Jews, Ezra and Qur'an

[Augustus]

You see, if we really believed in G-d, we wouldn't do all that. Instead we'd believe in Muhammad and eat lobster and not corrupt our Torah to make it say that we need to do all those other things.

Can just imagine the ancient Jews waiting with baited breath for the scribes to come back with their latest corruption of God's word.

"Ooh, I hope they legalise fornication this time, I've got my eye on one of Avram's daughters"
"I hope it's theft they legalise. I've been coveting my neighbour's ox for a moon's turn"

*scribes return*

"Right chaps, this time we've decided to corrupt the word of God in a way that bans you from eating cheeseburgers. That is all."

"Awww, scriiiibes... booooo"

 

[Rival]

So let me see if I understand:

The common Muslim argument goes something like this:-

"Qur'an says the Jews worshipped Uzair as the son of Allah; we have no idea who Uzair is, even though it's in our really clear kitab. And it doesn't mean all Jews, just some Jews; they worshipped Uzair (whoever he is) at some point in time (whenever that was) and then stopped worshipping him (at some random later point). The Jews later recorded this in their Scriptures (even though no Jewish Scriptures ever found record any such incident, but it's okay, we know because our perfectly clear book tells us so), then the Jews corrupted their Scriptures (because, you know, Jews) even though we also have no evidence of textual corruption, and then said it never happened. Even though they recorded all sorts of other stuff like, the golden calf, David and Bathsheba, Amnon raping Tamar, Jewish people worshipping at sacred groves and so on."

Okay.

 

[Rival]

Oh and by the way,

"Our perfectly clear book also can't do tenses and says it was in the past, when really it means present when really it means past (even though it's being compared to something in the present, and English translations of our perfectly clear book use the present tense) and also in the same surah it says that the Jews (no, just some Jews!) are damned for worshipping Uzair, even though they apparently no longer do it and instead of praising the Jews for giving up Uzair worship (as this is clearly in the past) Allah is going to damn them anyway."

Oy vey.

 

[Godobeyer]

Which doesn't mean much because you're retroactively applying your own claims to Jewish scripture and trying to force it to fit.

For story of Uzair.
I did not use Jewish scripture.

Are you equating disbelief in a prophet's claims with insulting them or God?

In Islam view, insulting God or His prophets both are forbiden.
both exist in Torah and may Talmud.

Disbelief in of one God messangers is the same as to disbelieve in God Him self.

The problem with confirmation bias is that once you've arrived at a conclusion, you'll try literally anything (including reading a meaning into scripture that was never there to begin with) in order to prove you're right - even if the evidence flies in your face. Don't you think that if the Jews, being a pretty religious bunch, were told to go and proselytise to the non-Jewish societies around them that they'd have done that? Oh wait, no you probably don't. Because it's far more likely that they corrupted their own scripture so that the Muslim one didn't match it and don't really believe in God because they reject Muhammad and (the Muslim version of) Jesus's claims of prophethood than Islamic claims about the Jews are wrong

It's not accusation or secret that Torah told that Jews were rebellious with God and His prophets, and insulting God and His prophets.

 

[Godobeyer]

From the Qur'an or from your logic?

both.

God said Jews "SAID" not "SAYING or SAY"

That's true. Its just hard to know which type of Muslim views is the one that All-h intended when he sent Muhammad.

Majority of Muslims don't consider Mahdi as prophet of God

That's besides the point. The point is that Muhammad didn't add anything for the Jewish people. So I wonder if maybe Muslims believe he was sent for everyone but the Jews.

Muhammad (pbuh) don't came to Arabs/Jews ONLY.

It's came to preach to correct message to humanity, tha Jews failed in and edited.

The problem of earliest Jews or the problems of earliest prophets? None of the Jewish prophets said to preach to the nations and they themselves didn't either.

ealiest Jews had problem with God prophets, they reject their messages,sometimes killed them.sometimes they edited/faked the message of God

But I can question.

In Judgemend day, you can ask Him,not me.

Noah, Shem, Abraham, Balaam, Be'or, Job, Eliphaz, Bildad, Zopher, Elihu (he was from Abraham's family, but he prophecied for others).

That's before.
I meant prophets/messangers sent to non-Jews,after Jacob called Israal,they recieve messangers/ of God . (same time), written in Torah.

btw I forget to mention that maybe prophets Salih (pbuh) and Khider (pbuh),Shuaib (pbuh),Hood (pbuh) are not mentionned in Torah ?

 

[Rival]

Majority of Muslims don't consider Mahdi as prophet of God

What do they consider him? Also, while we're on it: why is Jesus the Messiah for Muslims? What did he achieve and why is he born of a virgin, if Muslims don't believe God is Jesus' Divine Father? Doesn't this make Isa a b*****d?

Muhammad (pbuh) don't came to Arabs/Jews ONLY.

It's came to preach to correct message to humanity, tha Jews failed in and edited.

Then why do all prayers have to be in Arabic and the Qur'an only makes sense in Arabic? It sounds like an Arab religion to me.

ealiest Jews had problem with God prophets, they reject their messages,sometimes killed them.sometimes they edited/faked the message of God

Proof that the Jews faked and edited their Scriptures?

 

[Limo]

Irrespective if you're accepting Islamic explanations or not, let me address some mistakes that a few people has done:

• Allah didn't say Ezra, Allah said Uzair
• Allah didn't say that Jews worshiped Uzair He just said about Uzair is Son of Allah
  • By the way. It's usual for Jews to call good people Son of God
• It doesn't mean all Jews. in Arabic Al-yahoud doesn't mean all Jews. It's like :
  • Quran 21:30 "We have made from (The = ال ماء)water every living thing". Allah used ال with water but it doesn't mean "from all water"
• It's a known fact that Jews didn't record all their history and intentionally hided/omitted/changed major incidents. The vague example is El-Messiah history:
  • Hiding anything about El-Messiah in their history. There is no single ward about anyone who appeared and pertaining to be the Messiah
• There is a lack of knowledge about the Jews in Higaz. Some Christian scholars say that the targeted sect (it doesn't exist anymore) by this Ayah were living in Higaz or Yemen

 

[rosends]

Irrespective if you're accepting Islamic explanations or not, let me address some mistakes that a few people has done:

• It's a known fact that Jews didn't record all their history and intentionally hided/omitted/changed major incidents. The vague example is El-Messiah history:
  • Hiding anything about El-Messiah in their history. There is no single ward about anyone who appeared and pertaining to me the Messiah

In a word, no.
Not only isn't "known fact" -- because it is neither known nor a fact, but the [unprovable] "example" doesn't support the contention.
Care to try again?

 

[Godobeyer]

What do they consider him? Also, while we're on it: why is Jesus the Messiah for Muslims? What did he achieve and why is he born of a virgin, if Muslims don't believe God is Jesus' Divine Father? Doesn't this make Isa a b*****d?

I don't care about Mahdi actually.they consider him great scholar maybe.NOT prophet.

that's much arguing between Christains them selfs about Jesus (pbuh) status.
Some said He is God , some siad He is son of God, some said both.

Most of your question , God suppose answser to them NOT me.

Then why do all prayers have to be in Arabic and the Qur'an only makes sense in Arabic? It sounds like an Arab religion to me.

Arabic is language of religion.

Maybe you need to know that translation is not same to original.

Proof that the Jews faked and edited their Scriptures?

Current Torah is impossible to consider as Book sent from God. because it's contain some insult toward God and some of His prophets.

11th Century CE: Isaac ibn Yashush suggested that the list of the Edomite kings in Genesis 36 was added by an unknown person after Moses died. For this assertion, he became known as "Isaac the Blunderer." 1

15th Century: Bishop Tostatus suggested that certain passages were written by one of the prophets, not by Moses.

16th Century: Andreas van Maes suggested that an editor added additional material to some of Moses' writings.

17th Century: Thomas Hobbes prepared a collection of passages that seemed to negate Moses' authorship.

18th Century: Three investigators (Witter, Astruc and Eichhorn) independently concluded that doublets in the Torah were written by two different authors. A doublet is a story that is described twice, as in:


from http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.htm

 

[Rival]

This is quite sad actually. The base fact is that, if Muslims don't believe that previous scriptures are corrupted, then their own is necessarily wrong.

So we are never going to see another argument from them.

 

[Rival]

I don't care about Mahdi actually.they consider him great scholar maybe.NOT prophet.

that's much arguing between Christains them selfs about Jesus (pbuh) status.
Some said He is God , some siad He is son of God, some said both.

Most of your question , God suppose answser to them NOT me.

You are ignorant of Christianity. Also this doesn't answer my question:

According to Islam, Isa has no father. This makes him a b*stard. Why is Islam's messiah a b*stard?

Arabic is language of religion.

Maybe you need to know that translation is not same to original.

I'm pretty sure translations are just fine. I don't know why Islam has such a problem with them. Also, barely anyone speaks Arabic, (especially not Qur'anic) so why on earth would Allah make it the 'language of religion'? Shouldn't it be English, as this is most widely spoken?

Current Torah is impossible to consider as Book sent from God. because it's contain some insult toward God and some of His prophets.

11th Century CE: Isaac ibn Yashush suggested that the list of the Edomite kings in Genesis 36 was added by an unknown person after Moses died. For this assertion, he became known as "Isaac the Blunderer." 1

15th Century: Bishop Tostatus suggested that certain passages were written by one of the prophets, not by Moses.

16th Century: Andreas van Maes suggested that an editor added additional material to some of Moses' writings.

17th Century: Thomas Hobbes prepared a collection of passages that seemed to negate Moses' authorship.

18th Century: Three investigators (Witter, Astruc and Eichhorn) independently concluded that doublets in the Torah were written by two different authors. A doublet is a story that is described twice, as in:

1. Torah wasn't written by Moses (imo)

2. How does any of this make the Tnach 'corrupt'? Just because something was added later that doesn't mean it's corrupted.

3. Yes, doublets are found in the scriptures, both Jewish and Christian. So?

(NB: @Tumah may have different views)

 

[rosends]

Current Torah is impossible to consider as Book sent from God. because it's contain some insult toward God and some of His prophets.

11th Century CE: Isaac ibn Yashush suggested that the list of the Edomite kings in Genesis 36 was added by an unknown person after Moses died. For this assertion, he became known as "Isaac the Blunderer." 1

15th Century: Bishop Tostatus suggested that certain passages were written by one of the prophets, not by Moses.

16th Century: Andreas van Maes suggested that an editor added additional material to some of Moses' writings.

17th Century: Thomas Hobbes prepared a collection of passages that seemed to negate Moses' authorship.

18th Century: Three investigators (Witter, Astruc and Eichhorn) independently concluded that doublets in the Torah were written by two different authors. A doublet is a story that is described twice, as in:


from http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_tora1.htm

so wait, your "proof" is 1 Jew who is known as a blunderer...and other non-Jews who used their scholarship to "prove" that the text is not from God. Why don't you just claim "documentary hypothesis" and be done with it. None of what you posted is a proof that any Jew ever hid, corrupted or changed anything, just that

1. A Jew thinks that an "unknown person" ADDED a list
2. Others who think that there were other authors besides Moses

If I publish a website that says that other Suras were added well after the year 1000, does that "prove" that Muslims corrupted their texts?

You have much to learn about claims and proofs.

 

[Limo]

In a word, no.
Not only isn't "known fact" -- because it is neither known nor a fact, but the [unprovable] "example" doesn't support the contention.
Care to try again?

I'll be more than happy to give me a single word just a single word in any Jewish historical or religious book about someone in the period 5 BCE to 5 CE claimed to be Elmessiah ?

 

[Rival]

If I publish a website that says that other Suras were added well after the year 1000, does that "prove" that Muslims corrupted their texts?

And actually hadith would have us believe that at least one of Muhammad's companions considered that the Qur'an was 2 surahs too long. There is some belief that Al-Fatiah was added later and was just a Muslim prayer, separate from Qur'an, and other beliefs that a surah was lost. Aisha claims that a domesticated animal ate the surah, according to one hadith.

Fun stuff.

 

[Godobeyer]

You are ignorant of Christianity. Also this doesn't answer my question:

According to Islam, Isa has no father. This makes him a b*stard. Why is Islam's messiah a b*stard?

It's seems you are ignorant about Christianity and Islam.

Jesus(pbuh) created by miracle.

I'm pretty sure translations are just fine. I don't know why Islam has such a problem with them. Also, barely anyone speaks Arabic, (especially not Qur'anic) so why on earth would Allah make it the 'language of religion'? Shouldn't it be English, as this is most widely spoken?

That's your opinion, if you know Arabic you will feel the different.

IF you ignore that translation,is not like same in sense, that big problem .

1. Torah wasn't written by Moses (imo)

2. How does any of this make the Tnach 'corrupt'? Just because something was added later that doesn't mean it's corrupted.

3. Yes, doublets are found in the scriptures, both Jewish and Christian. So?

(NB: @Tumah may have different views)

You can check the reference below in website.

 

[Rival]

It's seems you are ignorant about Christianity and Islam.

Jesus(pbuh) created by miracle.

But why? What did Isa do that others didn't? Why did he get the virgin birth and Mohammad didn't?

That's your opinion, if you know Arabic you will feel the different.

IF you ignore that translation,is not like same in sense, that big problem .

I understand that meanings can be hard to convey from one language to another, but you'd think Allah would be able to do it. Also, Arabic is my favourite language on earth, but I will still disagree that it is somehow divine or the language of religion. A true God would accept any language.

 

[Godobeyer]

But why? What did Isa do that others didn't? Why did he get the virgin birth and Mohammad didn't?

That's God issue, as He created Adam (pbuh) from no male and female,and created Eve(pbuh) from male only, He created Jesus (pbuh) from female only.

why what,why !!!! it's not me, It's ALLAH want.
here is the real question :
it's exactly as if why Jesus (pbuh) died/suicide for sins he did not commit.

I understand that meanings can be hard to convey from one language to another, but you'd think Allah would be able to do it. Also, Arabic is my favourite language on earth, but I will still disagree that it is somehow divine or the language of religion. A true God would accept any language.

Maybe to get the the pure sense ?

It's like ask Jews to don't learn Hebrew or doing prayers in hebrew.

 

[rosends]

I'll be more than happy to give me a single word just a single word in any Jewish historical or religious book about someone in the period 5 BCE to 5 CE claimed to be Elmessiah ?

Well, the religious canon was written and completed by the 4th century BCE so while the canon makes reference to plenty of messiahs, it doesn't mention one who made the claim well after it was written (at least with the title -- it speaks of false prophets). You could look up talmudic discussion of Bar Kochva (2nd century CE).

Josephus was an historian and he wrote about this guy http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messianic_claimants09.html but that isn't a "Jewish book."

Jesus was a claimant in the 1st century bce. How could a canon closed 200 years earlier write about him? How does not writing about him prove anything was changed?

 

[Rival]

That's God issue, as He created Adam (pbuh) from no male and female,and created Eve(pbuh) from male only, He created Jesus (pbuh) from female only.

why what,why !!!! it's not me, It's ALLAH want.
here is the real question :
it's exactly as if why Jesus (pbuh) died/suicide for sins he did not commit.

"Allahu a'lam"

Alright. Fair enough.

Maybe to get the the pure sense ?

It's like ask Jews to don't learn Hebrew or doing prayers in hebrew.

Jews translated their own scriptures into Greek (the Septuagint [or LXX] which the Orthodox Church uses as its Old Testament) and also used 'targums' when they ceased speaking Hebrew for a time (RFer Jews may correct me if I am wrong); Daniel is partially written in Aramaic. The NT was written by Jews and they used Greek, but they also preached in the language of the people to whom they went. No problem with it.

 

[Limo]

Well, the religious canon was written and completed by the 4th century BCE so while the canon makes reference to plenty of messiahs, it doesn't mention one who made the claim well after it was written (at least with the title -- it speaks of false prophets). You could look up talmudic discussion of Bar Kochva (2nd century CE).

Josephus was an historian and he wrote about this guy http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messianic_claimants09.html but that isn't a "Jewish book."

Jesus was a claimant in the 1st century bce. How could a canon closed 200 years earlier write about him? How does not writing about him prove anything was changed?

oooh my dear.

Josephus is not a jew. Right?

You're saying because of last book was written about false messiahs was written in 4th century BCE. What a justification?

Let us agree that Elmesiah is very important person who appeared in 1St century regardless if you believe of he's Elmesiah or not. Right?

Does it make any sense that this person doesn't worth to say anything about him anything bad calling him a liar?