PDA

View Full Version : Qur'an: Does it say the Bible is inerrant



BoredAgnostic
04-18-2007, 02:22 PM
-The Qur'an states the bible is inerrant
-Muslim scholars thought the same and "accepted the bible"
-The scholars are: Ali al-Tabari (died 855), Amr al-Ghakhiz (died 869), Bukhari (810-870), Al -Mas'udi (956), Abu Ali Husain Bin Sina (1037), Al-Ghazzali (died 1111),Ibn-Khaldun (died 1406), Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan.
-Islam changed not the Bible all the scholars including Muhhamed trusted and believed the bible was correct.

-Islam eliminates all chance of Salvation
-Islam denies that Jesus Christ is savior and died on the cross
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Muhammad
04-18-2007, 02:51 PM
Hello,

This issue has been discussed before, such as in these threads:
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...t-believe.html
http://www.islamicboard.com/comparat...changed-3.html

I would advise you to read through some of the posts in there to gain a better understanding of the topic.

Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
-The Qur'an states the bible is inerrant
I hope you will take the time to read the Qur'an, because you will find many verses stating that the previous scriptures have been changed:
http://www.islamicboard.com/602294-post64.html

Muslim scholars thought the same and "accepted the bible"
The only parts of the Bible that we can accept are those which are in agreement with Islamic teachings.

Islam changed not the Bible all the scholars including Muhhamed trusted and believed the bible was correct.
Not true.

Islam eliminates all chance of Salvation
On the contrary, it calls for it.

Islam denies that Jesus Christ is savior and died on the cross
Absolutely.

Peace :).
Reply

BoredAgnostic
04-19-2007, 09:31 AM
Thank you for writing. I see you agree with conclusions 'a' and 'b', but you still maintan the Koran is valid. You mention history. Are you aware that prior to the year 1064, all Muslim scholars believed in the inerrancy of the Bible? The idea that the Bible had been changed was proposed by Ibn-Khazem in 1064. (below is a list of Muslim scholars from before and after Khazem) Mohammed never expressed any doubt in the truth of the Bible. Every Muslim scholar (including Mohammed), prior to 1064 professed complete agreement with God's word as we know it today, the Bible. Since they all believed in and trusted the Bible of the seventh century, it is incumbent upon you to show a substantial change, or you find yourself in disagreement with the founders of your religion. If you study the history of your religion, you will find it is Islam that changed, not the Bible. You really can't have it both ways. The inescapable conclusion is that Mohammed was mistaken. He was not a prophet of God. His Koran is not the inspired word of God. And Islam is a false religion.

Here is the main reason Islam is false. It denies the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. Islam erases all hope of salvation. Without the blood of Jesus there is no remission of sin. Hebrews 9:22 says: "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission". With no remission, the sin remains, we have no way to be forgiven of our sin, and therefore no way to attain passage to heaven. All our righteousness is as filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6 "But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away". Keeping the law of Moses leaves us equal to filthy rags. Keeping the Five Pillars of Islam leaves a person equal to filthy rags too.

If the best we can do is equal to filthy rags, how can we be saved? How can we deal with our sin? God provided a way, the only way. Jesus said in John 14:6 "I am the way, the truth , and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me". There is no other way. 1 John 1:7 "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from all sin". Satan doesn't need to deceive us very much. If he can get us to turn away from this truth, he has won.

I hope you will study the history of your religion and begin to ask the hard questions. God loves you and all Muslims. He provided a way for each of us to be with Him for eternity. Islam is not that way.

Penelope





Early Muslim Scholars:

1. Ali al-Tabari (died 855) accepted the Bible texts.

2. Amr al-Ghakhiz (died 869) accepted the Bible texts.

3. Bukhari (810-870) accepted the Bible texts. (he is the one who gathered some of the earliest traditions of Ilaam quoted the Koran itself to support his belief in the text of the Bible. Sura 3: 72, 78.

4. Al -Mas'udi (956) accepted the Bible texts.

5. Abu Ali Husain Bin Sina (1037) accepted the Bible texts.

6. Al-Ghazzali (died 1111) accepted the Bible texts. Said by many to be the greatest Muslim scholar. He lived after Ibn-Khazem, but did not accept his teachings.

7. Ibn-Khaldun (died 1406) accepted the Bible texts. He lived after Ibn-Khazem but did not accept his teachings.

8. Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan, founder of the Aligarth College "In the opinion of us Mohammedans it is not proved that corruption (tahrif-I-lafzi) was practiced" He accepted the Bible.

9. Fakhruddin Razi, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, a nephew of Mohammed, "The Jews and early Christians were suspected of altering the text of the Taurat and Injil; but in the opinion of eminent doctors and theologians it was not practicable thus to corrupt the text, because those Scriptures were generally known and widely circulated, having been handed down from generation to generation."

(Sources: Gerhard Nehls, J. Wijngaard, A. Yusuf Ali, Kitab al-Asnam, Ibn al-Kalbi, Sahih al Bukhari


I've tried on three occasions to put either the entire blog or the link up...it got deleted..I will attempt to do it again, because I have been accused of misrepresenting her work. Someone please tell me (Even the moderator who will probably delete this, was it totally wrong? Yes I left out some things obviously because I wanted it to make it short and simple and to the point and I believe it was)
Reply

aamirsaab
04-19-2007, 10:11 AM
:sl:
Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
.
<snip>
Here is the main reason Islam is false. It denies the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross. Islam erases all hope of salvation. <snip>
Ah you see there is hope of salvation though since in Islam, we believe Jesus/Isa is still alive and will come to earth once again where he will slay the dajal.

:statisfie
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
...
04-19-2007, 11:12 AM
Islam erases all hope of salvation. Without the blood of Jesus there is no remission of sin.
If we pray to Allah sincerely for forgiveness He forgives us, and for every pain we endure with patience, our sins are ommited.

But if we die in an unpure state (with respect to sin) then how do we enter Paradise, which is pure? And we know pure and unpure cannot mix.
It is because we are then purified by our sins with the punishments of the grave. And if we still have sins then we will have to spend some time in the fire of Hell until we are purified and thus may enter Paradise.

Every person is accountable for their own sins. Why should Jesus (as) have to be purified from others\' impurities? Allah is Just.
And do you believe that you don\'t have to do good in this world because Jesus (as) has already purified you of your sins?


Related to the rest of your post please check this link:

http://www.answering-christianity.com/crucified.htm

Let\'s look at verse 4:156-159 \"That they rejected Faith; That they uttered against Mary A grave false charge; That they said (in boast): \'We killed Christ Jesus The son of Mary, The Messenger of Allah.\' But they killed him not, Nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. Nay, Allah raised him up Unto Himself; and Allah Is Exalted in Power, Wise. And there is none of the people of the book (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (Jesus) Before his death; And on the Day of Judgment He (Jesus) will be a witness Against them.\"
Reply

Umar001
04-19-2007, 03:15 PM
I know you claim to be a bored agnostic I would have thought that this boredom would have provided you with time to investigate and at least provide sources for your quotes.



Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
Thank you for writing. I see you agree with conclusions 'a' and 'b', but you still maintan the Koran is valid. You mention history. Are you aware that prior to the year 1064, all Muslim scholars believed in the inerrancy of the Bible? The idea that the Bible had been changed was proposed by Ibn-Khazem in 1064. (below is a list of Muslim scholars from before and after Khazem) Mohammed never expressed any doubt in the truth of the Bible. Every Muslim scholar (including Mohammed), prior to 1064 professed complete agreement with God's word as we know it today, the Bible. Since they all believed in and trusted the Bible of the seventh century, it is incumbent upon you to show a substantial change, or you find yourself in disagreement with the founders of your religion. If you study the history of your religion, you will find it is Islam that changed, not the Bible. You really can't have it both ways. The inescapable conclusion is that Mohammed was mistaken. He was not a prophet of God. His Koran is not the inspired word of God. And Islam is a false religion.

Care to share any quotations and sources??

Also, you do know that there are changes in manuscripts which are not found before the 16th century, one alone is enough to prove substantial change.


Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
Here is the main reason Islam is false. It denies the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross.
This is beyond ridiculous, it is like saying 'Islam is not right becuase my mom says it isn't'.

Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
Islam erases all hope of salvation.

Well that's according to your presumption that Jesus is the way to salvation for all humans, you have yet to prove it.



Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
Without the blood of Jesus there is no remission of sin. Hebrews 9:22 says: "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission". With no remission, the sin remains, we have no way to be forgiven of our sin, and therefore no way to attain passage to heaven. All our righteousness is as filthy rags. Isaiah 64:6 "But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away". Keeping the law of Moses leaves us equal to filthy rags. Keeping the Five Pillars of Islam leaves a person equal to filthy rags too.
What if I told you, The Book of Hebrews is a lie, your following a lie? What would you say? "It's not a lie because Paul says he is a servant of God"?

Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
If the best we can do is equal to filthy rags, how can we be saved? How can we deal with our sin? God provided a way, the only way. Jesus said in John 14:6 "I am the way, the truth , and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me". There is no other way. 1 John 1:7 "But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from all sin". Satan doesn't need to deceive us very much. If he can get us to turn away from this truth, he has won.

I hope you will study the history of your religion and begin to ask the hard questions. God loves you and all Muslims. He provided a way for each of us to be with Him for eternity. Islam is not that way.

Why preach? I don't understand how you sleep at night. You go to people and say 'Believe in Jesus because the Bible says to' and how do you know if the Bible is true? I could just as easily say 'Believe in HInduism because their scripture says so, that's what your doing, how can you blindly follow something, it's amazing.


Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
Early Muslim Scholars:

1. Ali al-Tabari (died 855) accepted the Bible texts.

2. Amr al-Ghakhiz (died 869) accepted the Bible texts.

3. Bukhari (810-870) accepted the Bible texts. (he is the one who gathered some of the earliest traditions of Ilaam quoted the Koran itself to support his belief in the text of the Bible. Sura 3: 72, 78.

4. Al -Mas'udi (956) accepted the Bible texts.

5. Abu Ali Husain Bin Sina (1037) accepted the Bible texts.

6. Al-Ghazzali (died 1111) accepted the Bible texts. Said by many to be the greatest Muslim scholar. He lived after Ibn-Khazem, but did not accept his teachings.

7. Ibn-Khaldun (died 1406) accepted the Bible texts. He lived after Ibn-Khazem but did not accept his teachings.

8. Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan, founder of the Aligarth College "In the opinion of us Mohammedans it is not proved that corruption (tahrif-I-lafzi) was practiced" He accepted the Bible.

9. Fakhruddin Razi, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, a nephew of Mohammed, "The Jews and early Christians were suspected of altering the text of the Taurat and Injil; but in the opinion of eminent doctors and theologians it was not practicable thus to corrupt the text, because those Scriptures were generally known and widely circulated, having been handed down from generation to generation."

(Sources: Gerhard Nehls, J. Wijngaard, A. Yusuf Ali, Kitab al-Asnam, Ibn al-Kalbi, Sahih al Bukhari


I've tried on three occasions to put either the entire blog or the link up...it got deleted..I will attempt to do it again, because I have been accused of misrepresenting her work. Someone please tell me (Even the moderator who will probably delete this, was it totally wrong? Yes I left out some things obviously because I wanted it to make it short and simple and to the point and I believe it was)

Anyhow, go ahead show us the sources, saying 'Sahih Al Bukhari' makes it abit hard to find you know how big that is?

What's amazing from your quote of Ibn ABbas is that there is a complete opposite statement from him in Tafsir Ibn Kathir. Furthermore the quote in which it states that the Bible was too wide spread this again is against history, since we know from history that this is not true.

Regards,

Eesa.
Reply

snakelegs
04-21-2007, 12:37 AM
Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
He provided a way for each of us to be with Him for eternity. Islam is not that way.
and how do you know this?
you are a strange agnostic!
Reply

Malaikah
04-21-2007, 12:49 AM
BoredAgnostic,

Are you actually a BoredChristian? :?

You seem to be very confused about the Islamic position on the scriptures of the Jews and Christians... I don't know where you got your information from, but it seems to be mostly lies about Islam.

take care
Reply

BoredAgnostic
04-21-2007, 11:10 PM
Sorry guys, I didn't make it clear

I'm not Penelope

My name is Chrissy

Penelope is a Christian trying to prove Islam to be false.

This is her blog, and I put it up because she wasn't registered to this forum.
Reply

BoredAgnostic
04-21-2007, 11:12 PM
She saids that she is making an even better blog that has verses from the Qur'an showing that the it states the Bible is inerrant.
Reply

Muezzin
04-21-2007, 11:14 PM
Wait a second. Is Penelope replying to posts on this forum on her blog, and you (that is BoredAgnostic) are posting these replies? If so, she could just sign up to make things easier :)
Reply

Woodrow
04-21-2007, 11:18 PM
Go slow and try to explain carefully. Somehow I believe a credibility gap has just entered into the picture.
Reply

snakelegs
04-21-2007, 11:25 PM
so your name is chrissy and penelope is some one who has a blog where she's trying to prove islam is false and christianity is right because the qur'an says the bible is without error and this proves that islam is wrong and christianity is right, so she is quoting from a holy book of a religion that is false in order to prove that the true one is true, but she doesn't want to register here so you are telling us about how she writes this stuff on her blog because this is an islamic forum and......??? :? :? :?
Reply

Malaikah
04-22-2007, 01:26 AM
The bible, as it is referred to today (the NT in specific) has NOTHING to do with the 'injeel' that was given to Jesus (peace be upon him).

The book that is referred to in the Quran is the injeel which was the word of God revealed to Jesus. The Bible (NT) is nothing more than a historical record written by men (which Christians claim to have been "inspired" by God.).

They are two different things. Therefore, it is impossible to use the Quran to prove anything about the validity of the New Testament.
Reply

Malaikah
04-22-2007, 01:31 AM
I hope this clarifies things a little:

Muslims are all obliged to believe in the Gospel (Injeel) that Allaah revealed to His Prophet Jesus the Messiah (peace be upon him). The one who denies that is a kaafir according to scholarly consensus.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And in their footsteps, We sent ‘Eesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), confirming the Tawraat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Tawraat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqoon (the pious)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:46]

Our belief in the Gospel dictates that we should also believe that it exists and that it was revealed completely, and we believe that everything that he brought from Allaah was true.

But there is nothing in Islam to tell us whether this Gospel was written and compiled at the time of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) or who wrote it, or who preserved it and disseminated it, or whether the Messiah taught it to the people orally or whether the disciples transmitted it and who believed in it, or whether some of it was written down and some was not. These are questions that we cannot answer for certain nowadays, rather some researchers deny that there was even a true Gospel that was compiled in the form of a book; rather it was just words that were transmitted.

The great scholar al-Taahir ibn ‘Ashoor says in al-Tahreer wa’l-Tanweer (3/26), commenting on the tafseer of Soorat Aal ‘Imraan:

With regard to the Gospel, this is the name of the Revelation that was sent to ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and was compiled by his companions. End quote.

Shaykh Ahmad Deedat (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

We believe sincerely that everything that ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) said was Revelation from Allaah, and that it was the Gospel and glad tidings for the Children of Israel. But throughout his life, ‘Eesa did not write a single word, and he did not order anyone to write anything. Hal al-Kitaab al-Muqaddas Kalimat Allaah (Is the Bible God’s Word?), p. 14.

But it seems that the Messiah (peace be upon him) know how to read and write. This may be understood from the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And He (Allaah) will teach him [‘Eesa (Jesus)] the Book and Al-Hikmah (i.e. the Sunnah, the faultless speech of the Prophets, wisdom), (and) the Tawraat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:48]

Ibn Katheer (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

It seems that what is meant by Book here is writing.

Tafseer al-Qur’aan il-‘Azeem (1/485).

But we do not have any evidence that the revelation was written down at the time of Eesa (peace be upon him). The fact that the Gospel is called “a Book” in the Holy Qur'aan does not indicate that it was written down on pages at the time it was revealed. The fact that it is called a Book only refers to that which is with Allaah in al-Lawh al-Mahfooz, or that it was something that could be written. That applies to the Holy Qur’aan, as Allaah calls it a Book. Rather it was transmitted verbally as well as being written down randomly on skins and parchments. In fact it was not a compiled Book until the time of Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him). Indeed, Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And even if We had sent down unto you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) a Message written on paper so that they could touch it with their hands, the disbelievers would have said: ‘This is nothing but obvious magic!’”

[al-An’aam 6:7]

al-Taahir ibn ‘Ashoor said in his commentary on Soorat Maryam 19:30:

The Scripture refers to the law which is usually written lest it be subject to change. The word Scripture is applied to the Law of ‘Eesa just as it is applied to the Qur’aan.

Al-Tahreer wa’l-Tanweer (8/470).

Similarly the Christians do not believe that there is a book that was written by the Messiah or one of his disciples during his lifetime that was lost after that.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

As for the Gospel that is in their hands, they acknowledge that it was not written by the Messiah (peace be upon him), nor did he dictate it to someone else to write it down. Rather they wrote it after the Messiah was taken up (into heaven).

Al-Jawaab al-Saheeh (1/491).

There is a clear difference between the Revelation that was sent down to Moosa and the Revelation that was sent down to ‘Eesa. In the holy Qur’aan there is an indication that the former was written down, as Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And We wrote for him on the Tablets the lesson to be drawn from all things and the explanation for all things (and said): Hold unto these with firmness, and enjoin your people to take the better therein. I shall show you the home of Al-Faasiqoon (the rebellious, disobedient to Allaah)”

[al-A’raaf 7:145]

Although it seems from the words of some Muslim scholars that the true Gospel was compiled and written at the time of the Messiah (peace be upon him). You can find that in the words of Ibn Hazm in al-Fisal and Ibn Taymiyah in al-Jawaab al-Saheeh.

Similarly it says that the word Gospel (Injeel) is applied to that which Allaah revealed to the Messiah, as it says in the Gospel of Mark 8:35: “whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it”.

As for the Gospels that are extant nowadays, they are not the true Gospel, but no one can deny that they contain a great deal of the Gospel that Allaah revealed to the Messiah.

Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

These four books that they call the Gospel, or call each of them a Gospel, were written by them after the Messiah was taken up into heaven, but they do not say in them that they are the word of God, or that the Messiah conveyed them from God. Rather they transmitted in them some of the words of the Messiah, and some of his actions and miracles. They said that they did not narrate from him everything that they heard and saw from him. So they are more akin to what was narrated by the scholars of hadeeth, biography and maghaazi reports from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) of his words and deeds that are not Qur’aan. So the Gospels that they have in their hands are more like the books of seerah and hadeeth, or like these books, even if most of them are true.

Al-Jawaab al-Saheeh (2/14).

http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=85280&ln=eng

See also: http://www.islam-qa.com/index.php?ref=47516&ln=eng
Reply

BoredAgnostic
04-26-2007, 07:54 AM
I apologize for the confusion..Yes the Blog is Penelope's, and she is a Christian trying to refute Islam. She hasn't told me to write any replies yet because she told me she was going to make a better more detailed blog about this.
The first post, It was me who summarized the blog and put it into a couple main point so that it could be refuted...I wasn't allow to post the entire blog as a thread or post the link...so I just made it into a few basic points.
Penelope told me that I left out essential points and that "falsely plagarized" her work..so I apologized(Although I didn't think I did that) and I posted her entire blog up on the 3rd post.
I don't know if she wants to register into this forum..I highly doubt it..but I will ask her.
Reply

BoredAgnostic
04-26-2007, 07:57 AM
Thank you all for the replies, I send the link to Penelope again.
Reply

Umm Yoosuf
04-26-2007, 08:17 AM
Hi there,

I do not see the purpose or benefit in you posting her work here. If she wants a dialogic/discussion then she is more than welcome to register :)
Reply

Malaikah
04-26-2007, 09:29 AM
Originally Posted by BoredAgnostic
Are you aware that prior to the year 1064, all Muslim scholars believed in the inerrancy of the Bible? The idea that the Bible had been changed was proposed by Ibn-Khazem in 1064. (below is a list of Muslim scholars from before and after Khazem) Mohammed never expressed any doubt in the truth of the Bible. Every Muslim scholar (including Mohammed), prior to 1064 professed complete agreement with God's word as we know it today, the Bible.
This is totally false. Where did you get this information from? Where is your proof?

If you are going to try to prove Islam wrong, at least use authentic information.
Reply

Ansar Al-'Adl
04-26-2007, 03:44 PM
Greetings,

This is actually recycled material posted a long time ago on a missionary website known for its pathetically misinformed comments about Islam. Last I checked, copy-pasting material from anti-islamic sites rather than formulating your own arguments was against the rules.

First of all, it is the unanimous consensus of the entire Muslim ummah for the past 1400 years that anything which opposes the Qur'an is false. The Qur'an is the final criterion to distinguish between truth and falsehood.

Secondly, most of the people you are citing as 'muslim scholars' are nothing of the sort at all!
Ali at-Tabari was a persian jewish convert to Islam who was a medical physician, not a religious scholars. The philosopher Ibn Sina is likewise recognized only for his scientific contributions; in fact many of his philosophical ideas were denounced by all Muslim scholars as heretical. Al-Mas'udi, the traveller, and Ibn Khaldun the sociologist, were both historians not religious scholars. Sir SA Khan was a recent modernist. Honestly, when this is the kind of list that is composed of so-called 'muslim scholars' it really betrays a large amount of ignorance.

Thirdly, let us examine what the classical sources actually do say about the corruption of the previous scriptures.

From the Tafs&#238;r of Ibn Jar&#238;r At-Tabar&#238; on ayat 2:75:

حَدَّثَنِي بِهِ مُحَمَّد بْن عَمْرو , قَالَ : ثنا أَبُو عَاصِم , قَالَ : ثنا عِيسَى , عَنْ ابْن أَبَى نَجِيح , عَنْ مُجَاهِد فِي قَوْل اللَّه : { أَفَتَطْمَعُونَ أَنْ يُؤْمِنُوا لَكُمْ وَقَدْ كَانَ فَرِيق مِنْهُمْ يَسْمَعُونَ كَلَام اللَّه ثُمَّ يُحَرِّفُونَهُ مِنْ بَعْد مَا عَقَلُوهُ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ } فَاَلَّذِينَ يُحَرِّفُونَهُ وَاَلَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَهُ : هُمْ الْعُلَمَاء مِنْهُمْ . * - حَدَّثَنِي الْمُثَنَّى , قَالَ ثنا أَبُو حُذَيْفَة , قَالَ : ثنا شِبْل , عَنْ ابْن أَبِي نَجِيح , عَنْ مُجَاهِد بِنَحْوِهِ . 1098 - حَدَّثَنِي مُوسَى , قَالَ : ثنا عَمْرو بْن حَمَّاد , قَالَ : ثنا أَسْبَاط , عَنْ السُّدِّيّ : { أَفَتَطْمَعُونَ أَنْ يُؤْمِنُوا لَكُمْ وَقَدْ كَانَ فَرِيق مِنْهُمْ يَسْمَعُونَ كَلَام اللَّه ثُمَّ يُحَرِّفُونَهُ مِنْ بَعْد مَا عَقَلُوهُ } قَالَ : هِيَ التَّوْرَاة حَرَّفُوهَا . 1099 - حَدَّثَنَا يُونُس , قَالَ : أَخْبَرَنَا ابْن وَهْب , قَالَ : قَالَ ابْن زَيْد فِي قَوْله : { يَسْمَعُونَ كَلَام اللَّه ثُمَّ يُحَرِّفُونَهُ } قَالَ : التَّوْرَاة الَّتِي أَنَزَلَهَا عَلَيْهِمْ يُحَرِّفُونَهَا , يَجْعَلُونَ الْحَلَال فِيهَا حَرَامًا وَالْحَرَام فِيهَا حَلَالًا , وَالْحَقّ فِيهَا بَاطِلًا وَالْبَاطِل فِيهَا حَقًّا , إذَا جَاءَهُمْ الْمُحِقّ بِرِشْوَةٍ أَخَرَجُوا لَهُ كِتَاب اللَّه , وَإِذَا جَاءَهُمْ الْمُبْطِل بِرِشْوَةٍ أَخَرَجُوا لَهُ ذَلِكَ الْكِتَاب فَهُوَ فِيهِ مُحِقَ , وَإِنْ جَاءَ أَحَد يَسْأَلهُمْ شَيْئًا لَيْسَ فِيهِ حَقّ وَلَا رِشْوَة وَلَا شَيْء أَمَرُوهُ بِالْحَقِّ , فَقَالَ لَهُمْ : { أَتَأْمُرُونَ النَّاس بِالْبِرِّ وَتَنْسَوْنَ أَنْفُسكُمْ وَأَنْتُمْ تَتْلُونَ الْكِتَاب أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ } . 2

It was reported from Muhammad bn Amr from Abu Aasim from Eesa from Ibn Abi Najih from Mujahid that he said regarding this verse "Those who used to alter it and conceal the truth - they were their scholars."

It was also reported from As-Suddi that he said regarding this verse, "It was the Tawrah they altered."

It was also reported from Ibn Zayd that he said regarding this verse, "They altered the Tawrah that Allah revealed to them changing what was declared lawful therein to unlawful, and the unlawful to lawful, and changing what was declared truth therein to falsehood, and the falsehood to truth. So when a person seeking the truth comes to them they judge his case by the book of Allah, but when a person comes to them seeking to do evil with a bribe, they bring out the other book which says he is in the right. When someone comes to them neither seeking the right nor with a bribe, then they enjoin righteousness on him. This is why Allah told them "Do you enjoin righteousness on the people and forget yourselves, while you recite the book? Have you no sense?" (2:45)

The same thing is found in Tafs&#238;r Al-Qur'&#226;n Al-'Adh&#238;m by Ibn Kath&#238;r and also in Jami Ahk&#226;m Al-Qur'&#226;n of Al-Qurtub&#238;.

In fact the former mentions:

فَلَا شَكّ أَنَّهُ قَدْ دَخَلَهَا التَّبْدِيل وَالتَّحْرِيف وَالزِّيَادَة وَالنَّقْص

Without a doubt they have been altered, corrupted, added to and deleted from.

Here is a fatwa concerning the NT:

Question: I was speaking to a Christian friend, and mentioned to him that the New Testament is not the Gospel of Christ (peace be upon him) in its original form. He refused to accept this. Being a Christian, he does not accept statements from the Qur’&#226;n and Sunnah as evidence. What can I tell him?

Answered by Sheikh Ahmad al-Q&#226;d&#238;, research fellow at al-Imam University
It has been generally accepted by Christians for ages that the word “Gospel” does not refer to one specific text, but rather to four gospels selected out of hundreds, the others of which were declared unauthentic. Consequently, these four gospels – Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John – are not the revelation that was revealed to Christ (peace be upon him). Instead, they are accounts of Christ’s life and quotations of some of his statements that were recorded by others, some of whom never met him personally.

Leading Christian authorities acknowledge that there are differences and variations between these four gospels. For instance, the “Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation” of the Second Vatican Council states:
The sacred authors wrote the four Gospels, selecting some things from the many which had been handed on by word of mouth or in writing, reducing some of them to a synthesis, explaining some things in view of the situation of their churches and preserving the form of proclamation but always in such fashion that they told us the honest truth about Jesus. For their intention in writing was that either from their own memory and recollections, or from the witness of those who “themselves from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word” we might know “the truth” concerning those matters about which we have been instructed (see Luke 1:2-4).
This is a clear admission that the four gospels included in the New Testament are the work of men and are not the word of God.

This is the reason why there are differences between them and dozens of contradictions. A detailed exposition of these contradictions is given by Rahmatullah al-Hind&#238; in his book Izh&#226;r al-Haqq.

For us as Muslims, the greatest evidence that the New Testament is not the uncorrupted word of God is that the claim of Jesus’ divinity and the claim that Jesus (peace be upon him) is the son of God are to be found within it, along with the doctrine of the Trinity and other beliefs that contradict with the monotheism that was brought by all the Prophets (peace be upon them all).


That should clarify this matter.
Reply

mustafajadeed
04-26-2007, 07:06 PM
Salam Alay Koom

"This is the Book, in it is Guidance sure without doubt for those who fear The God." Q 2:2

The Qur'an itself says it is without error, and it is correct. People inject error into it, usually in the Translation from the actual Arabic, and in the re-translation by various Sheiks, Imams, Mufti, etc.

When we Muslims fail to listen to our Book, we get into trouble. The same for Christians.

Somehow both branches of what was once the same faith in The God decided to "Modernize" their faith.

Now the Christians believe the son of man (what the Messiah- Al Masih- re:Q: 5:75 called himself 26 times in Matthew alone) is "God".

Numbers 23:19 "God is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent."
as was told directly from The God to Balam contradicts that... See why people do not want to refer to the "Old Testament" (I was just fine for Isa/ Jesus as the Gentiles called him, who was a practicing follower of the Law of Moses- and warned others about teaching against the Law of Moses (Look it up: I am not a concise in my Biblical Verses, it has to do with that person who taught against the Law as being least in the Kingdom of The God).

Qur'an 4:29 specifically tells you not to kill yourself, yet everyday someone goes out and kills themselves and other Muslims, which will send a Muslim straight to Hell (Q 4:93).

You say you are Agnostic. Which really means: I am searching, but I need some proof.

The biggest complaint is: "I cannot see The God." While ignoring his "works" as just science.

Can you see a Virus? no, it is microscopic. You never know what hit you until you are sick or dying. What gave Man the knowlegde to align all those lenses to see what was killing him?

Can you see Air? no. You simply take it for granted that it is there. Some air is fresh and clean, some is down right foul, some is not even "Air" it may be Helium, Ammonia, Cyanide, etc.

But you feel it, do you not?

What keeps us from crashing into the moon or another planet? The World spins, why it it always balanced even though there is motion on it? (Spin a ball and touch it with your finger, see it start to wobble.) Our spin is about a thousand miles an hour, while spinning 67,000 or so miles around the Sun itself, yet a leaf can sit still on a tree and not move? Or we are not just flung-slung into space where there is no "air" but only looks like there is.

Look at the Human offsping, could it survive with a "Parent"? No. In the wild all that crying would say: "Free Lunch".

So, the "Parent" had to have come first, and as a full "Adult" to defend it's rather pathetically weak young.

I cannot tell you "where" that which is every where in His Knowledge (The God) is.

But if you look you can feel The Presence.

Islam was sent down as the Completion of the already here Religion (Q 5:4) and it was Perfected.

You cannot make something "Perfect" better...

Yet, people call themselves doing so.

For example: everyone is awaiting the "Magic" of the Rapture, even Muslims in their own way.

Excuse me, In the Bible towards the end of Matthew (as I remember it ) The Messiah was asked when he would be returning. Go find it. Go study it. That is not a "Rapture" when he is returning, that is Judgement Day.

Q: 3:55 "mutawaffeeka wa raafeuka ilaya" "I will take your soul and raise you up to me."
Q: 5: 119-120 "When you took me up, You were the Watcher over them."

That is where he Died, and when He was Raised Up, show me where he came back before Judgement Day. If he had came back, he would have known what was done in his name.

The Book tells the Truth of the matter. Both books agree on that point.

Isa / Jesus told his Disciples: "Do not go to the Gentiles" Matt 5:10 and Saul/ Paul who was not of the Original twelve took it on himself to do so.

So is it the Messiah's fault? He was only a man "The son of man".

Every one on this world has been Agnostic - needing proof at some point. Just do not become Atheist.
Reply

BoredAgnostic
04-26-2007, 10:21 PM
Originally Posted by Al-Mu'minah
Hi there,

I do not see the purpose or benefit in you posting her work here. If she wants a dialogic/discussion then she is more than welcome to register :)

The only benefit for me is that I wanted to see this blog refuted, because I personally didn't believe it was true....but having the detailed information shown by the posters on this thread would show her that the Qur'an isn't false on those reasons.

I've posted her this link twice..it doesn't seem like she wants to registered here.
Reply

BoredAgnostic
04-26-2007, 10:43 PM
I am Atheist Agnostic in the sense that I don't currently believe in the traditional God because I haven't found a good reason to, but you are right if there was substantial evidence leading to a God..that would help a great deal.
None of the things you mentions are 1) Have human characteristics-Love, Mercy, Anger, etc 2) They didn't reveal to human beings their message via scruptures 3) They aren't part of a story line with mythological concepts, angels, demons, etc.. 4) They don't talk to humans
I don't believe in the biblical scriptures literally..

But yaaa...all this is for a another thread..eh.
Reply

Malaikah
04-27-2007, 07:27 AM
If you open a new thread with your questions, we will be more than happy to help. :)
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

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-24-2018, 03:25 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-30-2011, 03:20 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2011, 02:33 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-03-2008, 05:40 PM
HeartHijab.com | Hijab Sale | Pound Shop | UK Wholesale Certified Face Masks, Hand Sanitiser & PPE

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!