Things in Islam I am curious about...

In the translations of verses from the Qur'an below, I have highlighted the words of Jesus (peace be upon him) in red, and those of the disciples in purple.

Thanks, so much. That was incredibly helpful.

Is that the TOTALITY of all that either Jesus or the disciples spoke in the Qur'an?

What other stories might be told about the message of either Jesus or his disciples in the ahadith or even in Islamic tradition? For instance, I know that it isn't actually in the Qur'an or ahadith, but many Muslims think that Judas died in Jesus' place because such stories have been handed down over generations. Are there other similar stories with regard to either their message or other acts?
 
I hate to try to carry on two conversations at once, it can get rather confusing as to which one is replying, but Muslim Woman your post raised an old question that as yet no one has really addressed for me. You quoted from the Qur'an:

And verily, We have sent among every Ummah (community, nation) a Messenger (proclaiming): "Worship Allah (Alone), and avoid (or keep away from) Taghut (all false deities i.e. do not worship Taghut besides Allah)."

What is the purpose of including the paranthetical comments? I often see them in the English translations that I read. I understand that they are meant to help provide explanation for better interpretation, but are they really needed right in the text? Doesn't it add to the risk that the translator's particular interpretation of the meaning of a verse gets injected into the reading?

I'm thinking a more true translation would simply read: And verily, We have sent among every Ummah a Messenger: "Worship Allah, and avoid Taghut." Then, if the reader had trouble understanding the passage, s/he would be advised to consult a footnote or a commentary to better understand the meaning, as opposed having the interpretive comments written directly into the text.

Though, perhaps, this practice is one reason that Muslims insist that one not accept a translation as being the equivialent as reading the actual Qur'an in Arabic? Are such intrepretory/explanatory comments that are found in the parenthesis omitted when reading the Qur'an in Arabic?
 
Last edited:
Is that the TOTALITY of all that either Jesus or the disciples spoke in the Qur'an?

That is the totality of the disciples' words, and it is all that Allah has said about them in the Qur'an.

It is the totality of Jesus's (peace be upon him) words, but not the totality of what Allah has said about him in the Qur'an. For example, there are verses where Allah talks about his miraculous birth, the fact that he was no more than a messenger, that he was given the Injeel (scripture), was not the son of God etc, but those verses do not contain words that Jesus (peace be upon him) himself spoke, rather Allah Himself is telling us those facts.

What other stories might be told about the message of either Jesus or his disciples in the ahadith or even in Islamic tradition? For instance, I know that it isn't actually in the Qur'an or ahadith, but many Muslims think that Judas died in Jesus' place because such stories have been handed down over generations. Are there other similar stories with regard to either their message or other acts?

Not that I know of, and I have not heard any authentic hadeeth that suggests that, but that could be due to my own lack of knowledge. Allah knows best in that matter.

In terms of the message that Jesus (peace be upon him) brought, it is the exact same message that all the other Prophets and Messengers were sent with: to draw people back to fearing Allah and worshipping Him alone, and to obey the instructions of the Prophet of the time.

The message has never changed, specific certain customary laws may have been different according to the place, time and circumstance, however the message that all the messengers preached was exactly the same, as God sent them with the same message. The goalposts never changed.

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is the final messenger sent for all mankind, so since the advent of his Prophethood, he is the Prophet to be obeyed til the end of time.

If you compare the bolded parts of verses in my previous post (spoken by Jesus peace be upon him) with the following, spoken by other prophets, you'll be able to see the similarity:

Indeed, We sent Noah to his people, [saying], "Warn your people before there comes to them a painful punishment."

He said: "O my people! Lo! I am a plain warner unto you

(Bidding you): 'Worship Allah, fear Him and obey me'. (71:1-3)

**********************************************

And [We sent] Abraham, when he said to his people, "Worship Allah and fear Him. That is best for you, if you should know." (29:16)

**********************************************

The folk of Lot denied the messengers (of Allah),
When their brother Lot said unto them: "Will ye not ward off (evil)?
Lo! I am a faithful messenger unto you,
So worship Allah and obey me.
No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord of the Worlds." (26:160-164)

**********************************************

And Aaron had already told them before [the return of Moses], "O my people, you are only being tested by it, and indeed, your Lord is the Most Merciful, so follow me and obey my order". (20:90)

**********************************************

(The tribe of) Aad denied the messengers.
When their brother Hud said unto them: "Will ye not ward off (evil)?
Lo! I am a faithful messenger unto you,
So fear Allah and obey me." (23:123-126)

**********************************************

And to the Thamud [We sent] their brother Salih. He said, "O my people, worship Allah ; you have no deity other than Him.... " (7:73, part)

**********************************************

And to Madyan [We sent] their brother Shu'ayb. He said, "O my people, worship Allah ; you have no deity other than Him." (11:80)

**********************************************

We sent no Messenger, but to be obeyed by Allah's Leave.. (4:64, part)

**********************************************

And the Qur'an exhorts people on many, many, more occasions, to worship Allah alone, associate none in His Divinity, fear Him, and obey the prophet (peace be upon him). That is the message that has always been.

Peace.
 
Last edited:
Given the above information then, why do Muslims believe that, prior to the arrival of the Qur'an, there is no record of this being the message proclaimed by the disciples? Not only is it not a part of the Christian scriptures, but it also isn't a part of other Christian writings of that day, nor even in those writings which were rejected by the early church. Were the disciples so quick to fall away that Jesus' real message didn't even last one generation after Jesus was taken into heaven or is there another reason this "Muslim" message of Jesus appears to have been lost to history?

And why does what history we do have record Jesus' disciples being willing to die to proclaim a different message (and especially a different version of Jesus' life) than that which the Qur'an teaches?
 
Given the above information then, why do Muslims believe that, prior to the arrival of the Qur'an, there is no record of this being the message proclaimed by the disciples? Not only is it not a part of the Christian scriptures, but it also isn't a part of other Christian writings of that day, nor even in those writings which were rejected by the early church. Were the disciples so quick to fall away that Jesus' real message didn't even last one generation after Jesus was taken into heaven or is there another reason this "Muslim" message of Jesus appears to have been lost to history?

And why does what history we do have record Jesus' disciples being willing to die to proclaim a different message (and especially a different version of Jesus' life) than that which the Qur'an teaches?

From the Qur'an we do know that the disciples believed in the Injeel (the scripture given by Allah to Jesus [peace be upon him]) at the time of the Prophethood of Jesus (peace be upon him) :

But when Jesus became conscious of their disbelief, he cried: "Who will be my helpers in the cause of Allah?" The disciples said: "We will be Allah's helpers. We believe in Allah, and bear thou witness that we have surrendered (unto Him). Our Lord! We believe in that which Thou hast revealed and we follow him whom Thou hast sent. Enrol us among those who witness (to the truth)". (3:52-53)

As such, the disciples would be expected to proclaim the same message.

I am not sure whether there are any ahadeeth that talk about when and why the message appears to have changed/corrupted, and am not particularly learned on the subject, but found the following:

These four accounts which they call the Gospel, and they call each one of them a Gospel, were written by these men after the Messiah had been taken up into heaven. They did not say that they are the word of God or that the Messiah conveyed them from God, rather they narrated some of the words of the Messiah and some of his deeds and miracles.

Moreover, these books which were written after the time of the Messiah did not remain in their original form. The original versions were lost long ago.

During this time, the Gospel that had been revealed from Allaah disappeared, apart from a few verses which Allaah preserved as proof against them and as a rebuke to them

I have taken these quotes from the link below, to help answer your questions about why there isn't a record of such a message being proclaimed by the disciples, and why it seems different. From a Christian point of view, you may not see everything in it as being accurate, but it gives one explanation for why there is no such clear record today.

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/47516/disciples For your information, 'Eesa = Jesus (peace be upon him).

We also know that disagreements took place.

When Jesus came with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty), he said: "I have come unto you with wisdom, and to make plain some of that concerning which ye differ. So fear Allah, and obey me. Lo! Allah, He is my Lord and your Lord. So worship Him. This is a right path."
But the factions among them differed. Then woe unto those who do wrong from the doom of a painful day. (43:63-65)

Then the factions differed [concerning Jesus] from among them, so woe to those who disbelieved - from the scene of a tremendous Day. (19:37)

It seems it was a combination of factors at the time. And Allah knows best.

Peace.
 
Last edited:

[FONT=&quot]These four accounts which they call the Gospel, and they call each one of them a Gospel, were written by these men after the Messiah had been taken up into heaven. They did not say that they are the word of God or that the Messiah conveyed them from God, rather they narrated some of the words of the Messiah and some of his deeds and miracles.


[FONT=&quot]Moreover, these books which were written after the time of the Messiah did not remain in their original form. The original versions were lost long ago.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]During this time, the Gospel that had been revealed from Allaah disappeared, apart from a few verses which Allaah preserved as proof against them and as a rebuke to them.[/FONT]

[/FONT]
The Qur'an speaks with approval of the Bible using the terms "Torah" and "Injeel". This presents an awkward problem for Muslims because the Bible disagrees with the Qur'an. The only way out of this difficulty is to argue that the Torah and Injeel are not the Bible at all but rather books that have been lost.

In Appendix No.2 of my copy of Yusuf Ali's translation it concludes: "The correct translation of the Taurat is therefore "The Law." In its original form it was promulgated by Moses, and is recognised as having been an inspired Book. But it was lost before Islam was preached."

And in Appendix No.3 of the same book it similarly states: "The Injil (Greek. Evangel = Gospel) spoken of by the Qur'an is not the New Testament. It is not the four Gospels now received as canonical."


Strangely though, Surah 10:94 gives Muhammed this directive: "If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee". A footnote here says: ""The Book" in this connection is Revelation generally, including pre-Islamic revelations." It is difficult to see how contemporaries of Muhammed could have been reading any "Book" that "was lost before Islam was preached" according to the appendix.
 
Last edited:


I don't get your point. Those links say exactly what Hiroshi said above, they "argue that the Torah and Injeel are not the Bible at all but rather books that have been lost." And they do not at all address the key point he was making:

It is difficult to see how contemporaries of Muhammed could have been reading any "Book" that "was lost before Islam was preached" according to the appendix.


Be that as it may, that's not really my concern. Rather, despite Insaanah's helpful posts, I am still confused as to the rationale that Islam provides for the disciples being willing to go to the death to defend a teaching that, according to Islam, they did not themselves believe.
 
Salaam/Peace

... Doesn't it add to the risk that the translator's particular interpretation of the meaning of a verse gets injected into the reading?


the translation I read , it's always mentioned in the footnote that these specific words are not written in Arabic i.e Quran .


Are such intrepretory/explanatory comments that are found in the parenthesis omitted when reading the Qur'an in Arabic?

Let's wait for Arab participants. I hope , to avoid the confusion , texts other than the original one are written in different colour / style / withing bracket etc.
 
Salaam/Peace

....And if the Bible was already lost before Islam was preached then Surah 10:94 is asking the impossible.


human being corrupted the privious scripts but still some truth were there and people were waiting for " That Prophet ".

So if you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) are in doubt concerning that which We have revealed unto you, [i.e. that your name is written in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)], then ask those who are reading the Book [the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] before you.

Verily, the truth has come to you from your Lord. So be not of those who doubt (it).


Did the Jews and Christians of that time recognize prophet Muhammad and expect his coming?

All the Jews and Christians of that time recognized God’s Messenger, upon him be peace and blessings. As stated in the Qur’an, They recognize him as they recognize their sons (al-Baqara, 2.146).


Those to whom We gave the Scripture (Jews and Christians) recognise him (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم or the Ka'bah at Makkah) as they recognise their sons. But verily, a party of them conceal the truth while they know it - [i.e. the qualities of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم which are written in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)].



After his conversion, ‘Umar asked ‘Adbullah ibn Salam if he had recognized God’s Messen-ger. ‘I recognized him’, Ibn Salam answered and added, ‘I may doubt my children – my wife might have deceived me; but I have no doubt about God’s Messenger being the Last Prophet

http://www.islamanswers.net/Prophet/jews.htm
 
I am still confused as to the rationale that Islam provides for the disciples being willing to go to the death to defend a teaching that, according to Islam, they did not themselves believe.

The rationale that actually needs to be looked at is this: Why, after thousands of years of sending messengers and prophets preaching one thing, God suddenly changes His mind and decides that he is composed of three persons/essences/godheads i.e. a trinity, and suddenly decides to beget offspring. And, why God would present as the main crux of the belief of a faith, a concept that doesn't make sense, people don't fully understand, can't explain, and so end up saying, "Well, you don't need to understand what you believe in", or, "The Lord works in mysterious ways".

When God (God forbid) suddenly becomes inconsistent in the message He sent, alarm bells should ring.

What Allah did tell us, is the most important thing that we need to know. That there is no trinity, that He did not beget a son, and that prior to the Qur'an, people have been writing things down and then themselves or others claiming it as a scripture/from God etc, and that the Qur'an comes confirming the message of the original divinely revealed scriptures. Allah tells us the scriptures have been changed/intermingled with the words of humans, and also tells us what the original message was in His Divinely revealed scriptures, and that is what we need to know, so that we can come back to the right path.

Peace.
 
Last edited:
The rationale that actually needs to be looked at is this: Why, after thousands of years of sending messengers and prophets preaching one thing, God suddenly changes His mind and decides that he is composed of three persons/essences/godheads i.e. a trinity, and suddenly decides to beget offspring. And, why God would present as the main crux of the belief of a faith, a concept that doesn't make sense, people don't fully understand, can't explain, and so end up saying, "Well, you don't need to understand what you believe in", or, "The Lord works in mysterious ways".
Using you reasoning one MUST ask why God suddenly changes his mind and sent the Qu'ran since it contains nothing new? May I ask does everything in Islam make sense to you and if it does not what then and more generally, is your sense of truth all about what makes sense to you? Also you are assuming the Qu'ran is always right so what is wring with me assuming the Bible is right?
 
The difficulty is, among other things, that Surah 10:94 directs us to prove the authenticity of the Qur'an by seeing how it measures up to the Bible. Not the other way around, which is what today's Muslims are doing. And if the Bible was already lost before Islam was preached then Surah 10:94 is asking the impossible.

It does not say any such thing. You are presuming "Book" to mean "the Bible". It is usually translated as "the scripture" and even if it does refer to previous scripture, that does not automatically translate to "a specific collection of 66 (or is it the higher number in the Catholic Bible?) writings compiled at Nicea". If you'd actually read those articles I linked you to then you would understand about this, as well as every future rebuttal you're likely to make. Just read them. If they're too long, read the site's FAQ.
 
Hiroshi and Hugo, just a reminder, this is a place for asking questions that we have with regard to Islam. It is not a place to try to convince Muslims that they are in error. If we don't like the answer that is given, ask another question for further explanation, clarification. But the reality is that in the end there are going to be some answers that Muslims provide to our questions that we will find unsatisfactory. If we found them all to be sufficiently satisfying we would ourselves become Muslims. So, sometimes, after the answer is given, we just have to accept that it is the Muslim answer. It may not work for us. But then, in this thread at least, it is time for us to walk away and accept that this is one of those differences. Please, let us not use this thread to argue our respective point(s), but simply to learn Islam's view on the point in question.
 
Last edited:


The rationale that actually needs to be looked at is this: Why, after thousands of years of sending messengers and prophets preaching one thing, God suddenly changes His mind and decides that he is composed of three persons/essences/godheads i.e. a trinity, and suddenly decides to beget offspring. And, why God would present as the main crux of the belief of a faith, a concept that doesn't make sense, people don't fully understand, can't explain, and so end up saying, "Well, you don't need to understand what you believe in", or, "The Lord works in mysterious ways".

When God (God forbid) suddenly becomes inconsistent in the message He sent, alarm bells should ring.

What Allah did tell us, is the most important thing that we need to know. That there is no trinity, that He did not beget a son, and that prior to the Qur'an, people have been writing things down and then themselves or others claiming it as a scripture/from God etc, and that the Qur'an comes confirming the message of the original divinely revealed scriptures. Allah tells us the scriptures have been changed/intermingled with the words of humans, and also tells us what the original message was in His Divinely revealed scriptures, and that is what we need to know, so that we can come back to the right path.

Peace.


OK. From a Muslim persepective it certainly makes sense for alarm bells to go off when a message is changed. I get all of that. But that really doesn't address my question:

Given that Islam holds that the disciples were faithful to Islam and never themselves changed the message of Islam that Jesus would proclaimed, and
Given that they would have known that Jesus was not crucified, and therefore also not resurrected,

What rationale does Islam provide to explain the disciples being willing to go to the death to defend a teaching that, according to Islam, they did not themselves believe?
 
Hiroshi and Hugo, just a reminder, this is a place for asking questions that we have with regard to Islam. It is not a place to try to convince Muslims that they are in error. If we don't like the answer that is given, ask another question for further explanation, clarification. But the reality is that in the end there are going to be some answers that Muslims provide to our questions that we will find unsatisfactory. If we found them all to be sufficiently satisfying we would ourselves become Muslims. So, sometimes, after the answer is given, we just have to accept that it is the Muslim answer. It may not work for us. But then, in this thread at least, it is time for us to walk away and accept that this is one of those differences. Please, let us not use this thread to argue our respective point(s), but simply to learn Islam's view on the point in question.

Holy crap, that was exactly what I was going to say.
 
who were pesecuting the disciples grace? what were they forced to beleive?

The disciples met different ends in different places, so there isn't one single answer that can be given. But it is reported that most met with death for their proclamation that Jesus was Lord, crucified and risen from the grave, and worthy of worship. www.ccel.org provides a short synopsis (Fate of the Apostles) of what tradition reports concerning their individual deaths.


As to the second part of your question, "what were they forced to believe?" I'm not understanding it. I didn't say that they were forced to believe anything. I am saying that tradition reports that the disciples were killed for proclaiming a belief that Islam reports they did not in fact have. So, then:
1) Given that they were killed, for what was it, according to Islam, that they were actually killed?
2) Why is it reported that they were killed for a teaching something that, according to Islam, they didn't actually teach?
3) Given that it was the accusation that they were teaching Jesus as Lord, and not the teaching of God as one, that resulted in their deaths, if (as Islam asserts) they didn't believe that Jesus was Lord and only were seeking to teach that God was one, why didn't they just deny the false teaching and confess the genuine teaching and thereby spare their lives?
 
Given that Islam holds that the disciples were faithful to Islam and never themselves changed the message of Islam that Jesus would proclaimed,

Certainly up to the point that Jesus (peace be upon him) was on this earth. However as to what happened afterwards, we haven't been given details. So after that point, without evidence from the Qur'an or ahadeeth, I cannot say. People may have drawn conclusions from their own research as to what happened, but that is a different matter.

What rationale does Islam provide to explain the disciples being willing to go to the death to defend a teaching that, according to Islam, they did not themselves believe?

And the answer to this would be as before. We have been told that the scriptures have changed, but not at what point. We have, however, been told what the message of the original scriptures was.

Allah knows best as to whether the disciples were led astray after Jesus's (peace be upon him) departure from earth, or whether changes occurred after the death of the disciples. We do not know. Had Allah deemed it necessary for us to know that, I am sure He would have told us. What Allah did deem necessary for us to know, i.e. the main message of the original scriptures, He told us.

If there is more to this than I know, I hope other more learned members will add it.

Using you reasoning one MUST ask why God suddenly changes his mind and sent the Qu'ran since it contains nothing new?

You are quite right in that it contains no new message that the Prophets, ending with Muhammad, (peace be upon him), didn't preach. It contains the same message, but that message is fully preserved by Allah in the final revelation and will be til the end of time. As you can see though, there is no change of mind there. That is what we call consistency.

May I ask does everything in Islam make sense to you

Yes, all praise be to Allah.

Also, just to add, that I am guessing (rightly or wrongly) there may be an argumentative response to this, which I shall not be replying to, not because as is often alleged by some here, Islam suppresses questioning, but because a) as stated above by Grace Seeker, this is not the thread for it, and b) I do not have the inclination nor the time for it.

Peace.
 
Last edited:

Similar Threads

Back
Top