The Gospels in Islam: Authentic or Corrupted?

[Rival]

Right.

That is a good explanation. But doesn't answer the question.

But one must either say "No, the gospels don't call themselves the gospel" or as wind walker says "The gospel is the message, not the name of the book".

Anyway, the Quran refers to a revelation which is called the Injeel. Thats why this question was asked in response to the OP. It is not for a faith based debate.

Thanks for the response.

In that case I would say no, they don't.

I've missed you, mon frere

 

[Terry Sampson]

So is the Gospel of Jesus referred to in the Quran the New Testament Gospels? Or does it refer to a Gospel that is now hopelessly lost, meaning the New Testament Gospels are corrupted? What evidence would support your conclusion?

• "The Gospel", as I understand it, is not a book (i.e.collection of words), it's a person; and not just any person, but a specific person, a righteous person: Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus of Nazareth, IMO, is the Gospel because he is God's Message (i.e. Word) to those who hear It. That Word seeks to reconcile the lost to God (the Speaker of the Word) and to transform them into righteous persons.
  • Who are the Righteous?
    • Proverbs 10:25.
      • כַּעֲבֹור סוּפָה וְאֵין רָשָׁע וְצַדִּיק יְסֹוד עֹולָֽם׃
      • (JPS) When the storm passes the wicked man is gone, But the righteous is an everlasting foundation.
      • (NASB) When the whirlwind passes, the wicked is no more, But the righteous has an everlasting foundation.
    • Jeremiah 17:7
      • בָּרוּךְ הַגֶּבֶר אֲשֶׁר יִבְטַח בַּֽיהוָה וְהָיָה יְהוָה מִבְטַחֹֽו׃
      • (JPS) Blessed is he who trusts in the LORD, Whose trust is the LORD alone.
      • (NASB) “But blessed is the one who trusts in the Lord, whose confidence is in him.

 

[firedragon]

In that case I would say no, they don't.

I've missed you, mon frere

Missed you to Rival. (Strange to call you "Rival")

 

[firedragon]

• "The Gospel", as I understand it, is not a book (i.e.collection of words), it's a person; and not just any person, but a specific person, a righteous person: Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus of Nazareth, IMO, is the Gospel because he is God's Message (i.e. Word) to those who hear It. That Word seeks to reconcile the lost to God (the Speaker of the Word) and to transform them into righteous persons.
  • Who are the Righteous?
    • Proverbs 10:25.
      • כַּעֲבֹור סוּפָה וְאֵין רָשָׁע וְצַדִּיק יְסֹוד עֹולָֽם׃
      • (JPS) When the storm passes the wicked man is gone, But the righteous is an everlasting foundation.
      • (NASB) When the whirlwind passes, the wicked is no more, But the righteous has an everlasting foundation.
    • Jeremiah 17:7
      • בָּרוּךְ הַגֶּבֶר אֲשֶׁר יִבְטַח בַּֽיהוָה וְהָיָה יְהוָה מִבְטַחֹֽו׃
      • (JPS) Blessed is he who trusts in the LORD, Whose trust is the LORD alone.
      • (NASB) “But blessed is the one who trusts in the Lord, whose confidence is in him.

I respectfully disagree brother because the Bible speaks about Jesus going and preaching the gospel. Thus, if Jesus was indeed "the Gospel" what he preaches will not also be called the gospel.

But I do understand your point.

 

[Windwalker]

Right.

That is a good explanation. But doesn't answer the question.

But one must either say "No, the gospels don't call themselves the gospel" or as wind walker says "The gospel is the message, not the name of the book".

Anyway, the Quran refers to a revelation which is called the Injeel. Thats why this question was asked in response to the OP. It is not for a faith based debate.

Thanks for the response.

Understanding what "gospel" means, how it was used historically is not faith-based. It's just the scholarship of historians who research its historical use and meaning. If the Quran understands "the gospel" to mean a book, or a "revelation" to a prophet, then it is not speaking of the "good news" in the way the NT authors meant it. It reflects a later evolved use of the word "gospel" to be pointing to a book.

The good news of Jesus Christ is that God's kingdom had arrived already. Just like the good news of Augustus Caesar was that Peace had come to earth though him. Jesus was the Jew's Caesar, in a twist against the Rome. You have to take how it was used to apply to Caesar, to see it's use applied to Jesus.

 

[firedragon]

Understanding what "gospel" means, how it was used historically is not faith-based. It's just the scholarship of historians who research its historical use and meaning. If the Quran understands "the gospel" to mean a book, or a "revelation" to a prophet, then it is not speaking of the "good news" in the way the NT authors meant it. It reflects a later evolved use of the word "gospel" to be pointing to a book.

The good news of Jesus Christ is that God's kingdom had arrived already. Just like the good news of Augustus Caesar was that Peace had come to earth though him. Jesus was the Jew's Caesar, in a twist against the Rome. You have to take how it was used to apply to Caesar, to see it's use applied to Jesus.

Great. I agree.

What if in the Quran the Injeel is also not a physical book but a message given through Jesus?

 

[Windwalker]

Great. I agree.

What if in the Quran the Injeel is also not a physical book but a message given through Jesus?

Is that how it's used? What are the verses that use that word? What are they pointing to?

 

[firedragon]

Is that how it's used? What are the verses that use that word? What are they pointing to?

The Injeel is referred to as containing Hudhan wa noorun, the guidance and light that was sent to Jesus in 5:46. The Injeel is not specifically referred to as a written down book on paper or anything of the sort. It is the revelation given to Jesus. Jesus was "taught" the revelations, both Tawraath and Injeel. The Torah and the Gospel 5:110.

The Injeel is never specified as a physical book. So it may very well be referring to what the "euaggelion tis basilias", the "Gospel of the Kingdom" referred to in Matthew 24. And when Mark says things like "those who lay down their life for me and for the gospel" it looks like it is not referring to a particular printed book but what Jesus preached or his message.

The thing is there are some variances in the message of Paul where he refers to "my gospel" which looks like a generic statement mou or of me. His gospel. His good news. His good news speaks of judgment through Jesus.

Anyway, the Quran also does not specifically refer to a gospel that was written down. It was a revelation.

Cheers.

 

[j1i]

Muslims believe in the gospel that was revealed to Jesus but the difference between Muslims and Christians over the contents of the gospel .

Christianity was in difficult and turbulent situations at the time of Jesus' departure
Between intimidation and murder of vulnerable Christians
The diaspora was assembled after generations of orphans
This made the process of achieving the transmission of sacred speech very difficult
So at first they differed in the concept of the Trinity
Arius was around the time of Jesus, he opposed the idea of the Trinity
This difference in the concept of the truth of Christ reflects the blurring of the Gospels in that period
My words support the difference in the reality of the heavenly messages before Christianity
Where they was calling to worship only the god of heaven
its did not mention Jesus at that time or the Trinity

The gospel is the true word of God but the difference in the credibility of the transmission of the Word of God
Is what the entire generations conveyed true?

GOD bless you dude

 

[Dawnofhope]

Brother. Good post.

If you read the Gospels in the New Testament, does any one of them refer to themselves as the Gospel?

Good to have input from our Muslims brothers.

A question has arisen as to what is meant by 'Gospel'. As we are discussing the use of the word Injil (meaning Gospel or Evangel) in the Quran, a better starting point may be to consider how this word is used in the Quran. The word Injil occurs twelve times in the Quran. In Arabic it is a singular noun, and should be rendered ‘gospel’ and not ‘gospels.’ It always refers to that which was sent down or given to Jesus or ‘Isa.

For instance:

Then We caused Our messengers to follow in their footsteps; and We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow, and gave him the Gospel, and placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him."
Quran, 57:27

And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel [Injil] wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah ] - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil). Let the People of the Gospel [Injil] judge by that which Allah hath revealed therein....".
Quran 5:46-47

The word 'Gospel' as used by Christians has a different meaning as understood by Christians and is often used to denote one of the four Gospels in the New Testament. However it can be used differently, for example:

1. An account of the life, crucifixion, death, resurrection, and teachings of Jesus, generally written during the first several centuries of the Common Era.
2. In the Protestant Church The teaching of Divine Grace as distinguished from the Law or Divine commandments.
3. A message expected to have positive reception or effect, one promoted as offering important (or even infallable) guiding principles.
4. That which is absolutely authoritative or true.
5. A form of music(Gospel music)

Originally the word Gospel was used to refer to the Christian message itself and then later the four Canonical Gospels of the New Testament.

gospel - Wiktionary

Gospel - Wikipedia

I believe if we can see the Gospel as referring to a Revelation of God through Jesus as understood in the Quran we can progress the discussion.

The New Testament books Matthew, Mark, Luke and John clearly have Words spoken by Jesus that would fulfil this criteria. The question then becomes can we reasonably attribute verses in these books (Matthew, Mark. Luke and John) to those God revealed through Jesus.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Hi Niblo,

Thank you for your thorough response. We've discussed this topic previously late last year:

Do Baha'i believe Jesus or the Holy Spirit can cure the Leper?

I hope we can discuss these important differences in the way Muslims, Christians and Bahaí's view the NT in the best spirit of interfaith discussion.

Hello, Adrian.

Concerning the Corruption of the New Testament:

The Arabic word ‘ʾInjīl’ is translated ‘Gospel’ by those writing in English. However, in the Qur’an the word is always in the singular, and is never used to describe the four gospels of the New Testament.

As discussed in post #50 above, Muhammad speaks of the Gospel in reference to the Revelation from God through Jesus, in much the same way as God has revealed Himself through Moses via the Torah and through Muhammad Himself wvia the Quran. As expected the meaning of the word Gospel for Christians is NOT based on the Quran and has a number of meanings including reference an account of the Life and Teachings of Christ. So the term Gospel would be applied to each individual account including the first four books of the New Testament. Muhammad doesn't use the Word Injil or Gospel in this manner. However, there is no doubt that each Gospel account the Christian's refer includes the Words allegedly spoken by Jesus. The question then becomes to what extent do these Words recorded in the Gospel reflect what Christ really said or taught?

Recollecting our previous conversation, you believe the NT books contain in part a genuine account of what Jesus really Taught and did. However you believe some of it isn't true and so the NT Gospel accounts have been corrupted. The standard you use to distinguish between what is genuine and what is corrupted is whether or not it contradicts the Holy Quran.

The Exalted says: ‘We sent Yeshua, son of Mary, in their footsteps, to confirm the Torah that had been sent before him: We gave him the Gospel (ʾInjīl) with guidance, light, and confirmation of the Torah already revealed - a guide and lesson for those who take heed of Allāh.’ (Al-Ma’ida: 46).

That's certainly one of the most relevant verses from the Holy Quran to discuss the OP question.

There is no doubt that the New Testament gospels were written decades after the lifetime of Yeshua (ʿalayhi as-salām); by anonymous authors who never met him (that of ‘Mark’ being the first). These narratives cannot possibly be the ‘ʾInjīl’ mentioned in the Qur’an.

The first NT Gospel to be written was probably Mark around 66 - 70 AD. Scholarly opinion varies about authorship and there is no consensus. However the majority of scholars would certainly agree that we don't know who the authors were.

It is quite clear from Al-Ma’ida 46 that Yeshua was given the ʾInjīl complete; how else could it have been ‘a guidance, light and confirmation of the Torah’?

I believe Jesus was given the Injil complete as you do. However I believe everything God intended to relay to humanity He did through the Gospel accounts in the New Testament along with the supporting apostolic letters. I can't see why God would go to all the trouble to reveal Himself and then not leave an account for future generations. Humanity would have been deprived of God's guiding grace for centuries until the advent of Muhammad. God revealed Himself through Muhammad and made provision for protection of what was revealed through the Quran. Why wouldn't He have done so for His Revelation through Jesus?

God willing I'll respond to the rest of your post when I'm able. Thank you once again for your well considered response.

The ʾInjīl is no longer extant. However, I have no doubt that elements of this Book are to be found in the synoptic gospels; in the ‘Sermon on the Mount’, for example; or in the words: ‘I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’ (Matthew 15:24).

 

[Dawnofhope]

I think it refers to a misunderstanding of what the "Gospel" actually is. They are trying to literalize it as a book, or a set of teachings. Rather, than entertaining that Muhammad had a misunderstanding of it reflected in his speaking of it, they try to legitimize a human error, starting with the assumption it must be accurate or true.

The "gospel" is actually not a book at all. It is the "good news" that the kingdom of God had already come into the world through Jesus. The term gospel was deliberately co opted from the "gospel" or good news that Caesar Augustus had brought peace to the world through his victories in battle.

It was a deliberate twist on its usage to say that the true peace of God's kingdom had already come, through non-violence. It was a challenge to Rome using that same term applied to Jesus. They did this with all the titles for Christ as well, lifting each of them from titles previous applied to Caesar, "Son of God", for instance.

There is no "book" that is the "gospel". The books called "gospels" in the Bible is a misnomer. There is only one single "good news". and those books are the "gospel" (singular) according to this person, or to that person.

I recall having read parts of the Koran when I was younger and was taken by it's references to things that were not in the Christian Bible, speaking as if they were. Such as the myth of Jesus breathing life into clay doves as a young, sassy child. The other is this dialog with Jesus questioning if he had told his followers to take himself and Mary as two other Gods besides Allah. That showed a clear misunderstanding of the doctrine of the Trinity, seeing it as Father, Son, and Virgin Mary.

The point is, this supposed Gospel that is seen as either some book, or some message that was given to Jesus in some form, simply shows a later culturally distorted view of that period of history of early Christianity and its origins as a competing sect within Judaism. It is not a more perfect view, but a distortion into another culture and time. It has no historical grounding.

It's a very human corruption of understanding something without the benefit of the tools of research being used. If it were valid, it would withstand closer scrutiny and would not conflict with the history we have been able to reconstruct. It doesn't fit with any of that.

The Koran cannot be held as a complement, or a continuation of a any "gospel" that may have had its origins in 1st century Rome, either the gospel of Caesar Augustus, or the gospel of Christ Jesus. It is at best, a 7th century religion's take on another religion born in another time and another place foreign to their own time and place.

Thank you for providing useful commentary in regards the etymology of the word Gospel. Muhammad from the Quranic text appears to refer to the Gospel or Injil as the Revelation from Christ as opposed to the four Gospel accounts in the NT. The different understandings of the word Gospel between Christians and Muslims contributes in part to this long standing controversy. The apparent contradictions between what Muslims and Christians believe their sacred books teach is another source of conflict.

If the Quran is viewed with the same flexibility that modern scholars take to the Bible, I suspect the contradictions wouldn't be so great and probably vanish. Of course if we have rigid interpretations of both the NT and Quran then the accounts and theologies are contradictory and impossible to reconcile.

 

[firedragon]

Good to have input from our Muslims brothers.

A question has arisen as to what is meant by 'Gospel'. As we are discussing the use of the word Injil (meaning Gospel or Evangel) in the Quran, a better starting point may be to consider how this word is used in the Quran. The word Injil occurs twelve times in the Quran. In Arabic it is a singular noun, and should be rendered ‘gospel’ and not ‘gospels.’ It always refers to that which was sent down or given to Jesus or ‘Isa.

For instance:

Then We caused Our messengers to follow in their footsteps; and We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow, and gave him the Gospel, and placed compassion and mercy in the hearts of those who followed him."
Quran, 57:27

And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel [Injil] wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah ] - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil). Let the People of the Gospel [Injil] judge by that which Allah hath revealed therein....".
Quran 5:46-47

The word 'Gospel' as used by Christians has a different meaning as understood by Christians and is often used to denote one of the four Gospels in the New Testament. However it can be used differently, for example:

1. An account of the life, crucifixion, death, resurrection, and teachings of Jesus, generally written during the first several centuries of the Common Era.
2. In the Protestant Church The teaching of Divine Grace as distinguished from the Law or Divine commandments.
3. A message expected to have positive reception or effect, one promoted as offering important (or even infallable) guiding principles.
4. That which is absolutely authoritative or true.
5. A form of music(Gospel music)

Originally the word Gospel was used to refer to the Christian message itself and then later the four Canonical Gospels of the New Testament.

gospel - Wiktionary

Gospel - Wikipedia

I believe if we can see the Gospel as referring to a Revelation of God through Jesus as understood in the Quran we can progress the discussion.

The New Testament books Matthew, Mark, Luke and John clearly have Words spoken by Jesus that would fulfil this criteria. The question then becomes can we reasonably attribute verses in these books (Matthew, Mark. Luke and John) to those God revealed through Jesus.

Even according to the canonical gospels called Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, the Gospel seems to be the message of Jesus, not a particular book.

The Quran says that Jesus was taught the Torah and the Gospel, the tawraath and the Injeel. And the citing in the Quran also suggests that it could be a message, not a printed or written down book. There is no indication that any of the revelations were in written format.

The Quran says that Jesus was taught the book (Al Kithab), and the wisdom (Hikmah), and the Tawraath, and the Injeel. Thus, this idea that every single mention of al kithab is either the injeel in written form or another book like the Zaboor or the Thawraath. Its mentioned separately.

 

[PruePhillip]

Islam is a polyglot of ideas from Christianity and Judaism which existed centuries before Mohammed had his alleged visions. His commentary on anything regarding Judaism and Christianity means absolutely nothing.

Islamic scholars and their views on anything are irrelevant to Christianity and Judaism.

The Gospels are exactly what they say they are. They are the only true revelation of Christ, as are the other books of the NT.

The Torah and other books of the OT are the only true revelation of God, until the Messiah ( Christ) came.

All else is false, and the source for the falsity is not God.

I agree with this. I am sure the Apostolic Church would agree as well.
How to tell? Just the sheer violence and cruelty of Islam, for starters.
That comes under what Jesus called the "fruits" of your life.

 

[wizanda]

However I believe everything God intended to relay to humanity He did through the Gospel accounts in the New Testament along with the supporting apostolic letters.

The Tanakh, and Yeshua told us that the corruption a.k.a, the Antichrist's teachings would happen soon after his death, and they'd deceive the world with "I Am" statements.

In the Parable of the Wheat and Tares, the Tares are planted soon after he is resurrected.

Humanity would have been deprived of God's guiding grace for centuries until the advent of Muhammad.

Muhammad was informed they'd corrupted the Bible, told us to accept the Torah, Prophets, and Psalms, and Gospels, not what came after.

The Quran teaches that the people of the book had created false texts, and have lied to the world, therefore they can not be trusted - which means modern scholarship has lots of corruption.

The word 'Gospel' as used by Christians has a different meaning as understood by Christians and is often used to denote one of the four Gospels in the New Testament.

If we dissect the case properly, rather than just follow mainstream scholarship down near Hell before Judgement day...

There are multiple different Gospel ideas in the New Testament, the Synoptic Gospels establish Yeshua's Gospel.

Simon the stone's Gospel was that jesus came to die, as he was Pharisaic, and missed the point in what was being said, as he'd rather "follow the ways of man, more than the ways of God."

John's Gospel is that jesus was the lamb of God, sent down here as an animal sacrifice for the Jews to give mankind salvation by his death.... Tho the Gospel of John doesn't use the word Gospel, it is implied by the usage in the cannon.

Paul's Gospel is that Christ being the Image of God acted as a human sacrifice to cleanse everyone sin by believing in his death.

A Christian's belief is built on a consensus ideology, that jesus came to bring the good news of his coming, and fetching the kingdom of God down here by his death.

The reality is Yeshua came to warn of the coming of the Kingdom of God on earth, that if he can come here once bringing destruction with him, ultimately it shows that Judgement day will happen, and after we will come to an age of infinity (Messianic Age/Satya Yuga), where we shall no longer have death in the world...

As by Yeshua's Gospel (Testimony/Snare - Isaiah 8:16 + Isaiah 8:19-20) all ravenous beings who accept his murder will be removed for being workers of iniquity/lawless; as they don't actually study the texts, and assume things that are evil to fill in the gaps - the Quran confirms this.

In my opinion.

 

[Dawnofhope]

The logos is from Greek logic, which implied everything in our reality comes from the Source; the Quran also says Yeshua was the word of God, that isn't the problem...

It is the idea that Yeshua was God made manifest that becomes problematic in Islamic texts, as he was a man, and corruptible; whereas because Christianity wanted a clean sacrifice, they've made him into a perfect God being.

3:45 [And mention] when the angels said, "O Mary, indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name will be the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary - distinguished in this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah].

4:171 O People of the Scripture, do not commit excess in your religion or say about Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah and His word which He directed to Mary and a soul [created at a command] from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers. And do not say, "Three"; desist - it is better for you. Indeed, Allah is but one God. Exalted is He above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. And sufficient is Allah as Disposer of affairs.

In my opinion.

The Quran certainly corrects the Christian view that Jesus was physically God incarnate or that He was literally the son of God. However the Divinity of Christ, His Manifesting God, and His Sonship in relation to the Father are important Christian theological narratives the Quran doesn’t deny. Committing excess in one’s religion works both ways.

 

[Dawnofhope]

As the Mormons will testify, anyone can write their own bible. Mohamed's violent followers certainly did.

The Book of Mormon isn’t Divine Revelation but I take your point. Despite its obvious flaws, this sect of Christianity has done remarkably well. So too have the Jehovah Witnesses despite faults that are glaringly obvious to all except the adherents themselves.

Islam has endured for a much longer period in history and continues to flourish despite criticism and suppression from its earliest days. The only other religion that comes close to being so thoroughly scrutinised and it scripture minutely examined is Christianity.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Islam is a polyglot of ideas from Christianity and Judaism which existed centuries before Mohammed had his alleged visions. His commentary on anything regarding Judaism and Christianity means absolutely nothing.

Islamic scholars and their views on anything are irrelevant to Christianity and Judaism.

The Gospels are exactly what they say they are. They are the only true revelation of Christ, as are the other books of the NT.

The Torah and other books of the OT are the only true revelation of God, until the Messiah ( Christ) came.

All else is false, and the source for the falsity is not God.

That certainly is the conservative Christian perspective. According to Pew Research Center Islám is set to overtake Christianity as the largest religion on the planet. One religion throwing scorn and malice on another looks bad to most fair minded observers, don’t you think?

Why Muslims are the world’s fastest-growing religious group

 

[Dawnofhope]

• "The Gospel", as I understand it, is not a book (i.e.collection of words), it's a person; and not just any person, but a specific person, a righteous person: Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus of Nazareth, IMO, is the Gospel because he is God's Message (i.e. Word) to those who hear It. That Word seeks to reconcile the lost to God (the Speaker of the Word) and to transform them into righteous persons.
  • Who are the Righteous?
    • Proverbs 10:25.
      • כַּעֲבֹור סוּפָה וְאֵין רָשָׁע וְצַדִּיק יְסֹוד עֹולָֽם׃
      • (JPS) When the storm passes the wicked man is gone, But the righteous is an everlasting foundation.
      • (NASB) When the whirlwind passes, the wicked is no more, But the righteous has an everlasting foundation.
    • Jeremiah 17:7
      • בָּרוּךְ הַגֶּבֶר אֲשֶׁר יִבְטַח בַּֽיהוָה וְהָיָה יְהוָה מִבְטַחֹֽו׃
      • (JPS) Blessed is he who trusts in the LORD, Whose trust is the LORD alone.
      • (NASB) “But blessed is the one who trusts in the Lord, whose confidence is in him.

I have no problem with equating the Holy Personage of Christ with the word Gospel. However the Quran doesn’t refer to the Gospel in such a way. Instead it makes a pronounced distinction between the Messenger (Jesus) and the Message ( the Gospel).

 

[Dawnofhope]

Even according to the canonical gospels called Mark, Matthew, Luke and John, the Gospel seems to be the message of Jesus, not a particular book.

The Quran says that Jesus was taught the Torah and the Gospel, the tawraath and the Injeel. And the citing in the Quran also suggests that it could be a message, not a printed or written down book. There is no indication that any of the revelations were in written format.

The Quran says that Jesus was taught the book (Al Kithab), and the wisdom (Hikmah), and the Tawraath, and the Injeel. Thus, this idea that every single mention of al kithab is either the injeel in written form or another book like the Zaboor or the Thawraath. Its mentioned separately.

Based on your understanding of the Quran do you think there is any truth or value in the Biblical Gospels?