedly also commanded the killing of every single breathing creature from humans and animals!

Kill everything that "breathes" from humans and animals!

Deuteronomy 20:16


However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an


inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes.


Apparently, it is one of the Bible's foundations to mass-murder every single human and animal from the defeated enemy.


1 Samuel 15:2-4


2 Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.


3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.


4 And Saul gathered the people together, and numbered them in Telaim, two hundred thousand footmen, and ten thousand men of Judah.


Kill everyone except the virgin girls:


Ironically however, this law seems to have been abrogated in the following verses when the virgin girls were spared:


"They fought against Midian, as the LORD commanded Moses, and killed every


man ........ Now kill all the boys [innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has


slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man. (Numbers 31:7,17-18)"


If Exodus 20:13 was supposed to be the basic pillar that prevents the Bible followers from committing murders against innocent people, then how are Numbers 31:17-18 and 1 Samuel 15:2-4 justified then when GOD Almighty Himself nullified His own Commands and decided to kill innocent children and virgin girls perhaps by the thousands?


Elisha's hilarious contradiction:


2 Kings 6:21-23


21 When the king of Israel saw them, he asked Elisha, "Shall I kill them, my father? Shall I kill them?"


22 "Do not kill them," he answered. "Would you kill men you have captured with your own sword or bow? Set food and water before them so that they may eat and drink and then go back to their master."


23 So he prepared a great feast for them, and after they had finished eating and drinking, he sent them away, and they returned to their master. So the bands from Aram stopped raiding Israel's territory.


Excuse me?? What a load of crap indeed!! It is obvious that uncle Elisha was a total ignorant about the laws of his bible!


This silly contradiction only goes to prove that the Bible was indeed not inspired by GOD Almighty, because GOD Almighty would not contradict Himself in such a ludicrous, absurd and foolish way! We first see the mass-slaughter of everything that breathes (humans and animals), and then everything except the virgin girls, and then we are told that no sane person would do such things?!


Son's can not be killed for their fathers' faults?


Ezekiel 18:20


The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.


But the sons, and even suckling infant babies, were put to death in the verses above!


Did you Know:


Extreme fundamentalists and racists from among the Christians such as Pat Robertson and George W. Bush who could careless about who dies and who doesn't in wars from innocent people are WELL KNOWN FOR THEIR CARELESSNESS about the deaths of innocent civilians? The 100s of thousands of innocent Iraqis that died in the previous Persian Gulf wars, and the deformed Iraqi children from the US' Deplete Uranium bombs clearly and irrefutably prove this.


Also, we must not forget that the biggest blood sheds and terrorism that took place throughout the world happened by Christians. World Wars I and II prove this. The white Christian race would literally wipe out nations out of the face of the earth if their interests are threatened.


We also must not forget about the African slaves who were forcefully brought to the US by the Europeans and were forced to embrace the polytheist trinitarian pagan christ ianit y to at least earn t heir freedo m.


Last and most definitely not least, we must not forget about the Native Americans (Red Indians) and how the white Christian man literally killed more than 90% of their population throughout the lands.


The white Christian man is the biggest terrorist this world ever known!!


GOD Almighty prohibiting brothers from marrying their biological sisters after He initially allowed it for Abraham and Sarah

"And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife. (Genesis 20:12)"


"Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, Amen. (Deuteronomy 27:22)"


It is important to know that in the same book of Genesis, GOD Almighty did Speak directly with Abraham. For instance:


Genesis 12:1-3


1 The LORD had said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you.


2 "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.


3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you."


The Bible claims that Sarah (Isaac's mother) was Abraham's biological sister:


I hope this article will shed some light upon the errors and the contradictions that exist in the Bible. As we can see from the introduction above, the Bible is filled with man-made alterations and corruptions. So to say the least, the Bible's narrations' accuracy and reliability can not really be trusted. Having said that, let us examine what the Bible says about Abraham and his wife Sarah:


The Books of Genesis and Deuteronomy are corrupted anyway according to the NIV Bible:


To further settle the matter about the Bible being a corrupted book, here is a quote from the NIV Bible's Historians and Theologians admitting that the book of Genesis is a corrupted book:


Today's Books and Gospels' authors of the Bible are UNKNOWN. See the comments from the NIV Bible itself! Just why in the world should I believe in today's Bible?


The Book of Genesis:


"Historically, Jews and Christians alike have held that Moses was the author/compiler of the first five books of the OT. These books, known also as the Pentateuch (meaning "five-volumed book"), were referred to in Jewish tradition as the five fifths of the law (of Moses). The Bible itself suggests Mosaic authorship of Genesis, since Ac 15:1 refers to circumcision as "the custom taught by Moses," an allusion of Ge 17.

However, a certain amount of later editorial updating does appear to be indicated (see, e.g., notes on 14:14; 36:31; 47:11). (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 2)"


So in reality, the book of Genesis had been tampered with by man. It had been corrupted. It is dangerous to consider all of it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty, because by doing so, we are running into the risk of committing a crime against Him since we are claiming that He spoke words that He never spoke.


The book of Deuteronomy:


"The book itself testifies that, for the most part, Moses wrote it (1:5; 31:9,22,24), and other OT books agree (1Ki 2:3, 8:53; 2ki 14:6; 18:12)--though the preamble (1:1-5) may have been written by someone else, and the report of Moses' death (ch.34) was almost certainly written by someone else. (From the NIV Bible Commentary, page 240)"


As we clearly see, there is ample evidence that proves beyond the shadow of the doubt that Moses was not the sole author of the book. He couldn't have possibly have written about his own death. Again, another corrupted book by man in the Bible. How can you claim that the book of Deuteronomy was indeed all revealed by GOD Almighty? If you're not sure, and you still insist on your claim, then you are committing a crime against GOD Almighty's Revelations.


But Moses' law came centuries after Abraham:


- GOD prohibiting brothers from marrying their biological sisters after He initially allowed it for Abraham and Sarah:


"And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife. (Genesis 20:12)"


"Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, Amen. (Deuteronomy 27:22)"


It is important to know that in the same book of Genesis, GOD Almighty did Speak directly with Abraham. For instance:


Genesis 12:1-3


1 The LORD had said to Abram, "Leave your country, your people and your father's household and go to the land I will show you.


2 "I will make you into a great nation and I will bless you; I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing.


3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you."

Yet, GOD never prohibited Abraham from marrying his own biological sister, Sarah!


So, Deuteronomy 27:22 is indeed an abrogation


to the previous Law!


I was told that since Moses' law about cursing those who sleep with their biological sisters came 100s of years after Abraham, thus this would excuse Abraham from the fault of marrying his own biological sister. I know that the law of Moses peace be upon him was written after Abraham peace be upon him, but the point still stands:


- GOD Almighty wasn't the author of the current bible, for otherwise we wouldn't have this type of embarrassing contradiction between Abraham marrying his own biological sister, Sarah, and Moses cursing those who have sex with their sisters. At least GOD Almighty wouldn't have inspired Abraham to marry his own biological sister.


- The Bible is full of man's narrations, that no one knows which is GOD Almighty's word and which isn't. It's funny how the Bible's own Historians and Theologians made this very claim themselves.


- Why would GOD Almighty allow for Abraham to marry his own biological sister if GOD Almighty was later going to curse those who do? Please spare us from the dubious "Adam married Eve" nonsense, because Eve was not Adam's sister. She was his mate created by GOD Almighty. She didn't come from his parents, because neither one had parents. And as to their children, there is no proof what so ever in the Bible that any of Adam's biological children married each others. The Bible itself suggests that GOD Almighty created people after Adam, because it mentions people that weren't related to Adam's family that met some of Adam's children. Adam was the first created by GOD Almighty directly without parents, but no where does it say he was the only one. But with Abraham, still he existed in a tribe and certainly he had plenty of women to marry.


Let us read the following from the Bible:


In Genesis 4:1-5, we read that Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel. No where before chapter 4 in Genesis do we see Adam and Eve having any kids. So therefore, this makes Cain as Adam's first born child, and Abel his second. Cain later killed Abel. We then read:


Genesis 4:13-15:


13 Cain said to the Lord , "My punishment is more than I can bear.


14 Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me."


15 But the Lord said to him, "Not so; if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance

seven times over." Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him.


Why was Cain concerned about his own safety if only him, his parents Adam and Eve, were left on earth after Abel was killed by him? This certainly proves that GOD Almighty created people (perhaps nations) after Adam, while Adam's immediate family still existed.


We then read that Cain found a woman and married her. She certainly was not his bio logical sister:


Genesis 4:16-17:


16 So Cain went out from the Lord 's presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.


17 Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch.


No one knows who were the parents of Enoch.


4- How on earth can any Jew or Christian prove that the Bible's claim was from GOD Almighty written by Moses ALONE, which would be a sufficient proof for any Muslim, when the Bible's Historians and Theologians themselves claim that the books of Genesis and Deuteronomy were written by multiple mysterious authors as clearly shown in the "The Books of Genesis and Deuteronomy are corrupted anyway according to the NIV Bible"


Personally as a Muslim, I don't believe that Sarah was Abraham's biological sister. It's the doubtful bible's claims that no one (including Jews and Christians) can be certain about its validity, and all the Christian and Jewish critics of this article know that very well.


Can the Bible followers work on Saturday or not?


No:


"Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. (Exodus 31:14)"


"Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. (Exodus 31:15)"


"Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. (Exodus 35:2)"

Yes:

"And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. (John 9:14)"


John 7:22-24


22 Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers;) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man.


23 If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?


24 Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.


Mark 6:1-3


1 And he went out from thence, and came into his own country; and his disciples follow him.


2 And when the sabbath day was come, he began to teach in the synagogue: and many hearing him were astonished, saying, From whence hath this man these things? and what wisdom is this which is given unto him, that even such mighty works are wrought by his hands?


3 Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary, the brother of James, and Joses, and of Juda, and Simon? and are not his sisters here with us? And they were offended at him.


Conclusion:


Paul was a fraud, a liar and a charlatan who claimed to be a prophet from GOD Almighty and that he was inspired by the Holy Spirit, when this was only his wishful thinking and fraudulent desire. Clearly, the only spirit that inspired him was none other than the spirit of satan, and those who continue to follow him after the Truth had been made manifest to them are indeed blasphemous fools!


Jesus was no creator, and even your very own corrupted New Testament proves it as I clearly showed above.