Quran VS Bible , a thoroughly comparative study,arranged by items

[Grace Seeker]

Origin of the christianity that shouldn't had been p.1

After long time of reading ,reflecting ...I'm totally satisfied with the following approach to such matter .... I'm always satisfied when my arguments is based both on the Quran and the scholary works that based on the biblical text itself ,not the speculations ....

Christianity is a problem that resulted from vain desires ,and false hopes ....... before we provide our introduction to the root of the problem ,let's make a visit again to the Quran :

we have read that according to the Quran , The Jews differed in their reaction with Jesus ....

A part of them accepted his message as a reformer prophet ....

....there are Jews who believed in Jesus as a prophet and nothing more during his lifetime, after his departure eg; those represented others who already quoted in NT ,and the Ebonite's etc.....

A second part believed in him as a prophet but from the false type ,as they believed that the the door of newly prophethood is closed ,just Elijah and the king messiah who would arrive .... such group refused him, ascribing to Him illegitimate birth, magic, and a shameful death ......

they refused him as he simply fulfilled not their own desires

A third party who neither accepted him as false prophet neither mere a prophet, such group though had something in common(the vain desire of messianic hopes ) with the second party already mentioned ,yet they overstepped the bounds .... the fact as they wouldn't be satisfied to accept Jesus as merely a prophet , they imported Old Testament titles Son of God,Son of man , a role and nature invalid for Jesus etc ..... to satisfy their desires and to give hope for those dreamers of a messianic golden age and the Earth that would turn into paradise ......

those third party are the writers of the New Testament and their communities ,who were already preceded by those(dead sea scrolls community) who had similar vain desires .....

In sum ,we have the Quran classifiying the Jews in such era into three basic parties ....and we provided non-Quranic clear text to support every verse...

next post would be the focus on the third party aka christians ......

we would try to investigate the origin ,

Despite all of the other posts that keep interrupting the train of thought in this thread, you have done an admirable job staying on topic. Even though there are places where I find myself questioning your theory, very informative with respect to your views and good solid research on your part as well.

 

[Hiroshi]

That isn't abuse, it is clarification of terms!
you neither believe in what God has revealed nor are your following the path of the righteous. If in your mind you believe you do, then what concern have you of the interpretation of others of your beliefs?

all the best

Sorry for the short break Vale's Lily, I've been away in hospital.

Okay, no offence taken then. But if you say that I am "corrupt" as well it implies that I am not sincere. I assure you that I am most sincere in everything that I say and I am sure that you are also.

Belief, most especially religious belief, has to be based on evidence. We can look around us and see the wonderful creation and take that as evidence of a God who loves mankind. But we need to know also what God requires of each one of us. What responsibilities must we carry in order to have God's approval? This question and many other questions can only be answered by looking at the scriptures.

Today, Muslims reject the Bible as being the reliable guidance from God to mankind. But this way of thinking is a change from what was taught by Islam from the very beginning. The Qur'an encourages respect for the Torah and Injil. It was not until four centuries after the rise of Islam that Muslim writers began to accuse the Bible of being grossly altered and corrupted by the hand of man. And this accusation was not based on any evidence in the manuscripts themselves (such evidence has never existed) but rather it was based on the points of disagreement between the Bible and the Qur'an.

So then one book has to be favoured over the other, if they cannot both be true. Which one? We need to compare them. Isn't that the whole purpose of this thread?

 

[Hiroshi]

I was referring to the injeel and taurat as revealed by Allah. Not books with writings of humans interspersed, giving rise to extraneous ideas such as God begetting a son, etc, that were never revealed by Allah.

Peace.

Psalms 2:7 (King James) says: "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee."

Does the Qur'an tell you to reject the psalms which were written long, long before the Qur'an came to mankind?

 

[Insaanah]

Psalms 2:7 (King James) says: "I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee."

Does the Qur'an tell you to reject the psalms which were written long, long before the Qur'an came to mankind?

Read the part in bold Hiroshi. You are well aware of what Allah says in the Qur'an about the man-made notion of him begetting a son, and how many times He refutes this concept. The Qur'an comes confirming the original scriptures as revealed by Allah, which taught that He is One, with no associates whatsoever in His Divinity, and no sons or other relatives. Those who knew the truth of the earlier scriptures at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), became Muslim, because they could see the Qur'an was from the same Revealer and the same Source, and that it confirmed the true message of their scriptures, and it was the logical step for them to do so because the message was the same, and it was now required of them to follow the unchanged scripture and the messenger to whom Allah had revealed it. Such people knew that despite the human interjections in the teachings of their faith, God had taught neither trinity nor son.

Peace.

EDIT: Apologies brother al-Manar for these posts interrupting your series

 

[Hiroshi]

Read the part in bold Hiroshi. You are well aware of what Allah says in the Qur'an about the man-made notion of him begetting a son, and how many times He refutes this concept. The Qur'an comes confirming the original scriptures as revealed by Allah, which taught that He is One, with no associates whatsoever in His Divinity, and no sons or other relatives. Those who knew the truth of the earlier scriptures at the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him), became Muslim, because they could see the Qur'an was from the same Revealer and the same Source, and that it confirmed the true message of their scriptures, and it was the logical step for them to do so because the message was the same, and it was now required of them to follow the unchanged scripture and the messenger to whom Allah had revealed it. Such people knew that despite the human interjections in the teachings of their faith, God had taught neither trinity nor son.

Peace.

EDIT: Apologies brother al-Manar for these posts interrupting your series

And peace to you.

The Qur'an speaks with approval of the Psalms in Surah 4:163, Surah 17:55 and Surah 21:105. But, as you have noted, these Psalms themselves contradict what the Qur'an states about God having no son.

So then, there seem to be two options here for you. Either the second Psalm was never inspired by God. Or it was but then came to be corrupted by copyists. What is the common belief among Muslims?

 

[جوري]

Sorry for the short break Vale's Lily, I've been away in hospital.

Hope you feel better

Okay, no offence taken then. But if you say that I am "corrupt" as well it implies that I am not sincere. I assure you that I am most sincere in everything that I say and I am sure that you are also.

corruption and sincerity are two separate issues ..

Belief, most especially religious belief, has to be based on evidence.

I utterly agree, but aside from evidence based it has to also make logical sense!

We can look around us and see the wonderful creation and take that as evidence of a God who loves mankind. But we need to know also what God requires of each one of us. What responsibilities must we carry in order to have God's approval? This question and many other questions can only be answered by looking at the scriptures. Today, Muslims reject the Bible as being the reliable guidance from God to mankind. But this way of thinking is a change from what was taught by Islam from the very beginning. The Qur'an encourages respect for the Torah and Injil. It was not until four centuries after the rise of Islam that Muslim writers began to accuse the Bible of being grossly altered and corrupted by the hand of man. And this accusation was not based on any evidence in the manuscripts themselves (such evidence has never existed) but rather it was based on the points of disagreement between the Bible and the Qur'an. So then one book has to be favoured over the other, if they cannot both be true. Which one? We need to compare them. Isn't that the whole purpose of this thread?

And I have clarified for you and repeatedly that what was revealed in the Torah and Injeel have nothing to do with what you have in your possession today, I have quoted to you from the Quran itself that the concept of trinity which existed well before Islam ergo the council of Nicea was well established and the bibles very much corrupt well before 'Muslim writers' began 'accusing'. In fact I'd say the obsession to validate self has always been a christian one, since Islam's very inception, christians have been working over time to mar distort and corrupt not mention wage illegal wars against Muslims and Islam, be that as it may It was God's promise that Islam shall reign supreme above all in spite of millennium long wars from the left and the right.

Let me ask you this, even if you find something in the Quran that states point blank what you have in your possession is the unaltered word of God (which you won't) but let's say you did, what good would that do? If everything in the Torah is correct and now you have christianity and chose to be christian would you go back to being a Jew simply because their book is unaltered? Hopefully you can see why this is a complete exercise in futility!

Not only is the bible corrupt, and you worshiping a false God, but we already have the unaltered word of God and a complete system, why should acknowledging christianity matter at this stage?

Matthew 15:24 -
He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”

so what is the point even if we're to agree by sheer hypocrisy that what you have is the true word of God?

all the best

 

[Insaanah]

But, as you have noted, these Psalms themselves contradict what the Qur'an states about God having no son.

None of the prophets that God sent since prophet Adam (peace be upon him), preached that God begot a son or had any other kind of associate in His Divinity. This notion flies in the face of everything God Himself had taught through all the Prophets, Messengers, and books, for thousands of years, not just the Qur'an. So, in your statement above, what you are actually saying is that God contradicted Himself. Glorified and Exalted be He above such things.

Either the second Psalm was never inspired by God.

That being a supposed "option", what are you trying to imply about the above verses you quoted, or the One Who revealed them?

And do you seriously think that Muslims would believe that the original zaboor (Allah only knows if true remnants of it are in existence) as given to Prophet David (peace be upon him) was never inspired by Allah, despite what you know Allah has said in the Qur'an? We believe in all of the Qur'an - we don't pick and choose bits to believe in while leaving out others.

Peace.

 

[Hiroshi]

So, in your statement above, what you are actually saying is that God contradicted Himself.

Am I? I am just agreeing with you that Qur'an says that God has no son although the Psalms in the Bible say the opposite. Psalm 89:26-27, as another example, says: "He himself calls out to me, "You are my Father, my God and the Rock of my salvation." Also, I myself shall place him as firstborn, the most high of the kings of the earth."

That being a supposed "option", what are you trying to imply about the above verses you quoted, or the One Who revealed them?

I am not trying to lead you anywhere with these questions. I just want to know what you believe the "Psalms" referred to in the Qur'an to be. You cannot believe that these are the Psalms in the Bible because of this conflict of statements.

And do you seriously think that Muslims would believe that the original zaboor (Allah only knows if true remnants of it are in existence) as given to Prophet David (peace be upon him) was never inspired by Allah, despite what you know Allah has said in the Qur'an?

I am sure that you believe that the original zaboor was inspired by God. But when and how was it then corrupted (as you seem to believe) into the writings that now appear in our Bible? And how could the Qur'an speak of them approvingly if they were already corrupted by the sixth and seventh centuries?

 

[Hiroshi]

Hope you feel better

My sincere thanks. Actually I am quite sick but feeling okay for the moment.

And I have clarified for you and repeatedly that what was revealed in the Torah and Injeel have nothing to do with what you have in your possession today, I have quoted to you from the Quran itself that the concept of trinity which existed well before Islam ergo the council of Nicea was well established and the bibles very much corrupt well before 'Muslim writers' began 'accusing'.

The trinity doctrine didn't corrupt the Bible. Corrupt theologians have twisted meaning of the scriptures. But nowhere is the Trinity mentioned.

 

[Insaanah]

I am sure that you believe that the original zaboor was inspired by God. But when and how was it then corrupted (as you seem to believe) into the writings that now appear in our Bible? And how could the Qur'an speak of them approvingly if they were already corrupted by the sixth and seventh centuries?

This is going to be my last post on the matter, because I am getting a little dizzy from going round and round in circles and getting asked the same question again and again, having already given the answer a few times,

here: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...tive-study-arranged-items-43.html#post1395056
here: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...tive-study-arranged-items-43.html#post1395356
and here: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...tive-study-arranged-items-43.html#post1396041

I just want to know what you believe the "Psalms" referred to in the Qur'an to be.

I have no need to know what the original zaboor is, because we have the complete, unchanged and final guidance of Allah with us. All we need to know is that it was given by Allah to Prophet David (peace be upon him), and we believe in it, even though we may never have seen it or read a word of it.

The Qur'an is our criterion for right and wrong. Possibly some parts of the psalms may agree with it, or may not. The parts that agree may be from Allah, or may not. But we don't need to go digging to find out, because we have the Qur'an, and as Muslims, we have faith in whatever Allah revealed before the Qur'an, even though we may not have seen it.

This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil). Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them; And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that which was revealed before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter. (Qur'an 2:2-4)

We believe in all the scriptures that Allah revealed, not the words of men added to them. The book we have to follow and act on now, is the final guidance sent by Allah, completely free from human interference. We have faith in Allah's earlier revelations, the original teachings of which the Qur'an confirms. We have no need to delve ito what is or isn't the psalms.

But when and how was it then corrupted (as you seem to believe) into the writings that now appear in our Bible?

Ditto.

Peace.

 

[جوري]

My sincere thanks. Actually I am quite sick but feeling okay for the moment.

you should take some rest!

The trinity doctrine didn't corrupt the Bible. Corrupt theologians have twisted meaning of the scriptures. But nowhere is the Trinity mentioned.

The trinity doctrine is quite corrupt and very deviant from the concept of monotheism. I agree trinity isn't mentioned any where in the bible yet it is indeed a conundrum why you subscribe to this triune God if no such mention is made in the bible? The Quran addresses the corrupt beliefs of christians and you can't deny that you believe in the trinity whether or not it is written down in such words worship me, worship my father who is also me, worship the holy spirit who is also me and bow before my mother for she birthed me...

It is odd frankly and not befitting of God nor the time we live in, I mean even if people were OK with millenniums of ignorance, the time has come to shed the cloak of darkness, ask the right questions and follow the right path!

all the best

 

[aadil77]

^He's a JW - he doesn't believe in trinity

 

[جوري]

It is all good says Lily as she munches on half an orange and calculates the calories of her صفيحة بعلبكية

 

[Ramadhan]

The trinity doctrine didn't corrupt the Bible. Corrupt theologians have twisted meaning of the scriptures. But nowhere is the Trinity mentioned.

who are those corrupt theologians?
why did they twist the meaning of your scripture?
what did they gain from it?
what are their motives?
how on earth did they have the gall to twist the meaning of the scripture?
If twisting (and not changing or corrupting) is the only things they've done, then surely most people (christians) could see the mistakes, right?

 

[Hiroshi]

This is going to be my last post on the matter, because I am getting a little dizzy from going round and round in circles and getting asked the same question again and again, having already given the answer a few times,

here: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...tive-study-arranged-items-43.html#post1395056
here: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...tive-study-arranged-items-43.html#post1395356
and here: http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...tive-study-arranged-items-43.html#post1396041


I have no need to know what the original zaboor is, because we have the complete, unchanged and final guidance of Allah with us. All we need to know is that it was given by Allah to Prophet David (peace be upon him), and we believe in it, even though we may never have seen it or read a word of it.

The Qur'an is our criterion for right and wrong. Possibly some parts of the psalms may agree with it, or may not. The parts that agree may be from Allah, or may not. But we don't need to go digging to find out, because we have the Qur'an, and as Muslims, we have faith in whatever Allah revealed before the Qur'an, even though we may not have seen it.

This is the Scripture whereof there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who ward off (evil). Who believe in the Unseen, and establish worship, and spend of that We have bestowed upon them; And who believe in that which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) and that which was revealed before thee, and are certain of the Hereafter. (Qur'an 2:2-4)

We believe in all the scriptures that Allah revealed, not the words of men added to them. The book we have to follow and act on now, is the final guidance sent by Allah, completely free from human interference. We have faith in Allah's earlier revelations, the original teachings of which the Qur'an confirms. We have no need to delve ito what is or isn't the psalms.



Ditto.

Peace.

Your answer requires tremendous faith in human interference where there hasn't been any. This famous Psalm is referred to as the second Psalm and is quoted again and again elsewhere in the Bible (Acts 4:24-26; Acts 13:33; Hebrews 1:5; Hebrews 5:5). Acts 4:25 says that the Psalm is the sayings of God through David.

I don't believe that there is a record anywhere of a single variance of even a word in any ancient manuscript of the second Psalm. If you could show me that there was then I would be most interested.

But we could close the discussion here as you wish. You say that you don't need to delve into these matters and I don't want to make you dizzy again.

 

[Hiroshi]

you should take some rest!


The trinity doctrine is quite corrupt and very deviant from the concept of monotheism. I agree trinity isn't mentioned any where in the bible yet it is indeed a conundrum why you subscribe to this triune God if no such mention is made in the bible? The Quran addresses the corrupt beliefs of christians and you can't deny that you believe in the trinity whether or not it is written down in such words worship me, worship my father who is also me, worship the holy spirit who is also me and bow before my mother for she birthed me...

It is odd frankly and not befitting of God nor the time we live in, I mean even if people were OK with millenniums of ignorance, the time has come to shed the cloak of darkness, ask the right questions and follow the right path!

all the best

I agree with everything that you say here. As Aadil77 pointed out, I don't believe in the trinity.

 

[جوري]

I agree with everything that you say here. As Aadil77 pointed out, I don't believe in the trinity.

Who is Jesus to you? and who is the comforter?

 

[Hiroshi]

who are those corrupt theologians?
why did they twist the meaning of your scripture?
what did they gain from it?
what are their motives?
how on earth did they have the gall to twist the meaning of the scripture?
If twisting (and not changing or corrupting) is the only things they've done, then surely most people (christians) could see the mistakes, right?

People do similar things even today. I have known commentators and clergymen make the claim that the Bible is in agreement with the theory of evolution. Evolution has become in modern times the fashionable explanation for our existence here on earth and few people dare to deny it for fear of ridicule.

In ancient times the fashionable explanation for life, the universe and everything was Greek philosophy. Early Christian theologians borrowed many ideas from the Greek philosophers, especially Plato, and used them to explain the meaning of the Bible. I can give you a whole list of names of these apologists and theologians if you like. Of great interest to them was the title of "Word" or "Logos" (in Greek) used for Jesus in John's prologue. As the "Word" of God, Jesus spoke words from God as all the prophets did. And that is all that the title meant. Jesus was like God's spokesman. But in Greek philosophy "Logos" was a technical term with many meanings including "mind" or "rational thought". So these theologians believed that Jesus was the very mind and thinking of God. So they then went on to conclude that Jesus must be co-eternal with God, even of the same substance as God. Eventually, they decided that Jesus must be God himself.

Since there could only be one God, the theologians believed that Father and Son must be the same God, although distinct persons. Then much later, the "Holy Spirit" was also added to make a third person, a trinity.

Plato had greatly admired the ancient Egyptian religion with it's trinity of gods: Isis, Osiris and Horus. He had used the technical vocabulary of his philosophy to explain how these three separate persons could be one deity. And the terminology of his philosophy was used in exactly the same way by early theologians to formulate the doctrine of the trinity that is still taught in the churchs today. The trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit is therefore really a copy of the earlier pagan trinities of ancient cultures such as Hindu, Babylonian and Egyptian.

 

[Hiroshi]

Who is Jesus to you? and who is the comforter?

The comforter is not a person but is rather the power of God, God's spirit, God's active force.

Jesus is God's servant who died for my sins and who God has exalted to become Lord and King over all the earth.

 

[جوري]

The comforter is not a person but is rather the power of God, God's spirit, God's active force. Jesus is God's servant who died for my sins and who God has exalted to become Lord and King over all the earth.

all the best