What scholars think of the historical value of John’s gospel is a million miles from what the man in the pew thinks:
J.D.G. Dunn, The Evidence for Jesus. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1985, pp. 31-32.
Dunn is a British New Testament scholar who was for many years the Lightfoot Professor of Divinity at the University of Durham. He is a minister of the Church of Scotland and a Methodist local preacher.
‹ If a woman needs it, should she be spanked? News clipping from the New York Daily Mirror, c. 1950s
Categories: Gospels, New Testament scholarship
And yet you use bits and pieces from these dodgy sources for proselytizing purposes.
Robert Bowman gives 10 good reasons for accepting the “I am” statements in the Gospel according to John.
https://robertbowman.net/2017/10/04/top-10-reasons-for-accepting-jesus-i-am-sayings-in-john-as-historically-reliable/#_edn11
Also, the earliest Islamic biographer of Muhammad’s life (Ibn Ishaq), affirms and confirms that John the apostle of Jesus and eyewitness of the crucifixion and resurrection, was the human writer of the fourth gospel.
https://apologeticsandagape.wordpress.com/2013/05/31/earliest-islamic-biographer-of-muhammads-life-affirms-that-john-the-apostle-of-jesus-and-eyewitness-of-the-crucifixion-and-resurrection-was-the-human-writer-of-the-fourth-gospel/
@ Ken
Ibn Ishaq is just writing what he has heard. There are many things he got incorrect he is simply compiling info.
ouch
Was the “ouch” to me or to the Muslim claims?
@Ken Temple
The ouch was due to Agnostic trying to think too hard.. it hurt his coneshaped head.
Ken Temple, share the criticism against your fundamentalist exclusivist agenda. But I also see the inconsistency of the Muslim apologists playground here. They have different content but the same approach as you.
That’s also what Muhammad did in the Qur’an – he is just writing what he heard and he did not know the previous Scriptures, and he is not formally educated. Islam even admits he is not educated. ( Surah 7:157)
Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e. Muhammad SAW) . . . ”
other translations say:
“unlettered”
he was “illiterate”
This does not mean he was dumb or stupid, no. He was a smart person, he just did not know about the world or the other religions and is going by what he is hearing. He was definitely a smart and gifted person, to be able to rally such an amount of followers and do the military exploits he and his followers did. They were mostly unjust and evil as he had no right to keep on attacking everybody, and the Caliphs after him were all wrong, but nevertheless, it was a amazing human feat to defeat so many all around over the next centuries. (and incorporate all of North Africa, Levant, Persia, and the Turkic World into Islam.)
Monotheism and judgment day and basic right and wrong morality, and God’s power is not hard to understand. (Romans 1:18-21; Psalm 19:1; Acts 17; Ecclesiastes 3; Romans 2) (Similar to the idea of Fitra in Islam and “the image of God” within mankind that speaks to the reality of our Creator God and morality of right vs. wrong.
Beyond that, he is just hearing things and going with all sorts of legends and Midrash and apocryphal materials and writing it down and claiming it is from God.
He is the one who is doing Surah 2:75, 78-79 – uneducated, hearing things, doesn’t know the Scriptures. (OT and NT)
@Ken
Claims are not evidence. Had no reason to lie. Had a great reputation before ever claiming prophethood. Purpose of being illiterate is to show he does not speak on his own authority (Q.29:48 pretty much any of the disconnected letters). Can’t write things down that he doesn’t know (also very hard to do an improv freestyle in a melodious tone), Persia and Rome actually started the wars. Still fulfillment of the Daniel vision in your books. Joshua(as) fought for the Holy Land and Jesus fights on his return so your argument is hypocritical.
I think I covered everything guys if I missed anything please add.
Claims are not evidence.
I agree; that is all Muhammad had for his own prophethood – his one man subjective claims.
I am not saying he is lying – he sincerely thought those apocyphal gospels and legends and Midrash from the Jews was the truth about the previous Scriptures, but he was sincerely wrong.
However, there are times when he goes by himself and seeks to get a word from Gabriel and the Hadith and Qur’an indicate he gets a new revelation in order to answer people’s questions.
A lot of his answers seem to be justification, for his getting so many wives – more than others; and his way of motivating the Jihadists to their wars is just his own mind about Houris, and eternal sex, etc.
No, the Muslims started the unjust wars.
Joshua (and up to David and Solomon) was only for Theocratic Israel and only for those borders of the promised land; NEVER for beyond that – which is not like Islam (the whole Dar Al Islam vs. Dar Al Harb tradition of conquering the world, etc.)
Jesus took the theocratic away from Israel in the NT. (Matthew 21:33-46; 1 Peter 2:9-10; Matthew 26:52; John 18:36; Ephesians 6:10-18)
@ Ken
Ken: “Joshua (and up to David and Solomon) was only for Theocratic Israel and only for those borders of the promised land; NEVER for beyond that”
That’s incorrect:
Land Promised:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promised_Land#/media/File:Map_Land_of_Israel.jpg
Land Conquered:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Israel_(united_monarchy)#/media/File:Kingdom_of_Israel_1020_map.svg
Clearly larger than the promised borders. Moving on Jesus(as) still had the intent to fight just not enough support but he fights in his Second Coming:
11Then I saw heaven standing open, and there before me was a white horse. And its rider is called Faithful and True. With righteousness He judges and wages war. 12He has eyes like blazing fire, and many royal crowns on His head. He has a name written on Him that only He Himself knows. 13He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood,a and His name is The Word of God.
14The armies of heaven, dressed in fine linen, white and pure, follow Him on white horses. 15And from His mouth proceeds a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations, and He will rule them with an iron scepter.b He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God, the Almighty. (Revelations 19:11:14)
So there goes the end of that argument.
Ken: “I agree; that is all Muhammad had for his own prophethood – his one man subjective claims.
Isn’t this the same argument the Jews make against Jesus(as) lol? Anything you use for Jesus(as) to prove prophethood I can apply to Muhammad(saw). The Jews almost 5,000 years old and have an EXTENSIVE history AND to make things worse for you. Jesus(as) sides with the Pharisees against the Sadducees. One of their BIGGEST contentions after the resurrection was the status of oral traditions such as those found in the Midrash. Pharisees obviously were pro- this so again your same argument applies to Jesus (as).
Ken: A lot of his answers seem to be justification, for his getting so many wives – more than others; and his way of motivating the Jihadists to their wars is just his own mind about Houris, and eternal sex, etc.
He did not need to “justify” anything because his word was pretty much law. There was never controversy on the number of wives (even then if you want to get technical the nine still wouldn’t be a violation in the Qur’an) his ONLY controversial marriage was in regards to Zainab (ra) and God did this to show it’s not forbidden as He stated way before this incident. He also has times where he imposes limits on himself such as having to do more prayers than regular Muslims, having to fast much longer than a regular Muslim and never being allowed to take another wife.
Ken: “No, the Muslims started the unjust wars.”
I mean if you don’t count Rome and Persia sending arms and support to the apostate tribes durring the Ridda Wars or killing a Messenger then yeah I guess you could argue we started it.
And breathe. Whew! See why I had to shorten everything up?