Does Isaiah 53 say that the Servant will be crucified?

The Bible is riddled with Errors, additions and revisions. Examples are 1^st John 5:7, last 11 verses of Mark, John 3:16 and the word begotten (Monogenes in Greek). There are dozens more to support this. Even Raymond Brown a leading scholar in Christianity has stated that the Gospel of John has at least 4 different Authors. This is obvious when reading through the gospel finding Jewish events described as "The Jewish Passover". There are no other groups in the area at the time that celebrated a Passover. The author who wrote this sentence was clearly an outside source. Let alone your oldest manuscript in existence today is no older than 120 AD and is the size of a credit card. It is called p-52 and guess what gospel it is from? John! One could go on for hours about this issue. This is however not why I am here. These examples are only to illustrate how we feel about the Bible. Maybe it was only one sentence maybe more. The point is it has been altered and we do not know what parts are the original or not. Due to this we disregard it. However the Bible is still a book that should be treated with the upmost respect as it does contain God's word.

Third, We believe in all the revelations sent to man before Islam. You are forgetting that we dub people who are prophets in Islam that are not considered so in Christianity. Example; Adam, Noah and Ismael. Peace be upon all of them. For the most part Muslims agree with the OT. There is nothing in there about worshipping a man. People dying for other people's sin and so on. You say that Islam makes us doubt the past prophets/revelations. Wrong it is history and the preservations methods of their writings. Jeremiah 8:8 confirms that scribes have tampered with scrolls. The earliest COMPLETE Torah in existence today is only from the 9^th century at best (that is younger then the Quran).

Fourth, Yes the prophets did foretell of a coming Messiah and they also preached the oneness of God as I am sure you are familiar with the Shima of Israel. However where your wrong is the role of the messiah and his contribution(s) etc. No prophesy in the OT states that a messiah would die for the sins of mankind. This is heresy to a Jew, and the OT was written by Jews so why would a Jew write that? No prophesy in the OT says that people will worship the Messiah.

Fifth, Isaiah. Isaiah 53 is not prophesying about the Messiah. Isaiah 52 is but not 53. The Jews only have 16 messianic prophesy in the entire OT. The Christians have come in and told the Jews this. Ignoring the fact that the Jews are the ones who wrote the OT originally. The Christians say that the Jews statements in the book of so and so, chapter whatever, verse umteem is actually a foretelling event when in plain reality it was only a passage about current events. Now, let's assume that Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah. Have you read it? Jesus does not fulfill that prophecy at all. Isaiah 53:3 says that "Jesus" is despised by all men. In Luke chapter 10 verse 1 Jesus has at least 70 followers and today Christianity is the largest religion! In verse 5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the death of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not killed. But let us go with killed for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. Verse 7 then states that he opened not his mouth. Wrong! Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. Verse 9 then says that he made his grave with the wicked and rich. Jesus did not make his grave, was buried alone. Yes I know he was meant to be buried like a criminal because he was considered one. But verse 9 says he was to be buried with both. Jesus was buried alone. It then goes on to say that God was please by bruising Jesus and that Jesus's seed would prolong the days in verses 10-11. Jesus never had any seed.

Isaiah 53:9's mistranslation and the rest of the Chapter:

(From me, Osama Abdallah)

(Most of the following points were taken from brother Musa's rebuttal; may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him)

1- Isaiah 53:3 says that "Jesus" is despised by all men. In Luke 10:1, Jesus has at least 70 followers, and in other verses we're told that he fed and healed thousands (John 6:9-11, Luke 17:11-19 and other verses).

2- In Isaiah 53:5 it says he was wounded for our transgressions. Now right away one might assume this is the death of Jesus. However it says he was WOUNDED not killed. But let us go with killed for your arguments sake. This is not what this verse is saying. It is saying that they made a mistake so he is paying for it. They plotted or accused against him. This is exactly what happened. And again, the verse says wounded, which further proves that Christ was never killed.

3- Isaiah 53:7 states that "he did not open his mouth". There are two possible interpretations and answers to this:

Jesus never literally spoke a single word during the crucifixion trial. This is obviously wrong because Jesus spoke during his trial with both Pontius Pilot and the Jews. And we all know Jesus' famous and final cry to GOD Almighty when he said: "Eloi Eloi lama sabachtani!", which translates: "My GOD my GOD, why have you forsaken me?" (Matthew 27:46) So wrong. He did open his mouth.
Jesus did not object to GOD Almighty's Will. This is also wrong, because again, Jesus cried during the crucifixion "My GOD my GOD why have you forsaken me?", and he also prayed ENDLESSLY to GOD Almighty on the night of the crucifixion to not get crucified! (Matthew 16:39, Matthew 26:36-44, Luke 6:12) He even bowed down his face to Allah Almighty in worship endless times begging Him for a change in Decision. So yes, Jesus did object.

4- Isaiah 53:9 says that he made his grave with the wicked and the rich. According to http://scripturetext.com/isaiah/53-9.htm:

"in his death" is also a false translation to the Hebrew Mawth. At the worst, it should be translated as "in death", making the word a symbolic one as further confirmed in the Hebrew lexicon:

"in ~~his~~ death
maveth (maw'-veth)
death (natural or violent) [notice not "his death". It only says "death"]; concretely, the dead, their place or state (hades); figuratively, pestilence, ruin -- (be) dead(-ly), death, die(-d)."

(http://scripturetext.com/isaiah/53-9.htm)

So in his death here is symbolically referring to his execution trial and not necessarily his physical and literal death. This is further proven in Young's Literal Translation of the verse:

He was assigned a grave with the wicked, and with the rich in ~~his~~ death [Here is how the literal translation says: "And it appointeth with the wicked his grave, And with the rich [are] his high places"....This is verified at this link: (Young's Literal Translation)], though he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Other translations read:

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah 53:9;&version=51;

Isaiah 53:9 (New Living Translation)
9 He had done no wrong and had never deceived anyone. But he was buried like a criminal; he was put in a rich man’s grave.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=isaiah 53:9;&version=46;

Isaiah 53:9 (Contemporary English Version)
9 He wasn't dishonest or violent, but he was buried in a tomb of cruel and rich people.

There are also two errors in the fulfillment of this Prophecy:

Jesus was never buried (Matthew 27:59-66, Matthew 28)! He was temporarily placed in a tomb and then his body disappeared after that. But he never ONCE was buried under ground as our dead get buried.
Jesus, who was never buried from the first place, was also NEVER BURIED with the wicked and the rich. His tomb was placed in an isolated area as recorded in the gospels.

Again, verse 9 says that he was to be buried with both the wicked and the rich. Jesus was buried alone.

5- In Isaiah 53:10-11, GOD Almighty will prolong Jesus' life and Jesus will live to even see his offspring (his children)! And Christ will see the Light and be satisfied after the suffering of his soul. The suffering of his soul here is referring to the overwhelming fear that Jesus had and the countless cries and Prayers that he made to Allah Almighty to save him. Psalm 91 further speaks clearly on this. Also, Jesus' life was never made long or extended. He only lived for 33 years, so we're told in the gospels, and he certainly never married any woman nor had any child from any woman. Yet, Isaiah 53:10 clearly says that he will live and he will have and see his children.

6- In Isaiah 53:12, we are told that Jesus' life or soul will be poured unto death. To me, given the Islamic position about Christ never got crucified, and given the symbolic speech in Isaiah 53 chapter that most of it conflicts with what really took place with Christ in the gospels, and given the fact that many early writings in Palestine and elsewhere stated clearly that Jesus never got crucified such as in the Apocalypse of Peter and other ancient texts, then my interpretation of this verse about Jesus' life being poured unto death means to me that Jesus' life will overpower death! This is indisputably proven in Psalm 91 where it states that not only Jesus will not get crucified, but GOD Almighty will also hear his cries and will send down the Angels to PROTECT HIM and SAVE HIM. And Psalm 91 also says that Christ will call upon GOD Almighty and GOD Almighty will HEAR him and HONOR him. Christ would not have been honored if he have died the humiliating death of the cross. And certainly, he would not have been "saved" either by the Angels.

Verse 12 (which is where your case is strongest) states that his soul shall be poured out unto death. However in the Hebrew and Aramaic texts the word death is not present. Now again assuming this is Jesus (AS) this description fits the Islamic story much better. Jesus was not killed as the word for death is not present. He MAY have been put on the cross. And he was exalted and lifted up (the ascension). But again, this is clearly not Jesus as he does not fulfill this.

Sixth, You said the Messiah would bring the end of the prophets. Well in Acts 11 and 21 there is a prophet mentioned by the name of Agabus. In fact if you read chapter 11 there is a whole group of prophets who came from Antioch to Jerusalem. A group of Prophets! Daniel 9:24 and 7:13 and the Messiah found within those texts is not the Jewish messiah it is Cyrus the Persian King who was the founder of the Persian Empire. He allowed the Jews to rebuild the Temple and return to Jerusalem. This is what is meant by reconciling their sin in Daniel 9:24 as they can offer sacrifices again in the new temple. Cyrus reigned in the exact time when Daniel was writing. This is why Jews praise Cyrus and even say he was anointed (a messiah) by God.

"Thus says Yahweh to his anointed, to Cyrus, whom he has taken by his right hand to subdue nations before him and strip the loins of kings, to force gateways before him that their gates be closed no more: I will go before you levelling the heights. I will shatter the bronze gateways, smash the iron bars. I will give you the hidden treasures, the secret hoards, that you may know that I am Yahweh. (Isaiah 45:1-3)"

Seventh, As for Malachi 3:1 the Ryrie Study Bible states that this is about John The Baptist. So you have Christian scholars against you on this. You must read into the context of the passages being used here Shawn. As for Matthew 24:24 I have already refuted that with the man named Agabus found within Acts who from a group of prophets. In fact

In the New Testament of Jesus Christ, God warned us that Satan the devil would come as an angel of light and preach a false religion. All the prophets of God spoke with God, however, the false prophet Mohammad spoke with an angel only! Look at what God warned us; 'And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.' (2 Corinthians 11:14) and 'But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!' (Galatians 1:8) Mohammad met Satan 600 years after God warned us in the New Testament, and then Satan, calling himself 'allah', created the false religion of Islam.

Paul never said Satan would do this. He said Satan had this ability. Now assuming he has this ability is pretty safe to say he has or is going to do so. But if your ead the description Paul gives when meeting Jesus, it is described as so much light Paul was blinded by it. So by this logic one can assume Paul was visited by Satan. Do you know who else was visited by an Angel of light? Mary, Peace be upon her. Allah Praise be upon him does not only call himself 'Allah' He also calls himself al hauul al qayyum which is his most holy name. It is found in Chapter 2 Verse 256 of the Quran. It roughly translates into He who is and to be the self efficient and sustainer of all that exists. Do you know what else translates into this? YHWH!

The entire purpose of Islam is to deny everything that God revealed through the prophets, and finally, in the person of Jesus Christ. Between the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are over 2000 years old and match perfectly what we use today, and the 24000 manuscripts of the New Testament, we can know 100% for certain that The Bible has never been changed. Infact, The Bible is the most trust worthy book in all of antiquity. Muslims claim their scriptures are authentic because they haven't changed in 1400 years. While that is simply not true, the more important fact is that The Bible has been proven to be preserved for over 2000 years. It is an old Islamic lie to claim The Bible is corrupt, because if The Bible is true, that means Islam is not true; The Bible teaches the total opposite of the quran.

The Bible being Corrupt I already touched on this but since you bring it up again I will as well. Yes the Dead sea scrolls are over 2000 years old. However the Dead Sea Scrolls are not the COMPLETE OT. They are some of the books found within the OT but not all of them. Dead Sea Scrolls are dated from 300-100 BC. That is not all that great when there are books within the OT that are dated from 700-500 BC. Where are these copies? Also the dead Sea Scrolls were found in the Qumran cave with Esseane documents. The Essene (Jewish) school of thought believes in two messiahs not one. You know what book is an Essene document and found within the Dead Sea Scrolls? Isiaha! That means Isaiah 53 and your other prophesy in Isaiah have to be about two messiahs not one.

God would never make us trust a single prophet; how could we verify that his words are true? God instead gave us many prophets, and they all confirmed each other. The only thing Jesus ever said about Muhammad was this; 'This is the antichrist, he who denies that Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come…' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed and all the Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the New Testament scriptures.

Right, If Muhammed peace be upon him or Islam is the Anti Christ then where is your rapture, tribulation, second coming, and oh yes, third temple? Muhammed (peace be upon him) also never denied Jesus (peace be upon him) is the Christ. Are you forgetting that Muslims believe Jesus is the anointed one sent to bring all mankind under God's law, destroy the anti-Christ and lead the world in a reign of peace? Do you know who else reject the son of God? Jews and they do not even accept Muhammed (peace be upon him).

VFX wrote:

Muslims claim that The Old Testament and the New Testament are not trustworthy, because they believe mankind corrupted them. However, in the Old Testament, God promised to preserve His word forever. 'As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. ' (Isaiah 59:21) and 'The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.' (Psalms 12:6-7). So, either Islam is a lie, or Islam's god 'allah' is weak and can not preserve his word as promised.

Musa's Response:

God promised to preserve his word then tell me why your oldest complete Torah is only 1400 years old at best? Tell me why out of your 24,000 manuscripts the Bible is based on not one of them is identical? Muslims around the world are dying to hear this. Now for the big one, tell me why if God shall preserve his word for all generations why Christians do not follow Torah? You have shot yourself in the foot.

So, in conclusion; Satan used Muhammad to create a religion that denies the truth God revealed to humanity, in order to damn as many souls as possible by making them anti-christs.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6) –

John 3:16 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. –

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him. (John 3:36) –

Again using the term son of God correctly Muslims have no problem with this statement.

Now, what is Satan's goal? We see Satan's goal in the Garden of Eden was to destroy Adam and Eve by making them sin, so God would have to punish them.

Now, if what Jesus said above is true, all Satan has to do is make you reject Jesus Christ as the Son of God as your Savior. Then, you will go to Hell, and Satan wins.

So, if Satan makes a copy of The Bible, but excludes the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died for your sins, then you will die in your sins and go to Hell, just as Satan wants.

That is the quran; it contains many of the beautiful things found in The Bible, but it denies that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who died for your sins to save you.

Mohammed was foretold, in these passages; 'This is the antichrist, he who denies that Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come…' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed and all the Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the New Testament scriptures

That is why Islam is evil. Everything good about the quran can be found in The Bible, but there is no salvation in the quran. It denies the one and only way, thus, it is from Satan.

Here are some of my problems with Islam. Like all man made religions, Islam believes that through good works, you can earn your way to Heaven. However, God makes it clear that 'All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God' (Romans 3:23), and 'there is none that doeth good, no, not one.' (Psalm 14:3) and 'but we are all as an unclean thing, and all our good works are as filthy rags'. (Isaiah 64:6)

Islam does not say god works will allow you into heaven. In fact there are numerous Hadith that state that good works will not permit paradise. This is another common misconception about Islam. When asked about good deeds by one of his companions the prophet said; know that your good deeds will not earn you paradise. The companion responded; not even you oh apostle of Allah? Muhammed peace be upon him said; no! Not even me. The only thing that gets us into heaven is God's mercy, will, and our faith. Our works are only a by product of our faith. After all Faith without works is dead as said in James 2:22 of the NT.

Have you ever heard the story of Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve? One day, they both brought a sacrifice to God. Cain brought good fruit, and Abel brought an animal to sacrifice. Cain's good fruits were rejected, but Abel's blood sacrifice was received. Why is that? It is because the wage of sin is death, so something must die for your sins. In a court of law, your good works can not pay the fine or debt in the place of the judgment you deserve. So, Islam, like all false religions, makes you do good works to try and get to Heaven. However, your 'good fruits' will be rejected, because they do not wash away your sins. Justice must be served.

We are all sinners who deserve to be judged guilty of sin and put to death. However, God became a man, Jesus Christ, according to prophecies given over 1500 years by the Jewish prophets, and Jesus took the judgment we deserved upon Himself, dying for our sins. This satisfies justice, and allows us to be forgiven, by the blood atonement, just like with Abel, Adam's son! Jesus then came back from the dead, because God is stronger than death.

Show me one JEWISH prophesy where God is supposed to become a man. Again Muslims believe Jesus is the Christ peace be upon him). As a former Jew you should know that Jews do not have to offer a sacrifice to be forgiven by God they may repent with teshob(v)a meaning roughly in Hebrew 'to return'. If a sacrifice is required for all sin then what of the people of Nineveh in the story of Jonah (peace be upon him). Again we do not believe works grant us heaven. This is clearly stated in our Hadith. Think of it like this. It is the mercy and will plus our faith that will allow us heaven. The works are like a currency that we may spend once we are in heaven. They help us out once inside but they are not what gets us in initially. Again this is another huge misconception about Islam. Im still surprised you haven't brought up the 72 Virgins.

Mohammed was foretold, in these passages; 'This is the antichrist, he who denies that Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come…' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed and all the Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the New Testament scriptures. Muslims do not understand what the title 'Son of God' actually means. Jesus had two titles, Son of Man refers to His manhood and the Son of God refers to His godhood. Muslims also have difficulty understanding the doctrine of the Trinity; God is One, in 3 persons; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. All 3 are divine, and make up the One God. Jesus said 'I and the Father are One.' John 10:30.

John 10:30, I was waiting for this one. Start at John 10:23 for the context. I love this passage for more than one reason. The Jews pick up stones to stone Jesus for saying he and the father are one. He then corrects them and quotes to them psalms 82:6. Where God called the Israelites GODS! So he is using the title in its context like I have been telling you too. Second Reason under Jewish Law as stated in Deut 18 you may stone somebody even if they claim to be just a prophet and not God or the son of God. So that is very well the reason the picked up stones. He was claiming to be a prophet not God. Third and favorite reason. Read John 10:24 "IF THOU BE THE CHRIST TELL US PLAINLY" Are they asking him if he is God or if he is the Son of God? No! they are asking him if he is the Christ. They never thought he was claiming to be God until he said I am and the father are one. Now look at it again. They say "tell us plainly". Why do they say this? Because they need evidence to condemn him in court. What kind of court? A Jewish one that follows Torah law. However, they did not have this evidence. In Torah court you need four witnesses. In John 8:58 there were more than four witnesses present so why don't they use that ammo on him in court? The Christians seem to love that one. Yet here they are again 2 chapters after john 8:58 asking for more evidence. But Jesus plays it smart he back his statement up with a quote for psalm and they have nothing. If all the passages like John 3:16, John 1:1-14, John 8:24, John 7:14 and the many other ones before John 10:24 are actually Jesus claiming to be God. Then why are the Jews still asking him for evidence when they had more than 4 witnesses present and were looking for the slightest slip f tongue. John 10:24 wipes out all claims before it and proves that the Jews by asking if he was the Christ and not God didn't think he was God. They were so powerless in the issue and could not even deliver a verdict under their own law. They had nothing! Just as you do VFX.

Yes you are correct Muslims do have trouble understanding this. So do Jews. Look Jesus did have the title 'Son of Man' I agree. But so did many other righteous people at the time. Lets take a look at John 3:16 and the word Begotten. First off the word is not even present in the earliest manuscripts but lets ignore that for now. In the Greek the word Monogenes is used. In Hebrews 11:17 (which by the way as of today does not have a known author). Isaac is called Abrahams only begotten son (monogenese in Greek). Now this is false because Abraham had 8 children but Ismael was the first. So when Isaac was alive, so was Ismael as he was 13 years older. Now the common Christian response is that Issac is called only begotten because he was born of the spirit and Ismael the flesh etc. Fine! Let's go with that. The Greek word is Monogenes meaning begotten or sired. It is present in both Hebrews 11:17 and John 3:16. The Hebrew Equivalent 'yalad' is found within Psalm 2:7 referring to David. Now in both Psalms and Hebrews you would say that the term begotten is only meant to mean (spiritual) importance or a way to describe a special status. David is the first begotten son of God and Issac the only begotten son of Abraham. If taken literally it is an obvious error. Take it metaphorically however, you find the solution. So then why are the rules broken or changed when they're applied to Jesus in John 3:16? The answer is simple, the rules aren't broken or at least they weren't until Christianity came along. Nobody took the idea that Jesus was the actual son of God literally in his day. If they did then they would have did the same with David and Moses and Elijah and many others peace be upon all of them. As the famous Ahmed Deedat God rest his soul said "sons in tons"

In fact, The Father even calls Jesus the 'Son' and even calls Jesus 'God'. Hebrews 1:8 'But unto the Son He saith, Thy throne, O GOD, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom.' Flipping back to the Old Testament, this was written many hundreds of years before Jesus Christ was born. This is a prophecy of His birth; Isaiah 9:6 'For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.' A child called God? Incredible.

Isaiah 9:6. In order to understand this you must read the context. It starts in Isaiah chapter 7 where Isaiah is delivering a letter to King Ahaz. You know the King of Judah nobody liked. They wanted to replace him with the son of Tabel because he was aligning with Assyria etc. Again the context matters so much. This is going to be a bit long so buckle your seat belts.

This verse in Isaiah is quoted often, demonstrating the Messiah's nature and character foretold 700BC before he was even born. Here, Isaiah proclaims the Messiah would be a son of man by being born as a child, and at the same time be a "son" given. He goes on to identify the nature of this "son" and "child" by identifying him as "Mighty God", "Everlasting Father" and "Prince of Peace" terms only used here in the Hebrew, EXCEPT for Mighty God (El Gabor)which appears two other times in Isaiah 10:21 and Ezekiel 32:21. In Isaiah 9 it is Ahaz who is referred to as the 'House of David' as he is the current King. Not Israel. In fact the Jewish reads like this;

For a child has been born to us, a son has been given us. And authority has settled on his shoulders. He has been named "The Mighty God is planning grace; The Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler"—

Also you have to remember Ahaz was to be given a sign. Ahaz died long before Jesus walked the Earth. So this could not have been talking about a sign that would occur outside of the lifetime of Ahaz. Ask yourself, was Israel at war with Judea when Jesus walked the Earth? Was Judea teaming up with Assyria during his time? No, but this is what was happening in Isaiah. Again Context matters. In fact among further investigation these verses are easily fulfilled in Hezekiah, the royal son, who sat on the throne of David, where his father Ahaz sat. Again however, let's assume this is about Jesus, All of this is about what Jesus would be called not what he would beor his character. Jesus according to Christianity was called either Yahushua or Yeshua coming from the words 'Yah' and 'Yasha' meaning God's Salvation. So even if this is about Jesus it is wrong! Jesus was called Yahushua or yeshua and not the other names listed in Isaiah 9. Remember what is aid before about Isaiah being an Essene document? Essenes believe in 2 messiahs not one. So even all my arguments are refuted you still have that very small hoop to jump through.

Jesus Christ is God, and Muslims reject Him as God. In Exodus, God gave Moses His holy name. Exodus 3:14 'This is what you shall tell the Israelites: I AM sent me to you.' Now look at what Jesus said. John 8:24 ' That is why I told you that you will die in your sins; for, unless you believe that I AM HE, that is what will happen.' and 'I tell you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I AM!' (John 8:58) Jesus used the name of God for Himself, and said that anyone who rejects Him as God will die in their sins. That means all Muslims will go to Hell. If you want to be saved, repent and put your faith in Jesus Christ, your Lord and Saviour.

The name given in Exodus in Hebrew is HayahHayah or in Greek Ho-On. The name used in John 8:58 is Ego Eimi. It is not the same period. Again though lets assume it is. Even if Jesus did use the name the Jews would not have been able to know as the Jews stopped using the name and forgot its true pronunciation 300-200 BC. The reason is the commandments given in Exodus 20. Thou Shall Not Use The Lords Name In Vein. They did not want to say his name in vein so it became practice to not use his name except only in the Temple. But the Temple was destroyed and his name eventually became unknown. This is noted in the Jewish Encyclopedia. So even if he did say it how did they know? John 8:24 simply states that he is 'He'. Well who is He? He is the one who is the anointed. Muslims believe in this. I have no objection here. In fact if you fast forward the same title is used in John 9:9. By Jesus you ask? No, by the blind man who Jesus healed. It is also the same as the Greek Ego Eimi. Does this make the blind man God? No, Again VFX you must read the context.

Part 2

If you concept of God is wrong and contradictory to logic why debate or even care about what your holy book states? -you
Exactly, which is why you should leave Islam immediately. Your 'god' is clearly not the Creator, because the Creator of the Universe doesn't contradict Himself.

In the New Testament of Jesus Christ, God warned us that Satan the devil would come as an angel of light and preach a false religion. All the prophets of God spoke with God, however, the false prophet Mohammad spoke with an angel only! Look at what God warned us; 'And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.' (2 Corinthians 11:14) and 'But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!' (Galatians 1:8) Mohammad met Satan 600 years after God warned us in the New Testament, and then Satan, calling himself 'allah', created the false religion of Islam.

The entire purpose of Islam is to deny everything that God revealed through the prophets, and finally, in the person of Jesus Christ. Between the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are over 2000 years old and match perfectly what we use today, and the 24000 manuscripts of the New Testament, we can know 100% for certain that The Bible has never been changed. Infact, The Bible is the most trust worthy book in all of antiquity. Muslims claim their scriptures are authentic because they haven't changed in 1400 years. While that is simply not true, the more important fact is that The Bible has been proven to be preserved for over 2000 years. It is an old Islamic lie to claim The Bible is corrupt, because if The Bible is true, that means Islam is not true; The Bible teaches the total opposite of the quran.

God would never make us trust a single prophet; how could we verify that his words are true? God instead gave us many prophets, and they all confirmed each other. The only thing Jesus ever said about Muhammad was this; 'This is the antichrist, he who denies that Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come…' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed and all the Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the New Testament scriptures.

Muslims claim that The Old Testament and the New Testament are not trustworthy, because they believe mankind corrupted them. However, in the Old Testament, God promised to preserve His word forever. 'As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. ' (Isaiah 59:21) and 'The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.' (Psalms 12:6-7). So, either Islam is a lie, or Islam's god 'allah' is weak and can not preserve his word as promised.

So, in conclusion; Satan used Muhammad to create a religion that denies the truth God revealed to humanity, in order to damn as many souls as possible by making them anti-christs.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6)

John 3:16 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.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him. (John 3:36)

Now, what is Satan's goal? We see Satan's goal in the Garden of Eden was to destroy Adam and Eve by making them sin, so God would have to punish them.

Now, if what Jesus said above is true, all Satan has to do is make you reject Jesus Christ as the Son of God as your Savior. Then, you will go to Hell, and Satan wins.

So, if Satan makes a copy of The Bible, but excludes the belief that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died for your sins, then you will die in your sins and go to Hell, just as Satan wants.

That is the quran; it contains many of the beautiful things found in The Bible, but it denies that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who died for your sins to save you.

Mohammed was foretold, in these passages; 'This is the antichrist, he who denies that Jesus is the Christ. No one who denies the Son has the Father. He who confesses the Son has the Father also.' (1 John 2:22-23) 'you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come…' (1 John 2:18) Mohammed and all the Muslims reject the Son of God, so they are all anti-christs according to the New Testament scriptures

Meh the rest of this is just all circular logic and rambling about nothing. Here is your bomb rex enjoy dropping it. sorry for the mistakes n w/e im very tired lol