الاثنين، 10 ديسمبر 2012

Mishari Alafasy ||1428H|| (الكهف/Al-Kahf) 1-4

Who Altered The Bible?

Who Altered The Bible?

Despite the Bible's warnings not to add to, nor take away
from the words of the Holy Scriptures, some translators and
copyists have altered and changed the wording of various
scriptures in order to support the hokey Trinity hoax.

18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy
of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will
add to him the plagues described in this book. 19 And if
anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy,
God will take away from him his share in the tree of life
and in the holy city, which are described in this book.
(Revelation 22:18-19)

Some have, indeed, added entire verses that were not part
of the original text. God's name, Jehovah, was removed
to obscure the distinction between God and His Son.

Did anyone notice?

"What I discovered in most of the versions of the Bible
produced by trinitarians which I studied - is irrefutable
proof of intentional mistranslation of words which refer
to God. This statement is not intended as an antagonistic
denunciation of those translators. It is simply a statement
of fact, and it is a fact that no scholar on earth can refute.
In the versions of the holy scriptures which they produce, I
learned that Christian trinitarians routinely and purposely
mistranslate Greek pronouns, so as to promote the
doctrine of the holy Trinity."
-The Influence of Trinitarian Doctrine
on Translations of the Bible
by John David Clark, Sr.

"...every time a trinitarian finger is pointed to a verse or to a
word which might, by a great stretch of imagination, be
interpreted as endorsing the doctrine of a "holy Trinity", it
only serves to show how devoted to his faith a trinitarian
can become."
-The Influence of Trinitarian Doctrine
on Translations of the Bible
by John David Clark, Sr

After the completion of the Bible by the Apostles, certain
scriptures were added or changed centuries later in order
to trick the reader into accepting a triad-type god that has
no basis in scripture.

Why did they do this?

It must be remembered that when Rome took over
the Christian faith and made it a State Religion,
it was a political ploy to gain control over all
religious factions in her jurisdiction at the time.
Rome had grown fearful of Christianity - and her
policy had become - "If you can't fight it - join it."

Persecuting the early Christians was getting Rome
nowhere. Instead of being able to rid herself of the
pesky preachers - they multiplied rapidly under
martyrdom - so Rome decided that if she could not
conquer Christianity, and rid herself of them - she
would instead make it the "State Religion" of Rome.

Unfortunately, the Roman leaders were not interested
in preaching the gospel message but rather in
having complete political control of all her subjects -
both Pagan and Christian.

"The Council of Nicea was a pivotal event in the history
of Christianity. The sudden adoption of a quasi-philosophic
term to define the historic Jesus as equal to God was a major
departure from scripture... Further, the use of this term in a
Creed meant that, from 325 A.D. on, Nicenes could and did
proclaim other dogmas that have no basis in Scripture."
- State Church of the Roman Empire; Ben H. Swett; 1998

Thus, the Holy Roman Empire was installed - with
the intent of satisfying all parties concerned with
this new amalgamation of religions. Thus, many
pagan concepts, beliefs, holidays, liturgies and
forms of worship were adopted and mixed into a
potpourri of pagan and Christian rites.

The trinities of Rome's pagan cults were absorbed
into the religion of Christ, which was a monotheistic
worship of the Jewish God Jehovah. Since Rome
hated the Jews about as much as the Christians -
her first reform was to rid Rome of the Jewish God,
Jehovah. By making a trinity out of Christ - and
wiping Jehovah's name from the Bible - replacing
it with "LORD" was a first step in destroying all
mention of Jehovah God Almighty.

Despite the fact that Christ repeatedly confirmed
that his Father was distinct and superior to himself,
the newly formed doctrine of the Nicea Council -
completely ignored his teachings:

28 "You heard me say, 'I am going away and I am coming
back to you.' If you loved me, you would be glad that I am
going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I.”
(John 14:28) (NIV)

Christ clearly said that his Father was greater than he was
(John 14:28) (Luke 18:19) but the trinity doctrine says they
are equal.

Yet he said that there were some things he didn't know…

36 "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the
angels in heaven, nor the Son,but only the Father.
(Matthew 24:36) (NIV)

…and some authority that was not his…

23 Jesus said to them, "You will indeed drink from my cup, but to
sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong
to those for whom they have been prepared by my Father."
(Matthew 20:23) (NIV)

…yet they ignored these and many other scriptures
where he denied equality with God.

The subjects of Rome questioned this new
philosophy - asking questions such as “who was
Christ praying to?” And “whose voice thundered
from heaven when he was baptized?”

16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the
water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw
the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on
him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son,
whom I love; with him I am well pleased."
(Matthew 3:16-17) (NIV)

Such questions only caused trouble and quarrels in
the Roman Empire - something that was most un-
welcome from her leaders. Thus, in time, the church
leaders acquired the courage to defy God’s warning
and set about altering the scriptures in the Bible in
order to support a doctrine that is totally in
contradiction to what Christ and the Apostles taught.

Over the years, various Scholars have researched
the question of - “Why the contradictory statements?”
Why would God's Son say he was God - one minute -
and then declare he was not God - the next?

Over the years - these questions have come up with
findings that confirm that under religious pressure
to support the Trinity Dogma - some copyists and
translators have falsely inserted or altered certain
scriptures in order to support the pagan trinity formula
that Rome has sought to force upon all of her subjects.

Did Rome fool everybody?

"Who but a thoroughly deluded man would be so bold as,
to intentionally mistranslate for his own doctrinal purposes,
the words of the apostles of Jesus? Who but a thoroughly
deluded man could have so little fear of the righteous
judgment of God that he would publish a translation of the
Greek that he himself knows is unfaithful to the original
words, as almost all the translators in this study have done?
Jesus said that the time would come when his followers
would be murdered by those who think that they are
doing a service to God (John 16:2). And if throughout
Christianity's sordid history its leaders have felt
constrained by their faith to execute people, for the simple
"crime" of refusing to receive some of its teachings, why
should it be surprising to learn that Christianity's scholars
feel free to alter, without comment, some of the words of
the Greek text in order to promote their Trinitarian doctrine?"
-The Influence of Trinitarian Doctrine
on Translations of the Bible
by John David Clark, Sr

How could Rome hope to perpetuate this myth?

"To enforce the decisions (about the trinity) of the Council of Nicea,
Constantine commanded, with the death penalty for disobedience."
- A History of Christianity
Volume 1 1997
Kenneth Scott Latourette

"The day was to come when the Nicene party won out completely and then the emperors, who wished to prevent any more such quarrels, decreed that one who denied the Trinity should be put to death." -The Church of our Fathers - 1950, pg. 46

"The doctrine that Jesus Christ the Son of God was instead God
the son was decreed by worldly and ecclesiastical powers. Men
were forced to accept it at the point of the sword or else, Thus,
the error of the trinity was propounded to the end that ultimately
people believed it to be the truth. Thus Christianity became in essence like Babylonian heathenism, with only a veneer of Christian names." -Forgers of the Word -1983 Victor Paul Wierwille

The trinity was indeed forced at the point of the sword, under
torture and death penalty, for its acceptance. Indeed that only
confirms the source of this heathen doctrine. It is not from Jehovah
God, nor from his Son, nor the Apostles - But a doctrine directly from Satan himself, the father of the lie.

44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out
your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not
holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he
speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
(John 8:44)

"When we look back through the long ages of the reign of the
Trinity... we shall perceive that few doctrines have produced
more unmixed evil."
- (A Statement of Reasons for Not Believing
the Doctrine of the Trinitarians Concerning the Nature of God and the Person of Christ); by Andrews Norton; 1833

The apostles foretold that when Rome would take over the
Christian faith - it would become corrupted, and that people
would begin to believe the lies. Yes, under the direction of
wolf-type relgionists, the lie of the Holy Trinity would be
forced upon the masses - and eventually extend around the
world in time.

16 Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves:
be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.
(Matthew 10:16)

29 I know that after my departure fierce wolves
will come in among you, not sparing the flock;
(Acts 20:29)

So even today, many still believe the pagan trinity lie and
equate it with true Christianity, while those who reject it as
spurious are labeled as a cult. They have, thus, fulfilled Bible
prophecy by teaching that good is evil and evil is good:

20 Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who
put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put
bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.
(Isaiah 5:20)

"...they obviously felt constrained to substitute the apostles'
words with their own. As a result, instead of simply bending
a rule ofgrammar in order to make the original meaning clear,
they violated a cardinal principle of integrity in scholarship
by rejecting the words of holy men of God in order to propagate
their own private beliefs. For them to have done this is not simply
a matter of inappropriate methodology; it is EVIL."
-The Influence of Trinitarian Doctrine
on Translations of the Bible
by John David Clark, Sr.



"People who are using the King James Version might be
inclined to point to I John 5:7 'For there are three that bear
record in heaven, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost'
But it is now generally recognized that this verse does NOT
belong to the original text of the letter; it is a later insertion."
-Exploring The Christian Faith 1992

1 John 5:7 - "Anyone who uses a recent scholarly version
of the NT will see that these words on the Trinity are not in
verse 7. This is because they have no basis in the Greek
text. Under Roman Catholic pressure, Erasmus inserted
them from the Latin Vulgate. They are not a part of the inspired
Bible" (Word Meanings in the NT, Ralph Earle. P. 452).

"The baptismal formula was changed from the name of
Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
by the Catholic Church in the second century."
-The Catholic Encyclopedia, II, page 263

"TRINITY PROOF" TEXTS - Matthew 28:19

"Matthew 28:19... its trustworthiness is impugned on grounds
of textual criticism, literary criticism and historical criticism...
this triune formula is a later addition."
-The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics

"It is often affirmed that the words 'in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost' are NOT the exact
words of Jesus, but... a later liturgical addition."
-The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries, I, 275

"In Matthew 28:19 the Trinitarian formula was later inserted."
-Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christianity, page 295

"Matthew 28:19... is contrary to the facts of early Christian history,
and its Trinitarian formula is foreign to the mouth of Jesus."
-The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia,
Vol. 4, page 2637, Under "Baptism"

"The baptismal formula was changed by the Catholic Church
from the name of Jesus Christ, to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in
the second century."
-Encyclopedia Britannica
(11th Edition, Volume 3, pages 365-366)


"The removal of the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) from the New
Testament and its replacement with the surrogates KYRIOS
and THEOS blurred the original distinction between the
Lord God and the Lord Christ, and in many passages made
it impossible to tell which one was meant. As time went on...
it was often impossible to distinguish between them. Thus it
may be that the removal of the Tetragrammaton
contributed significantly to the later... Trinity."
- George Howard, Bible Scholar ;
The Name of God in the New Testament,
BAR 4.1 (March 1978), pg 15

"It was they who demanded, in effect, that Christianity be
"updated" by blurring or even obliterating the long-accepted
distinction between the Father and the Son."
- When Jesus Became God
by Richard E. Rubenstein, p.74

So we see the earliest forms of various pagan religions were really
derivations of the One God, Jehovah. Their doctrines concerning the One God were obviously lacking specific truths as they had departed somewhat from true faith. The more that people crept away from faith in God the more elaborate the concoctions became regarding their view of God, until a "trinity" of three persons was invented.

-- From the Book -- The Pagan Influence Upon the Development
of the Doctrine of the Trinity; - by Michael F Blume

"The biggest doctrinal issue in Christianity is whether Jesus
is God and what the Trinity means. Even as late as A. D. 200,
the majority of Christians did not believe in the Trinity, as
Tertullian freely conceded. These sorts of disputes led to many
alterations of the New Testament. Is it any surprise that just a
few years later, one of the very earliest manuscripts of John's
Gospel we have was altered to read, "Whoever has seen me has
seen the Father also"? A very useful change for doctrinal
reasons." -Which Bible? ; by Steven Carr

"Of course, people who said that Jesus was God the Father were
altering manuscripts. The earliest manuscript of 1 and 2 Peter is
called p72. It states, in 1 Peter 5:1, that Peter was a witness of the
sufferings of God, not a witness of the sufferings of Christ. This is
not an accidental slip." -Which Bible? ; by Steven Carr

"Second Peter 1:2 in English Bibles today says, "May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God AND of Jesus our Lord."

P72 removes the "and" so that it becomes "God, our Lord Jesus." P72 also alters Jude 5 to say that the person who saved the people out of the land of Egypt was "the God Christ."
-Which Bible? ; by Steven Carr

Did God ever say that He was three persons?

5 I am Jehovah, and there is none else; besides me
there is no God. (Isaiah 45:5)

In the last days - all these false doctrines, which came
from pagan Rome - would be exposed. Unfortunately,
not all will seek the light but prefer the darkness.
When Christ returns, each will be judged according
to their preference for either the un-popular truth
or worldly deceptions of mystery and darkness.

Have the people who altered the Bible in order to promote
the pagan Trinity doctrine done anybody any favors?

"On that day of judgment," says the LORD, "I will punish the leaders... and all those following pagan customs."
(Zephaniah 1:8)

How strange

‎" How strange it is that a peo­ple whose de­par­ture (from this world to the next) has been an­nounced, and whose pre­de­ces­sors have al­ready de­parted, still play around! "

-Al-Hasan Al-Basrī – Allāh have mercy on him
[Abū Bakr Al-Daynūrī, Al-Mujālasah wa Jawāhir Al-’Ilm ar­ti­cle 843.]

[Don't forget to Tag & Share]

" How strange it is that a peo­ple whose de­par­ture (from this world to the next) has been an­nounced, and whose pre­de­ces­sors have al­ready de­parted, still play around! "

-Al-Hasan Al-Basrī – Allāh have mercy on him 
[Abū Bakr Al-Daynūrī, Al-Mujālasah wa Jawāhir Al-’Ilm ar­ti­cle 843.]

[Don't forget to Tag & Share]



NFL's Abdullah brothers chose HAJJ over millions of $$$ they skipped 2012 NFL season
May ALLAH (swt) guide us all

Join Please https://www.facebook.com/Avoid.From.Fitnah
NFL's Abdullah brothers chose HAJJ over millions of $$$ they skipped 2012 NFL season
May ALLAH (swt) guide us all

Join Please https://www.facebook.com/Avoid.From.Fitnah


Anas b. Malik (Radi Allah Anhu) reported Allah’s Messenger (sal-allahu-alleihi-wasallam) as saying:
“Three things follow the bier of a dead man. two of them come back and one is left with him: the members of his family. wealth and his-good deeds. The members of his family and wealth come back and the deeds alone are left with him.”

Sahih Muslim : Book 42 Number 7064


Like & Share please.
Unlike ·

From a Normal Teenager to the Flag-Bearer of Islam

☑ From a Normal Teenager to the Flag-Bearer of Islam

Before I became a Muslim, I think I was just a normal teenager, I suppose. I went out with friends, and I just did normal teenage stuff. I think I liked to go to concerts, I took the day out, ... I went to high school, I was really a very normal person.

It wasn’t until I got to university that I decided that I wanted to be Muslim . When I was about 17, I started to question why I believed what I believed.

Did I believe what I did just because I have been raised to believe it, or because I thought it was true?

So I decided that I wanted to look into other religions. I actually had as my New Year’s resolution that I wanted to look into Judaism, and that sort of thing. I had no interest at all in becoming Muslim.

When I read about Islam itself, I realized it was actually very different to what I thought. It was actually very peaceful, very egalitarian, with strong emphasis on equal treatment of women, and a strong stance on social justice. I thought it was a very intellectual religion, yet it was also very spiritual, and that also appealed to me as well.

And so after a couple of years of actually looking into it and taking it seriously, when I was 19 I realized that this is actually something that I really believe in.

My daily life hasn't changed at all. In other words, it changed quite flatly I think. The main difference would probably be that I pray five times a day. I perform the ritualistic prayer five times a day, so the first prayer is before sunrise and then they are scattered up throughout the day. So that’s changed. And I obviously wear a headscarf now which I didn’t do before I was Muslim.

In the other words, I don’t feel like I changed a lot. I’m still the same person. I still like the same sort of things. I still got the same friends I had before, and I have some new cool friends that I have made since becoming Muslim, some are Muslims and some aren't.

We live in a society where women are constantly objectified. How many times do we turn on the TV or drive past a billboard where a half-naked woman is being used to sell spaghetti or toothbrushes or carpets or whatever. By wearing the hijab, these women are saying I don’t want to be part of that and I want to be taken more for my mind than the size of my chest or how long my legs are or what kind of hair I have, or anything like that. God has chosen the women in this society to be the flag-bearers of Islam.

You know, my husband has a beard but people can’t necessarily tell that he is Muslim. He just seems to fit in with everybody else. But for me as soon as someone sees me, they know that I’m Muslim and so I’m like the flag-bearer or the ambassador for Islam, and I find it really interesting that God chose women for that role and not men.

I think there certainly are stereotypes of Muslims. People will assume that I'm oppressed or I do not speak English or assume that my husband is a terrorist, or whatever. If there is a negative stereotype of Muslims out there, then a lot of the blame for that is on the shoulders of Muslims. People aren't going to think the wrong things about us if Muslims aren't constantly doing the wrong thing or coming across negatively.

Muslims also need to have open minds and participate in open non-threatening dialogues, and welcome non-Muslims into their mosques and talk to them about their religion, because as long as there is sort of a closed mentality things are going to stay the way they are. Just a matter of talking to your neighbors or the guy who is next to you at work or the woman that you sit next to you on the bus, and just be normal and friendly and doing that sort of thing can really change stereotypes.

Watch the video of sister Susan http://youtu.be/Hx2a0Q8Y4xw

سورة هود 84 الى 107 بصوت الشيخ الرائع صلاح بو خاطر quran

Understanding Atheism - A challenge of modern knowledge



With the 
splitting of the atom, all of man’s conceptions of matter have been drastically altered. In fact, the advance of science in the past century has culminated in a knowledge explosion, the like of which has never before been experienced in human history, and in the wake of which all ancient ideas about God and religion have had to be reexamined. This, as Julian Huxley puts it, is the challenge of modern knowledge.

In the following series of notes which will discuss this issue, I propose to answer this challenge, for I am convinced that, far from having a damaging effect on religion, modern knowledge has served to clarify and consolidate its truths. Many modern discoveries support Islamic claims made 1400 years ago that what is laid down in the Quran is the ultimate truth, and that this will be borne out by all future knowledge.

"Soon We will show them Our signs in all the regions of the earth and in their own souls, until they clearly see that this is the truth."
(Al-Qur'an 41:53)

Modern atheistic thinkers dismiss religion as being unfounded in fact. They maintain that it springs from man’s desire to find meaning in the universe.

While the urge to find an explanation is not in itself wrong, they hold that the inadequacy of our predecessors’ knowledge led them to wrong conclusions, namely, the existence of a God or gods, the notions that creation and destruction were a function of the godhead, that man’s fate was of concern to God, that there was a life after death in heaven or hell, as warranted by the morality of man’s life on earth, and that all thinking on these matters must necessarily be regulated by religion. They feel that, in the light of advanced learning, man is now in a position to make a re-appraisal of traditional ways of thinking and to rectify errors of interpretation, just as in secular matters he has already exploded myths and overturned false hypotheses whenever facts and experience have forced the truth upon him.

According to Auguste Comte, a well-known French philosopher of the first half of the nineteenth century, the history of man’s intellectual development can be divided into three stages—the theological stage, when events of the universe are explained in terms of divine powers, the metaphysical stage, in which we find no mention of specific gods (although external factors are still referred to in order to explain events) and the stage of positivism, where events are explained in terms of common laws deduced from observation and calculation without having recourse to spirit, God or absolute power. We are now passing through the third intellectual stage which, in philosophical terms, is known as Logical Positivism.

To be continued, Insha Allah...
In order to convince someone to accept something, we first need to know what he thinks about it, we always try to present the truth about GOD to an atheist but most of the time we fail to make him believe, the reason for this is that we do not know what are the things that resist him from believeing in the GOD. So kee
ping this is mind, I will post few notes which will make us UNDERSTAND Atheism, then once we have understood them, it will be easy for us to convince them about the TRUTH of GOD. Everything which is shared here from an Atheist point of view will be responded in ANSWERING ATHEISM.