A Question Relating to the Bible being changed

format_quote Originally Posted by Grace Seeker

Eesa,

I just realized something, that I don't know why it didn't sink in before. It would do absolutely no good -- with respect to Islam that is -- for Christians to be in possessions of the original autographs of the Bible. As far as Islam is concerned, even what was originally written down could itself be tainted and you would be under no compulsion to accept it as the accurate record of Jesus revelation or any other revelation of God. It would still be just as you said above --"The process that allowed some mistakes to enter the Biblical Writing is one that doesn't just dissapear when a part of the text agrees with the Qu'ran." -- unless it were penned by Jesus himself. And even if that existed, but there were differences between that and what was written in the Qur'an, Islam would just argue that it was not the work of Jesus based on the belief that the Qur'an was authentic and thus anything else that disagreed must be what is in error. There is no proof that anyone could ever to a true believe in the Qur'an that anything else could be valid if it disagreed with the Qur'an. It is not a question of proof or reason, it is purely a question of faith.

Yes I think that is true. Christians could have texts of any ancient age, in excellent preserved condition, and because of the manner in which the Bible is a collection of writings by different authors, the case for corruption could always be made.

I also appreciate Woodrow, Eesa, Grace Seeker and others who can participate in on-line discussion calmly and with mutual respect. I am still learning, but I think I'm doing better.

Peace.

format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow

Speaking for myself, I would say that if there had been no loss or distortion of the Message Isa(as) was given, he would have been the final Prophet(PBUH) and there would have been no need for Allah(swt) to have sent the Qur'an as Muhammad(PBUH) would have already had the true Injil to spread to the world.

However, from my perspective I respectfully disagree. We must ask, "What was the message and mission of Jesus (pbuh) as comparaed to the message and mission of Muhammad (pbuh)?" According to the Bible, Jesus was sent to the "lost sheep of Israel" Matthew 15:22-24 "And behold, a Canaanitish woman came out from those borders, and cried, saying, "Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a demon." But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, "Send her away; for she crieth after us." But he answered and said, "I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel." In contrast, we believe that Muhammad (pbuh) was sent to the whole world - not just the Arabs.

I believe that a part of the mission of Jesus (pbuh) was to foretell the coming of Muhammad as I interpret the "Comforter" referred to in John. For example, John 16:13-14 "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, [these] shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall take of mine, and shall declare [it] unto you."

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the means through which Allah established Islam as a perfected religion and way of life for all of mankind and until the Judgement Day. The basic beliefs are the same as that brought by other prophets but some details of worship and worldly legislation were abrogated and new ones established. For example, no longer observing the Sabbath (Saturday), but now worshipping in congregation on Friday.