The Gospel and the Torah, the Quran, Christian, Bahai, and other apologetics.

[Starlight]

True. Christians believe in four gospels. But they dont claim "Jesus was given many gospels". Never.

You are correct about that. According to protestant, catholic and ortodox christianity the other gospels that exist is heretic

 

[firedragon]

But which one of the four gospels?

Muslims believe believe in "THE GOSPEL". The Injeel. It is not the four books in the New Testament.

These four books are not named Gospel by the authors. It is named by the collector and that is internal evidence. If you read the four gospels in the NT, it would say "Jesus preached the Gospel". That means Jesus was preaching the Gospel, not referring to these four Gospels.

The Gospel the Quran refers to is the message or revelation Jesus was given. Not the books in the New Testament canon.

 

[firedragon]

You are correct about that. According to protestant, catholic and ortodox christianity the other gospels that exist is heretic

They dont even claim that "Jesus was given the four canonical gospels". They claim that they were written by people, although inspired. That is their claim.

 

[Starlight]

Muslims believe believe in "THE GOSPEL". The Injeel. It is not the four books in the New Testament.

These four books are not named Gospel by the authors. It is named by the collector and that is internal evidence. If you read the four gospels in the NT, it would say "Jesus preached the Gospel". That means Jesus was preaching the Gospel, not referring to these four Gospels.

The Gospel the Quran refers to is the message or revelation Jesus was given. Not the books in the New Testament canon.

So you believe the orginal Gospel Jesus was given is not in the Bible today?

 

[Starlight]

They dont even claim that "Jesus was given the four canonical gospels". They claim that they were written by people, although inspired. That is their claim.

Yes thats true

 

[Starlight]

What do you think of the Baha'i faith?

 

[firedragon]

So you believe the orginal Gospel Jesus was given is not in the Bible today?

This is the orthodox Muslim belief. Also, by using the singular Injeel, and the use of the word Furqan in the Quran, it is indicating clearly that it is not referring to the Bible at all.

So yes is the answer to your question sis.

 

[Starlight]

This is the orthodox Muslim belief. Also, by using the singular Injeel, and the use of the word Furqan in the Quran, it is indicating clearly that it is not referring to the Bible at all.

So yes is the answer to your question sis.

I see. Then i learned something new today

 

[firedragon]

What do you think of the Baha'i faith?

The Bahai faith is a fairly new faith begun by Abdul Baha, who is the son of Bahaullah the theology is named after. It arose with a revolutionary called Shiraz who called himself the Bab, which means doorway, gateway, opening for an entrance from one place to another. Anyway, he inherited certain beliefs that existed in the Shii theology since he is from Iran.

Anyway, to cut things short, their theology is based on Bahaullah who is Abdul Baha's father being the coming Mahdi, Who is only mentioned in some hadith coming from the Al Thalitha (Salisa) hadith which means other party or third party hadith, and the Qaim, which is not Quranic. I just mentioned that because you are believing in the Quranic Islamic theology.

This is a whole other topic sis. Its a huge topic.

 

[Starlight]

The Bahai faith is a fairly new faith begun by Abdul Baha, who is the son of Bahaullah the theology is named after. It arose with a revolutionary called Shiraz who called himself the Bab, which means doorway, gateway, opening for an entrance from one place to another. Anyway, he inherited certain beliefs that existed in the Shii theology since he is from Iran.

Anyway, to cut things short, their theology is based on Bahaullah who is Abdul Baha's father being the coming Mahdi, Who is only mentioned in some hadith coming from the Al Thalitha (Salisa) hadith which means other party or third party hadith, and the Qaim, which is not Quranic. I just mentioned that because you are believing in the Quranic Islamic theology.

This is a whole other topic sis. Its a huge topic.

You know alot about Baha'i. Do you read much about different religions?

 

[firedragon]

You know alot about Baha'i. Do you read much about different religions?

Oh. I read on the Bahai faith because it was the Bahai's here who taught me their religion about a year or two ago. But I must say that their literature is too big and too much to be expert on them. Maybe a little similar to Judaism who also have like a humungous amount of literature. My God. You can never begin or end with Judaism.

But the Bahai faith comes up in every nook and corner of this forum. So this frequency of their posts mentioning Bahaullah and their faith everywhere in this forum kind of triggered us to read. And yes, I read some. The difficulty with the Bahai faith is that its very difficult to get manuscript evidences, dating, and original scripts. Though I have a collection of some in the original script, like the Bayan of Shiraz, the Kithab al Akdhas, and some other books. Very intriguing and very interesting.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

In a nutshell, the Quran mentions the Gospel (Injeel), the Torah (Thaurath), and of course other scripture as well. But like a famous advertisement most of us would have these two top of mind, which probably is the reason these two are cited more often.

Christian evangelists and Apologists seem to bring up this fact and insist that Muslims must accept the "Gospel's" and the "Torah" in the OT. Some even think Muslims believe in those as well. I mean the books in the Bible. The Bahai's make the same exact argument quite often as well.

But, wrong or right, the Muslims do not believe in the Bible and the books in the Bible. In fact, the Quran does not quote the "Gospels" in the plural. It just says "injeel" in the singular.

In the OP I am not gonna argue the Quranic position is right or wrong, but this has to be made clear first. The Muslims do not believe in the books in the Bible that are called Torah and the Gospels. Prior to making this apologetic one must understand the Islamic position first, right or wrong can be discussed afterwards.

Does anyone think that Muslims believe in the Torah in the Tanakh, or/and the Gospels in the New Testament? Why would you think like that? What are your questions and what are your statements? Please bring the discourse here since it seems to be emerging quite often in topics, so its better to address the question in its own thread.

Peace.

Many Muslims do not believe the Bible is legitimate, and do not care to even read them. But I dont think this is the position of the Quran, or instruction of Muhammad. On the contrary the Bible current among Jews and Christians is confirmed as legitimate in the Quran, and Hadith. I believe The world-wide Muslim community interpretations is incorrect and that comes from their clergy.

 

[Harel13]

Does anyone think that Muslims believe in the Torah in the Tanakh, or/and the Gospels in the New Testament?

Nope. I've long concluded this for myself. Would be nice if some Muslims also realized this and stopped trying to prove that Muhammed is mentioned in the Tanach.

 

[Rival]

Nope. I've long concluded this for myself. Would be nice if some Muslims also realized this and stopped trying to prove that Muhammed is mentioned in the Tanach.

While I agree with you in principle, this is the issue,

Sahih International: Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they who have believed in him, honoured him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him - it is those who will be the successful. (7:157)

The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

 

[firedragon]

Nope. I've long concluded this for myself. Would be nice if some Muslims also realized this and stopped trying to prove that Muhammed is mentioned in the Tanach.

Yeah. I will try to tell them all.

 

[Clara Tea]

Christian evangelists and Apologists seem to bring up this fact and insist that Muslims must accept the "Gospel's" and the "Torah" in the OT. Some even think Muslims believe in those as well. I mean the books in the Bible. The Bahai's make the same exact argument quite often as well.

But, wrong or right, the Muslims do not believe in the Bible and the books in the Bible.
Peace.

Torah in Islam - Wikipedia

The Wikipedia article disagrees with your statement. I am not sufficiently well versed to argue with Wikipedia on this topic. But I suggest that you edit Wikipedia.

 

[firedragon]

Torah in Islam - Wikipedia

The Wikipedia article disagrees with your statement. I am not sufficiently well versed to argue with Wikipedia on this topic. But I suggest that you edit Wikipedia.

I am not interested in editing Wikipedia Clara Tea. If you have some points to discuss, and if you have some scripture to back up what you are saying it is great. But just saying "This website disagrees with you" without knowing the nuances, and telling others to "Edit this website" is not good discussion. It is just appealing to authority, a logical fallacy.

 

[Harel13]

While I agree with you in principle, this is the issue,

Sahih International: Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they who have believed in him, honoured him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him - it is those who will be the successful. (7:157)

The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

It seems to me, from comparing the alternate translations, and per the OP, that according to Muslims, when the Quran was written, the Thaurath and the Injeel still existed, and those are what's referred to here.

 

[Rival]

It seems to me, from comparing the alternate translations, and per the OP, that according to Muslims, when the Quran was written, the Thaurath and the Injeel still existed, and those are what's referred to here.

Seems odd to me that their god would then let these disappear but leave this verse and it's clear many Muslims seem to think they can still find Muhammad in both.

 

[firedragon]

Seems odd to me that their god would then let these disappear but leave this verse and it's clear many Muslims seem to think they can still find Muhammad in both.

Yeah. You are mistaking Islamic theology, the Quran and what Muslims apologetics say on the internet.

If you wish to have a "Their God vs our God" discussion, you very well could and lets do that. But when you make statements sis, make them with some critical thought and clarification. Not from what "some muslims you know believe". And if you have heard some Muslim apologists and believe "they are absolutely correct" then sis you should accept all apologetics without question. And I know that you are way above that level of intellect.

The verse you are referring to in the Quran is speaking of the Thaurath and the Injeel. Not the Bible. If you want to discuss if this idea that the Thaurath or/and the Injeel are not referring to the Bible is wrong, then you are more than welcome. But please try to understand the Quran, even if its wrong. When you understand it, then you can question its authenticity, veracity, correctness, whatever you want from a theological or naturalistic platform. No problem.

But dont just make side remarks based on what you have heard some apologists say on line or somewhere else. I hope you understand.