Why do muslims use the bible if they don't 'believe' in it?

This is your statment!

format_quote Originally Posted by Nisthar

as muslims, we believe in injil , the original word of god sent down to prophet Isa (pbuh).

My question is were can I get a copy to read?

Third time I have asked and you still avoid the question. One must then assume this Injil you refer to is a fantasy of the Islamic faith. Thus the reason you have to hijack the bible. Yet you do not follow your own Qurans message as noted in Surha 3:3 and others. Thus if you do not accept the Quran teaching about the Bible. What else are you avoiding.
This is not about me or my faith, its about you and your salvation. That fact is you have been lied to, look at the facts for yourself and your family. Make an informed decision.

I say again re John 3:16. Any Christian who dose not believe this scripture is nothing less than Satan. You on the other hand simply deny it, well until you accept it you are just as lost.

Re Mohammad in the Bible, please stop listing to you leaders and do the research your self and then make a decision.

Re proof of Biblical text, the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint are the two main ones, then there are the Dead sea scrolls that predate the Masorectic text by 900 years and are exactly the same. Again do the homework. There are over 5,000 copies of the new testament in dating back as far as the first century. The list is endless. The Quran, 1 copy dated around the 8th century, hidden and no one may compare it to Islamic teachings or today Quran.

Regards
Doug

format_quote Originally Posted by dwa2day

This is your statment!

Originally Posted by Nisthar
as muslims, we believe in injil , the original word of god sent down to prophet Isa (pbuh).

My question is were can I get a copy to read?

Third time I have asked and you still avoid the question. One must then assume this Injil you refer to is a fantasy of the Islamic faith. Thus the reason you have to hijack the bible. Yet you do not follow your own Qurans message as noted in Surha 3:3 and others. Thus if you do not accept the Quran teaching about the Bible. What else are you avoiding.
This is not about me or my faith, its about you and your salvation. That fact is you have been lied to, look at the facts for yourself and your family. Make an informed decision.

I say again re John 3:16. Any Christian who dose not believe this scripture is nothing less than Satan. You on the other hand simply deny it, well until you accept it you are just as lost.

Re Mohammad in the Bible, please stop listing to you leaders and do the research your self and then make a decision.

Re proof of Biblical text, the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint are the two main ones, then there are the Dead sea scrolls that predate the Masorectic text by 900 years and are exactly the same. Again do the homework. There are over 5,000 copies of the new testament in dating back as far as the first century. The list is endless. The Quran, 1 copy dated around the 8th century, hidden and no one may compare it to Islamic teachings or today Quran.

Regards
Doug

Hello again Sir,

It is not correct of you to use certain verses of the Qur’an such as Surah 3, verse 3 to state that the Qur’an tells Muslims to believe in the Bible – whereas the Bible isn’t even a recognized book in Islamic theology, the Injil is. It is the Injil that the Qur’an is referring to.

In good faith, I will assume you must have missed the Qur’anic verse in my initial post to you:

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

The Bible wasn’t given to Isa . It was put together many years after Isa left this world.

Perhaps you should look into the history of the Catholic Church to figure out the fate of the Injil. In a PM, you yourself told me that I was hiding things like the Catholic Church did in the Middle Ages. Now we’re supposed to believe that this corrupt institution has come clean on everything. That’s your choice if you do.

So no, the Qur’an does not confirm the Bible, it confirms the Injil – which has been lost.

As far as your comparing Qur’anic with Biblical authenticity: there is no comparison. You base your Faith on archaeological findings and information from anonymous sources – we base ours on studying the character of the person transmitting the message. Please do refer to post http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/134341862-islam-based-biblical-teachings-4.html#post2928102

Hi pops,

format_quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder

The teachings and example of the Christ is preserved in the bible,...

I didn't dismiss the Bible (i.e. Torah/Jewish & New Testament/Christian in one book) as an important book. As this is about Isa , in at least a couple of places I mentioned the Islamic perspective in relation to the New Testament:

"At best, the New Testament is a historical record (ahadith) with questionable chains of transmission"

So I am not throwing out the baby with the bathwater. I am just specifying what the Qur'an is talking about.

though many focus on other things.

In order to ascertain and maintain the soundness of what our beloved Prophet said, we do have to focus on specifics.

format_quote Originally Posted by popsthebuilder

I wasn't responding to you. I was just stating the truth in general.

Saying that the best of what can be extracted from the bible is a historic account of some sorts is, well, just not true.

Everything I read in the Quran is verified with the Bible. Everything I read in the bible is verified by the Quran. There are minor differences, but they teach the same things for the same reason to the faithful and submissive to GOD and the will of GOD.

If you refute that then you should study some more. If you don't refute it then you should be openly honest about it even amongst fellow Muslims.

We all have the potential to remove fear, greed and pride leaving only truth. Questioning ones own motives at the core level is helpful in shedding light on one's own internal manipulation.

Not saying that you or anyone else are being self manipulated, again just stating the truth.

Peace

Hi again,

One of my responsibilities as Moderator here on IB is to clarify the Islamic position on matters and make sure these clarifications are made - particularly - when un-Islamic things are mentioned and false statements are made about Islam.

And yes, I am proud. I am proud of the Messenger of Allah - who brought the Truth from the Lord to humanity. In Islam, there is no understanding of Allah without Muhammad .

He can not be taken out nor his position be watered down to fit the misguided sensitivities of people. Furthermore, my pride only increases knowing that Islam has something called the isnaad and the various Islamic sciences - so we can verify Truth from falsehood.

There is no Lord except Allah, and Muhammad is His Messenger.

* Please note that the pride I have in Islam and my own personal pride are mutually exclusive - having no relationship whatsoever.

format_quote Originally Posted by najimuddin

Hi again,

One of my responsibilities as Moderator here on IB is to clarify the Islamic position on matters and make sure these clarifications are made - particularly - when un-Islamic things are mentioned and false statements are made about Islam.

And yes, I am proud. I am proud of the Messenger of Allah - who brought the Truth from the Lord to humanity. In Islam, there is no understanding of Allah without Muhammad .

He can not be taken out nor his position be watered down to fit the misguided sensitivities of people. Furthermore, my pride only increases knowing that Islam has something called the isnaad and the various Islamic sciences - so we can verify Truth from falsehood.

There is no Lord except Allah, and Muhammad is His Messenger.

* Please note that the pride I have in Islam and my own personal pride are mutually exclusive - having no relationship whatsoever.

There is nothing wrong with being proud of the messengers of GOD. I would hope that all would look to clarify discrepancies and lies regardless of whom they are directed towards or come from. I'm glad your pride in GOD and His messengers isn't conflated with your personal pride. That is a good thing surely. My entire point was that the messengers of GOD are all of GOD and of one accord, yet instead of emulating this; people choose to draw dividing lines based on pride fear and greed. You, being a mod have no doubt read my posts in the past. I consider myself faithful and submissive to GOD alone. My initial post, again, was in general, and not anti Islamic or against the Quran.

Peace

format_quote Originally Posted by dwa2day

Hi Najimuddin.
Before we put the Injl to rest, I comment on the following form your post.

In understanding history one can be empowered not to make the same mistake again. When an institution say “Because I say so” like the Catholic church did in the middle ages it takes the single most import human right away from people, The Right to Make Their Own Choice. Do the maths your self.

Math?

Yes, this corrupt institution violated human rights in multiple ways since its inception.

They corrupted the very foundation of belief for those that claim to follow Isa – by for example, like you mentioned, hiding things. The hierarchy within are known liars and criminals – with examples that extend into contemporary society.

Clearly you have no understanding of the importance of Historical facts and how they authenticate any given premise one may have. Weather you choose to engage in the historical record or not has no bearing of the discussion, simply ha lack of insight into the truth on your part.

We have no meeting point on the determination of scriptural authenticity. We’re talking about qualitatively different things. We have a different understanding of facts and their interpretation.

As I mentioned in a previous post, you base your Faith on archaeological findings and anonymous sources – Muslims base theirs on evaluating the trustworthiness of the transmitter of the message.

I invite you to investigate and learn about the Islamic method of verifying authenticity by clicking on the following links. They provide a decent introductory discussion on these matters:

https://ahadithnotes.com/2016/08/13/...o-the-prophet/

&

https://ahadithnotes.com/2016/09/04/...at-from-chaff/

There's a lot more.

The Injil
The Quran makes the following statements about the Injil:
And in their footsteps, We sent 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun (the pious - see V.2:2). S. 5:46 Al-Hilali & Khan; cf. S. 57:27

He [Jesus] said, "Lo, I am God's servant; God has given me the Book, and made me a Prophet." S. 19:30 Arberry

It is He Who has sent down the Book (the Qur'an) to you (Muhammad SAW) with truth, confirming what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel). S. 3:3 Al-Hilali & Khan

Sura 5:46 states that the Injil was given to Jesus by Allah. Sura 19:30 and 3:3 then clarify that the Injil is a book just as the Qur'an and the Torah are books that were sent down by Allah.

The Qur'an also contains a second set of statements regarding the Injil:
Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah has revealed therein. ... S. 5:47 Al-Hilali & Khan

Say: "People of the Book, you do not stand on anything, until you perform the Torah and the Gospel [Injil], and what was sent down to you from your Lord." ... S. 5:68 Arberry

Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel [Injil] (which are) with them. S. 7:157 Pickthall

[Say (O Muhammad SAW)] "Shall I seek a judge other than Allah while it is He Who has sent down unto you the Book (The Qur'an), explained in detail." Those unto whom We gave the Scripture [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] know that it is revealed from your Lord in truth. So be not you of those who doubt. S. 6:114 Al-Hilali & Khan

These verses make clear that the Injil is the book of the Christians, the book that is with them and which they believe in. The author of the Qur'an even admonishes the Christians to fully obey (the Torah and) the Injil that they have.

However, here is the problem: when we look at the New Testament, the book which is the Scripture of the Christians, we see that it nowhere makes the claim that it is a book that was "given to Jesus". On the contrary, the New Testament consists of several books that were written by followers of Jesus (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) After the ascension of Jesus.

This is not a logical statement to make in regards to Islam. Why would anyone look into the New Testament to find a passage stating that it was a book given to Isa when the New Testament was compiled after Isa left this world?

This should make it clear that the Injil the Qur’an is talking about is not the New Testament and definitely not the Bible.

This is where the corruption lies.

Therefore, the Injil can EITHER be a book given to Jesus, OR it can be the book that the Christians hold as they Holy Scriptures, but it cannot be both. The essential nature of the Qur'an and the Bible are very different. A book "given to Jesus" in a similar way as Muhammad claims to have received the Qur'an does not exist and Christians have never claimed that such a book existed at any time.

Muhammad apparently assumed that the Scripture of the Christians (and Jews) would be very similar to the Qur'an, the book which he thought he received from Allah. However, Muhammad was clearly ignorant of the matter. This claim of S. 5:46 is merely a wrong idea that sprang from the mind of Muhammad.

Had the author of the Qur'an made only statements like those found in S. 5:46 and 19:30, it might have been an option for Muslims to claim that the Injil of Jesus was simply lost. Thus if Jesus indeed did received such a book but, somehow, it disappeared. Muslims could have said that the NT clearly is something very different from the Injil as defined by the Qur'an, and could have concluded that therefore they do not believe in the Christian New Testament since the Qur'an does not endorse it.

However, the second set of statements above prevents this explanation. The Qur'an identifies the Injil as the Scripture of the Christians. Thus, since the Injil is the book of the Christians, the Qur'an makes a blatantly wrong claim about the basic nature of the Injil. It neither is nor ever was a book given to Jesus.

How could this error arise in the mind of Muhammad? He may have heard statements like in the first verse of the Gospel according to Mark:
The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, ... and mistakenly thought that this meant the same as "the Torah of Moses" i.e. a revelation given to a prophet in form of a book. However, reading the context shows that it means "this is the beginning of the Gospel ABOUT Jesus Christ"; the Gospel is the message telling us about the life and teaching of Jesus, written up by his followers, not a book given to Jesus himself.

Muhammad projected his own experience of receiving revelation of a book (the Qur'an) on Jesus and simply assumed that the book OF Jesus that was held sacred by his followers must also have been a book given to Jesus (like the sacred book of the Muslims is the book given to Muhammad). However, Muhammad was wrong about this, and this mistake exposes the Qur'an as a forgery. The Qur'an is not divine revelation but a collection of mistaken assumptions by its author.

Why then, my (missionary?) friend are you attempting to make Muslims believe that the Qur'an confirms the Bible?

In most cases when the Qur'an contradicts the Bible, Muslims shout, "but the Bible is corrupted", as if that is the answer and solution to every such problem. There are at least two reasons why this response will not solve the problem.

First, the Qur'an never claims that the Injil is corrupted. There are certain accusations against the Jews, but no charge that the Christians corrupted their Scripture. The Qur'an does not support the Muslim claim of Bible corruption.

Second, even if there had been some corruption of certain passages, small changes resulting in certain shifts of meaning, this cannot possibly explain the above contradiction in the Qur'an. Here we have a fundamental difference in the nature of the book which cannot be accounted for either with gradual changes or with a sudden change.
For illustration: The Qur'an is (allegedly) a book that was "sent down" from Allah to Muhammad. It was (supposedly) not written by Muhammad but given to him by Allah. On the other hand, the Hadith are memories of the companions and followers of Muhammad, formulated and written up by Muslims long after the death of Muhammad. They are their recollection of what Muhammad said and did.

As we've already established, the Injil is not the New Testament and definitely not the Bible. Hence, there is no contradiction in the Qur'an.

Since you believe the Qur'an is a forgery, it's interesting that you're using Qur'anic verses to support your argument.

The Qur'an does support the Muslim claim of Christian scriptural corruption, since the Injil itself is lost and the Christians are using something totally different than what the Lord gave Isa.

Would it be possible for anyone to change the Qur'an (the book given to Muhammad) into a collection of hadiths without the Muslim community realizing that their scripture had changed into something entirely different?

Without doubt, the Muslim answer will be a resounding NO.

But if that is impossible for the Muslim book and community, why would any Muslim think that this would have been possible in the Christian community? Originally, the Christians had a "book given to Jesus" but one day they woke up and their scripture had turned into a collection of writings by followers of Jesus and nobody realized the change, and nobody protested against it? Believing such a theory demands a lot of blind faith in the Qur'an. It is impossible. Anyone with the least bit of common sense will have to conclude that this cannot possibly have happened, and this implies that the author of the Qur'an simply made an error regarding the nature of the Christian Scripture.

Regards
Doug

With all the liars and criminals in the Catholic Church, I beg to differ with you by saying it is completely possible. It is absolutely possible that you only know what the Church hierarchy released to the public. To think otherwise demands that we believe that criminals and liars with a vested interest in protecting their positions decided to come clean on everything.

In light of this: You can believe that Muhammad was mistaken. There is no compulsion for you to believe in Islam. May the Lord guide you to the Truth.

You cannot, however, say that he was a corrupt individual - as his integrity has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

For the convenience of our readership I will reproduce a portion of a previous post I made that gives a synopsis relating to the foundation of Islamic belief and practice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The foundation of the Islamic faith is based on the truthfulness of the Messenger of Allah .

The renowned Islamic scholar, Mawlana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi has mentioned:

"Absolute truthfulness and dependability of a messenger of God constitute the first and the most essential factor for acceptance of his mission."

Source: (Muhammad Rasulullah: The Apostle of Mercy, p. 111)

The wisdom of Allah is indeed amazing. Muhammad interacted with society for 40 years prior to being commissioned as a Prophet by Allah. This resulted in the Prophet Muhammad's truthfulness being confirmed by all who knew him. It is for this reason that he was known as Al-Amin. Those that refused to acknowledge the message of revelation realized that he wasn't a liar. Thus, their rejections were for a variety of other reasons.

As stated of the Prophet by Mawlana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi :

"From early youth, the unobtrusive youngman was known for his gentle disposition and austere purity of his life as well as his candidness, honesty and integrity and the stern sense of duty. His was the straight and narrow path and none could find the slightest fault with him. The fair character and honourable bearing of the Apostle won for him, in the flower of his youth, the title of Al-Amin, the Trusty, from his fellow citizens."

Source: (Muhammad Rasulullah: The Apostle of Mercy, pp. 97-98)

The reports of the Prophet Muhammad's truthfulness are of the highest degree of authenticity due to their being mutawatir. The definition of this Islamic term is:

"A mass-transmitted report that is transmitted from one generation to the next in such large numbers, that one could not imagine that they conspired to forge it."

(See The Preservation of Hadith)

According to the principles of Islam, one of the processes involved in evaluating a report is the scrutiny of the reporter's biography. In an Islamic context, the messenger is of no less importance than the message itself. For a glimpse of who Mawlana Sayyid Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi was, please see the following: About Mawlana Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi.

In light of this, the knowledge of the Shari'ah has a specific method of transmission. There are no clerics in Islam. There are people who have spent time and effort learning Islam and it's principles. They become experts (i.e. scholars/ulama) in understanding, practicing, and explaining Islam to others and are known by various titles (i.e. Shaykh, Maulana, etc.) People, thus, look to them for guidance. These subject-matter experts are not a separate class of people as in Catholicism, for example.

"The method in which this divine knowledge was passed down to us by our predecessors was from heart to heart which required one to be under the direct tutorship and supervision of ‘Ulama. The first teacher of this ummah was our beloved Rasulullah (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) who taught the Sahaba (radhiyallahu ‘anhum), they then taught the Tabi’een (rahimahumullah), who in turn taught the Tab’e Tabi’een (rahimahullah) and who in turn taught our predecessors. As such, the knowledge of Shari’ah was transferred from generation to generation in this manner."

Source: http://www.askimam.org/public/question_detail/30663

The knowledge of Shari’ah continues to be transmitted this way. The verification of its authenticity can be ascertained by becoming acquainted with the people who are part of this method of education. The image below shows the chains of transmission in ahadith for Shaykh Mansur Memon Madani, Shaykh al-Hadith Abdul Moiz, Shaykh Ibrahim Memon Madani, and Mufti Husain Ahmed Madani. They are all currently teachers at Darul Uloom Canada.

Image obtained from:http://enterthesunnah.com/bloggers-short-bios/.

A high quality version can be obtained by clicking on the following link: https://bukhari2013.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/sanad.pdf




With the context established above, if-then statements and/or criteria for comprehending the authenticity of Islamic narratives – such as the Qur’an – are not contingent on non-Islamic understandings/philosophy/logic. Shaikh Ibrahim Madani - a high-level subject matter expert of traditional Islam - has stated that the correct way for a Muslim to understand everything, including historical narratives in the Qur’an, is through what Muhammad has taught us.

For example:

• All historical narratives in the Qur’an are from Allah.
• Muhammad’s truthfulness is established beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Therefore, the authenticity of Qur’anic narratives are not contingent on non-Muslim beliefs/philosophy/logic.
• They are contingent on what Muhammad told us.

We, as Muslims, do not accept any other authority on this matter and we learn the context of this information from subject-matter experts like those mentioned above.

format_quote Originally Posted by najimuddin

Math? .........................
We, as Muslims, do not accept any other authority on this matter and we learn the context of this information from subject-matter experts like those mentioned above.

Hi najimuddin
Thank you for your reply.
With regard to your comments on post, it seems to me you have a foot on both sides. I say this as if the Quran dose not refer to the Bible as I have noted, then clearly you do not accept the writing of the Quran. Yet at the same time you claim authority in the biblical writings when you claimed in your previous post Mahammad is prophesied in the Bible.

Regarding your links, thank your and explanation. In simplicity all you are saying is the Isnad is the chain of authorities (Muslim Scholars) attesting to the historical authenticity of Islam. Similar to when one get his friends together to make a club and they agree on the mission statement.
Problem with this is it is only valid for the group not accepted rules of apologetics. That is to say it is easy to get likeminded people to agree on their own rules. Just the the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages.

Regards
Doug

format_quote Originally Posted by dwa2day

Hi najimuddin
Thank you for your reply.
With regard to your comments on post, it seems to me you have a foot on both sides. I say this as if the Quran dose not refer to the Bible as I have noted, then clearly you do not accept the writing of the Quran. Yet at the same time you claim authority in the biblical writings when you claimed in your previous post Mahammad is prophesied in the Bible.

A study of my posts will show that you are clearly mistaken as I would never do such a thing.

Furthermore, a study of your words quoted above in comparison to both our posts are not in line with reality. In fact, they are misleading.

Regarding your links, thank your and explanation. In simplicity all you are saying is the Isnad is the chain of authorities (Muslim Scholars) attesting to the historical authenticity of Islam. Similar to when one get his friends together to make a club and they agree on the mission statement.
Problem with this is it is only valid for the group not accepted rules of apologetics. That is to say it is easy to get likeminded people to agree on their own rules. Just the the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages.

Regards
Doug

A reading of the articles provide much more than your simple explanation.

It is clear you are not here to learn and have expressed a desire (both implicitly and explicitly) to take Muslims away from Islam. For this reason, I am disabling your account.

Rest assured. I will not delete your posts. Nothing will be hidden.