Hello Lee. I am going to have to answer your message in two parts due to the
length of my responses. Going by your comments, you appear to embrace a more
liberal interpretation of the Scriptures than I do.

LL> No work of man is ever perfect.  But the gospel accounts must be taken as
LL> accurate, if the story is to be believed.  That is the only record we
LL> really have, meaning we must accept that record a priori.

Oh, and I most certainly do accept the truth of the Gospels. When I say that
I believe that the Bible is not a perfect work, what I mean by that is that
in some places human error did creep in, whether it was due to religious or
political influence, personal bias, or perhaps just something that was
honestly misunderstood by a scribe or copier.

As I point out in a few of my articles, during the four decades that I have
studied and taught the Bible, I have come across instances where I would have
chosen to translate a particular word into English differently. Of course, I
am not a scholar when it comes to Hebrew, Greek or Aramaic, so who am I to
say?

One case in point is the word "servant", which is found
throughout the Bible,
in both the Old and the New Testaments. In my view, in some cases, the word
"slave" would have been more appropriate. However, if we consider for whom
the translators were doing their work -- King James -- then out of fear of
offending the king, they may have chosen "servant" over
"slave"; after all,
England was heavily involved in slave trade at the time. In short, they chose
a politically-correct term.

That is just one small example of what I mean. But overall, yes, I most
certainly do accept the Bible as being the inspired Word of God, meaning that
it was God-breathed; that is to say, that the writers were moved and
motivated by God's Spirit as they wrote. Thus, it is written:

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for
doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
2 Timothy 3:16, KJV

"For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of
God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."
2 Peter 1:21, KJV

LL> No book of the bible is a history.  Not even the gospel accounts. It is
LL> more a revealing of religious truth(s).  Those who wrote the gospel
LL> accounts were believers.  Nobody knows who the actual people who wrote
LL> them were.  Nor is that really important.  The Jewish people accept the
LL> writings of the Torah as true, just as Christians accept the gospels as
LL> true, same as Muslims accept the Qur'an as true.

I have to disagree with you on that point. There is plenty of actual history
in the Bible, particularly the history of ancient Israel, as well as the
history of the First Century Church. The ancient world empires of Europe and
the Middle East, from Egypt to Rome, are also discussed in considerable
detail, naming emperors, kings, battles, etc. I am amazed that you would
think otherwise.

Neither can I agree with your statement that we don't know who wrote the
Gospels. There is ample evidence in the four Gospels, the Book of Acts, the
Epistles, an

Matthew was a former tax collector for the Romans, and an original Apostle of
Christ. Mark, also known as Marcus and Mark John, is mentioned in the Book of
Acts, as well as in some of the Epistles. Originally a young man, he was a
traveling companion of Paul and Barnabas during their missionary journeys. In
fact, Paul and Barnabas had a dispute over Mark John. Luke, of course, was a
Macedonian physician; thus his Gospel describes in more detail the miracles
of Jesus. Luke wrote both the Gospel of Luke, as well as the Book of Acts,
which is basically a continuation of his Gospel. Luke accompanied Paul on his
missionary journeys and attended to his needs. John, of course, was possibly
the youngest of the Apostles, and was particularly loved by Jesus. He wrote
the Gospel of John, three Epistles, and the Book of Revelation. John was an
Elder in the Early Church, and also took care of Mary after Jesus was
crucified. In short, these four men are not total unknown strangers to us.

Concerning your latter statement, let me just say that just because certain
people accept something as true, does not necessarily mean that it is true.
In the case of the Torah, well obviously, as a Christian, of course I accept
it as being true; after all, it comprises a large part of the Old Testament.
But as to the Qur'an, I obviously do not accept it as being God-inspired,
because it totally denies the Divinity of Christ, and His atoning Sacrifice
on the Cross for the sins of the world.

LL> Muslims argue that the Torah when given to man by God was perfect, but
LL> was later "corrupted" by man.  Muslims also argue that the
Gospels when
LL> given to man by God was perfect, but was later "corrupted" by man.
LL> Naturally, Muslims argue the Qur'an when given by God to man was also
LL> perfect. Within the first century of Islam, the Qur'an was also
LL> "corrupted", which is why Muslims destroyed later editions
of the Qur'an,
LL> the idea to keep the Qur'an "pure."  That is why the Qur'an must be
LL> recited in Arabic at all mosques.  English won't cut it. French won't cut
LL> it.  Nor any other language.  It has to be Arabic.

To deny that any of the holy texts were corrupted at some point in time would
not be accepting the truth. They all were. Of course the Muslims have to find
a way to justify the purity of the Qur'an, in order to establish its
precedence over the Torah and the Christian Bible. I believe that they are
terribly deceived. The fact that they embrace Christ as a Prophet, but not as
the Son of God and only Savior of the world is clear proof of this.
Regardless of in which language they recite the Qur'an, it is still a false,
deceptive work which entices its followers away from Salvation through Jesus
Christ.

LL> What is God-inspired?  How do we know something to be God-inspired? The
LL> Prophet Muhammad did not know if the Qur'an was the work of God or of the
LL> Devil.  It took his wife, Fatima, to convince him it was the work of God,
LL> rather than the Devil.

That is an excellent question. Exactly how do we know? The only answer that I
can give you is what Jesus said Himself:

"Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheepÕs clothing, but
inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men
gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree
bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A
good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring
forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down,
and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them."
Matthew 7:15-20, KJV

The last sentence above is the key. Just look at the fruits. If Muslim
terrorism is the fruit of the Qur'an, then I think that the question has been
duly answered. On the other hand, we receive forgiveness for our sins,
Salvation and Eternal Life through faith in Jesus Christ, something which the
Qur'an denies.

Yes, one can argue about all of the wars which have supposedly been fought in
the name of God, or in the name of Christ, but we both know that it is a
gross misinterpretation of the Scriptures for political ends. On the other
hand, the Qur'an clearly encourages killing for the faith. If we concentrate
solely on the real central message of the Bible, it is one of Salvation and
hope through Christ alone.

LL> As Christians, we believe the Gospel to be God-inspired. Naturally, Jews
LL> believe the Torah to be God-inspired, and Muslims believe the Qur'an to
LL> be God-inspired.

Please see above.

LL> If Christians believed in the same way as Muslims (or Jews), Christians
LL> would not be Christians.  If Muslims believed in the same way as
LL> Christians (or Jews), Muslims would not be Muslims.  If Jews believed in
LL> the same way as Christians (or Muslims), Jews would not be Jewish.

Your point being?

LL> What is a "non-believer"?  Muslims call all non-believers
"infidels". Yet
LL> Muslims give honor to Jews and Christians, calling them "People of the
LL> Book" - whose religion is tolerated because all believe in one God.

Yes, I am aware that Muslims refer to Jews and Christians as the "People of
the Book"; however, just recognizing that fact is obviously not enough. They
need to recognize and accept Christ for who He really is -- the Savior of the
world.

LL> The Jewish way of salvation is not the same as the Christian or Muslim
LL> way of salvation.  Peoples of different faiths have different beliefs.

Lee, I really don't understand you. You say that you are a Christian -- you
did use the phrase "we Christians" -- and yet you don't seem to
fully believe
the central message of the Bible. There is only ONE way to Salvation, and
that is through Christ. To not believe this is to call Jesus a liar, for He
clearly said, as you already know:

". . . I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father,
but by me."
John 14:6b, KJV

The phrase "no man" means exactly that -- no man. There is no other way.
People can have all of the beliefs that they want, but if they deny the
atoning Sacrifice of Jesus Christ, then their belief system is wrong,
deceptive and dangerous. John 3:16 clearly states that God gave His Son for
the world -- the WHOLE world -- and not just for a select group of people.
That is why Jesus also said in the Gospel of John:

"And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me."
John 12:32, KJV

Notice that Jesus very clearly says "all men", and not just
"some men". If
you study the Book of Acts, you will see that this is precisely what happened
too. People of many ethnic groups accepted Christ throughout Europe, the
Mediterranean and the Middle East. God's Salvation Plan is universal. I would
like to encourage you to read a few of the articles on my website. In
particular, if you are interested, please consider reading "Is Salvation
Meant For All Men?" and "All Are Given A Chance...But". And
of course, our
central message is contained in "Message To The World", which I will be
posting in full, in this echo in the near future.

I am going to continue answering this message in a new message, as my BBS
software has a limitation of 200 lines per message.

See you there.

Jeff Snyder, SysOp - Armageddon BBS  Visit us at endtimeprophecy.org port 23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Download Center 4 Mac BBS Software & Christian Files.  We Use Hermes II


--- Hermes Web Tosser 1.1