/* */

PDA

View Full Version : why didn't Allah protect the Injeel?



User_23338
12-18-2012, 07:53 AM
can anyone give me an answer on why Allah decided not to protect the Injeel? why did allah have to reveal Quran instead?, or could he have just called the last book the Injeel?
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Muslim Woman
12-18-2012, 08:47 AM
:sl:

I read an ans long ago : first it was human responsibility to protect their holy books. When they failed to do that , Allah declared that He will protect the Final book.

And Allah Knows Best.
Reply

Signor
12-18-2012, 09:09 AM
Why Would Allah Protect Some of the Divine Books & Not All of Them?

Answered by Shaykh Gibril Haddad

Question: Recently a devout Christian and a Muslim were debating about Islam and Christianity and the Christian posed the question, “If Muslims believe that the Bible has been altered by Men but the Quran has been preserved since it’s revelation and Allah has promised to preserve it. Why would Allah protect only one of his books and not all of them?” How do we answer this?

Answer: Wa `alaykum as-Salam wa rahmatullah,

May Allah Most High bless you and yours here and hereafter.

The short reply is that The Qur’an abrogates and supersedes all previous dispensations including the Old and New Testaments as indicated in verse 5:48: And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So whatever is found in other books to be in conformity with the Qur’an is accepted as true and whatever not is rejected as false.

The long reply which I will put sternly but with brotherly charity nevertheless since Christians, Jews and Muslims are all originally spiritual sons of our Father Abraham, upon him peace, is that the question itself contains two semi-false premises which obscure the truth deliberately or unwittingly. The first semi-false premise is that “Muslims believe that the Bible has been altered by Men;” in reality this is agreed upon by the Christians themselves in the post-Biblical studies age if not since the days of the Septuagint, Jerome and other translations and is clear from the mere fact that multi-denominational Bibles differ in their very substance and the number of the books contained therein, not just in their betrayal of the original language, and in their indiscriminate admixture of Divine discourse with Prophetic discourse with commentary and supercommentary through the ages.

The second semi-false premise is that only Muslims “believe that the Quran has been preserved since its revelation” but in reality that also is agreed upon by even the rankest enemies of Islam from all their multifarious sides such as both the crusading missionaries of the Middle Ages and Renaissance on the one hand and the Protestants and free-thinkers of the so-called Enlightenment on the other, its most patent proof being the Arabic of present-day copies which do not differ from the Arabic of the earliest manuscripts.

It emerges clearly from the above facts that (i) the Muslims who allegedly did not reply did not fail to do so out of inability to reply but most likely out of recognition that the logical fallacy of the question itself rendered it spurious as a question, and that to proceed to demonstrate that fallacy and ask for the question to first shed its own spuriousness and be reiterated in correct fashion was beyond the call of duty or the availability of time; and (ii) the question at hand, namely “Why would Allah protect only one of his books and not all of them?” is one that both Jesus in the parable of the vineyard, and the Christian burners of the apocryphal Gospels have already answered. That is, God sends what He wishes with whom He wishes to whom He wishes and when He wishes; and the consequence is an argument against the receivers, not against the Sender; and once truth has been altered and defaced to the point of disappearance in part or in whole, its original shell is fodder for the fire. Or (the Muslim might tell his devout Christian interlocutor), as you might hear your own preachers tell you from the pulpit, corrupted books are of no avail whatsoever as a path of salvation no matter what pomp and solemnity continue to “paint their face fair” to the flocks immersed brow-deep in false worship. And this is the status of all abrogated Scriptures: God has willed that they become eviscerated of their spiritual function and meaning so that are mere shadows of their former selves and no longer the Divine Books that they were at the time of their respective revelation. This is clear to all, the Christian denominations and sects, their apostates and free-thinkers, and lastly Muslims, and is nothing new nor difficult to grasp.

Was-Salam

GF Haddad

Reply

Predator
12-18-2012, 10:52 AM
All of the Prophets who came before Muhammad (peace be upon him) were sent exclusively to their own people. Muhammad (peace be upon him) was the only Prophet to be specifically sent with a message all humanity.

Allah declares in the Qur'ân: "Say (O Muhammad): Indeed I am Allah's Messenger to you all." [Sûrah al-A`râf: 157]

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "Each prophet used to be sent to his own people, whereas I have been sent to all humanity." [Sahîh al-Bukhârî]

The Qur'ân makes it clear to us that the message of Jesus (peace be upon him) was specifically for Jews He was not sent to other nations, like the Greeks and the Romans. He was not sent as a messenger for all humanity.
The Injil wasnt meant for all mankind as Jesus(PBUH) was specifically sent to Jews to fix their sicknesses and call them to repentance and worship of Allah with no partners . At that time Jews were making progress in medicines and so he was setup to to miracles like healing blind ,leprosy dead , create life in birds etc to show them true miracles

Allah tells us that Jesus says: "O Children of Israel, I am Allah's messenger to you, confirming the Law (which came) before me and giving Glad Tidings of a Messenger to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad." [Sûrah al-Saff: 6]

We find the same meaning expressed in the Bible: "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." [Matthew 15:24]


However, just because Jesus (peace be upon him) was sent with his message to the Jews does not mean that others were not allowed to embrace that message. Everyone who believed in Jesus (peace be upon him) and responded to his message are rightly counted among his followers, even if they were not from the Children of Israel.
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Futuwwa
12-18-2012, 11:33 AM
Well, the Quran was the last revelation, and Muhammed, peace be upon him, was the last prophet. The Quran had to be protected since no later prophet would come to set matters straight.

Also, even if the Injeel had been properly preserved, that would not have made the Quran redundant. The Quran is the completion of the monotheistic message, and includes things that were not revealed to earlier prophets.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!