islam abduallah
Active Member
do you read post # 17?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Please help me Muslims
- Thread starter -Peacemaker-
- Start date
do you read post # 17?
islam abduallah
Active Member
what's the problem to find some stories in the quran not in the bible, my dear we don't use the bible to judge the quran, the current bible represent nothing to Muslims, the opposite is correct we use the Quran to judge what in the bible, so the story of iblis we believe in it and we believe that the bible missed it
islam abduallah
Active Member
my dear let's rephrase what mentioned before as i feel we don't understand each other
Muslims and Christians are satisfied by their own books and so every party said about the other's book it's fabricated as it contradicts our book, you do that and we do that
to who are looking for the truth, they have to judge the book through the book itself, in other words if i'm Christian and i want to check the credibility of the bible i'll catch it and if i found any errors or contradictions or anything unbelievable or order us to the impossible, anything of that means that this book isn't the word of god i did that test or check on both bible and quran during my journey of looking for the truth and the results leads that i become a muslim, what's your opinion of that way of testing? surly regardless the result i found
gnostic
The Lost One
islam abduallah said:
I know you do. It is why Islam is senseless religion.
I know that Muslims also think Islam is oldest religion, that predate Muhammad, beginning with Adam. I also know that Muslims also think the Qur'an was authored by Allah.
It is pure propaganda BS that I have heard before here and other forums that I were member of, with absolute no merits to their claims. But you can believe what you want.
Timeline wise. Both Judaism and Christianity are older religions, with older scriptures and history than Islam, and yet, you judge the Tanakh/Bible by the Qur'an. Which is why I think your way of going about thing is not just wrong, but irrational.
But then again, I am not surprise religious people believe in fables like talking serpent, donkey, ants and birds. Completely irrational. (Sure, there are parrots and some other similar birds can mimic human speech, but it doesn't mean it actually understand what they are saying.) Also irrational is believing a being (referring to djinn) can take the form of smoke or fire, or creating Adam out of earth or clay.
But beside the irrationality of religion in general. Anyone with any credibility in religious scholarship would do it the other way around. I am agnostic, but even I would know that Judaism is older religion than both Christianity and Islam, then its scriptures (Torah) would be used as a basis or guide for the 2 later religious scriptures.
Moses was by far the most important prophet in Judaism. Moses being the founder of early Judaism, and had been credited to be the author of the Torah (Law). There was no Hebrew religion before Moses, despite what was written in the Genesis.
My point being, Moses make no mention of Satan in Genesis. In fact, Moses never mentioned any name of any angel or fallen angel (demon or djinn). The whole of early Judaism, prior to the Exile (in Babylon) the scriptures leave them (referring to angels and demons) completely nameless. There were no Satan, Michael, Gabriel. These name were fabrication of later period, and Moses clearly didn't know them.
Do you want to know why these messengers of god receive names during and after the Exile?
Because they were influenced by the Zoroastrian religion that existed in Babylonia at that time (6th century BCE). The dualism of Zoroastrianism have all these angels and demons with names. Only at this time, did authors of Hebrew scriptures began placing names to these lesser beings, thereby personifying the angels.
Even then, Judaism did not have fallen angels or demons rebelling against God. Satan was a servant of God with specific duties. He was not a personification of evil during the Return from Exile. Satan's attributes and personality only began to change after the death of Alexander the Great, when one of the Successors ruled Syria along with Palestine. It is the Book of Enoch (or 1 Enoch) which popularised the war in heaven between angels and fallen angels (known as the Watchers or Grigori).
Basely both Christianity and Islam have adopted and adapted pagan religious teaching, even though you believe in Allah as being the only god, you have the whole concept of good vs evil, Islam was never monotheistic religion. Satan have become a god in all but in name.
Woodrow LI
IB Ambassador
Just dropping in a thought. dealing with only a single point. We do know that Jesus(as) taught in an earthly ministry for at least 3 years. we do know he taught the true revelation of God(swt). We call that truth the Injil. (translated into English as Gospel, But not to be confused with the gospels of John, Mark, Matthew and Luke) But, no where can we find the teaching of Jesus(as) except for possibly a few brief sermons quoted in the NT such as the "Sermon on the Mount". The book was either never preserved or it was omitted from the bible. Either way the teaching no longer exists.
The entire NT is the eyewitness accounts of men detailing what they believe they saw and heard. There is no verification or chain of authenticity. There were also other books and gospels written that did not make it into the NT such as the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas. We also know that The earliest books of the NY were first written in Koin Greek and the authors were unnamed. They were not given the names of authors until later, Matthew not being named as an author until nearly 400 years later. But Jesus(as) did teach, where is the injil (the words he taught,)? This is why we say the Injil was corrupted, we know it was revealed, but there is no trace of what it was, in the Bible.
The entire NT is the eyewitness accounts of men detailing what they believe they saw and heard. There is no verification or chain of authenticity. There were also other books and gospels written that did not make it into the NT such as the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas. We also know that The earliest books of the NY were first written in Koin Greek and the authors were unnamed. They were not given the names of authors until later, Matthew not being named as an author until nearly 400 years later. But Jesus(as) did teach, where is the injil (the words he taught,)? This is why we say the Injil was corrupted, we know it was revealed, but there is no trace of what it was, in the Bible.
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
Sounds like some stuff that may be found in the Apocrypha Book of Solomon.
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
How can you use the sequel to judge the original?
gnostic
The Lost One
JacobEzra said:
You can't, rationally.
I don't think you it is rational way to judge.
Sometimes, the Qur'an is more logical than the Bible, like the Qur'an's version of the Flood. But with regards to Solomon being able to control animals and djinns, I don't think it is at all rational. You are actually better off reading the A Thousand And One Nights than the Qur'an, because at least the Arabian Nights is more entertaining folk tales.
I have not read the Book Of Wisdom. I just never got around to reading it, so I really can't comment on that.JacobEzra said:
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
Yes i can, but it would be better if i didnt spoon feed you like you are a child no?
[Pickthal 6:146] Unto those who are Jews We forbade every animal with claws. And of the oxen and the sheep forbade We unto them the fat thereof save that upon the backs or the entrails, or that which is mixed with the bone. That we awarded them for their rebellion. And lo! we verily are truthful.
Now as i understand SOME jews dont eat camel/hares etc (especially those who were in Arabia) as can be seen in the above sentence there isnt any mention of them being banned in the Torah.
[Pickthal 4:157] And because of their saying: We slew the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, Allah's messenger - they slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them; and lo! those who disagree concerning it are in doubt thereof; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; they slew him not for certain.
Dont really need to comment on this one
[Pickthal 4:153] The people of the Scripture ask of thee that thou shouldst cause an (actual) Book to descend upon them from heaven. They asked a greater thing of Moses aforetime, for they said: Show us Allah plainly. The storm of lightning seized them for their wickedness. Then (even) after that) they chose the calf (for worship) after clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty) had come unto them. And We forgave them that! And We bestowed on Moses evident authority.
I include this as a testament of how Jews and Christians have changed over the years...NOT. I mean you ask for the same dribble now as they did then.
Salaam
Although in my knowledge of Islam I am an infant. Thank you for the examples.
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
Im not talking about wisdom.
When I mentioned apocryphal i mean books that were never cannanized. Theres one call the *Testament of Solomon, where he controls Deamons and uses them to build the temple
Edited* Sorry for the confusion, this is what I ment to mention in the beggining
Last edited by a moderator:
gnostic
The Lost One
islam abduallah said:
In each of your examples, islam abduallah, you are right that you have shown that the Qur'an differ from the Tanakh/Bible, and hence the contradictions between your scripture and their, but there is fatal flaws in your reasonings why they differed.*
You did not in any way prove that the bible is "corrupted", just that there are 2 versions that are different. You certainly didn't prove that the Qur'an can be used to judge the "corruption" of the bible.*
In any mythology of any culture or civilisation, myths will change over time, often diverging from the original context or message of the myth. The context change and new interpretation replaces the old one. The new version (which is the Qur'an) doesn't necessarily mean it is the right version, let alone being the oldest.
Taking one of examples under the spotlight for examination, you say that David is a prophet is too good to did what he did to Bathsheba. The problem is that you and the author of the Qur'an ( whether that be Allah or Muhummad) have seriously failed to understand the whole story of David-Bathsheba. Despite being king of the united kingdoms of Israel, David was still human, who make mistake (or sin), recognize his sin, repent and be forgiven by god. God still kept his convenant with David, that his descendants will at least rule the southern kingdom of Judah. David was a great king, but still flawed like anyone else.
You have said in yourself in the earlier example that Jesus was "human like me and you", but a "prophet". Whether, David is a prophet or not, is not really the point. But as human, David is not perfect, regardless if he was a prophet. *If David was perfect then he wouldn't be human and he couldn't (or wouldn't need to be) forgiven.
I am well aware that some of Muslims believe that the prophets can't sin or do wrong, but if that is so, why did Muhammad have doubt of being prophet? Why did Moses have doubts, because according to the Exodus he did not he would make a good public speaker, let alone being prophet? And there was the prophet Jonah tried to run away from his calling.
In any case, I don't think David was a prophet, judging by the history of David in the bible (not that I believe for one moment that it is real history). The reason being, if David was a prophet then why would there be any need for the prophet Nathan to tell David that he had sinned against god in the Bathsheba episode? But I'm getting sidetracked.
No,*islam abduallah. I don't think actually understand David-Bathsheba episode. And if you don't understand it, then how can possibly judge it to be corrupted?
Last edited:
A-ManESL
Well-Known Member
The answer you are seeking is not canonical. Different Muslims believe in different things. The Quran or the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) never point out any specific place of corruption.(You may read Chapter II here for more information). There is a tradition that the Prophet Muhammad asked his followers not to judge and say that such and such a thing is false in the Bible, nor say it was right.
There are even some Muslims which dont believe the corruption is of the literal text, but is a corruption in understanding the meaning and applying it. (See Chapter III of the above link).
Regards.
Last edited:
A-ManESL
Well-Known Member
In continuation of the last point above some Muslim scholars who dont propose the thesis that the text of the Bible has been 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).
6 I found many other names, who posit this, by a google search one even of Imam Ghazali (could not find the source). In reference to him, I did find this written about him:
Quote:
His creed is that it is impossible that there should be a union of divinity and humanity in Christ, and the method of interpretation he has adopted must lead to this result. So in spite of the appearance of fairness which we have here, it must be admitted that Al Ghazzali's argument is to support a foregone conclusion. It is, however, very interesting to find that he is prepared to argue the case on the assumption that the Gospels are genuine, and this is in marked contrast to what we have seen in the case of Ibn Hasm's attack. (Sweetman, Islam and Christian Theology, Part 2, Vol. 1, p. 267).
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).
6 I found many other names, who posit this, by a google search one even of Imam Ghazali (could not find the source). In reference to him, I did find this written about him:
Quote:
His creed is that it is impossible that there should be a union of divinity and humanity in Christ, and the method of interpretation he has adopted must lead to this result. So in spite of the appearance of fairness which we have here, it must be admitted that Al Ghazzali's argument is to support a foregone conclusion. It is, however, very interesting to find that he is prepared to argue the case on the assumption that the Gospels are genuine, and this is in marked contrast to what we have seen in the case of Ibn Hasm's attack. (Sweetman, Islam and Christian Theology, Part 2, Vol. 1, p. 267).
-Peacemaker-
.45 Cal
But there are obvious contradictions between the Bible and the Koran such as the crucifixion of Jesus as well as the story of the sacrafice of Isaac. How could Islam resolve these contradictions without believing those stories are corrupted?
Last edited:
JacobEzra.
Dr. Greenthumb
Quran needs to do more then just say so to prove its superiority and authority over the Bible. More so then Jews and Christians, since we came first
islam abduallah
Active Member
how do you want us to refer to book we believe that it was distorted and corrupted? it's non sensible
yes we did, do you want me to prove that to you???
again, how do you want me to judge the quran by books we believe that quran was sent to correct them???
also i'd like to say that when we said that the bible is corrupted we prove it to the non Muslims through logical minds not through the quranic verses as surly they didn't believe in what in the quran for example leviticus 15 if you read it you would say loudly it's impossible to be word of god
if you believe that the god is too competent to do anything and he's capable of doing what is more that you will not be surprised who created the human and birds is able too to make a conversation between them if he wills, just to say be and immediately it is
not necessary as we don't have the original Torah which revealed from Allah to Moses
Moses isn't the author of Torah it was the god, but which torah??? the one we have now??? surly not
let's assume that what we have now is a correct Torah, what's the mind that the god teach both Mohamed and Jesus more than Moses peace upon all
i know that the torah was purly distorted during the exiling to Babylon, but we don't have the original one to compare, we just rely on our minds to define the corruption and Muslims use plus the mind the quran
hahaha, this is the best joke i have ever heard
islam abduallah
Active Member
what type of evidences you want to prove that fact?
islam abduallah
Active Member
yes, we believe it was corrupted in the bible
islam abduallah
Active Member
yes i agree that i didn't prove anything yet in that thread but you could review that link
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/general-religious-debates/117299-right-religion.html
there you will find many debates between me and some christian members you review that, also you will find a debate between me and another agnostic member too
THIS never could be happened with quran as it's the word of god and he promised to be kept from distortion and corruption
wrong way of Judging, BS we don't believe in the story of Bathsheba at all, this story is rejected by Muslim, Quran didn't mention anything about it..
the concept of sins of prophets is totally different about what you said, we believe that Prophets (all of them including david) were perfects, they do some mistakes which they saw as a big sins because they fear Allah too much more than us while some of us see it as a normal thing which doesn't need asking the god for forgiveness
let's see when the prophet david asked the god for forgiveness in quran "Be patient over what they say and remember Our servant, David, the possessor of strength; indeed, he was one who repeatedly turned back [to Allah ], Indeed, We subjected the mountains [to praise] with him, exalting [ Allah ] in the [late] afternoon and [after] sunrise, And the birds were assembled, all with him repeating [praises], And We strengthened his kingdom and gave him wisdom and discernment in speech, And has there come to you the news of the adversaries, when they climbed over the wall of [his] prayer chamber, When they entered upon David and he was alarmed by them? They said, "Fear not. [We are] two adversaries, one of whom has wronged the other, so judge between us with truth and do not exceed [it] and guide us to the sound path, Indeed this, my brother, has ninety-nine ewes, and I have one ewe; so he said, 'Entrust her to me,' and he overpowered me in speech.", [David] said, "He has certainly wronged you in demanding your ewe [in addition] to his ewes. And indeed, many associates oppress one another, except for those who believe and do righteous deeds - and few are they." And David became certain that We had tried him, and he asked forgiveness of his Lord and fell down bowing [in prostration] and turned in repentance [to Allah ]" quran 38
David asked the god for forgiveness because he judged between them before he listened to the other one, it's not like the concept of sin in our minds, it's a mistake
i hope that you understood the right view of the concept of prophet's mistakes, it's not sins as you think it's just not doing the better choice
[/QUOTE]