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

[IAmZamzam]

There are two other possibilities: that the Gospels themselves suffered textual corruption (which they have, at least in many other cases), or that the prophecy cited comes from some now forgotten book which is not included in current Old Testament canon (which just goes to show you how reliable a canon Christians have). Any which way, though, the Christians have it bad.

 

[Al-manar]

There are two other possibilities: that the Gospels themselves suffered textual corruption

yes, and that could be linked to the third possibility ....

or that the prophecy cited comes from some now forgotten book which is not included in current Old Testament canon .

I'm not in much favor to such possibility ,I think the case of Elijah is a similar case to Jesus eg; the writers manufactured OT prediction about his resurrection that doesn't even exist ....
Luke 24:46 He told them, “This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day.....

nowhere it is written that the messiah will rise from the dead on the third day.....

If they manufactured a prediction of the end of life of Jesus ,why don't they manufacture a prediction of the end of life of John the baptist ?....
putting in our mind ,the fact that, Elijah is not John the baptist ... If it is written that Elijah will come to turn the hearts of the fathers to their children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers and be executed ....it should be none of John the baptist business .... John is not Elijah ,we just accepted ,for the sake of argument, the new testament concept of a person similar to Elijah could represent him in fulfilling the prophecies ,which is flawed concept .....

Any which way, though, the Christians have it bad

Exactly.... If their quotations are not manufactured that neccesarily leads to a scripture that the writers of the gospels believed to be the word of God ,yet been lost and forgotten ...

peace

 

[Pak-istan786]

MashAllah, Islaam is proving to be the most definitive religion, this thread is very interesting to read through. Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been able to disprove anything in Islam? Everything I see seems to be intact, and Dr. Naik is a very good debater and he is so educated and convincing IMO( one example of a person Ive heard about). What about for the Bible and the Torah, I don't see much integrity with their history? I am so amazed that you guys have all this knowledge mashAllah! People try to dispute Islam, but I havent seen anyone succeed from this thread.

 

[Hiroshi]

MashAllah, Islaam is proving to be the most definitive religion, this thread is very interesting to read through. Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been able to disprove anything in Islam? Everything I see seems to be intact, and Dr. Naik is a very good debater and he is so educated and convincing IMO( one example of a person Ive heard about). What about for the Bible and the Torah, I don't see much integrity with their history? I am so amazed that you guys have all this knowledge mashAllah! People try to dispute Islam, but I havent seen anyone succeed from this thread.

Islam has had to make changes from what was originally believed. For the first nearly four centuries Muslims were made to respect the Torah and the Gospel as Muhammad and the Qur'an had taught them. Surah 5:44-46 says that in them are "guidance and light". But then Muslim writers began accusing Christians and Jews of changing their own scriptures. There was no basis for these accusations except that these scriptures disagreed with the Qur'an.

There has obviously been no corruption of the Torah and Gospel before Muhammad otherwise the Qur'an is wrong to say that there is "guidance and light" in them. And there can have been no corruption after Muhammad's time because we still have writings of these scriptures preserved for us today from before the rise of Islam for comparison.

 

[جوري]

Islam has had to make changes from what was originally believed. For the first nearly four centuries Muslims were made to respect the Torah and the Gospel as Muhammad and the Qur'an had taught them. Surah 5:44-46 says that in them are "guidance and light". But then Muslim writers began accusing Christians and Jews of changing their own scriptures. There was no basis for these accusations except that these scriptures disagreed with the Qur'an. There has obviously been no corruption of the Torah and Gospel before Muhammad otherwise the Qur'an is wrong to say that there is "guidance and light" in them. And there can have been no corruption after Muhammad's time because we still have writings of these scriptures preserved for us today from before the rise of Islam for comparison.

I wish you'd stop dispensing with the same rhetoric which was dispelled by several members using both Quran and hadith, yesterday you try your own rendition with Abraham (p) test of devotion turning God into some bloodthirsty purposeless harvest God, today with the 'Muslim writers' deranged the original beliefs. Do you want to go around peppering every section with nonsense hoping to find one weak link with which you can infiltrate with all sorts of deviant and perverse renditions? Keep your explanations as far as your religion is concerned. NO ONE here has given you the authority to speak on behalf of Muslims. Not only are you completely ignorant of Islam but you don't have basic level knowledge of it to be able to do so!

all the best

 

[Hiroshi]

I wish you'd stop dispensing with the same rhetoric which was dispelled by several members using both Quran and hadith, yesterday you try your own rendition with Abraham (p) test of devotion turning God into some bloodthirsty purposeless harvest God, today with the 'Muslim writers' deranged the original beliefs. Do you want to go around peppering every section with nonsense hoping to find one weak link with which you can infiltrate with all sorts of deviant and perverse renditions? Keep your explanations as far as your religion is concerned. NO ONE here has given you the authority to speak on behalf of Muslims. Not only are you completely ignorant of Islam but you don't have basic level knowledge of it to be able to do so!

all the best

Sorry if the facts of history disagree with you.

 

[Insaanah]

Islam has had to make changes from what was originally believed. For the first nearly four centuries Muslims were made to respect the Torah and the Gospel as Muhammad and the Qur'an had taught them.

But then Muslim writers began accusing Christians and Jews of changing their own scriptures. There was no basis for these accusations except that these scriptures disagreed with the Qur'an.

You know full well that this is not the case. I have quoted this very verse to you just a couple of weeks ago:

"Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands and then say, "This is from Allah," that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby." (2: 79)

Throughout your stay here, even after having the same facts repeatedly clarified by Muslim members to you, at various times and in various different threads, you seem hellbent on putting your own spin on verses to make them appear to agree with your own beliefs or to try to make us look like as though we are in the wrong. It is one thing having an honest misunderstanding which one then acknowledges clarification of, but to repeatedly persist in your fallacious renditions of your own desires is something else.

This is not an "Islam how Jehovah's Witnesses would like to see it" forum, as you well know - this is an Islamic forum!

Peace.

 

[جوري]

Sorry if the facts of history disagree with you.

There are no facts in what you mention (see everyone's post on the matter) if you're not looking for the Muslim response then don't be on an Islamic forum for surely you're to encounter truths that disagree with your brand and there are millions of christian website to peddle in christian rhetoric! else justify your posts to echo what is known to Muslims scholars and laymen alike with evidence from Quran and Sunnah!

 

[جوري]

against the forum rules.

It is also intellectual dishonesty to disseminate faulty information with the intent of misleading people purposefully if one were a little bit altruistic and not looking merely to follow the law! Truly I pity Christians, they persist in their falsehood hoping to lead astray as many as they can to an eternal abyss and what a grievous thing that is to live like devils and follow in their footsteps!

 

[Amat Allah]

Islam has had to make changes from what was originally believed. For the first nearly four centuries Muslims were made to respect the Torah and the Gospel as Muhammad and the Qur'an had taught them. Surah 5:44-46 says that in them are "guidance and light". But then Muslim writers began accusing Christians and Jews of changing their own scriptures. There was no basis for these accusations except that these scriptures disagreed with the Qur'an.

"And among them are those who listen to you, but We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. Even when they come to you arguing with you, those who disbelieve say, "This is not but legends of the former peoples." (25) Surat Al-An`aam.

 

[Hiroshi]

You know full well that this is not the case. I have quoted this very verse to you just a couple of weeks ago:

"Therefore woe be unto those who write the Scripture with their hands and then say, "This is from Allah," that they may purchase a small gain therewith. Woe unto them for that their hands have written, and woe unto them for that they earn thereby." (2: 79)

Throughout your stay here, even after having the same facts repeatedly clarified by Muslim members to you, at various times and in various different threads, you seem hellbent on putting your own spin on verses to make them appear to agree with your own beliefs or to try to make us look like as though we are in the wrong. It is one thing having an honest misunderstanding which one then acknowledges clarification of, but to repeatedly persist in your fallacious renditions of your own desires is something else.

This is not an "Islam how Jehovah's Witnesses would like to see it" forum, as you well know - this is an Islamic forum!

Peace.

Rather than quote Surah 2:79, can you produce one scrap of hard manuscript evidence of the wholesale corruption of Torah and Injil that seems to be so casually accepted as fact?

 

[Woodrow]

Rather than quote Surah 2:79, can you produce one scrap of hard manuscript evidence of the wholesale corruption of Torah and Injil that seems to be so casually accepted as fact?

The Council of Nicea in 325 and the removal of many books from both the OT and NT as being gnostic and/or apocryphal

 

[Ramadhan]

Rather than quote Surah 2:79, can you produce one scrap of hard manuscript evidence of the wholesale corruption of Torah and Injil that seems to be so casually accepted as fact?

Hiroshi, just take a closer look at your own jehova witness bible (new world translation).
That's your evidence.

 

[Hiroshi]

The Council of Nicea in 325 and the removal of many books from both the OT and NT as being gnostic and/or apocryphal

Hi Woodrow.

As far as can see, early Islamic commentators took Surah 2:79 to mean that the Jews deliberately altered passages in the Torah that prophecied about the coming of Muhammad.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp...oraNo=2&tAyahNo=79&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0


If such action was actually carried out then what would have been the result? Could the Jews have consistently altered every copy and record of the Torah over the entire world? Surely not.

And have you ever made a study of these apocryphal books that you mention? I have undertaken some research myself. Some of the writings have a certain historical value. But others are rife with historical and geogaphical inaccuracies and anachronisms. There is often evidence of deliberate dishonesty and influence from pagan Greek ideas. They contain superstition and error. They are completely lacking in prophecy. And external as well as internal evidence weighs against them in that many authorities rejected them. None of the NT writers quoted from OT apocryphal books. And the later apocryphal books that were pretended to form part of the NT were even less convincing.

 

[جوري]

If such action was actually carried out then what would have been the result? Could the Jews have consistently altered every copy and record of the Torah over the entire world? Surely not.

It doesn't matter how much or how little was altered! what matters is that it was altered-- which part should one accept as accurate or false? You seem to be under the impression that you can get 65% of your religion correct and that will be ok with God?!
If you're going to establish the law of (God) then you must take it in totality not snip out the parts that displease you or abolish things that don't fit the tide, if you are truly a believer!
as an example, in the current "Jewish state' for instance polygamy was abolished in the 1950's, when it is allowable under Jewish law noticed I said allowed not an injunction so why do away with things that unread Christians consider barbaric simply to have money funneled in or whatever other reason.

Islam we take in totality no adulteration, that which we don't understand we trust that there might come an age when we will or accept it simply as part of faith even though the disbelievers may protest it!

all the best

 

[Woodrow]

Hi Woodrow.

As far as can see, early Islamic commentators took Surah 2:79 to mean that the Jews deliberately altered passages in the Torah that prophecied about the coming of Muhammad.

http://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp...oraNo=2&tAyahNo=79&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0


If such action was actually carried out then what would have been the result? Could the Jews have consistently altered every copy and record of the Torah over the entire world? Surely not.

And have you ever made a study of these apocryphal books that you mention? I have undertaken some research myself. Some of the writings have a certain historical value. But others are rife with historical and geogaphical inaccuracies and anachronisms. There is often evidence of deliberate dishonesty and influence from pagan Greek ideas. They contain superstition and error. They are completely lacking in prophecy. And external as well as internal evidence weighs against them in that many authorities rejected them. None of the NT writers quoted from OT apocryphal books. And the later apocryphal books that were pretended to form part of the NT were even less convincing.

The changes in the Torah are probably the most subtle and took place over afew thousand years. In my opinion most of those occured as a change in language as Hebrew ceased to be a spoken language and used only in the synagogues. At that point the Torah became what it was interpreted to mean. There is considerable difference between how Christians and Jews interpret the Torah. Either one or both interpretations are in error.

As for the gnostic books, I do agree there were very many false books that were presented as being true Gospels. However no matter what sources you use it does appear the Gospels of Thomas, Peter and Bartholomew do seem to have been legitimate and were accepted as true until the time of the First Council. So the question remains as to how valid was the Council of Nicea and how did the Vatican determine what should be removed.

It is ironic that the JWs who are one of the most outspoken groups against Catholicism, base their belief on works preserved by the Catholic Church. How do you fix a broken clock, when you do not have the original clock to see how it is supposed to be?

 

[Al-manar]

If such action was actually carried out then what would have been the result? Could the Jews have consistently altered every copy and record of the Torah over the entire world? Surely not. .

you know ,I won't blame you for your obsession with such issue (does the Quran validate the bible) , neither for skipping my quranic quotations related to the topic,in previous posts .....

I only blame you for narrowing the meaning of textual truthfulness to mere the Question of Transmission....

1- Does proving a written work as transmitted perfectly through the ages ,validate its entire content as facts ?

I don't think so...


2- Does the Quraic validation to the entire content of the bible (if it is so the case),prove to the objective researcher that the bible all the way tell the truth?

I don't think so.


you have asked :

Rather than quote Surah 2:79, can you produce one scrap of hard manuscript evidence of the wholesale corruption of Torah and Injil that seems to be so casually accepted as fact? .

there you ask for a manuscript evidence of corruption,but what corruption you refer to?

If corruption for you Synonyms with (textual modification to already existing text) I will provide you with an example for such narrow definition to corruption...

read the article (at the last line of the post) as a beginning and more will be given in the right time...

but the Quran seems to define the corruption in a wider range ..... It is not only to modify an already existing text ...but to write a text eg;book,chapter and claim it to be from God and add it to the body of the scripture ....

it is not a matter of a phrase deleted or added to a page ...it is full books that been added to the bible which have not the least trace of divine inspiration eg; song of solomon etc..... more to mention regarding such specific point in our future term (TORAH)...

If you honestly search for a prove of Biblical tampering , try not compare the modern text in accordance with the old text ...but try to compare the modern text with the easily to be verified facts ........

I have provided some biblical problems eg; http://www.islamicboard.com/compara...tive-study-arranged-items-46.html#post1401294

that shows that parts of the bible ( call it the original autographs if you wish) can't be telling the truth .....

if you think otherwise,then that is what that thread for,just refute me ,if making sense, I promise to update my thoughts immediately ....


Again your question

can you produce one scrap of hard manuscript evidence of the wholesale corruption of Torah and Injil ? .

Yes I can ,just one of the irrefutable proofs of the narrow definition of corruption

http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/4jerem90.html

peace

 

[gmcbroom]

Hmmmm......Sura 10:37 This Koran could not have been devised by any but God. It confirms what was revealed before it and fully explains the scriptures. It is beyond doubt from the lord of the universe.

Now if the Koran doesn't doubt the accuracies of the Torah or the Gospels, why should you? Further, Sura 5:44-47 and Sura 5:68 would tend to imply that Jews and Christians would attain nothing until they observed the Torah and the Gospel and that which has revealed to you from your Lord.

Seems Christians and Jews are supposed to believe what they believe according to their sacred scriptures.
Peace be with you
gmcbroom

 

[Hiroshi]

It doesn't matter how much or how little was altered! what matters is that it was altered-- which part should one accept as accurate or false? You seem to be under the impression that you can get 65% of your religion correct and that will be ok with God?!


all the best

But you see, any such alteration would only take place by a few unprincipled characters living in the 7th century. And how many manuscripts could they corrupt? The vast numbers of other copies elsewhere in the world would immediately reveal the late alteration and the variant reading would be rejected. 1 John 5:7 contains a (very) late textual corruption in the King James Version. But modern versions of the Bible reject this reading and show the correct wording here. So it is not a problem.

 

[جوري]

But you see, any such alteration would only take place by a few unprincipled characters living in the 7th century. And how many manuscripts could they corrupt? The vast numbers of other copies elsewhere in the world would immediately reveal the late alteration and the variant reading would be rejected. 1 John 5:7 contains a (very) late textual corruption in the King James Version. But modern versions of the Bible reject this reading and show the correct wording here. So it is not a problem.

Did you not read anything at all Al-Manar wrote? your religion was voted on by a council not dictated by God as for variant readings that would be rejected or accepted I really recommend you some

for starters..

all the best