How do we know which parts of the Bible (or the previous scriptures) are corrupted?

[abdulwahab]

Bismillah walhamdulillah wassalatu wassalam 'ala rasoolillah. Assalamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu.
I want to preface this by apologizing for such a long question, and I appreciate your patience. I have been having doubts that I will explain here.
I hope this isn't an inappropriate place to ask this question.
After having read parts of the Bible, I wonder which parts of the Bible are considered corrupted or not.The New Testament makes claims that we as Muslims reject, but how are we supposed to know which claims were true and which ones were false?

In a previous answer on islamqa.info (No. 199116) it is stated that "there are four Gospels which contradict one another; there is no one Gospel which can be relied upon."This is a valid point, but what do we make of the details in the Gospels that are not contradictory, but rather support each other? For example, all of the books of the New Testament support the claim that Isa is the "Son of God". Audhubillah. But still, are all of them corrupted and wrong?What about the stories? Which of them do we know to be corrupt, and how do we know for sure?

Here is an example. In John 10:32-33, it states:Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

How do we know whether this kind of story is true?If we apply the rule outlined in Qur'an 43:81 ("Say, [O Muḥammad], "If the Most Merciful had a son, then I would be the first of [his] worshippers.") and we managed to prove that this story is a very early story, would we not be obligated to follow Isa (a.s.)?If this story was true, imagine the level of blasphemy us Muslims would be committing. We would be just as guilty as the Jews who tried to stone Isa (a.s.)! Astaghfirullah. That is, of course, assuming the story is even true. Still, the possibility that we're wrong is very scary to me.

So how do we, the ummah, or even the 'ulema know which stories are authentic? How do we know what is authentic (without, for example, relying on the Qur'an to see what contradicts it)? Isn't it a bit ad hoc to selectively decide which verses are corrupt and which are not corrupt based on what supports our 'aqeedah? Aren't the Christians more likely to have accurate writings because they were written closer to the time of Isa (a.s.)? And why do all the Christian "church fathers" (their scholars) and the writings of the apostles in the New Testament agree that Isa (a.s.) was divine? Some of them lived at the time of Isa (a.s.), and others soon after him. If Isa (a.s.) was raised to a status by his corrupt followers, how could the truth about Isa (a.s.) be corrupted so quickly? Did not the apostles at least try to defend the truth faith in the face of these corrupters? Or did the corrupters never exist?What could their motivation possibly be to corrupt the true message of Isa (a.s.)? I can't understand why the New Testament writers would want to make up stories about Isa (a.s.). If they believe in God, wouldn't they fear a punishment from God by making up stories about Him or His prophets? Wouldn't they, as believers, want to spread the truth? Is it a wild assumption to think that not all of the New Testament writers were corrupt?I think this is a very important question because if the New Testament's claims about Isa (a.s.) are true, then that poses a problem for Islam.

I've been struggling with this doubt for months and I was hoping you could provide an answer. I was going to initially ask islamqa.info but I've had a lot of difficulty posting there, as I've tried several times in the past month. They won't accept my questions even if I ask at the appropriate times. I apologize for making this question so long. Forgive me if it is a bit repetitive or I repeat questions. Please take your time and try to address every point I make in detail, or at least point me to resources that have already addressed these points. I would also appreciate some recommendations of scholars who have refuted the Christians in the past. May Allah have mercy on us and guide us. May we all be gathered with the righteous on the Day of Resurrection, insha'allah.Jazakumullahu khayran. Asalamu alaykum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh.

[abdulwahab]

UPDATE

5:48 And We have sent down to you the Book (thisQur'an) in truth, confirming the Scripture that camebefore it and Muhayminan over it (old Scriptures).So judge between them by what Allah has revealed,and follow not their vain desires, diverging awayfrom the truth that has come to you. To each among you, We have prescribed a law and aclear way.If Allah willed, He would have made you one nation,but that (He) may test you in what He has givenyou; so compete in good deeds. The return of you (all) is to Allah; then He willinform you about that in which you used to differ.5:49 And so judge between them by what Allah hasrevealed and follow not their vain desires, butbeware of them lest they turn you far away fromsome of that which Allah has sent down to you.And if they turn away, then know that Allah's will isto punish them for some sins of theirs.And truly, most men are rebellious.

Subhanallah! The Qur'an makes things so clear. If only I had seen this earlier. I can't believe I haven't found it until now. Alhamdulillah, I think this fully resolves my doubts!

if anyone has any useful information to provide they can do so here. As for my doubts, I think they are completely gone. May Allah reward the brother that shared this with me.

[abdulwahab]

As for the "ad hoc" nature of the corruption argument, it becomes irrelevant because the Qur'an acknowledges that the previous scriptures have some right and some wrong, and the overall messages were consistent, but they differed over details.


I'm still not certain about why the message of Isa (a.s.) would be corrupted by supposed "believers" but Islam makes too much sense as a religion for me to care to investigate this problem further. At least, not for now.