by Abu-Usaama
A claim that many radical christians make in their endless endeavors to convert Muslims to christianity is that the Qur’an affirms the books that are in their possession, namely, the Old Testament and the New Testament. The purpose of this article is to show the falsehood of their claim that the New Testament in particular is endorsed by the Qur’an and also to clarify what the Injeel is and isn’t.
Ayaat regarding the Injeel
Allah mentions the Injeel, which can be translated as Gospel, in several places in the Qur’an. Allah says:
نَزَّلَ عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ مُصَدِّقاً لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَأَنزَلَ التَّوْرَاةَ وَالإِنجِيلَ
It is He Who has sent down the Book (the Quran) to you (Muhammad SAW) with truth, confirming what came before it. And he sent down the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel). [3:3]
وَيُعَلِّمُهُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَالتَّوْرَاةَ وَالإِنجِيلَ
“And He (Allah) will teach him ['Iesa (Jesus)] the Book and Al-Hikmah (i.e. the Sunnah, the faultless speech of the Prophets, wisdom, etc.), (and) the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel).” 3:48
يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لِمَ تُحَآجُّونَ فِي إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمَا أُنزِلَتِ التَّورَاةُ وَالإنجِيلُ إِلاَّ مِن بَعْدِهِ أَفَلاَ تَعْقِلُونَ
O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! Why do you dispute about Ibrahim (Abraham), while the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel) were not revealed till after him? Have you then no sense? [ 3:65]
وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ أَقَامُواْ التَّوْرَاةَ وَالإِنجِيلَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيهِم مِّن رَّبِّهِمْ لأكَلُواْ مِن فَوْقِهِمْ وَمِن تَحْتِ أَرْجُلِهِم مِّنْهُمْ أُمَّةٌ مُّقْتَصِدَةٌ وَكَثِيرٌ مِّنْهُمْ سَاء مَا يَعْمَلُونَ
And if only they had acted according to the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), and what has (now) been sent down to them from their Lord (the Quran), they would surely have gotten provision from above them and from underneath their feet. There are from among them people who are on the right course (i.e. they act on the revelation and believe in Prophet Muhammad SAW like ‘Abdullah bin Salam رضى ), but many of them do evil deeds. [[5:66]
قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَسْتُمْ عَلَى شَيْءٍ حَتَّىَ تُقِيمُواْ التَّوْرَاةَ وَالإِنجِيلَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَلَيَزِيدَنَّ كَثِيراً مِّنْهُم مَّا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ طُغْيَاناً وَكُفْراً فَلاَ تَأْسَ عَلَى الْقَوْمِ الْكَافِرِينَ
Say (O Muhammad SAW) “O people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians)! You have nothing (as regards guidance) till you act according to the Taurat (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel), and what has (now) been sent down to you from your Lord (the Quran).” Verily, that which has been sent down to you (Prophet Muhammad SAW) from your Lord increases in many of them their obstinate rebellion and disbelief. So be not sorrowful over the people who disbelieve.
وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَى آثَارِهِم بِعَيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقاً لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الإِنجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقاً لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِّلْمُتَّقِينَ
“And in their footsteps, We sent ‘Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), confirming the Taurat (Torah) that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Taurat (Torah) that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for Al-Muttaqun (the pious – see V.2:2).
وَلْيَحْكُمْ أَهْلُ الإِنجِيلِ بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فِيهِ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ
هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah has revealed therein. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed (then) such (people) are the Fasiqun (the rebellious i.e. disobedient (of a lesser degree) to Allah.” [5:46-47]
Michael Nazir-Ali, a pakistani born Christian Bishop states regarding the last-mentioned ayaat:
“The point here is not what Muhammad (SWS) thought the Injil to be…but what in fact it was at his time. He is, in the above passage, exhorting the Christians of his day to look into the Injil for guidance. Now, if these Christians had responded to such an exhortation and had looked into their Injil or evangel into what would they have looked? The answer is quite obvious: They would have looked into their New Testament (which is also ours)…” (Nazer-Ali, Islam: A Christian Perspective, pg. 14.)
Nazer-Ali makes a few incorrect assumptions in his statement. Firstly, he assumes that the aayah is implying that the Injeel given to Jesus (alayhe salam) was present at the time of Prophet Muhammad .
Ibn Taymiyyah (May Allah have mercy on him) states in his book “Al-Jawaab As-Saheeh” regarding the aayah[5:47]:
ذا قرىء وليحكم كان المعنى وأتيناه الإنجيل لكذا وكذا وليحكم أهل الإنجيل بما أنزل الله فيه وهذا يوجب الحكم بما أنزل الله في الإنجيل الحق لا يدل على أن الإنجيل الموجود في زمن الرسول هو ذلك الإنجيل
“This is a command for ruling by what Allah revealed in the true Injeel, it is not a proof that the Injeel present in the time of the Messenger (meaning the Prophet Muhammad ) is that Injeel.”
He also says:
وأما قراءة الجمهور ^ وليحكم أهل الإنجيل ^ فهو أمر بذلك فمن العلماء من قال هو أمر لمن كان الإنجيل الحق موجودا عندهم أن يحكموا بما أنزل الله فيه
“It is a command for whoever has the true injeel residing with them that they judge by what Allah revealed therein”
Even if one were to assume that the aayah and other similar aayaat exorted the christians at the time of the Rrophet Muhammad to look into something available to them, one can not assume how the christians at that time would have interpreted this. The wide range of texts relating to Jesus’ teachings and message that existed outside what is traditionally known as the new Testament are numerous, and many revered up until the time of the Prophet Muhammad and even later. In fact, a “gospel” which is not present in today’s New Testament, which is known as the Gospel of Peter, was revered by groups of early christians, which is testified to the fact that portions of it were found in the tomb of a monk in egypt dating back to the time of the Prophet Muhammad
Bart D Ehrman, a scholar of Christian history states in his book “the Lost Christianites” concerning the “Gospel of Peter”:
“Somebody revered Peter and his Gospel, somebody living in Egypt, some four or five hundred years after Serapion had forbidden the Gospel’s use. And the Egyptian was not alone.She or he must have been part of a community which must have had a contemporary copy of the Gospel and accepted it as a sacred text. Nor was the community of the ostracon’s inscriber alone: A fragment of hte Gospel was buried, presumably as a cherished text, in the tomb of a monk a century or so later. The Gospel of Peter may have become lost to us but it was widely used in the early centuries of Christianity, and it continued to be used down to the early Middle Ages in some parts of the church.”
Some of the beliefs of this document include that Jesus (alayhe salam) felt no pain while being crucified, did not die on the cross, and that his soul was raised to heaven directly from it.
So how can it be said that the christians would have interpreted the aayah as an exortation to follow the writings of Mark, Luke, John, and Matthew, let alone the writings of Paul and other unknown individuals after Jesus (alayhe slaam)?
There is some evidence that there may have existed some groups who held fast to what was originally given to Isa(Jesus) alayhe slaam.
حدثنا بشر , قال : ثنا يزيد , قال : ثنا سعيد , عن قتادة , قوله { الذين آتيناهم الكتاب من قبله هم به يؤمنون } قال : كنا نحدث أنها نزلت في أناس من أهل الكتاب كانوا على شريعة من الحق , يأخذون بها , وينتهون إليها , حتى بعث الله محمدا صلى الله عليه وسلم , فآمنوا به , وصدقوا به , فأعطاهم الله أجرهم مرتين , بصبرهم على الكتاب الأول , واتباعهم محمدا صلى الله عليه وسلم , وصبرهم على ذلك , وذكر أن منهم سلمان , وعبد الله بن س
It is related that Qatada said regarding the aayah: “those whom We gave the Book from before, they believe in it”. It has been related to us that this was revealed regarding a group from the people of the Book who were upon a true shareeah, they held unto it and followed it, until Allah sent Muhammad (salallahu alayhe wasallam) so they believed in him and affirmed him. So Allah gave them a double reward for their patience upon the previous Book. And their following of Muhammad (salallahu alayhe wasallam) and their patience upon that. And it is mentioned that from them are Salmaan (al-Farisi) and Abdullah ibn Salam.”
If one examines what is related of the testimony of Salmaan Al-Farisi, regarding his journey to Islam, one notes that the number of people who were grasping onto the truth before the Prophet were very small. He relates that a bishop mentioned to him at the thores of death: “By the name of God, I do not know of anyone who follows the same genuine religion I follow. Humanity is in a great trouble: people have changed the original teachings, abandoned and ignored most of what the forefatherse belived in except so-and-so living in Mosul.” Additionally, its related that the individual in Mosul also said to him ” I do not know anyone who follows the same teachings as we do except a man in Nasebin, and his name is so – and – so, follow him.” However, the details of the religion or scriptures of these people is unknown, except for that they were waiting for the Prophet Muhammad to come.
Another narration that discusses some followers of the Injeel before the Prophet (salallahu alayhe wasallam): Ibn Jarir and Abu `Abdur-Rahman An-Nasa’i — and this is his wording – recorded that Ibn `Abbas said, “There were kings after `Isa who changed the Tawrah and the Injil when there were still believers who recited Tawrah and the Injil. Their kings were told, `We were never confronted by more severe criticism and abuse than of these people.’ — they recite the Ayah,
[وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْكَـفِرُونَ]
(And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers.)(5:44), as well as, they accuse us of short comings in our actions, while still they recite. Therefore, summon them and let them recite these Ayat our way and believe in them our way.’ The king summoned them and gathered them and threatened them with death if they did not revert from reciting the original Tawrah and Injil to using the corrupted version only. They said, `Why do you want us to do that, let us be.’ Some of them said, `Build a narrow elevated tower for us and let us ascend it, and then give us the means to elevate food and drink to us. This way, you will save yourselves from hearing us.’ Another group among them said, `Let us go about in the land and eat and drink like beasts do, and if you find us in your own land, then kill us.’ Another group among them said, `Build homes (monasteries) for us in the deserts and secluded areas, where we can dig wells and plant vegetables. Then, we will not refute you and will not even pass by you.’ These groups said this, even though they all had supporters among their tribes. It is about this that Allah the Exalted and Most Honored sent down this Ayah,
[وَرَهْبَانِيَّةً ابتَدَعُوهَا مَا كَتَبْنَـهَا عَلَيْهِمْ إِلاَّ ابْتِغَآءَ رِضْوَنِ اللَّهِ فَمَا رَعَوْهَا حَقَّ رِعَايَتِهَا]
(But the monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them, but (they sought it) only to please Allah therewith, but that they did not observe it with the right observance.) ”
The details of the the Injeel of these followers however is not mentioned.
Regardless, whatever Allah truly gave ‘Isa (alayhe salam) is to be regarded as the Injeel, so whatever rememnants of this that may have been present at the time of the Prophet Muhammad, if any at all, may be considered Injeel. This does not constitute anything that promotes polytheism or false-concepts.
Was the Injeel given to Isa (alayhe salam) written in the form of a book?
Many scholars talk about the Injeel as if it was written down in the form of a book between two covers, however, all what is shown in christian history as is presented are books that were written by individuals after Jesus about Jesus (alayhe salam). It is not impossible that the Injeel was not written down in the time of Jesus (alayhe salam ) but rather simply transmitted orally.
al-Taahir ibn ‘Ashoor said in his commentary on Soorat Maryam 19:30:
“The Scripture refers to the law which is usually written lest it be subject to change. The word Scripture(kitaab) is applied to the Law of ‘Eesa just as it is applied to the Qur’aan. [Al-Tahreer wa’l-Tanweer (8/470)].”
However delving into which is the case is mere speculation.
Does the New Testament today have remenants of the Injeel?
There is evidence, that the New Testament as it is today may contain remenants of the Injeel revealed by Allah to Isa(Jesus) alayhe salam. Allah says in Surah Al-Fath
مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُولُ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاء عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاء بَيْنَهُمْ تَرَاهُمْ رُكَّعاً سُجَّداً يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلاً مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَاناً سِيمَاهُمْ فِي وُجُوهِهِم مِّنْ أَثَرِ السُّجُودِ ذَلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِي الْإِنجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْأَهُ فَآزَرَهُ فَاسْتَغْلَظَ فَاسْتَوَى عَلَى سُوقِهِ يُعْجِبُ الزُّرَّاعَ لِيَغِيظَ بِهِمُ الْكُفَّارَ وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ مِنْهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْراً عَظِيماً
“Muhammad (SAW) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and falling down prostrate (in prayer), seeking Bounty from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. The mark of them (i.e. of their Faith) is on their faces (foreheads) from the traces of (their) prostration (during prayers). This is their description in the Taurat (Torah). But their description in the Injeel (Gospel) is like a (sown) seed which sends forth its shoot, then makes it strong, it then becomes thick, and it stands straight on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. Allah has promised those among them who believe (i.e. all those who follow Islamic Monotheism, the religion of Prophet Muhammad till the Day of Resurrection) and do righteous good deeds, forgiveness and a mighty reward (i.e. Paradise). [48:29]
A form of the parable mentioned in regards to the Injeel is recorded in the “Gospel of Mark” in the New Testament today, as a statement of Jesus (alayhe salam) to his disciples.
To claim however, that the English New Testament in the hands of the christians today can be referred to as “the Injeel” is quite frankly, a stretch beyond a stretch, and deception beyond deception. The mixture of the opinions of varoius unknown authors and individuals with no chains of transmissions, promoting various contradicting ideas and polytheistic concepts, along with the loose and biased translations to fit particular creeds, make the New Testament in the hands of christians today no short of an insult to Allah.
Islamic position regarding what the Christians have
The basic position of the scholars regarding the the scriptures in the hands of the christians and Jews is that the Qur’an is muhaymin (trustworthy) over them, as Allah says in the aayah afterwards:
وَأَنزَلْنَآ إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَـبَ بِالْحَقِّ مُصَدِّقاً لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ الْكِتَـبِ وَمُهَيْمِناً عَلَ
“And We have sent down to you the Book (this Qur’an) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Muhayminan over it (old Scriptures).”
Ibn Katheer mentions in his tafseer regarding the aayah that Ibn Jarir said, “The Qur’an is trustworthy over the Books that preceded it. Therefore, whatever in these previous Books conforms to the Qur’an is true, and whatever disagrees with the Qur’an is false.”
Nice research Sidi Abu Usaama! It is saddening when you see some of the Muslims giving credence to the authority of the New Testament, a book that has been changed more times than one can count. One of the first things, when I was a christian, that awoke my soul to the christian deception of the authenticity of the Bible, was the Bible itself.
The NIV admits, for example, beneath Mark 16 the following;
((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.))
And Also: ((The earliest and most reliable manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have John 7:53-8:11.))
This is simply what they are willing to admit too now. Many theologians are realizing that the claim to authenticity of the Bible is overstated by the ignorant masses. You should also mention some of the other books that were left out or lost mentioned by Professor Bart Ehrman. His book is a fascinating read. I remember there was a book he mentioned that mentioned the Gospels of a shephard or something…could you maybe mention some more texts the papacy and the protestants removed upon whim?
There are many “Gospels” as well as writings that were not put into the New Testament. From among these (that are known about) are:
the Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of the Egyptians
Gospel of the Hebrews
Gospel of the Ebionites
Gospel of the Nazoreans
Secret Book of James
Shephard of Hermas
and many more.
the Gospel of Thomas makes no mention of the supposed crucifixion of Jesus (alayhe salaam), and does not hold much weight to it at all, but rather focus’ on narrations of Jesus’ words and wisdom.
Ron Cameron comments (op. cit., p. 540):
Gos. Thom. took Jesus seriously as a teacher who spoke with authority. It celebrated his memory by preserving sayings in his name that sanctioned the formation of a distinctive community. The gospel locates its group’s position within the Christian tradition as an independent Jesus movement, which persisted over the course of several generations of social history without becoming an apocalyptic or kerygmatic sect. Authorized by interpreting the written legacy of Jesus, Gos. Thom. maintained its autonomy and distinct identity by acts of creative attribution. Jesus was characterized as the embodiment of Wisdom; his words, which could harness the very power of the universe, offered her path of ‘knowing’ as an investment of the imagination. Gos. Thom. defines the role of its community in constructing the fabric of society as a process of sapiental insight and research. The gospel, therefore, charts the course of salvation as a study in interpretation, providing the elixir of life to those for whom the secret of the kingdom is disclosed in the interpretation of Jesus’ words.
Most of the other books I mentioned only exist in fragments and are not completely available.
The Shephard of Hermas as is translated is an interesting document int hat it plainly and clearly states the doctrine of tawheed and clarifies it:
“1[26]:1 “First of all, believe that God is One, even He who created all things and set them in order, and brought all things from non-existence into being, Who comprehendeth all things, being alone incomprehensible.
1[26]:2 Believe Him therefore, and fear Him, and in this fear be continent. Keep these things, and thou shalt cast off all wickedness from thyself, and shalt clothe thyself with every excellence of righteousness, and shalt live unto God, if thou keep this commandment.”
”
Apparently the Shephard of Hermas was included in some copies of the New Testament in early christianity.
Additionally there are many Gnostic writings that were never placed in the New Testament.
you can find these at http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
Another issue interestingto mention, is regarding alterations that Bart D Ehrman believes to have been made in the New Testament in order to oppose the “adoptionist” beliefs that some early christian sects had such as the ebionites.
Basically the idea that they had was that Jesus alayhe salam was not begotten of God, but was “chosen” or “adopted” by God and because of this he is called the son of God. They completely denied any divinity to Jesus whatsoever.
Bart D Ehrman states that “the original writings of the New Testmanet, though, rarely come out with anything so bold as a statement that Jesus is God”, but that scribes would make alterations to the texts in order to clarify this point.
He mentions that in one verse, which is used by christians occasionally to attempt to prove Jesus’ divinity, in the Gospel of John as it is written with christians today, it states:
18No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only,[a][b]who is at the Father’s side, has made him known.
John 1:18
According to Bart D Ehrman, this verse was changed by scribes intentionally from
“No one has ever seen God, but the ONly Son”
into
“No one has ever seen God, but God the one and Only”
in order to stress the idea that Jesus is God.
This is even admitted on a Bible website by christians themselves:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=john%201:18&version=31
1. John 1:18 Or the Only Begotten
2. John 1:18 Some manuscripts but the only (or only begotten) Son
Mashaa Allaah, great work. Jazak Allaahu Khayran!
Salamu alaykum
Make sure to catch ‘Ban from the Bible’ on History channel. It plays it ever so often.
Assalamu alaykum
I have a question dear brother:
Some Christian missionaries as Dr. William Campbell claim that the Holy Qu’ran confirms the Torah and the Gospel that Jews and Christians have with them, and they quote the phrase “Musaddiqan limaa bayna yadaihe” (in Surah 3:3, 5:48), which means according to them, “Which confirms that, which is at hand “.
Is it a valid translation according to you ?
Yes, that translation is accurate.
The Quran, however, most certainly does not affirm the authenticity of the present-day translations and the historically-proven adulterations of the Torah and the Gospel (do we even have The Gospel anymore?).
Salaam
Ok but I wonder how christians can judge according to the Injeel if this last that have with them is not authentic.
Perhaps, when He says “The Injeel”, Allâh, swt, mentions the Jesus Christ’s gospel which is today disperse into canonical and apocryphia’s gospels and that christian’s scholars can reconstitute at any time, no ?
the Gospel of Thomas
Gospel of the Egyptians
Gospel of the Hebrews
Gospel of the Ebionites
Gospel of the Nazoreans
Secret Book of James
Shephard of Hermas
None of those gospels were written by eye witnesses. None of them are authoritative. They were left out because they were not written by people who knew Jesus personally.
We have a partial of the original Gospel of Matthew. In that Gospel, Matthew ***CLEARLY*** speaks of Jesus as being God. You don’t get this from the English translations. If you go to the original Koine Greek, you see it very clearly. This partial dates to 66 AD, it was found in Eqypt, and since it is the original, it has been unedited.
The fact is, the people who knew Jesus personally, all knew that He was God and not just a messenger.
John lets discuss this on my blog:
http://unveilingchristianity.wordpress.com/
Assalamu’alaikum and greetings,
John..your concerns are addressed here http://unveilingchristianity.wordpress.com/2008/05/30/corruption-of-the-bible-the-final-judgement/
Stop the discourse and divisiveness, we are all children of Allah, although some of us have not woken up from the sleep. Just because you say you read from this book, or that, does not make you righteous.
Does it not say:
That is Allah, your Lord, there is no god but He; the Creator of all things, therefore serve Him, and He has charge of all things.
There is no man greater than his brother. There is only one greater, and that is Allah. Allah owns all things and we are given them to share amongst us. Learn to share that which is Allah’s in the first place. Share your lives, your possesions, your food and your faith. Give up your claims to oil, land and material goods so that you may follow Allah in the Spirit. Is all not Allah’s? So why do you dispute?
Does it not say:
And as to those who believe and do good deeds, He will pay them fully their rewards; and Allah does not love the unjust.
The seeds of the polytheist are many. Look at the man that worships money, or believes he can give worldly goods in trade for a place in the heavens. Or, of the man that uses his wealth to rule over his brothers and sisters. Allah cares not about the weight of a purse, only the weight of the heart. Is all not Allah’s? So why do you dispute?
You know in your heart what is just and unjust. Show man the good in your heart and he will follow you. Show man the evil in your heart and he will fight you.
As Isa states:
Be perfect as your Father in Heaven is perfect.
Be as brothers and love one another. What does a man gain from being good to those who are good to him? Be just to the unjust, as Allah also gives rain to feed the spiteful and transgressors in hope that they will live to see the day that they request forgiveness. The day is not over until the night comes. The same is for man to request forgiveness, the ability does not end but by the last breath that he takes, by the Grace of Allah. Is all not Allah’s? So why do you dispute?
Peace be unto you, my brethren!
Kalita I can see from your post that you don’t have a understanding of Allah, what is befitting and what is not befitting to say about Allah. First and formost we are not the children of Allah. Allah is not like his creation, His creation have children, Per qur’an surah 42 ayat 11 …………… He is not like His creation, meaning from hadith qudsi……….. what ever you imagine Allah to be he is different from. Now for the discourse it is a must and for the division it is not our doing but we must defend and promote the Deen of our Lord. I think you missed the whole point of the post so by that you miss use ayat according to your ownunderstand with out knowledge. How can one truley believe that any thing in the new testament is the word of jesus just from these few verse’s. In Mark 10 verse 18
THE BIBLE Vs QUR’AN-HADITH
The Bible
The Bible comprises:
1. God’s statements (at times printed in red)
2. Prophets’/Apostles’ traditions and
3. The report of events of Biblical times
In Islam, the ‘God’s statements (Qur’an) is completely separated from the ”Prophet’s/Apostles’ traditions”.
Muslims’ Ignorance
It is a pity that Muslims, who mistakenly imagine the Holy Bible to be like the Qur’an, quote the ‘reports’ and ‘traditions’ parts of the Bible in their efforts to proof that “the Bible is contradictory etc and therefore it is not God’s statements” instead of them to quote the Biblical God’s statements. Nevertheless, their arguments are normally simplistic.
The Hadith
It should be noted that Hadith, the Islamic equivalent of the portion of the Bible often capitalised upon by the Muslims, is the most contradictory and controversial book on Earth.
In the Hadith, to virtually every story or law there are radical or contradictory versions.
Qur’an/Hadith
Though successive revisions and corrections of the Qur’an have made it more consistent than Hadith, even Uthmanic version, the last version of the Qur’an, has created more questions than answers and left so many vital questions unanswered. Thus more fabrications and plagiarisms aimed at complementing even this last version of the Qur’an were made and added, not to the Qur’an as would have been preferred but, to the Hadith because the Qur’an had erstwhile been publicly declared as haven been perfectly completed.
Consequently the Hadith, which is supposed to solely be Traditions of Muhammad (Interpretation of the Qur’an) exceeds its scope such that it contains, in addition to Quranic elements:
i. Some big pre-Islamic stories/religious laws that are not traceable to the Qur’an and were logically plagiarised from the Bible and para- phrased.
ii. Some stories/religious laws that are by their virtue, supposed to be divine revelations and, therefore, originate from the Qur’an, but are curiously, not traceable to the Qur’an.
Examples of Hadth Exceeding its Scope (including Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih al-Muslim)
i. Hadis-al-Qudsi (supposed Allah’s statements), which are not traceable to the Qur’an.
ii. The Second Coming of Jesus (and some funny details), which are not traceable to the Qur’an.
iii. How to pray in Islam which, you may not believe it, is not traceable to Allah’s statements (Qur’an).
iv. The coming of the Dijjal on the Last Day and the reversed movement of the Sun by then, which is not from Qur’an.
v. Some additional sexually incredible stories of the said Paradise gift damsels (Hurul-in) and many other materials that are supposed to have been originally stated by Allah but are curiously not traceable to the Qur’an.
Indisputable Evidences of Corruption of The Qur’an
The evidences of mutilations even in the current (Uthmanic) version of the Qur’an include the following:
a. ALIF. LAM. MIN (which has been rendered meaningless by wrongful removal of some connective letters or words)
b. KAF. YA. A. IN. SAD ” ”
c. TA. SIN ” ”
d. ALIF. LAM. MIN. SAD ” ”
e. TA. SIN. MIN ” ”
f. ALIF. LAM. RA. ” ”
g. ALIF. LAM. MIN. RA etc etc. These evident corruptions occurred more than thirty (30) times in the Qur’an. What is clear is that God could not have made such meaningless statements. And if He did Prophet Muhammad would logically have asked Him (God) their meanings.
The So-called Variant Readings of the Qur’an (actually various versions of the Qur’anic verses and phrases)
Let me start from the Islamic sources themselves. According to ‘wise’ Islamic Scholars, the reason for these various versions is that, “When Qur’an was collated and compiled, the scribes and copyists wrote the text without using any diacritical points or marks. They relied on their familiarity with the text for correct reading. However, with passage of time the readers of the Qur’an faced difficulties in this respect and they came to read and understand the verses in ways that differed slightly from one another”. See AL-TAWHID, 1990 Vol. vii, no. 3 page 41. (P.O. Box 14155, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran).
The AL-TAWHID stated that versions of fourteen (14) reciters were originally chosen of which seven (7) have been considered the ‘mutawatir’ (most reliable), three as ‘ahad’ and the other four as ‘shadhah’.
AL-TAWHID adds, “Some like Jalal al-din al-Balqini, have accepted this classification while some like al-Suyuti consider the tawatur’ (authenticity) of the seven readers as doubtful for the following reasons:-
i. Because they have been transmitted through ‘Akhbar ahad’.
ii. Because some of the seven qurra (readers) were not reliable (muwaththaq) as narrators.
iii. Because those qira’at (readings) depended on subjective judgement (ra’y) and personal ‘ijtihad’ (thought) of the qurra. Had these been received through ‘tawatur’ from the Messenger of Allah there would have been no need of proof to establish their authenticity.
iv. Because some scholars have rejected some instances in the readings of the seven qurra”
AL-TAWHID continues “According to al-Zarakshi in al-Burhan fi ulum al-Qur’an (i, 318), those who believe in these seven qira’at being mutawatur (reliable) do so on the following bases:-
i. They claim ‘ijma’ (consensus) on the affirmation of their tawatur.
ii. They furnish evidence in favour of their authenticity on the bases of the care exercised by the ‘Sahabah’ (Muhammad’s companions) in the memorization and recitation of the Qur’an.
iii. They argue that not to regard these qira’at as ‘mutawatir’ necessarily leads to regarding the Qur’an also as non ‘mutawatir ‘.”
Another Moslems’ book titled ‘ITHBAT AN-NUBUWWA (THE PROOF OF PROPHETHOOD)’ noted that some Islamic scholars doubted the authenticity of Qur’an as compiled, maintaining that even “The Sahabah (Muhammad’s companions) were in doubt about some parts of the Qur’an. Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (radi-Allahu’anh) said that surat al-fatiha and suras of ‘Mu’awwizatan’ did not belong in the Qur’an. However, these three suras (chapters) are most renowned suras of the Qur’an….”.
In response, the book claim, “Sahabahs doubt about some suras belonging to the Qur’an….was because each of the suras was only reported by one person. According to the principle of ‘usul al-hadith’, information transmitted by one reporter is not certain, but doubtful…., there was disagrement as to wether or not they (the suras) belong to the Qur’an, which brings no harm agaisnt our (Moslems’) cause”
Obviously, the doubting scholars cited Mas’ud because he, as shown by many Hadith (including that of Bukhari and Muslim) had been rated by Prophet Muhammad himself as the best of all reciters. In fact, even if the above given reason is the only and the only cause of Mas’ud’s disbelieve in such chapters, his action was not only the best by the law of logic but even by the Qur’an itself (5:109-111, 24:4-10). Thus the ‘fakeness’ of the doubtful chapters.
The book acknowledges that the doubting scholars pointed out that “there have been disagreements concerning both the recitation and the meaning of the Qur’an among the scholars of Islam. On the other hand, Allahu-ta-ala intimates that the Qur’an contains no points of disagrement. For example He declares in the eight-first ayat of surat an-Nisa: ‘Were this Qur’an the word of some one other than Allah, it would contain many incongruities’…”
According to this book, the doubting scholars cite the incongruities which, in the light of surat an-Nisa, imply human authorship of the Qur’an as:-
i. Some read a phrase in surat al-Qaria: 81 as:
“Kal’ ihni’l-man-fush” while others read it as “Kassafi’l-manfush”
ii. Some read surat al-Jum’a: 9 as:
“fas’aw ila dhikri’llah” while others read it as “famdu ila dhikrillah”
iii. Some read surat al-Baqara: 61 as:
“alaihimu’ dh-dhillata wa’l-maskanata” while others read it as “alaihimu’l-maskanata wa’dh-dhillata”
The doubting scholars, the book noted, conclude, “The disagreement pertaining to meanings in the Qur’an can be examplified as follows:
i. The 19th ayat of surat Saba’ states, ‘Rabbana ba’id baina asfarina’. Which means, ‘Our Rabb! Take our books way from us? It is an invocation to Allah.
Some read it as, ‘Rabbana ba’ada baina asfarina’ which means, ‘Our Rabb has taken our books away from us”
ii. The 115th ayat of surat Ma’ida says, ‘Hal yastati’u Rabbuka’, which means ‘Will your Rabb accept your prayer?’.
Some read it as, ‘Hal tastali’u Rabbaka,’ which means, ‘Will you pray to your Rabb’ “.
Responding, the book acknowledges that the Quran ic verses were confirmed by (human) consensus and adds, “….Our Prophet (SAW) said, ‘The Qur’an was revealed on seven harps (readings) each of which is curative and sufficient.’ For this reason, the disagreement arising from the readings and the meanings of the Qur’an do not undermine its being ‘Mu’jiz’, said the book, ITHBAT AN_NUBUWWA (Waqf ikhlas Publications No. 9, TENTH EDITION, with address as:
HAKIKAT KITABEVI
Darrussefeka Cad. No. 57/A P.K. 35
34262-Faith ISTANBUL Tel: (90) (1) 523 45 56
TURKEY
1991
In his edition, a leading English Qur’an translator, Abdullah Yusuf Ali, explains two examples of the variant meanings among the present Qur’ans:
i. Qur’an 1:3
“Master of the Day of Judgment” and
“Sovereign of the Day of Judgment”
ii. Qur’an 5:6
“…wash your faces…and (wash) your feet” and
“…wash your faces and wipe your heads and (wipe) your feet”
Then he (Ali) claims, “..It is obvious from the two instances that in the variant readings, there is absolutely no contradiction in essence. On the other hand, they make the meaning all the more comprehensive. And the same is true of all the other variant readings”.
Readers, in the above examples, all given by Islamic authorities themselves, of the numerous inconsistencies that exist in the Qur’an, I still let you see the best excuse or reasons the renowned Islamic Scholars could themselves invent which (the ‘reasons’ ) only expose how a mere consensus book and, therefore fallible and controversial the Qur’an has always been. It does not require much intelligence to realize from the above that:
i. There is no original Qur’an at all and
ii. The Qur’an is full of evidences of its being produced by human being.
That is apparently why Ali takes solace in the escapist conclusion that in ‘essence’ the Qur’an does not contradict itself. That is because Ali knew that all the variant readings can’t be correct at the same time. They, logically and technically, could not have been uttered by Allah at the same time. So, only one can be correct in every category. Even the mildest variant reading Ali cleverly cited of ‘Master’ and ‘Sovereign’ still implies that the Qur’an has been tempered with. Allah could only have said ‘Master’ or ‘Sovereign’. Other inconsistencies are evident at a glance.
More Inconsistencies in the Qur’an
Compare Qur’an 3:45-49 and 19:17-20 (Allah account of Jesus birth. Compare the corresponding words in capital)
Qur’an 3:45 “…the ANGELS said ‘OH MARY! LO! ALLAH GIVES YOU A GLAD TIDING OF A WORD FROM HIM. WHOSE NAME IS MESSIAH, SON OF MARY, A SIGN IN THE WORLD AND HEREAFTER AND ONE OF THOSE CLOSE TO ALLAH. 46 HE WILL TALK TO MANKIND IN HIS CRADLE AND HIS MANHOOD. AND HE IS AMONG THE RIGHTEOUS. 47 She said ‘MY LORD how can I have a son when no man has touched me? He said SO IT WILL BE. ALLAH CREATES WHAT HE WISHES. IF HE DECREES A THING HE JUST SAY TO IT ‘be’ AND IT WILL. 48 AND HE WILL TEACH HIM SCRIPTURE AND WISDOM AND TORAH AND GOSPEL. 49 AND HE WILL MAKE HIM A MESSENGER TO ISRAELITES”.
QUR’AN 19:17 “…then we sent to her (Mary) our spirit (angel) and he assumed to her the likeness of a perfect man. 18 She said ‘LO! SEEK REFUGE FROM THE BENEFICIENT ONE ABOUT YOU, IF YOU ARE A GOD FEARING ONE. 19 He Said ‘I AM JUST A MESSENGER OF YOUR LORD, THAT I MAY GIVE YOU A FAULTLES SON. 20 She said ‘How can I have a son when no man has touched me AND I HAVE NOT BEEN UNCHASTE? He said ‘SO IT WILL BE YOUR LORD SAID IT IS EASY FOR US. AND IT WILL BE THAT WE WILL MAKE HIM A REVELATION TO MANKIND AND MERCY FROM US IT IS A THING ORDAINED”.
For more inconsistencies compare:-
Qur’an 7:11-13 with 38:72-78, with 15:28:34; especially 7:13-18 with 38:77-86, with 15:34-44 and with 17:62-65.
Qur’an 3:7-8 with 39:23, 11:1, 16:89, 2:185, 54:17, 27:1; especially 3:7-8 with 16:89, 54:17 and 11:1.
Qur’an 29:16-18 with 21:51-57 with 37:83-90 with 26:69-82; especially 21:57-58 with 37:89-93, 21:58-66 with 37:97-99
Qur’an 3:45-49 with 19:17-20; especially 3:45-46 with 19:19, 3:47 with 19:20, 3:47-49 with 19:20
Qur’an 7:120-124, with 20:70-73; especially 7:120-122 with 20:70, 7:123-124, 20:71, 7:125-126 and 20:72-73
Qur’an 29:31-32 with 51:24-34, 15:51-60, 11:69-76
Qur’an 11:77-83 with 15:61-74.
Qur’an 3:38-40 with 19:2-10, 21:89-90.
Qur’an 28:29 with 20:9-10, 27:7-12.
Qur’an 28:30 with 20:11-16, 27:8-11.
Qur’an 20:21 with 28:31, 27:10-11.
Qur’an 28:32 with 20:22-24, 27:12.
Qur’an 28:33-34 with 20:25-35.
Qur’an 20:65 with 10:79-81.
Qur’an 20:65 with 10:81, 7:115.
Qur’an 28:34 with 7:109-115, 20:57-64, 10:79-81.
What came from one person (God) is supposed to at least be consistent. Therefore the Qur’an did not come from one person (God), because other than human factor there is no honest or realistic reason for its inconsistecies.
ARE THERE INCONSISTENCIES AND CONTRADICTIONS IN THE HOLY BIBLE?
Unlike the Qur’an, the Bible did not come from one person. Pathetically, the Muslims mistakenly see the Bible as the Christian equivalent of their Qur’an. So, like I said earlier, they cite wrong parts of the Bible to proof that the Christian Word of God is contradictory.
Even then, logically, the seeming inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible are what confirm its genuineness. Such parts of the Holy Bible were observations and writings of VARIOUS INDIVIDUALS and under VARIOUS CONDITIONS. Scientifically, such reports are subject to INDIVIDUALITY and CONDITIONALITY unless they are edited. Therefore, this existence of ‘INDIVIDUALNESS’ and ‘CONDITIONALITY’ is logically a strong proof that the individual Biblical account have never been edited; and are not fictions in which case they would have been identically written by all the collaborators, but are true and historical events writen independently by various individuals.
Example of CONDITIONALITY
Mark (10:46-52) says that Jesus healed while LEAVING Jericho. But Luke (18:35-43) says while ENTERING Jericho. This, as a Western Reverend writer observes in his book, had been thought to be (as it is apparently) a sharp contradiction until the excavation of Earnest Sellen of the German Oriental Society (citing ‘Archeology and Bible History page 295), when it was discovered that the Jericho of Jesus’ time was a double city–Jewish (old) Jericho and Roman (modern) Jericho, such that LEAVING one could as well mean ENTERING the other.
Therefore both Mark and Luke are perfectly right. Their various versions were caused by the CONDITION of the then Jericho namely, its double-city nature.
Example of INDIVIDUALITY
Because Mark and Luke (as in the case above) did not collaborate but rather independently wrote, INDIVIDUALITY became obvious in their judgments. Thus while one of them ‘conservatorially’ regarded regarded the original (Jewish) Jericho as the (actual) Jericho, the other ‘modernly’ regarded the administrative (Roman) Jericho as (currently) the Jericho.
Other Examples
i. Mark (1:6) says, “John’s food was ONLY locust and honey”, while Mathew (11:18) says, “John came NEITHER eating nor drinking.
Here, while Mark considered the ‘exact aspect’ of John’s feeding, Mathew on the other hand considered the ‘comparative’ or ‘metaphorical’ aspect .
ii. According to John (19:17) Jesus bore his cross up to the Golgotha. But according to Luke (23:26), one Simon was later on forced to carry the cross to follow Jesus. ‘A clear contradiction!! ‘, Muslims would exclaim. But the fact is that the then Jerusalem was a large and walled city and Golgotha was a place just outside Jerusalem. Normally, Jesus most have bore his cross from the Pilate’s Court to as far as outside the Jerusalem Wall and within the premises of the Golgotha before the Simon, who was not even an accused, was nevertheless forced to just take over form the apparently too fatigued Jesus to the exact crucifixion spot.
Therefore, while John ignored the ‘negligible’ contribution of Simon, Luke on the other hand, recognized it, perhaps for historical record.
Naturally, ‘INDIVIDUALITY’ and ‘CONDITIONALITY’ variously manifest any time a historical event is independently reported by different individuals and or when there is a difference of condition.
These types of situations are what Muslims simplistically referred to as contradictions in the Bible.
It should be noted, however, that the contradictions and inconsistencies in the Qur’an can not be explained in terms of ‘CONDITIONALTY’ and ‘INDIVIDUALITY’ because the Qur’an as a whole was supposedly uttered by one person (God). Of course if there exist contradictions in the direct words of God in the Bible, they likewise can not be explained in that ways. But there is non in actual sense.
May the Almighty Yahweh open the eyes of my Muslim friends to see the light of Christ.