The Islamic position on the current Bible

[MidnightRose]

Assalamu alaikum

Many Muslims believe that the terms Injeel and Bible are interchangeable. I've tried to break down some points in relation to this. Any feedback would be appreciated.

BIBLE

Is a combination of:

1. Old Testament
2. New Testament
3. Other additions in different versions

Now, let's break down the above categories:

1. Old Testament:

A. Revealed by Allah to Musa (PBUH)
B. Combination of different books
C. Jewish scripture
D. Dictated the religious code of life
E. Known to Muslims as the Torah
F. Not in original form
G. Alterations made over time by different entities
H. Quran supersedes anything in the Torah

2. New Testament

A. Combination of different books
B. Believed to be the teachings of Jesus Christ (Isa - PBUH)
B. Abrogated the laws of the Torah
C. All books were written by different authors after Allah took Isa (PBUH)
D. Put together by an entity of the Roman Empire over 300 years after Allah took Isa (PBUH)

INJEEL

1. Book revealed by Allah to Isa (PBUH)

And He sent down the Torah and the Injeel. (Surah 3: part of verse 3)

We sent Isa, son of Maryam, and gave him the Injeel. (Surah 57: part of verse 27)

OBSERVATIONS BASED ON THE ABOVE

1. The Bible is not what the Quran describes as the Injeel
2. The Bible should not be confused with the Injeel
3. The Bible should not be attributed to Isa (PBUH)
4. Islamically, the New Testament should not be attributed to Isa (PBUH)
5. At best, the New Testament is a historical record (ahadith) with questionable chains of transmission
6. Allah knows best what happened to the Injeel

[Scimitar]

I put it simply for you... the NT is a book of hadeeth, and not inspired revelations from Allah.

Matthew, Mark, Luke and John were apparently the authors of these accounts and they all start with "the gospel according to..." *enter matthew, mark, luke and john*

Whereas the injeel is the gospel of Jesus pbuh. Not an account of it by someone called matthew, mark, luke or john.


savvy?

Scimi

[vipin]

my friend,

you got everything wrong.

A christain bible has 66 books written by different authors.

torah is written by moses. it has five books. it mentions stories and law. it may be very similar to quran not in its style. but the content wise.

then many prophets came to isreal. many have written their book and added to that book. time to time. all that books are in old testament.

old testament contain books of major prophets and minor prophets.

then jesus came.

he didnt write any book but he taught did many miracles.

his disciples wrote gospels. gospel contain story of jesus. there are 4 books. all of them says story of jesus.

his disciples used to write letters to church. some of thos letters are chosen and added with gospel forming new testament.

totally, 66 books it has.

this is christain explanation.

so old testament is not just torah. new testament is not just gospel.

[vipin]

all these 66 books are inspired by god.

thank you.
vipin

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

[BlueOwl358]

If you are gonna say its 66 books you might as well state which Church you follow, cause each one has a different number of accepted books. Protestants have 66 and the Ethiopian Church has 81. There is no such thing as an agreed Christian Bible because no authority accepted by all Christians has decided what the Bible is.

Also Moses didn't exactly write the Torah, well not all of it, because the Deuteronomy has his death, so it's clearly someone else as well.

Thirdly, we can easily agree that the Bible is a third party report at the least, because God didn't write it word for word, unless He refers to himself in the third person, Moses didn't write his death and Jesus didn't write about himself, and the rest is in third person as well. And we can't even prove these so called author's wrote it themselves, except Paul that is.

Then there's the whole point of translation problems, version problems, and other stuff. So it's just a book from history and surely not revelation. That is all

[MidnightRose]

If you are gonna say its 66 books you might as well state which Church you follow, cause each one has a different number of accepted books. Protestants have 66 and the Ethiopian Church has 81. There is no such thing as an agreed Christian Bible because no authority accepted by all Christians has decided what the Bible is.

Also Moses didn't exactly write the Torah, well not all of it, because the Deuteronomy has his death, so it's clearly someone else as well.

Thirdly, we can easily agree that the Bible is a third party report at the least, because God didn't write it word for word, unless He refers to himself in the third person, Moses didn't write his death and Jesus didn't write about himself, and the rest is in third person as well. And we can't even prove these so called author's wrote it themselves, except Paul that is.

Then there's the whole point of translation problems, version problems, and other stuff. So it's just a book from history and surely not revelation. That is all

The Catholic Bible has 73 books.

See http://www.catholic.com/quickquestio...d-to-the-bible

[Abz2000]

:sl:
although the first five books of the O.T are attributed to Musa (pbuh) there do appear to be many additions and subtraction, and even some blatant malicious editing.
it is unlikely that Musa (pbuh would have said, "and Moses died", "no man knows where this grave is to this day", and "there was never a Prophet raised amonst the children of Israel like Moses",
Also it is stated that God wasn't known to Ibrahim pbuh by the name of jehovah, but He was known by the description "God Almighty", it is therefore highly unlikely that Ibrahim pbuh would name a place "jehovah jireh" (jehovah provides).
Then we find a list of other books amongst which are historical accounts of the diaries (biographies) of kings and judges, also the biographies of Prophets pbut.
Amongst these biographies of Prophets, there appear to be scattered direct revelations, descriptions of revelations and again malicious political edits.
We must bear in mind that Allah also refers to Himself in third person during the revelation of the Quran, such as "huwa Allah alladhee" "idh qaala Allahu" "inna Allaha".
then we come to the "new testament", where we again find what appear to be narrated biographies, sometimes agreeing on accounts and sometimes differing, books and letters written by a man who never met Jesus, but which contain legislation which goes totally against the Laws of Tawrah and sunnah of Jesus, and also contain references to prophecies seemingly encrypted into other first hand accounts.
then we come to the book called "revelation to John (Yahya)" which certainly contains prophetic visions and prophecies about the end times, with some being encrypted, sealed, and implying karma based rewards, left for the people to fulfill.
there are also what appear to be descriptions of paradise and al kawthar right at the end.

In the Quran, Allah clearly confirms parts of the remnants of previous scriptures, abrogates parts, and condemns the malicious editing that has clearly taken place.
we should be careful not to call the revelations from Allah "asaatueer al awwaleen" (folklore of the men of old), and if we choose to refer to the previous scriptures, we must read them as a man who's lifted the end of his garment while walking carefully through a flowery field containing gems and other precious stones, some in plain sight, some disguised, anf some hidden by Allah, in which a malicious enemy has dropped mines and sown briers and thorny plants - by Allah's leave.

24Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field:*
25But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way.*
26But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit, then appeared the tares also.*
27So the servants of the householder came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy field? from whence then hath it tares?*
28He said unto them, An enemy hath done this.
The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?*
29But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.*30Let both grow together until the harvest:
and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them:
but gather the wheat into my barn.
Matthew 13.

[Abz2000]

One may also reseach the life of Ezra in order to shed light upon the evolution of the remnants of Torah.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezra

[sfontel]

:sl:
although the first five books of the O.T are attributed to Musa (pbuh) there do appear to be many additions and subtraction, and even some blatant malicious editing.
it is unlikely that Musa (pbuh would have said, "and Moses died", "no man knows where this grave is to this day", and "there was never a Prophet raised amonst the children of Israel like Moses",
Also it is stated that God wasn't known to Ibrahim pbuh by the name of jehovah, but He was known by the description "God Almighty", it is therefore highly unlikely that Ibrahim pbuh would name a place "jehovah jireh" (jehovah provides).
Then we find a list of other books amongst which are historical accounts of the diaries (biographies) of kings and judges, also the biographies of Prophets pbut.
Amongst these biographies of Prophets, there appear to be scattered direct revelations, descriptions of revelations and again malicious political edits.
We must bear in mind that Allah also refers to Himself in third person during the revelation of the Quran, such as "huwa Allah alladhee" "idh qaala Allahu" "inna Allaha".
then we come to the "new testament", where we again find what appear to be narrated biographies, sometimes agreeing on accounts and sometimes differing, books and letters written by a man who never met Jesus, but which contain legislation which goes totally against the Laws of Tawrah and sunnah of Jesus, and also contain references to prophecies seemingly encrypted into other first hand accounts.
then we come to the book called "revelation to John (Yahya)" which certainly contains prophetic visions and prophecies about the end times, with some being encrypted, sealed, and implying karma based rewards, left for the people to fulfill.
there are also what appear to be descriptions of paradise and al kawthar right at the end.

In the Quran, Allah clearly confirms parts of the remnants of previous scriptures, abrogates parts, and condemns the malicious editing that has clearly taken place.
we should be careful not to call the revelations from Allah "asaatueer al awwaleen" (folklore of the men of old), and if we choose to refer to the previous scriptures, we must read them as a man who's lifted the end of his garment while walking carefully through a flowery field containing gems and other precious stones, some in plain sight, some disguised, anf some hidden by Allah, in which a malicious enemy has dropped mines and sown briers and thorny plants - by Allah's leave.

I am very impressed.....some times I dont agree with a few things you said lately...but this one is pure manageble sense!

God bless!

[popsthebuilder]

Through addition and translation there seems to be discrepancies in All three. They are easily identifiable once one understands the lack of division, greed, and violence we are to strive for in unity under GOD. Most additions in the translations I have read of all three are generally in parinthesis, brackets, or crucifixes.

Peace

[greenhill]

Through addition and translation there seems to be discrepancies in All three. They are easily identifiable once one understands the lack of division, greed, and violence we are to strive for in unity under GOD. Most additions in the translations I have read of all three are generally in parinthesis, brackets, or crucifixes.

Peace

Which three?

:peace:

[popsthebuilder]

The three we are discussing. The Torah, the new covenant, and the Quran. Of couse I speak only of the English translations as these are the only version I have any experience with.

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you najimuddin;

Allah knows best

We read in the Bible that the Jews are God's chosen people, Christians are chosen by Christ, and in Islam, Allah chooses whom he wills.

So I ask, did God make a mistake? Why did he make each of our scriptures so convincing to our separate faiths?

I sincerely believe that the same God created us with the intention, that we should get on with each other despite our differences.

In the spirit of praying to 'One God'

Eric

[popsthebuilder]

Greetings and peace be with you najimuddin;



We read in the Bible that the Jews are God's chosen people, Christians are chosen by Christ, and in Islam, Allah chooses whom he wills.

So I ask, did God make a mistake? Why did he make each of our scriptures so convincing to our separate faiths?

I sincerely believe that the same God created us with the intention, that we should get on with each other despite our differences.

In the spirit of praying to 'One God'

Eric

To me, quite clearly in fact, the three work well with one another and are extremely similar in pretty much all ways. If you would like to speak of any particular chapters or even verses that contradict one another please let me know. I will state one thing that I know is a big divider between otherwise faithful people; many worship Christ, the man as if he were literally equivalent to GOD the one Creator, as a man, as opposed to being pure in his adherence to the word of GOD. We are to follow the teaching and example of Jesus of Nazareth. He was the pure selfless sacrifice, the lamb without blemish. Man isn't equivalent to GOD, even the Son of man.

The Holy Spirit is different and eternal and Crist. It is direction wholly and utterly under God. It's fine to say Jesus is Lord of lords or King of kings as these terms are only reference to humans. Jesus of Christ was unseen the most high man. Technically to say that Jesus couldn't have been GOD incarnate is limiting the abilities of GOD. Worship of any man as if literally equivalent to the One Creator GOD is not the way. We must understand that it's ok to insist that Jesus was the son of God in the flesh as he was perfect in Crist. People get upset and feudal over names, without considering that the division and hypocrisy aren't called for in any of our books. Can Christians realize their general hypocrisy in knowing of sin yet actively and habitually continuing in it as opposed to walking in the spirit, freed from the bindings of sin based in greed? Can Muslims understand that mercy is called for as God is merciful? Can they realize that all violence against the ignorant, innocent, or faithful is not condoned by GOD?

Can the Jewish realize that spite, misdirection, and atrocities that were once perpetrated are all forgiven by the mercy of GOD, and that the only sacrifice that is acceptable to the God is that of self sacrifice, more specifically sacrifice of the wants of the self or greed. Faith is very important in all aspects, division is to be upon testing against scripture, and not condoned except for those whom blaspheme The Holy Spirit.

None are perfect, and we can all learn of the will and direction of God by being still in the word of God. However you may reach it. Discernment should be made when one speaks of self as opposed to the work of God and anything that actually deviates from our ancient scriptures.

May peace be upon us all under the direction of the self subsisting and all beneficent, the merciful and just. By his will.

May we all humbly submit to GOD for our sake.

[popsthebuilder]

"unseen"- indeed"

[MidnightRose]

Greetings and peace be with you najimuddin;

Allah knows best

We read in the Bible that the Jews are God's chosen people, Christians are chosen by Christ, and in Islam, Allah chooses whom he wills.

So I ask, did God make a mistake? Why did he make each of our scriptures so convincing to our separate faiths?

I sincerely believe that the same God created us with the intention, that we should get on with each other despite our differences.

In the spirit of praying to 'One God'

Eric

Greetings and peace be with you as well brother Eric,

Thanks to the guidance of Muhammad :saws:, I am able to get along with everyone I know. This is regardless of differences in religious beliefs and practices.

I’ll use my recent road trip as an example.

A couple of days ago I traveled to New Jersey to see my parents. I live in Michigan. For context, my parents divorced many years ago when I was a small child. My father remarried and made a new family for himself. There’s more but it’s a long complicated story (This is a simplified version).

To begin, I visit my father whenever I get the chance. The atmosphere of Islam in his home does not correspond to that of mine. There are stark contrasts. Despite this and the associated difficulties that have arisen, I have successfully maintained ties with him. Although he welcomes me into his home, he does not reciprocate my efforts.

Adding on, I visit my mother whenever I get a chance also. She is a devout Catholic. Despite this and the associated difficulties that I have had to deal with, I have successfully maintained ties with her as well. She has reciprocated my efforts.

For the sake of brevity, I’ll end with the above – with the understanding that I do live in the USA.

In light of this, the guidance of Muhammad :saws: tells me to treat everyone with the best of intentions and conduct, with special emphasis for people such as parents and neighbors. This guidance tells me to do this for the pleasure of the Lord :swt1:, my Creator and Sustainer.

The guidance of Muhammad :saws: tells me that doing the above and accepting non-Islamic beliefs/practices are mutually exclusive. In Islam, there is no contradiction in this. This guidance tells me to treat people with the best of intentions and conduct regardless of their beliefs/practices.

There is no need for a Muslim to modify Islamic beliefs/practices in order to be able to treat everyone with the best of intentions and conduct. It’s already there. This comprehensive guidance of Muhammad :saws: is not an option for a Muslim. It is an obligation.

And yes, I truly believe that Allah :swt1: knows best.

When I was younger, it really annoyed me when adults would make remarks such as “you’ll understand when you get older” and the like. I really did think that my intellectual ability was fully mature at the time. Now that I am older, I realize how little I really knew back then. This experience has allowed me to appreciate my elders and the wisdom they impart.

If that’s the case with people (based on my experience), then (for me) the Creator of these people is beyond any type of reproach.

With this realization, these questions don't even arise.

It is recorded Khidr :as: informed Musa :as: that "even the combined knowledge of the two of us, yours and mine, cannot claim a status against Divine knowledge that could be compared even with the water in the beak of this bird as related to this sea."

Source: Ma’ariful Quran, Volume 5, p. 626

We received this guidance from Muhammad :saws:. He :saws: is my savior. I would not know anything of my Lord :swt1: without him :saws:.

May Allah :swt1: guide all of us to the straight path. Ameen.

[Insaanah]

We read in the Bible that the Jews are God's chosen people, Christians are chosen by Christ, and in Islam, Allah chooses whom he wills.

So I ask, did God make a mistake? Why did he make each of our scriptures so convincing to our separate faiths?

I sincerely believe that the same God created us with the intention, that we should get on with each other despite our differences.

In the spirit of praying to 'One God'

Greetings Eric,

Hope you are well.

According to Islam, the Children of Israil were God's favoured people, as long as they obeyed Him, but they lost that status, by repeatedly rejecting/blaspheming the prophets and messengers He sent. The Christians at the time of Jesus (peace be on him), who followed his teachings rather than those of Paul et al, who didn't believe he was God or son of, and worshipped the God of Jesus, would also have been the righteous of their times. As Muslims, we do not believe that we are God's favoured, special, or chosen people. This is not something exclusive to Muslims, but all those who followed their prophets and messengers original untampered teachings during their respective times since the time of Adam (peace be on him). As submitters to God, they may be called Muslims too in that sense. Since Islam as revealed to Prophet Muhammad (peace, blessings, graces, salutations, of God be on him) is preserved, and he is the final messenger for all mankind, it is now required to follow him. Thus, there is no mistake or contradiction.

Peace.