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

[Al-manar]

it is usual when looking at documents to accept the earliest ones as more authentic that later ones.

what kind of documents are you refering to? those sourced by the divine or by the human?

The NT simply reports that fact attested by many eye witnesses that is proof enough in any court of law

you repaet yourself again !!!

At the same time you accept what the Qu'ran says when it is impossible to verify what it says

Again ,it is the bible that asserts(so the burden on its shoulder) not the Quran....

. What I find strange is that God in a supposed book that was written before time began would bother to tell us about something that did not happen.

Have we someone,here, who is fond of repeating himself?!!

But there are warnings such as those found in Acts 13:10 "And said, O full of all subtlety and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord?" Galatians 1:7 "Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ." So there have always been those who refuse to accept the Gospel so you not a new phenomenon are you?

you know what is the sad part in Galatians 1:7 ?it is from a writer(s) who already perverted the Old Testament(I will prove that in details later),yet blames those who would pervert his gospel later !!!

 

[جوري]

^^ in addition to that, how is the bible a compilation of eye witnesses if written some centuries after the fact of the matter.. disagree on content, with dubious authors and illogical events of inconsistent sequence as well composed of letters of a self-proclaimed apostle (the ilk of Saul) whose 'conversion' there is no eye witness to, and perversion is obvious to the naked eye.. Hugo must live on an alternate planes whereby his nonsense is somehow perceived as scholarly wisdom?

 

[Al-manar]

^^ in addition to that, how is the bible a compilation of eye witnesses if written some centuries after the fact of the matter.. disagree on content, with dubious authors and illogical events of inconsistent sequence as well composed of letters of a self-proclaimed apostle (the ilk of Saul)

If you note sis τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ ,till now I haven't raised the question of date and authorship of the new testament, cause I think it is inferior of importance to the question of content...

the question, what the text has to say ?... is the crucial one .... as it would decide what kind of author (whether inspired or forger)?

next posts would be journey into the internal realm of the bible , I think with all the problems therin ,If once,someone provides me with irrefutable proofs that Jesus is the one who inspired the New Testament from A to Z ,I would immediately not only accuse Jesus as a false prophet but also I would quit being a muslim believing the Quran who would view Jesus as truthful etc....

Hugo should argue the question of authorship with anyone but me.... I'm not the one who would scratch the surface but prefer going to the core....

peace

 

[جوري]

If you note sis τhε ṿαlε'ṡ lïlÿ ,till now I haven't raised the question of date and authorship of the new testament, cause I think it is inferior of importance to the question of content...

the question, what the text has to say ?... is the crucial one .... as it would decide what kind of author (whether inspired or forger)?

next posts would be journey into the internal realm of the bible , with all the problems therin ,If someone provides me with irrefutable proofs that Jesus is the one who inspired the New Testament from A to Z ,I would immediately not only accuse Jesus as a false prophet but also I would quit being a muslim believing the Quran who would view Jesus as truthful etc....

Hugo should argue the question of authorship with anyone but me.... I'm not the one who would scratch the surface but prefer going to the core....

peace

I got you.... for most getting to the core is rather futile when the surface is so questionable .. would you eat a can of beans that has been lying there open for an x period of time and whose contents has clearly festered while mocking that which is better? to me that speaks of a very warped psychology ..

 

[Al-manar]

Item :7

Biblical Errancy vs Quranic Inerrancy P.4

before going into the three kinds of tampering ,we would answer some common questions related to the topic.....

1- Why the Quranic focus on the jews when accuses directly of biblical corruption ,why not using the word (christians)?

the answer cause the New testament is a jewish production, it was composed by Jews eg,Mark, Matthew etc......

if both the old and new testaments are jewish production then ,it is understood why the Quranic accusation of a jewish tampering.


2- Would the pious,religious Jews corrupt the word of God?

yes, that is the human nature...

before Judaism we have clues that religious people from different times and places forged for the sake of God, even in Islam some religious persons forged Hadiths !!....

no wonder man would always lie for his vain desires...


3- Why would the religious, lie,corrupt the word of God?

A- To gain religious statue which mostly leads to materialistic benefit.... ,some forgers had good intentions of a religious reform ,so they were seduced to put the divine signature under their theories to attract the masses and get them taking the ideas of reform seriously ...

the group of the dead sea scrolls ,and some of the writers of the NT could be included in such category ,they weren't conspirators (with the literal meaning of the word) to Judaism but they tried to reform it (the way they thought to be effective)..... ,in other words they believed that the END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS.

B- In order to gain deminance, they forged supporting documents under the names of earlier authorities,altering the words of the sacred text, to make them more patently orthodox and to prevent their misuse by christians who espoused abberant views.

That last motive is exposed in details in the book, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament.Bart D. Ehrman




4- would early christians die for a lie?

no wonder ,as long as ,from a christian point of view, muslims are dying for a lie too...
Nazists died for a lie .. etc etc etc....

propaganda would turn the biggest lie to the sweetest truth which you would kill and die for...


To be continued

 

[Hiroshi]

The Qur'an says nothing bad about the Bible, the Torah and the Injil. Rather, it says that these give guidance and light (Surah 5:46). And the Bible that was in existence at the time of the rise of Islam remains unchanged from that time. We still have manuscripts from very early centuries. How then can it be true then that the Bible has such errors that it is of no value?

 

[Ramadhan]

The Qur'an says nothing bad about the Bible, the Torah and the Injil. Rather, it says that these give guidance and light (Surah 5:46). And the Bible that was in existence at the time of the rise of Islam remains unchanged from that time. We still have manuscripts from very early centuries. How then can it be true then that the Bible has such errors that it is of no value?

I am giving you the benefit of the doubt (until proven otherwise) of being ignorant about this particular and yet very important issue, and hence I am going to give you proper responses.



From Islamqa:

What sura in the Quran is related or mentions about the curruption of the Torah and Gospel?



Praise be to Allaah.

Allaah says about the Jews (interpretation of the meaning): “Do you (faithful believers) covet that they will belive in your religion in spite of the fact that a party of them (Jewish rabbis) used to hear the Word of Allaah (the Tawraat), then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it?” [al-Baqarah 2:75]

Qutaadah said: “The phrase ‘then they used to change it knowingly after they understood it’ refers to the Jews, who used to hear the words of Allaah, then they altered it after they had understood what it meant.”

Abu ‘Aaliyah said: “They took what Allaah had revealed in their Book describing Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and changed its meaning.” Ibn Zayd said: “The phrase ‘[they] used to hear the Word of Allaah (the Tawraat), then they used to change it’ refers to the Tawraat which Allaah revealed to them; they changed it, making what it permitted forbidden, and what was forbidden allowed, changing the truth to falsehood and falsehood to truth…” [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]

Allaah also said (interpretation of the meaning): “Among those who are Jews, there are some who displace words from (their) right places and say: ‘We hear your word (O Muhammad) and disobey,’ and ‘Hear and let you (Muhammad) hear nothing.’ And Raa’ina [in Arabic this means, ‘Be careful, listen to us and we listen to you,’ whereas in Hebrew it means ‘an insult.’] with a twist of their tongues and as a mockery of the religion (Islam). And if only they had said, ‘We hear and obey,’ and ‘Do make us understand,’ it would have been better for them, and more proper, but Allaah has cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not except for a few.” [al-Nisaa’ 4:46]

The phrase “[they] displace words from (their) right places” means that they misinterpret them and understand them in a way that Allaah did not intend, doing this deliberately and inventing lies against Allaah. [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]

Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): “So because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard. They change the words from their (right) places and have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them. And you will not cease to discover deceit in them, except a few of them. But forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds). Verily, Allaah loves al-Muhsineen (good-doers).” [al-Maa’idah 5:13]

The phrase “because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them” refers to the fact that they broke the Covenant which had been made with them, so Allaah cursed them, i.e., He kept them away from following the True Guidance. “[We] made their hearts grow hard” means that they will not benefit from any preaching because their hearts are so hard. “They change the words from their (right) places” means that they play havoc with the words of Allaah and misinterpret His Book, taking it to mean things that were never meant and attributing to Allaah things that He never said; may Allaah protect us from that.

“[They] have abandoned a good part of the Message that was sent to them” means that they stopped following its teachings because they did not want to follow them. Al-Hasan said: “They did not adhere to their religion or keep their duties towards Allaah, without which no deeds are acceptable to Him; their fitrah (innate nature) was not sound and their deeds were not righteous.” [Tafseer Ibn Katheer]

So it becomes quite clear that the ways in which the Children of Israel tampered with the Tawraat and Injeel include the following:
Changing Omitting Adding things and attributing to Allaah words that He did not say Misinterpreting the words of Allaah.

When Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was sent, the original Tawraat and Injeel had already been altered and distorted. Allaah revealed the Qur’aan to His Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and guaranteed that He Himself would preserve it, as He says (interpretation of the meaning): “Verily We: it is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e., the Qur’aan) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption).” [al-Hijr 15:9]

This distinguishing feature was not found in any Book before the Qur’aan. From the time of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) until the present (more than fourteen hundred years) the Qur’aan has stayed the same, and not a single letter of it has been changed, as ancient manuscripts and the hearts of generation after generation of people who have memorized the entire text and earned the title of “haafiz” bear witness. We ask Allaah to guide us to the true and straight path. And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

 

[Ramadhan]

From Islamqa:

The Gospels that are extant nowadays were written after the time of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and have been tampered with a great deal
It is well known among us Muslims that Allaah revealed the Gospel (Injeel) to ‘Eesa (peace be upon him), but when I studied some things about Christianity, they told me that the Gospel was not brought by the Messiah, rather it was written by the disciples of the Messiah after the crucifixion (or after Allaah raised him up to Him, as it says in the Qur’aan). How can we reconcile between the two views?.

Praise be to Allaah.

There is no contradiction between the two views such that we would need to ask how they can be reconciled. Rather the reason why the questioner is confused is that he is mixing up two things that we must believe in and that are both true, praise be to Allaah.

The first issue is the Gospel that was revealed from the Lord of the Worlds to the Prophet of Allaah ‘Eesa (peace be upon him). Belief that Allaah revealed a Book to His Prophet ‘Eesa and that the name of this book was the Gospel (Injeel), are basic principles of faith that we must believe in. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The Messenger (Muhammad) believes in what has been sent down to him from his Lord, and (so do) the believers. Each one believes in Allaah, His Angels, His Books, and His Messengers. (They say,) ‘We make no distinction between one another of His Messengers’ — and they say, ‘We hear, and we obey. (We seek) Your forgiveness, our Lord, and to You is the return (of all)’”

[al-Baqarah 2:285]

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to Jibreel, when he asked him about faith, as mentioned in the well-known hadeeth: “Faith means to believe in Allaah, His angels, His books, His messengers, the Last Day, and to believe in His divine will and decree, both good and bad.” (Agreed upon).

Disbelieving in that or doubting it is misguidance and kufr or disbelief in Allaah. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Believe in Allaah, and His Messenger (Muhammad), and the Book (the Qur’aan) which He has sent down to His Messenger, and the Scripture which He sent down to those before (him); and whosoever disbelieves in Allaah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day, then indeed he has strayed far away.

137. Verily, those who believe, then disbelieve, then believe (again), and (again) disbelieve, and go on increasing in disbelief; Allaah will not forgive them, nor guide them on the (right) way”

[al-Nisa’ 4:136-137]

“Verily, those who disbelieve in Allaah and His Messengers and wish to make distinction between Allaah and His Messengers (by believing in Allaah and disbelieving in His Messengers) saying, “We believe in some but reject others,” and wish to adopt a way in between.

151. They are in truth disbelievers. And We have prepared for the disbelievers a humiliating torment”

[al-Nisa’ 4:150-151]

The second issue is the Gospel or, more precisely, the Gospels that the Christians have today. Although one of the basic principles of our faith is to believe in the Gospel that was revealed to ‘Eesa, we also believe that there is no longer any book that remained as it was revealed by Allaah, neither the Gospel nor anything else, apart from the Qur’aan. Even the Christians themselves do not believe that the books that they have before them were revealed in that form from God, nor do they claim that the Messiah wrote the Gospel or at least that it was written during his lifetime. Imam Ibn Hazm (may Allaah have mercy on him) says in al-Fasl fi’l-Milal (2/2):

We do not need to try hard to prove that the Gospels and all the books of the Christians did not come from God or from the Messiah (peace be upon him), as we needed to do with regard to the Torah and the books attributed to the Prophets that the Jews have, because the Jews claim that the Torah that they have was revealed from God to Moosa, so we needed to establish proof that this claim of theirs is false. With regard to the Christians, they have taken care of the issue themselves, because they do not believe that the Gospels were revealed from God to the Messiah, or that the Messiah brought them, rather all of them from first to last, peasants and kings, Nestorians, Jacobites, Maronites and Orthodox are all agreed that there are four historical accounts written by four known men at different times. The first of them is the account written by Matthew the Levite who was a disciple of the Messiah, nine years after the Messiah was taken up into heaven. He wrote it in Hebrew in Judaea in Palestine, and it filled approximately twenty-eight pages in a medium-sized script. The next account was written by Mark, a disciple of Simon ben Yuna, who was called Peter, twenty-two years after the Messiah was taken up into heaven. He wrote it in Greek in Antioch in the land of the Byzantines. They say that the Simon mentioned is the one who wrote it, then he erased his name from the beginning of it and attributed it to his disciple Mark. It filled twenty-four pages written in a medium-sized script. This Simon was a disciple of the Messiah. The third account written was that of Luke, a physician of Antioch who was also a disciple of Simon Peter. He wrote it in Greek after Mark had written his account, and is similar in length to the Gospel of Matthew. The fourth account was written by John the son of Zebedee, another disciple of the Messiah, sixty-odd years after the Messiah has been taken up into heaven. He wrote it in Greek, and it filled twenty-four pages in a medium-sized script. End quote.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in al-Jawaab al-Saheeh (3:21):

With regard to the Gospels that the Christians have, there are four Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They are agreed that Luke and Mark did not see the Messiah, rather he was seen by Matthew and John. 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. End quote.

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. Ibn Hazm said:

With regard to the Christians, there is no dispute among them or anyone else that only one hundred and twenty men believed in the Messiah during his lifetime… and all of those who believed in him concealed themselves and were afraid during his lifetime and afterwards; they called people to his religion in secret and none of them disclosed himself or practised his religion openly, because any of them who was caught was executed.

They continued in this manner, not showing themselves at all, and they had no place where they were safe for three hundred years after the Messiah was taken up into heaven.

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, as we have mentioned. Then when the Emperor Constantine became a Christian, then the Christians prevailed and started to practise their religion openly and assemble in safety.

If a religion is like this, with its followers practicing it in secret and living in constant fear of the sword, it is impossible for things to be transmitted soundly via a continuous chain of narrators and its followers cannot protect it or prevent it from being distorted.

End quote. Al-Fasl, 2/4-5.

In addition to this huge disruption in the chain of transmission of their books, which lasted for two centuries, these books did not remain in the languages in which they were originally written, rather they were translated, more than once, by people whose level of knowledge and honesty is unknown. The contradictions in these books and their shortcomings are among the strongest evidence that they have been distorted and that they are not the Gospel (Injeel) that Allaah revealed to His slave and Messenger ‘Eesa (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Allaah indeed spoke the truth when He said (interpretation of the meaning):

“Had it been from other than Allaah, they would surely, have found therein many a contradiction”

[al-Nisa’ 4:82].
Islam Q&A

 

[Al-manar]

Welcome Hiroshi to the thread....

The Qur'an says nothing bad about the Bible, the Torah and the Injil.

Yes the Quran says nothing bad about the Torah and the Injil...but what is the the Torah and the Injil ?

according to the Quran ,saying the Torah and Injil are not the same as saying the Old and New testament....

And the Bible that was in existence at the time of the rise of Islam remains unchanged from that time. We still have manuscripts from very early centuries..

there we go to another Issue, there is a difference between the Quranic claim of biblical corruption and validity of such accusation.....

I never addressed the validity of the Quranic claims yet ..... that issue is coming soon....

before going there don't you think that the author of the Quran viewed the bible as partially corrupted?

The Qur'an says nothing bad about the Bible

If the gospel claims a crucifiction,resurrection of jesus,yet the quran denies , don't you think that the author of the Quran didn't accept the bible as wholly true? you believe that the Quran said nothing bad about the bible,yet it says something (bad) like denying the crucifiction,resurrection? don't you think so?

regards

 

[Zafran]

The Qur'an says nothing bad about the Bible, the Torah and the Injil. Rather, it says that these give guidance and light (Surah 5:46). And the Bible that was in existence at the time of the rise of Islam remains unchanged from that time. We still have manuscripts from very early centuries. How then can it be true then that the Bible has such errors that it is of no value?

Salaam

The Quran doesnt talk about the Bible - It talks about the Injeel and the Torah. The torah is not in its perfect form and the Injeel well you have gospels but the Quran talks about the Injeel. The original books no doubt had light in them. what you have today is not the same as the original.

peace

 

[Hugo]

what kind of documents are you refering to? those sourced by the divine or by the human?

And exactly how can we know that a document is of divine origin? We cannot go and ask whoever that divine person is can we, we cannot check his handwriting and the paper is was written down on?

you know what is the sad part in Galatians 1:7 ?it is from a writer(s) who already perverted the Old Testament(I will prove that in details later),yet blames those who would pervert his gospel later !!!

I look forward to seeing your 'proofs' and to get such proof you will have to stretch back at least a 1,000BC. By the way, has it even occurred to you that the Galatians verses might very well be speaking about you?

 

[Hugo]

Hugo should argue the question of authorship with anyone but me.... I'm not the one who would scratch the surface but prefer going to the core....

Who is or was the provable author of the Qu'ran? I ask this question because whatever rules or criteria you cook up for the Bible or indeed any book must apply everywhere?

 

[Hugo]

The Quran doesnt talk about the Bible - It talks about the Injeel and the Torah. The torah is not in its perfect form and the Injeel well you have gospels but the Quran talks about the Injeel. The original books no doubt had light in them. what you have today is not the same as the original.

Since we don't have the originals as you allege how can we know for certain that they are not the same as we have today? You seem to be in a very odd position of believing in this 'original' Injeel but you have never seen it. We KNOW the complete Bible as we have it today was available centuries before the Qu'ran saw the light of day so did Mohammed check it out after the relevant Qu'ranic verses appeared by looking at some 'original'?

 

[جوري]

Since we don't have the originals as you allege how can we know for certain that they are not the same as we have today? You seem to be in a very odd position of believing in this 'original' Injeel but you have never seen it. We KNOW the complete Bible as we have it today was available centuries before the Qu'ran saw the light of day so did Mohammed check it out after the relevant Qu'ranic verses appeared by looking at some 'original'?

How do we know for sure? well because god wouldn't make mistakes and have memory lapses (along with other slips) if the book is authored by him!
maybe the problem is that you beseech a lesser god who couldn't salvage himself against a couple of oafs or choose apostles that wouldn't denounce him that he should naturally be equally ineffectual at writing an error free book cohesive book to guide mankind.

not a difficult deduction to make without hordes of nonsensical statement.. employ logic sometime you might arrive to the same conclusions!

all the best

 

[Hugo]

1- Why the Quranic focus on the jews when accuses directly of biblical corruption, why not using the word (christians)?.the answer cause the New testament is a jewish production, it was composed by Jews eg,Mark, Matthew etc......

Are you saying that Allah could not make a distinction between Jew and Christian?

3- Why would the religious, lie,corrupt the word of God?[/B]A-[/B] To gain religious statue which mostly leads to materialistic benefit....

The OT records sins, serious sins, grievous sins for every one of it major characters including Abraham - it is therefore rather hard to see how anyone might gain 'religious stature' by showing in graphic detail that the founding fathers of their faith were just as weak and sinful as any one else and in some cases worse. The idea you express that this activity made them more 'patiently orthodox' is an absurdity

That last motive is exposed in details in the book, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture: The Effect of Early Christological Controversies on the Text of the New Testament.Bart D. Ehrman

Just as a matter of interest have you actually read all of this book? Have you read other commentators such as Daniel B. Wallace or F.F. Bruce or are you content to find something the props up your own view? Ehrman writes in a lively style and there is no doubt he is a competent scholar but so are the others I mentioned. My own view is that he pushes his thesis to far and props it up with silly ideas - for example, he talks about the Christianity being literary and how it was necessary to read to the early Christians and seem to forget that books were rare and valuable - in the first century you could not order from Amazon. You might like to know that there are similar books on the Qu'ran and the criticisms they contain are much more devastating, but I guess you would not even bother reading them would you?

 

[Hugo]

How do we know for sure? well because god wouldn't make mistakes and have memory lapses (along with other slips) if the book is authored by him!

Well maybe, just maybe if this God of yours exists he would shape up to you expectations but it always worries me when people start deciding what God can and cannot do especially when it is designed to prop up a dogma and into the bargain uses circular arguments as you do. If we speak of the Qu'ran it is easy to find web sites and books that rubbish the idea that it is in any way divine or faultless: consider "A Guide To Quranic Contradictions" by Abul Kasem or "In search of the Original Koran by Mondher Sfar or Sam Shamoun's "Variant Readings of the Quran" etc etc.

 

[جوري]

]Well maybe, just maybe if this God of yours exists he would shape up to you expectations but it always worries me when people start deciding what God can and cannot do especially when it is designed to prop up a dogma and into the bargain uses circular arguments as you do. If we speak of the Qu'ran it is easy to find web sites and books that rubbish the idea that it is in any way divine or faultless: consider "A Guide To Quranic Contradictions" by Abul Kasem or "In search of the Original Koran by Mondher Sfar or Sam Shamoun's "Variant Readings of the Quran" etc etc.

God either exists or he doesn't, we are not going back to atheism when here discussing religion.. However, God should be at least in keeping with the definition of the terms which doesn't conform to my particular idea of God, God by his very definition should exist beyond the human reductionist approach, it isn't Islam that reduces god to the lowest common denominator and renders him meek worst yet-dead!
Yes of course the websites you frequent are filled with drivel you all to frequently spew on here and you have had two miserable attempts to prove the Quran in error, you couldn't carry them through for obvious reasons. Not the case with the bible is it? I mean even someone in grade school can browse through it and be slapped left and right with chronological errors, illogical events, and disgraceful description that spare no one and confusions galore.. I mean for starters how many sons did god have.. was it Adam? Israel? Jesus, or Satan? hmmmm

Adam, which was the son of God. Luke 3:38
or?
Israel is my son, even my firstborn." II Samuel 7:14 and I Chronicles 22:10: "...and he shall be my son (Solomon)." Jeremiah 31:9: "

...and Ephraim is my firstborn." Also, Psalm 2:7.

The sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. Job 1:6

Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the LORD. -- Job 2:1

strange indeed-- what should we deem in allegory and what should we deem literal?

BTW I totally welcome you to bring the contents of the 'variant readings' so we can discuss them!

all the best

 

[Hugo]

The Gospels that are extant nowadays were written after the time of ‘Eesa (peace be upon him) and have been tampered with a great deal
It is well known among us Muslims that Allaah revealed the Gospel (Injeel) to ‘Eesa (peace be upon him), but when I studied some things about Christianity, they told me that the Gospel was not brought by the Messiah, rather it was written by the disciples of the Messiah after the crucifixion (or after Allaah raised him up to Him, as it says in the Qur’aan). How can we reconcile between the two views?.

It seems obvious that the Gospels that tell the story of Jesus could hardly have been written before he died? One cannot reconcile these two views since there is not a shred of evidence to suggest that there was anything else except the Gospels as we now them and if the Muslim position is that Jesus 'brought' them then where are they or is your, and that of Mohammed's faith here completely blind? One has to remember that the Gospels as we have them today were available fully long before the time of Islam's prophet so if as you say God preserved the Qu'ran did he forget about the Injeel?

We do not need to try hard to prove that the Gospels and all the books of the Christians did not come from God or from the Messiah (peace be upon him), as we needed to do with regard to the Torah and the books attributed to the Prophets that the Jews have, because the Jews claim that the Torah that they have was revealed from God to Moosa, so we needed to establish proof that this claim of theirs is false.

Can you tell us how you will do this? It is a principle in science that we need to falsify. That is we need to state a way that in principle it would be possible to falsify a claim. This applies to any writing, including those that claims to be supernatural - so how would you go about falsifying the claim that the Qu'ran is God given? If you cannot find a way then what we are dealing with might or might not be true - we cannot tell.

With regard to the Christians, there is no dispute among them or anyone else that only one hundred and twenty men believed in the Messiah during his lifetime; and all of those who believed in him concealed themselves and were afraid during his lifetime and afterwards; they called people to his religion in secret and none of them disclosed himself or practised his religion openly, because any of them who was caught was executed.

This is pure nonsense. We ONLY have the Biblical accounts and they show this statement to be false on every point.

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, as we have mentioned. Then when the Emperor Constantine became a Christian, then the Christians prevailed and started to practise their religion openly and assemble in safety.

How do you know this and where are these 'few verses' - why does anyone invent this stuff?

 

[Zafran]

Since we don't have the originals as you allege how can we know for certain that they are not the same as we have today? You seem to be in a very odd position of believing in this 'original' Injeel but you have never seen it. We KNOW the complete Bible as we have it today was available centuries before the Qu'ran saw the light of day so did Mohammed check it out after the relevant Qu'ranic verses appeared by looking at some 'original'?

I was specifically replying to someone elses post who was talking about how the Quran views the "bible". The bible has had books taken out and kept in - we still dont know what goes where. 66 books and 73 books is a starter. By the way the bible has 4 gospels. The Injeel is quite simple its what Jesus pbuh taught - his gospel - his good news.

 

[syed_z]

Since we don't have the originals as you allege how can we know for certain that they are not the same as we have today? You seem to be in a very odd position of believing in this 'original' Injeel but you have never seen it. We KNOW the complete Bible as we have it today was available centuries before the Qu'ran saw the light of day so did Mohammed check it out after the relevant Qu'ranic verses appeared by looking at some 'original'?

Michael Hart has the following to say in his book “The Hundred”

Paul, more than any other man, was responsible for the
transformation of Christianity from a Jewish sect into a world
religion. His central ideas of the divinity of Christ and of
justification by faith alone have remained basic to Christian
thought throughout all the intervening centuries ... Indeed, the
influence of Paul’s ideas has been so great that some scholars
have claimed that he, rather than Jesus, should be regarded as
the principal founder of the Christian religion.

(by the way Michael Hart was a Christian and he accepted Muhammad to be the # 1 person in his book of 100 most influential personalities)

According to the Holy Qur’an, Prophet Isa (AS) was appointed a prophet only for the Israelites (Aal-e-Imran 3:49 & Al-Saff 61:6), and this is confirmed by his sayings which appear in the Gospels (Matthew 10:5,6 & 15:24),


(Quran 3:49) and he will be a Messenger to the Children of Israel.' (And when he came to them he said): 'I have come to you with a sign from your Lord. I will make for you from clay the likeness of a bird and then I will breathe into it and by the leave of Allah it will become a bird. I will also heal the blind and the leper, and by the leave of Allah bring the dead to life.



(Gospel Mathew 10:5-6) These twelve Jesus sent out, charging them, "Go nowhere among the Gentiles (non jews), and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.



It was Pauls innovations which were spread among the Pagans of Rome, who were very impressed by the Heavenly Religion.... while Jesus (a.s) clearly had told not to preach it to Non Jews, as this Message was not for all mankind...


.....also none of the writers of the four so-called authentic gospels — i.e., Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John — ever met with the prophet Jesus himself. These gospels were written between 70 C.E and 115 C.E. but their earliest available manuscripts date back to the fourth century C.E, making their authenticity rather dubious.


A number of different gospels were in circulation throughout the early period of Christianity, the manuscripts of which were freely altered and amended by the copyists in order to suit the doctrines of their particular sect. The four gospels that are included in the New Testament were accepted as genuine by the Church — and the rest were rejected as apocryphal, and their possession prohibited — not on the basis of merit, but only because these four books were in conformity with the official Church dogma. The Worshiping of the Idol of Jesus is one of the effects of Pagan festivities which have entered Christianity religion from Pagan Roman civilization after their conversion.