Why does the Quran direct Muslims to Bible?

[chazz]

With the new digital dead sea scrolls now available with more to come, and the possible publication of the Sana'a papers, I think that Islam and Judaism is on a collision course with God, not to mention a few others.

[muslim-]

This is a good question. The reason behind this is that we believe that ALL messengers had essentially the main message of monotheism. We usually mean Tawheed by that, and not just "believing in One God" as even idol-worshippers believed in one God, but they took idols as intercessors.

So all prophets and messengers came with a message eliminating "the middle man", enforcing the idea of directing all acts of worship only to God, directly, which was the message confirmed over and over again by all prophets.

They had different laws, but with regard to belief we believe this was the main messege of the Torah and injeel, before not only tampering happened, but even twisting the ways verses are understood.

To understand this better far from getting into a discussion about the origins of the Bible, it is better to understand the concept of authenticity among Muslims.

The Qur'aan is the word of God, the Sunnah is the sayings or actions of prophet Muhammad peace be upon him passed to us by narrations. We dont accept any narrations, so scholars developed a whole science called Mustalah Al Hadeeth, in which sayings are classified into categories, weak, good, correct, and fabricated.

They must know every person in the chain of narrators, whether its one or two people in each level of the chain, or the saying is passed on by a group, to another group, of known people.

What I mean by known, is taken from another science related to the sciences of authentication which is called "Ilm Al Rijaal" (Sciences of men), so they must know about the persons piety, truthfulness, and also, they must know how his memory is. Sometimes even memory shaprness changes towards the end of life so they take this into consideration also. In other words we have to know for sure the prophet said this, its one of his rights upon us, and shows deep respect and care for his sayings.

So theres very, very strict rules regarding this, and if a saying doesnt fit the criteria, it is not accepted as authentic. Theres collections of the non authentic narrations even.

So we tend to take this very seriously. And this is Sunnah and not the Qur'aan even, which even til today, we have tens of thousands of 11 year olds who memorize it by heart.

So when we apply such strict rules to the Bible today (which are narrations of men, who arent even Jesus the messiah peace be upon him), a saying from the Sunnah that is weak, and not accepted, is classified as stronger in authenticity than the Bible today, which again isnt even words of Jesus or word of God. Even in places where God is quoted, this we dont consider "scripture", but we'd call it "hadeeth Qudsi" in which the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him narrates from God.

No Muslim can be Muslim without believing in Jesus peace be upon him as the messiah, and his miraculous birth, and his miracles etc. In fact, no Muslim can be Muslim without believing in the Gospel being sent down to Jesus, and the Torah to Moses peace be upon them. It is one of the six articles of faith to believe in them.

So what we have today from the Bible, if it doesnt contradict anything from Quraan or Sunnah, we dont accept it as authentic, but dont reject it either. This is with regard to beliefs, as for laws, they have been abrogated anyway by Islamic laws so we dont accept or reject them either as not authentic.

Theres hadeeths and verses and narrations about the Bibles authenticity in Islam im sure some already mentioned them. But thought id explain more, so that one can get a better, more holistic view.

[ohhcuppycakee]

The Qur'an is not directing Muslims towards what is the Bible now. In Islam, we believe the Bible was corrupted by man, and no uncorrupted copy exists here on earth. The true Bible is with Allah (SWT.)

[gnostic]

Originally Posted by ohhcuppycakee

The Qur'an is not directing Muslims towards what is the Bible now. In Islam, we believe the Bible was corrupted by man, and no uncorrupted copy exists here on earth. The true Bible is with Allah (SWT.)

And yet, no Muslims have been able to explain which books, letters or verses have been corrupted.

And the Bible was written by God. It never was. Only Muslims and Muhammad would claim such nonsense, especially when you considered that the Qur'an were also written by many men (Muhammad's followers).

To understand why the numbers of books were written, you have to understand the history of scripture authorship and how it was their ways (Hebrew and Christian authors) to present their relationship with God. God may have deliver some messages, covenants or commandments to the prophets, disciples, etc, and those authors may have written them or pass them on through oral traditions, but nothing was written by god himself.

And if the Bible was corrupted, then you need another scripture to compare with, and Muhammad presented no authoritative copy to compare with it. And you can't compare it to the Qur'an because the Qur'an bear no resemblance whatsoever to any of individual books or letters that are found in the Bible.

I am not Christian or Jew, but I am not fool by such shameless Muslim propaganda to bolster Islam's so-called superiority in the scriptural department.

Even other Muslims admitted that there is no corruption in the bible as it is; the corruption lie within interpretation, and that's a whole different matter, ohhcuppycakee.

I would suggest you read my posts: To Musliims only: The Bible is corrupted. Especially a post by Muslim member - a-manESL (post 38).

[ohhcuppycakee]

Originally Posted by gnostic

And yet, no Muslims have been able to explain which books, letters or verses have been corrupted.

And the Bible was written by God. It never was. Only Muslims and Muhammad would claim such nonsense, especially when you considered that the Qur'an were also written by many men (Muhammad's followers).

To understand why the numbers of books were written, you have to understand the history of scripture authorship and how it was their ways (Hebrew and Christian authors) to present their relationship with God. God may have deliver some messages, covenants or commandments to the prophets, disciples, etc, and those authors may have written them or pass them on through oral traditions, but nothing was written by god himself.

And if the Bible was corrupted, then you need another scripture to compare with, and Muhammad presented no authoritative copy to compare with it. And you can't compare it to the Qur'an because the Qur'an bear no resemblance whatsoever to any of individual books or letters that are found in the Bible.

I am not Christian or Jew, but I am not fool by such shameless Muslim propaganda to bolster Islam's so-called superiority in the scriptural department.

Even other Muslims admitted that there is no corruption in the bible as it is; the corruption lie within interpretation, and that's a whole different matter, ohhcuppycakee.

I would suggest you read my posts: To Musliims only: The Bible is corrupted. Especially a post by Muslim member - a-manESL (post 38).

Okay, how has the Bible not been corrupted or changed? It's been translated and re-translated over and over, books taken out, verses added. Catholic Bible or the standard one? Which one is closer to God's? Why isn't the famous story of the woman who committed adultery, a story quoted over and over again, not found in the Codex Sinaiticus?

[gnostic]

Originally Posted by ohhcuppycakee

Okay, how has the Bible not been corrupted or changed? It's been translated and re-translated over and over, books taken out, verses added. Catholic Bible or the standard one? Which one is closer to God's? Why isn't the famous story of the woman who committed adultery, a story quoted over and over again, not found in the Codex Sinaiticus?

Again, like most other Muslims who claim the Bible is corrupted, failed to produce a comparison of which to measure this so-called "corruptions".

Unless you can produce complete books in which to compare every other single books, letters, chapters, passages and verses, then all I hear is your unsubstantiated claim that corruptions.

And unless you do have books that can point out corruption, it is poor scholarship (as well as heavy does of propaganda), which I am not surprise.

Look, I don't view the bible's contents to be perfect, because I don't think the books need to be perfect to deliver messages or guidelines. Second, I don't believe in the bible, no more than I believe in the Qur'an or other religious texts from other religions. I read it like I read any other scriptures, as myths, folklore, parables or allegories.

In fact, I don't believe the Qur'an to be perfect as well, despite the empty claims of "divine authorship" by none other than Allah himself. It is your scripture, and you can believe whatever you want. But don't expect us to believe that sort of propaganda that Allah wrote the Qur'an. I don't give a crap if Allah wrote the Qur'an or not, because to me it was written by humans (disciples of Muhammad).

If Allah did write it, then why is so incomplete? It doesn't have single book that are found in the Bible. It never tell complete narrative, just some here and some there, that may bear some resemblance to the stories found in the bible.

It doesn't tell complete narratives of the lives of Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, Jesus, etc.

Translations will always be different. Some would convey the original contexts better than other translations. I have seen the English translations of the Qur'an, and none of them are exactly the same, and like the translations of the bible, some are better than the others.

Now can you show me where the Qur'an and the Bible don't meet?

And I don't think you can make comparisons, because they weren't written the same. Just abbreviated versions, like a bunch of summaries. And some of these stories found in the Qur'an are wildly exaggerated, like Solomon being able to control weathers and command and control animals (like birds and ants) and army of djinns (which sounds like a badly written fable when you compare it to A Thousand And One Nights). There are number of books of the prophets, both major and minor prophets, and all those prophecies, and the Qur'an have very little of these.

If all this is true, then how can you possibly compare the two to find these so-called "corruptions"?

You can't.

[ohhcuppycakee]

I'm sorry, but it is common knowledge that the Bible has been changed throughout history. How is there even an argument here?

Why would the Qur'an have WHOLE books of the Bible in it? The Bible in Islam is a previous revelation, having some laws and stories in it that are meant specifically for different times. The stories that are for every time is in it. (Noah's Ark, story of the golden calf, etc) And the Qur'an is not meant to be a long history much like the Bible is.

Oh, and it's really not propaganda for Muslims to say the Qur'an is from Allah, much like it is not propaganda for Christians to state their beliefs about the Bible.

[gnostic]

Originally Posted by ohhcuppycakee

Why would the Qur'an have WHOLE books of the Bible in it?

Good grief.

I don't know why some Muslims bother to reply. Do you have no concept of comparative religions or comparative scholarship?

Because you think there is corruption and the Qur'an say, then YOU WOULD NEED SOMETHING TO COMPARE IT WITH to find these so-called corruptions.

It simply not good enough just to base it on what the Qur'an say. You need to prove it. Without comparisons, then your claim is pretty much baseless.

Since, the Qur'an claim there are corruption, then there should be there to compare it with. The Qur'an is incomplete. What I mean it has no complete narrative, just random exegesis, random prophecy, random law, mixed with random fables and fairytale.

You say there are lot of translations. That's simply not good enough, because you of all people should understand that a literal translation is not recommended, because it often render the work, unreadable and will still lose the original context during translation. No translators these days, do literal translation. Instead of literal translation, they tried to paraphrase and try to convey the best possible readable passages while trying to maintain as faithful to original context as possible.

[asa120]

Originally Posted by Pegg

This is a question for the muslim posters mainly but others may join in. I have noticed that a lot of muslims posters seem to be of the opinion that the bible (hebrew and greek scriptures) are not to be viewed as the Word of God...that the text is compromised and untrustworthy.

However, i'd like to ask what the opinion is on these verses from the Quran which encourages the use of the bible?

Āl ‘Imrān [3]:3, 4, NJD: “He has revealed to you the Book with the truth, confirming the scriptures which preceded it; for He has already revealed the Torah and the Gospel [Injīl in Arabic] for the guidance of men.”

Al-Mā’idah [5]:46, 47: 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)

Yūnus [10]:94.“If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee.”

It seems to me that the Quran is endorsing the use of the holy bible rather then trying to correct its teachings. I'd like to know where this idea that the bible needed correcting comes from?

And if the bible was falsified 'later' as muslims claim, then when is 'later'? It must have been before Mohammads time, otherwise he would not have come and declared that it had been changed... but then if it was before Mohammad, why would the Quran (which was written AFTER Mohammads time) direct people to the bible?


This all seems very contradictory to me.

well i hate to enter and to debate
but no the quran does not direct Muslims to the gospel but it direct Cristian to meditate in the gospel but not in those verses in thise verses it describe faith of islam we belive in the taura and the gospel and we belive that thy were changed in other verses
because the gospel was not changed by intension like the taura but it was loste soo even the version that existe now have conception make it e lot closer to islam than crisitniy faith
and crisitian belief was not built totaly on gospel

1 the gospel describe all man kind as children of god not just jesus we are not gods , soo we are less sepirior than god
2 jesus pray and fast an action of e woshiper that he will not do if he is god and equal to god
3 jesus debate the jews aboute worship one god thy say why you always call us to worship one god and he return to worship mean to love,,,,,, the verses continue soo he is clairly calling to woship with love one god and notwhat we have in criasinity now
4 jesus never absolutly never tell hise folower to worship him the holy spirite like the cristian do now

5 jesus debate e lot the jewish correpted rabays aboute religion as islam look at him e correctioniste
6 if you researsh history you will find that criasitnity was devloped by outsiders not by the deciples the deciples fond another form of religon called massianisme ans thy teach only jews and thy reject the man who now is who regroupe crisianity he name i think is paule

if you read the gospel you will find an image of traditional ibrahamque religion that worship non but god and do good as e preparation for the laste dayand thise is not what we have in cristianity now

[Bismillah]

And the Bible was written by God. It never was. Only Muslims and Muhammad would claim such nonsense, especially when you considered that the Qur'an were also written by many men (Muhammad's followers).

You really don't understand the idea of the Injil do you? Try to stop speaking for the Prophet and Muslims and understand what they say instead, you'll come off as less foolish.