ask me about Islam

[Gharib]

Have you read any of Bart Ehrman's works?

good link thanks for sharing that Sunstone

 

[Gharib]

What proof did Muhammad have that the Bible and Torah were changed?

i am already regretting my post to you, but what exactly counts as proof according to you?

 

[Gharib]

If I'm not mistaken, the Koran commands Muslims to read the Gospels, Psalms, and Torah. Why don't Muslims follow those commands more often?

as the brother has answered you, the Qur'an does not command muslims to read the previous scriptures, it mentions them but does not order us to read them.

 

[Gharib]

here you can ask any question you want. except rude questions,because it will be reported.....

salam brother, i hope you don't mind me answering some of the questions. you kinda need to know some of the people here before you reply to them, not all of them are honest and sincere.

 

[Gharib]

English??? first Of All The Bible Wasn't In English at the first! and it isn't me who's joking.and i didn't write the bible! and not god or jesus who wrote the nowadays Bible! Humans Did That, It's Clear! But your just being ignorant because you have that cultural Thing! ((Why Would we christians convert to islam and it is from arabia and it's massenger is arabian! You Say That Right!!! but islam is for the world as you see that islam is spreading in Europe and that's the truth walking and you see it with your own eyes!

what Ymir has said is correct, brother. the four corners usually (as far as i know) means the North, East, South and West. it doesn't say that the earth is square, however another passage does say that the sun rotates around the earth.

when scientists started to gather evidence that the earth actually rotates around the sun, christians became very angry with them and their claims, because their God knew everything, but it turns out he didn't know that the earth rotates around the sun. to be honest THEIR GOD who sent them a prophet named Isa alayhi salam (Jesus) was very well aware that the earth rotates around the sun, however human additions and alterations to the bible is what caused the contradictions.

 

[Gharib]

Good lord. well its reassuring to know that Muslims are as literal about the Bible as they are about the Qur'an.
I can't imagine that Jews and Christians who have read such passages for centuries ever took them to mean just that. 'the four corners of the earth' is figure of speech.

it is hard for someone whose english is a second language to distinguish between sarcasm, metaphors, etc. especially if the person has not lived among native english speakers.

 

[Gharib]

there is no true religious book written by human :no:

humans wrote the books, it was Allah who authored them. Allah didn't write the Qur'an, the Sahaba did, but it came from Allah.

many of these members here like to play with words so they can confuse you. don't fall for their traps.

 

[-Peacemaker-]

what Ymir has said is correct, brother. the four corners usually (as far as i know) means the North, East, South and West. it doesn't say that the earth is square, however another passage does say that the sun rotates around the earth.

when scientists started to gather evidence that the earth actually rotates around the sun, christians became very angry with them and their claims, because their God knew everything, but it turns out he didn't know that the earth rotates around the sun. to be honest THEIR GOD who sent them a prophet named Isa alayhi salam (Jesus) was very well aware that the earth rotates around the sun, however human additions and alterations to the bible is what caused the contradictions.

Why is the Bible spoken of with such reverence and respect in the Koran if it is unreliable?

 

[Gharib]

Why is the Bible spoken of with such reverence and respect in the Koran if it is unreliable?

the qur'an does not speak about the bible that was available at the time of prophet Muhammed peace be upon him, nor about the current bible, if you read the verses of the Qur'an properly you will see that it speaks of the bible and the torah and the psalms revealed to the prophets, namely Jesus, Moses and David.

we believe that those three prophet peace be upon them, were true prophets of the same God of Muahmmed. we also believe that they received revelation in the form of a book from God just like Muhammed. as muslims we must respect all the revelations from God and all his prophets. one cannot be a muslim unless they accept that Moses received the Torah from God, the same with David and Jesus receiving their books. however, we do not believe that the current books which supposedly represent the 3 previous scriptures are unaltered and that everything which is in them is true.

 

[The Peacekeeper]

How does the Holly Quran defines the term of holly war? Is the term just a new one invented by warmongers or is it stated in the holly book as well? I was wondering what was it's true meaning if it's stated there after all. Is it similar to what the crusaders did?

P.S. Thanks for the awesome topic you opened.

 

[Gharib]

How does the Holly Quran defines the term of holly war? Is the term just a new one invented by warmongers or is it stated in the holly book as well? I was wondering what was it's true meaning if it's stated there after all. Is it similar to what the crusaders did?

P.S. Thanks for the awesome topic you opened.

read through the short thread in the link below and let me know if it doesn't answer your questions:

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/islam-dir/78262-jihad-way-allah.html

 

[-Peacemaker-]

the qur'an does not speak about the bible that was available at the time of prophet Muhammed peace be upon him, nor about the current bible, if you read the verses of the Qur'an properly you will see that it speaks of the bible and the torah and the psalms revealed to the prophets, namely Jesus, Moses and David.

we believe that those three prophet peace be upon them, were true prophets of the same God of Muahmmed. we also believe that they received revelation in the form of a book from God just like Muhammed. as muslims we must respect all the revelations from God and all his prophets. one cannot be a muslim unless they accept that Moses received the Torah from God, the same with David and Jesus receiving their books. however, we do not believe that the current books which supposedly represent the 3 previous scriptures are unaltered and that everything which is in them is true.

Do you realize that the only way the Bible could've been altered without us knowing it is for the original writers to write something other than what God inspired them to write? You see once the original copies were put into circulation, people would've starting making copies of the original. If someone were to alter one of the copies, some people would continue copying these altered copies but faithful copies of the original would still exist in other places and would continue to be copied. We have ancient copies of the NT from all over the ancient world. 5,300 are in the original Greek and many more translated into other languages like Latin. And guess what? They're ALL THE SAME. Do you really believe that there was a conspiracy throughout the ENTIRE ANCIENT WORLD to alter these texts?

 

[YmirGF]

i am already regretting my post to you, but what exactly counts as proof according to you?

My ideas of proof are irrelevant, Eselam. The fact is that he simply made the claim and stuck to his guns. In English, we have an expression that is similar to, "Throw enough peanut butter at the wall, and eventually, some of it will stick." I am confident saying that Muhammad understood this principle well. You know as well as I do that he never offered a single piece of evidence to backup his claim.

 

[A-ManESL]

My ideas of proof are irrelevant, Eselam. The fact is that he simply made the claim and stuck to his guns. In English, we have an expression that is similar to, "Throw enough peanut butter at the wall, and eventually, some of it will stick." I am confident saying that Muhammad understood this principle well. You know as well as I do that he never offered a single piece of evidence to backup his claim.

In the first place did you decide by yourself that he claimed that the Torah/Gospel had been literally changed or you read it somewhere?

The situation in 7th C Arabia was that Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) found corruption in general attitude of the Arabic Jews and Christians, in his neighborhood, and felt that they were not following the correct way. Claims that he said that literal alterations had taken place are probably misinterpretations.

Some Muslim scholars who propose the thesis that the text of the Bible has not been literally altered (obviously, in their opinion they are not in contradiction to the Quran or the Hadith).

1 Syed Ahmad Khan:
”As far as the text of the Bible is concerned, it has not been altered. No attempt was made to present a diverging text as the authentic one.”
From: M.H.Ananikian, “The Reforms and Religious Ideas of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan”,
The Moslem World 14 (1934) p.61

2 Muhammad Abduh:
”... the charge of corruption of the Biblical texts makes no sense at all.
It would not have been possible for Jews and Christians everywhere
to agree on changing the text. Even if those in Arabia had done it,
the difference between their book and those of their brothers,
let us say in Syria and Europe, would have been obvious.”
From: Jacques Jomier, “Jesus, The Life of the Messiah”, C.L.S., Madras, 1974, p.216

3 Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (Mohammed pbuh's cousin and one of his companions)
“The word “Tahrif” [corruption] signifies to change a thing from its original nature; and there is no man who could corrupt a single word of what proceeds from God, so that the Jews and Christians could corrupt only by misrepresenting the meanings of the word of God.''
From: Imam Muhammad Isma'il al-Bukhari in Dictionary of Islam, T.P.Hughes,
Kazi Publications, Inc, 3023-27 West BelmontAvenue, Chicago Il. 60618, 1994, p.62

4 Fakhruddin Razi on the authority of Ibn Abbas, a nephew of Muhammed pbuh:
"The Jews and early Christians were suspected of altering the text of the Taurat and Injil; but in the opinion of eminent doctors and theologians it was not practicable thus to corrupt the text, because those Scriptures were generally known and widely circulated, having been handed down from generation to generation." (I could not find the source for this from the internet)

5 "The early commentators of the Koran and doctors of Islam who did not have a firsthand knowledge of the Bible believed in "Tahrif-I-Manawi" (corruption in meaning) only. (Abdul-Haqq, Sharing Your Faith with a Muslim, p. 38).

Imam Bukhari explains Surah 4:46 as follows; ‘displace words from their right places…means misinterpreted'. On similar lines Imam Ghazali made many analysis of various aspects of Christianity based on the assumption that the Gospels are genuine.

In fact you will find two lists here: The first (which includes Imam Ghazali, Razi) posit that only the meaning of the Bible has been misinterpreted, while the second (which includes Ibn Taymiyaa) posit that the literal words have been changed.

It should be obvious to you by now that had there been a clear claim by the Prophet (as for some reason you think there was) that the texts had been literally changed there would not be this debate.

Regards

 

[YmirGF]

In the first place did you decide by yourself that he claimed that the Torah/Gospel had been literally changed or you read it somewhere?

Originally, I got the idea from reading the Qur'an. There are several instances where "changing the word of God" is mentioned. It is a bit odd for a god to harp on how his changeless his real message is, that the Qur'an itself is protected from change etc, if it is not a direct indictment against the Bible and Talmud.

The situation in 7th C Arabia was that Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) found corruption in general attitude of the Arabic Jews and Christians, in his neighborhood, and felt that they were not following the correct way. Claims that he said that literal alterations had taken place are probably misinterpretations.

Possibly, no doubt it was all just a misunderstanding.

Some Muslim scholars who propose the thesis that the text of the Bible has not been literally altered (obviously, in their opinion they are not in contradiction to the Quran or the Hadith).

The key word here is SOME. Obviously, there is some contention with Muslim ranks on this minor point. As a non-Muslim, I don't feel that I am making such a big error because of this.

In fact you will find two lists here: The first (which includes Imam Ghazali, Razi) posit that only the meaning of the Bible has been misinterpreted, while the second (which includes Ibn Taymiyaa) posit that the literal words have been changed.

This illustrates one thing I do like about Islam. If you don't get agreement from one Imam, shop around. You will eventually find some folks that support your thinking.

It should be obvious to you by now that had there been a clear claim by the Prophet (as for some reason you think there was) that the texts had been literally changed there would not be this debate.

Oh, I understand pretty well, A-ManESL. The point is that there IS a debate about it. So, I'm not totally off my rocker assuming that he may well have meant textual changes.

I do enjoy our brief discussions. You definitely make me think. That said, I certainly respect your understanding. You're awesome.

 

[Gharib]

My ideas of proof are irrelevant, Eselam. The fact is that he simply made the claim and stuck to his guns. In English, we have an expression that is similar to, "Throw enough peanut butter at the wall, and eventually, some of it will stick." I am confident saying that Muhammad understood this principle well. You know as well as I do that he never offered a single piece of evidence to backup his claim.

just as i expected, why ask a question if you don't want to hear the answer or if you have already answered yourself?

 

[YmirGF]

just as i expected, why ask a question if you don't want to hear the answer or if you have already answered yourself?

We could pretend that you have a meaningful answer to counter my own.

 

[work in progress]

Do you realize that the only way the Bible could've been altered without us knowing it is for the original writers to write something other than what God inspired them to write? You see once the original copies were put into circulation, people would've starting making copies of the original. If someone were to alter one of the copies, some people would continue copying these altered copies but faithful copies of the original would still exist in other places and would continue to be copied. We have ancient copies of the NT from all over the ancient world. 5,300 are in the original Greek and many more translated into other languages like Latin. And guess what? They're ALL THE SAME. Do you really believe that there was a conspiracy throughout the ENTIRE ANCIENT WORLD to alter these texts?

There are no original copies of any of the books of the Old or New Testaments. The earliest NT writings are fragments, not complete books. Also, the Gospels were based on oral tradition of the language spoken in Judea at the time -- Aramaic -- and later translated and written in Greek:

The autographs, the Greek manuscripts written by the original authors, have not survived. Scholars surmise the original Greek text from the versions that do survive. The three main textual traditions of the Greek New Testament are sometimes called the Alexandrian text-type (generally minimalist), the Byzantine text-type (generally maximalist), and the Western text-type (occasionally wild). Together they comprise most of the ancient manuscripts.
Bible - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

​

And, yes there are discrepencies in hand-copied manuscripts...most minor, but some major errors, additions or omissions by later scribes copying earlier manuscripts. It was not a neat process like printing books:

When comparing one manuscript to another, with the exception of the smallest fragments, no two copies agree completely throughout. Note, however, that a single difference prevents agreement. There has been an estimate of between 400,000 variations among all these manuscripts (from the 2nd to 15th century) which is more than there are words in the New Testament.

The vast majority of these are accidental errors made by scribes, and are easily identified as such: an omitted word, a duplicate line, a misspelling, a rearrangement of words. Some variations involve apparently intentional changes, which often make more difficult a determination of whether they were corrections from better exemplars, harmonizations between readings, or ideologically motivated.[6
Biblical manuscript - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
​

The Gospels were written accounts in Greek, of oral traditions passed on in Aramaic...the language of 1st century Judea:

Most critical scholars today[25] would accept the view that the texts of the first written accounts of Jesus Christ were based upon the Oral Tradition.[26][27][28] Some scholars believe these early writings were based directly upon the Oral Tradition,[29][30] while others argue others argue that the Christian logia grew into pericopes, which were in turn collected into still larger accounts or proto-Gospels. Then the Gospel authors further developed these proto-Gospels into the final Gospels we have in our canon.[31][32][33][34][35] Scholars are in general agreement that the Christians up to the destruction of the Temple had no written Gospels being circulated among them.[36][37][38][39][40]
The writings of the Church fathers also tend to confirm that the Oral Tradition was the basis of the earliest gospels.
Oral tradition and the historical Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



​

 

[Gharib]

We could pretend that you have a meaningful answer to counter my own.

yeah why not, i wouldn't want you to say what counts as proof and then have it presented which in turn you will not accept anyway. so if it makes you happy then no problem.

 

[Gharib]

In the first place did you decide by yourself that he claimed that the Torah/Gospel had been literally changed or you read it somewhere?

The situation in 7th C Arabia was that Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) found corruption in general attitude of the Arabic Jews and Christians, in his neighborhood, and felt that they were not following the correct way. Claims that he said that literal alterations had taken place are probably misinterpretations.

Some Muslim scholars who propose the thesis that the text of the Bible has not been literally altered (obviously, in their opinion they are not in contradiction to the Quran or the Hadith).

1 Syed Ahmad Khan:
”As far as the text of the Bible is concerned, it has not been altered. No attempt was made to present a diverging text as the authentic one.”
From: M.H.Ananikian, “The Reforms and Religious Ideas of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan”,
The Moslem World 14 (1934) p.61

2 Muhammad Abduh:
”... the charge of corruption of the Biblical texts makes no sense at all.
It would not have been possible for Jews and Christians everywhere
to agree on changing the text. Even if those in Arabia had done it,
the difference between their book and those of their brothers,
let us say in Syria and Europe, would have been obvious.”
From: Jacques Jomier, “Jesus, The Life of the Messiah”, C.L.S., Madras, 1974, p.216

3 Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (Mohammed pbuh's cousin and one of his companions)
“The word “Tahrif” [corruption] signifies to change a thing from its original nature; and there is no man who could corrupt a single word of what proceeds from God, so that the Jews and Christians could corrupt only by misrepresenting the meanings of the word of God.''
From: Imam Muhammad Isma'il al-Bukhari in Dictionary of Islam, T.P.Hughes,
Kazi Publications, Inc, 3023-27 West BelmontAvenue, Chicago Il. 60618, 1994, p.62

4 Fakhruddin Razi on the authority of Ibn Abbas, a nephew of Muhammed pbuh:
"The Jews and early Christians were suspected of altering the text of the Taurat and Injil; but in the opinion of eminent doctors and theologians it was not practicable thus to corrupt the text, because those Scriptures were generally known and widely circulated, having been handed down from generation to generation." (I could not find the source for this from the internet)

5 "The early commentators of the Koran and doctors of Islam who did not have a firsthand knowledge of the Bible believed in "Tahrif-I-Manawi" (corruption in meaning) only. (Abdul-Haqq, Sharing Your Faith with a Muslim, p. 38).

Imam Bukhari explains Surah 4:46 as follows; ‘displace words from their right places…means misinterpreted'. On similar lines Imam Ghazali made many analysis of various aspects of Christianity based on the assumption that the Gospels are genuine.

In fact you will find two lists here: The first (which includes Imam Ghazali, Razi) posit that only the meaning of the Bible has been misinterpreted, while the second (which includes Ibn Taymiyaa) posit that the literal words have been changed.

It should be obvious to you by now that had there been a clear claim by the Prophet (as for some reason you think there was) that the texts had been literally changed there would not be this debate.

Regards

actually many from among the sahaba and the majority of scholars agree that literal changes to the text of the previous scriptures took place. this is supported by the following verses:


2:78 And there are among them (Jews) `Ummyyun
(unlettered) people, who know not the Book, but
they trust upon Amani (false desires) and they but
guess

2:79 Then woe to those who write the book with
their own hands and then say, "This is from Allah,''
to purchase with it a little price!
Woe to them for what their hands have written and
woe to them for that they earn thereby

Az-Zuhri said that Ubadydullah bin Abdullah narrated
that Ibn Abbas said,
"O Muslims! How could you ask the People of the
Book about anything, while the Book of Allah
(Qur'an) that He revealed to His Prophet is the
most recent Book from Him and you still read it
fresh and young Allah told you that the People of
the Book altered the Book of Allah, changed it
and wrote another book with their own hands.
They then said, `This book is from Allah,' so that
they acquired a small profit by it. Hasn't the
knowledge that came to you prohibited you from
asking them By Allah! We have not seen any of
them asking you about what was revealed to
you.''
This Hadith was also collected by Al-Bukhari.

Allah's statement,

Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe
to them for that they earn thereby.

means, "Woe to them because of what they have
written with their own hands, the lies, falsehood
and alterations. Woe to them because of the
property that they unjustly acquired.''
Ad-Dahhak said that Ibn Abbas commented,

(Woe to them),

"Means the torment will be theirs because of the
lies that they wrote with their own hands,

(And woe to them for that they earn
thereby),

which they unjustly acquired from
people, be they commoners or otherwise.''

to read the whole commentary of Ibn Kathir follow the link below and go to verse 78 and 79;

http://www.quran4u.com/Tafsir Ibn Kathir/PDF/002 Baqarah I.pdf