I have retranslated the verse according to its proper meaning, reffering to the italic part in blue, which indicates that Jesus came to the fig tree expecting ripe figs, ready to eat, not unripe figs. Evidence to that is the Arabic word Taqsh is used in the book of Revelation 16:13, and its equalivent in Greek language is Oolunthus, not sukh. Either you check your sources or you have made a slip or perhaps you was aware of Oolunthus and thought the same word would be used Gospels also, but what ever the reason, I just felt that you need to be corrected on linguistics of Bible. The new interpretation won’t solve any problems for you, it might create more.
MuhammedAli the logic that Jesus could not be God because He did not know all things works both ways. If we could find a scripture where Jesus does know all things, then that would prove that He was God, wouldn't it?
You are waisting my precisous time, i have already answered your this above in these words:
No that wouldnt prove that he is God, it will only prove that Bible is such a mess, and a such a big contradiction that most of the verses contradict each other, and to compensate for these contradictions Christians have devised non-sensical docrtines such has "HypoStatic Union", where a person is God is al-stupid and al-Wise (just using different expressions so you dont get bored reading) at the same time, rather then admit that they have a book which is not worth the ink it is written with the missionary glorifies those very same defects on which a heathenMuslim pukes on, infact not only Muslims any sane person with a full and functional brain, will realise the apparent and yelling truth that bible is contradictory.
YOU NEED TO PROVE TO ME THAT WHY THOSE STATEMENTS ARE NOT CONTRADICTORY WITH EACH OTHER, WHICH PROVE THE MANHOOD OF JESUS WITH WHICH PROVE HIS gODLINESS. AND THE ANSWER I "BELEIVE" IN THE BIBLE HAS WORD OF GOD IS NOT GOOD, OR ANY CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONAL REPLY. Then you present me the verses which you think prove the godliness of Jesus and I will analyze them togather.
He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Tend My sheep" (John 21:17 - NASB).
I have already explained this to you:
Here the Matter is Peter's reply "you know all things" and you say because Peter says Jesus new all things, that means he does know all things, does what peter say, has to be truth? No ofcourse not, Peter doenst know that Jesus doesnt know of that day, or about the fig tree incident, we should judge Jesus on his words not on the words of Peter. Lets suppose Peter was ignorant of this fact, but Jesus wasnt, so if Jesus was honest he would have told him look man i dont know everything, but i tell you why he didnt. YOu alledge Jesus didnt stop Peter when he said you know all things and didnt rectify him, that means Jesus was God-Man. well the reason why he didnt stop him because there was no need for it, Peter didnt mean literally all things, its a way of speaking. Let me explain to you this with a analogy, you will understand it better this way, hopefully. Your parents are very strict they dont let you smoke, but you buy cigrates and smoke them hiding with your mates, one day you return home, and your father is standing with a basefull bat, and calls you and asks you well that person came and told me that you was smoking down the road in the car park, what will you do (not you literally but generally), the person will say honestly daddy, i was with my mate, he knows Everything, honestly daddy i wasnt smoking, here ask Tim I wasnt smoking. Does this boy means literally that Tim knows everything about the universe, and how the universe was created, how the plants grow, does he really mean that this boy is Al-knowing like God, ofcourse not. What the boy means here is that look daddy he knows everything that we did today, togahter and you can ask him about what we did today. The word which i didnt use the the context, we need to understand the statement of Peter in the context, statement of Peter has to be understood in its context, in the context of there Peter's relationship with Jesus, how Peter fallowed Jesus, how honest he was in the fallowing Jesus, etc; you dont need to be God to know about the character of someone who has been hanging aroung with you for years, you will become aware of the people and there intentions when live with them and talk to them, and there behaviour toward you, you know if the person really loves you or hates you, or has anyother motives, so when Peter said you know all things, was reffering to the past dealings with Jesus, how sincere he was, honest and so on, and Jesus knowing all this about Peter also knew how sincere Peter was, and when Jesus asked three times the same question, Peter appealed to his sound character and the sincerity he had shown, jus has the boy said Tim knows everything, yet he didnt knew everything, in the same way Peters statement was not meaning all things. I hope this has put the Biblical verse in its historical perpective.
FOR YOU TO USE THIS VERSE HAS EVIDENCE TO PROVE THAT JESUS KNEW EVERYTHING, FIRST YOU NEED TO REFFUTE MY ABOVE EXPLAINATION WITH EVIDENCE, NOT WITH YOUR MERE REPITIONS. and then i will consider this verse has a sound argument from biblical perspective, but you still will have to deal with it a has a rational perspective, when you acheived the both i will accept the al-knowing of Jesus has fact, why i wont except the biblical bases and accept the al-knowing of Jesus is same has yours for denying the Quran, its not word of God.
This is not a biblical contradiction this shows us Jesus as both God and man. It is not a denial of Him being God, but a confirmation of Him being man as well as God
Hwo is "US" me or you, or you and your christian bretherns, if you mean then dont include me in it. And his Man-God status hinges on your sucessfull reffutation of my reply, please read just one response above this response, to get the guidelines.
Col. 2:9 says, "For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form."
Bible is not what Jesus preached its a compilation of deffective history, its a persons own understanding of the events of Jesus, none of the gospel writers where present nor had seen the events in the life of Jesus, they either are writing from there personel beleife, or writing what they have heard from others, or luke puts it quite candily that his inspiration was not holy spirit but his inspiration was feeling of being better then others, he says many have written down what they heard or was handed down to them by their ancestors who where eye-witnesses to the events, he then goes on to say because he has studied all those traditions from the beginning, meaning from from the young age, or studied them systemeticly, i can write a better then the others, so that the readers know about the authenticity of the things which has been tought. So we assume that after his study he produced the Gospel of Luke (?), in which he mentions things that are not mentioned by other and takes things out has well, indicating the results of his study, what he found right he added it to his excellent theophilus, what he thought was in-accurate or spurious he rejected. The conclution according to the author or Luke (?) is that what ever is not in his Gospel its false, what is confirmed by his Gospel authorative, this puts him against the odds with other Gospel writers, he was inspired by his ego, and the others by Holy Spirit, but for Christians all where inspired by the Holy Spirit, now tell me which part of the Gospels is authorative and the parts which disagree with Luke are authorative because ...
You might assume that i have sidestepped your quotation, but i wrote the above to explain to you that every author of the Gospel was writting what was ACCORDING TO THEM THE TRUTH, each author had a set agenda, he wanted to convey his understanding of the life of Jesus and about Jesus. Some gospels record he reffering to himself has prophet, some has son of man, some has son of god, each has a theological message which it is preaching. And the author of Collossians traditionally considered Paul (but now rejected, its attributed to unknown author) also wanted to preach message so he attributes to Jesus god in human form. Miracles do not prove the godliness of Jesus, becuase if they did then we have many gods, Moses, Solomon and many others. What would be interesting is where the author of the Gospel writes has Jesus directly claiming to be god-himself, we have either Jews alledging him to be god, jews alledging him that he claimed to be God, but each time he rebuked them by using the OT. Which is common the enemys make such allegations to defame a person to flick mud at his sound character.
WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS TO SHOW ME A VERSE WHERE JESUS DIRECTLY HIMSELF CLAIMED TO BE GOD. which you canT. we shouldnt judge someone by what others beleive is the truth, we should judge by what the person himself says.
Jesus was ignorant of the season? maybe it was done on purpose? Jesus knew there were no figs on the tree even at a great distance away, and indeed everyone of the disciples knew that the season for figs was still early a little early. So, in essence Jesus was exposing the disciples to the fact that their nation of Israel was not yet ready to produce fruit for the Lord either. But alas, remember, a fig tree produces not one harvest, but two harvests in a growing season.
Maybe he did it in ignorance or on purpose, but still the fact does not change, has you yourself said he went there to find taqsh, the reason he went there was taqsh not to set the analogy, and the bible says he was hungry just read few verses befre it, clearly indicating he wanted to eat the figs but when he didnt find any he was disapointed (
only can be disapointed when he expected them to be there) when he didnt he cursed the fig tree. If i take your philosophical interpretation that would mean he wanted to show the fruitless-ness of the Jews, when he came to the Jews he expected them to have the spiritual figs, but intead he only found the leaves, only shallow pretentions, only a spiritual apearence
(tree with leaves) but the spiritual fruit, humility, honesty, truthfullness, Law abiding-ness, all was missing, so he cursed the Jewish people (tree) and it withered, one gospel says slowly, another says imediately, one had theological postion on mind regarding the demise of the Jews (they preished gradually) while the other had in mind the effect of Jesus's command, so in his understanding it had to be carried out there and then, both preaching the same thing, but for different reasons.
I just entertained your philosophical notion just to prove to you that I have done my study well, on what i am writing about, :roll:.
Despite your philosophical response, the basic premise has not been changed, even if i take your theological interpretation has valid and forget the literal fig tree, still you have the same problem to contend with, Jesus thought that before he came to the Jews that they are spiritually ready, but when he got the fig tree he found out they are all show-off no fruits. Still you have not reffuted my original argument, you have been explaining to me, these are only theological explanations, lt me reinstate my basic premise, JESUS WAS IGNORANT OF THE FACT, THAT THERE ARE NO HALF SPIRITUALLY DEVELOPED JEWS.
WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS TO CONFESS THAT YOU ARE WRONG, AND JESUS WAS NOT ALL-KNOWING.
:roll:
First of all the above shows me your lack of knowledge concerning the Trinity.
Lack of knowledge? YOu got that wrong, that was lack of brain, and I am not the only one that Lacks the part of brain which understands the Trinity, no one in this world can, nor ever will understand it
God the father is always all knowing, God the father doesnt forget nor is he forgotten. Jesus or God the father both never commited sin, infact Jesus was born free from original sin! God cannot be evil. So please before you start speaking about the trinity, you have to understant the character of God.
What!
Now you going to tell me the character of God? Subhan-allah! Look Jesus forgets, because he was human, its in human nature to forget, if you think he didnt forget then what was the sign of Jonnah about, the Jews came to him for asking him to show a miracle, he replys you evil and adulterous generation no sign shall be given to you except the sign of jonah for has Jonah was in the belly of the whale so shall the son of man be in the heart of hearth. He forgot all the miracles he performed, he didnt tell them go and ask the thousands i fed with few pieaces of bread and fishes, he didnt tell them go and ask that blind man he healed, he didnt tell them ask the demon possed man how i healed him, he didnt tell them go and ask the samritain woman whos daugther her healed, he forgot all of them, he told them the ONLY SIGN, ONLY MIRACLE, would be of Johnah, and you say he didnt forget. And he didnt sin! "You evil and adulterous generation ... " what is that a compliment! No, thats a insult by its intention, weather they where adulterous or not is not the point but the reason behind this utterance was anger, disapointment, and he was angry because he wanted them to fallow him but there tricks, mockery and utter disbeleife in him even after he showed them miracles made him angery, and he in frustration hurled abuse at them, calling them swines, dogs, evil and adulterous generation, all are insults, how many of you will consider me reffering to you has dogs, pigs, has a compliment! They have always been insults because in the jewish religion and in Islamic religion, pig is considered has a filthy animal, and being reffered has swine, dog, was a insult. Which to this day are used has insults, people call each other has pigs and swines, just has Jesus in the Bible does, and this name calling is SIN, especially comming from someone who is reffered has the Son of God, and beleived to be by the deluded has God.
I dont write statements emotionally, i combine the emotions and the beautifull preachings, to make my response, each and every single sentence is not written ignorance, in total awareness, I cant ford to make statements which i have to chew my tonge on later, especially on Christianity. Anything i say has full evidence, weather i give it or not thats a different thing, but when i need to I will.
"...they shall call his name EMMANUEL, which being interpreted is, GOD WITH US."Matthew 1:23
First of all this was the only time when he is reffered has Emmauel, no where else he is reffered has the angel said he will be called. Thus proving that this verse way either a later insertion or a cheap attempt by the gospel writer to attribute one more out of quoted context prophecy. I just have reffered to few commentries and it has been suggested by them that this was a prophecy that was to be fullfiled by Jesus and quoted from Isaiah chapter 7 verse 14, but the context clearly indicates that this birth is not a sign to the later generations but to the king Ahaz who was a king to Judah.
WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS TO PROVE TO ME IN THE CONTEXT, THAT THIS PROPHECY REFFERS TO JESUS, AND JESUS WAS CALLED EMMANUEL ANY WHERE ELSE IN THE BIBLE
If ye believe not that I am he,
ye shall die in your sins." John 8:24
One of the most common trait found among the Christians is "Quoting out of Context", from big Tom to little Dick, too stupid Harry, they all can quote the bible, but all out of context. Only time they bather to read the context is that when they have been cornered, (like the JW's were once at my house) they want you to read the context, otherwise they quote, and quote, and never stop, and they even can go on to prove that Pakistan was prophsied in the Bible (obviously if they quote out of context).
What was the context in which Jesus said this phrase? Some will start readind this instance from beginning (John 8:1-59) to dray the relevent context, but I will draw the context from a different source, thats the history. Jesus was a prophet sent to the Jews, who waited for the arrival of their long waited Messiah who will come and liberate them from the trynical Roman rule, and will re build the temple of Solomon, and so on. Jesus came to the Jews at a time when the Jews where devided among them selves into many sects. Pharisees, Sedducees, Zealots, they all had there own version of Messiah, and they all beleive that there was the true one. When Jesus began preaching the Jews came and asked him "Master if thou be the christ plainly" they are allegeing that he is not clarifying who he is. They again and again send delegations to find out who he really is.
So Jesus says "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.". And there denial of a messenger of God will be denial of God himself, so if they deny Jesus then they are going to die in sin, for not beleiving in a messenger of God who was supposed to be fallowed, and if they didnt they will be punished according to the severity for their denial of Gods Messenger.
To convince the Jesus said "I am he" (he didnt say "I am He"), telling the Jews I am the Messiah. Now the Christians will says well Jesus didnt say I am Messiah, he only said I am he. I will explain this, something like the story of David and Goaliath: "The phalistines bring a gaint to fight Jews, and in return Jews take their Army to fight the Phalistine Army, all the Jews are scared of this gaint Goliath, David says that he will kill this giant, he takes his sling shot, little David puts a stone in his sling shot and hurles a stone at Goliath and the stones hits Goliath, Goliath is dead, and little David is a hero of the nation"
Now suppose two Jewish soilders are talking in a pub after the battle with phalistines, with some civilians who didnt get to see the war and didnt know the result of War and didnt know how the Jewish Army won the fight..
Quote:
JewOne: It was marvalous what David did, I couldnt do that, not in a million year
JewTwo: Thanks to YHWH David was there other was Goliath would have smashed our Army.
JewOne: I aggree
JewTwo: Lets go to the temple and sacrifise a goat.
Now suppose you was sitting in the same pub with these two Jewish soilders, what will you understand, you dont know what David did, nor how he did it, or how big Goliath was? You wouldn't know anything about the detail of the battle, but soon has you are told about how David killed the Goliath, you will understand what the soilders where talking about and why JewTwo said that I couldnt do it in a million year.
In the same why all the Jews where fully aware of Jesus and his claim, he didnt need to repeat the samething again and again, cause they all knew that he is the Messiah but they were not convinved about his title. So to assure them that he said look "I am he" the same messiah you are waiting for.
It only proves that Jesus made the claim for the Messiahship not for God. He again and agian said in the bible that he is sent by the FAther and he also said that the one who is sent is not greater then the one who sent him the only position Jesus has is the Messenger of God, like rest of the Messengers, David, Moses, Abraham, and Solomon.
Jesus said "Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." So his refference to "I am he" could have been a refferenc to this statement, if we look at the biblical context. He had said beleive that "I am he" the light of this world and those who fallow me shall never see darkness. Now a Christian will say look Muhammed Can't b a messenger cause jesus has said that he is the light of the earth, but Jesus said "As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. Joh (9:5)" So according to Jesus has long has he is in the world there can not be anyone else has the light of the world but when he leaves the world then someone else can be the light of the world.
WHAT YOU NEED TO DO IS TO PROVE TO ME THAT MY ABOVE EXPLANATION IS NOT ACCURATE, THEN ONLY, THEN "
I AM HE" IS WORTH SOMETHING.
But you being a Muslim, I understand why you think God can be evil etc...
Allah is, the Source of Peace & Perfection, the King, the Compasinate Merciful, the Creator, the Sustainer, the Helper, the Creator of good, its man that is creator of Evil, and so on.
Sura 39:4 clearly states that God could have taken Himself a son from among his creation, i.e. without the necessity of a consort to father such a son. According to Surah 39:4 God could have a Son, but he doesnt. As Christians we simply believe God does have a Son
There is a difference between a chosen Son, Glory be to Allah! the Wise, with full of wisdom, in surah 33 verse 4 states that if Allah wished to have a son he would have chosen one from among what he has created, and in surah 6 verse 6 Allah states that he created everything, and how can he have a son when Allah doesnt have a wife? The indication is that if god had a wife and his biological son would also be God, therefore if Allah wanted a son he would choose one from what he has created, therefore the chosen son would not be special in anyway, just a son adopted son, surah 33 verse 4-5 explains the status of a adopted son, that he should be called his fathers son, not your own son. There fore If Allah had chosen a son he would have been still called his fathers son, not Son of Allah. In the case of Mary, and her son, Jesus the son of Mary, not son of Allah. I hope that answers your question.
As Christians we simply believe God does have a Son.
The Christians simply dont beleive that God has a son they beleive that the only-begotten or Unique Son, which if you scrutinise the chrisitan Doctrine will yeild the same meaning only begotten-son, and the reasons are given above in one of my either previous responses or in this one. And simply christian doctrine of son is not a normal son, this son is God, like Father, and the chosen son concept was put forward to debunk this hellenistic docrtine.
You say the bible is one big contradiction, intresting. I can give you at least 50 contradictions or errors in the Quran.
Firstly if you give me two millions contradictions in the Quran or prove to me without shadow of the doubt that Quran is all error, will this solve any of contradictions found in Bible?? Secondly I challenge you to bring all the contradictions in the Quran that you have piled-up from various Christian website against the book of Allah, and insh-allah I will explain to you all of them.
Any way before I do present me with the 50 contradictions, I am going to make my life easier by just writing you a little guide, intructing how to understand the Quran, so you can yourself reduce the amount for me, without me pointing out anything, even if you manage to solve one of those contradictions with the help of this guideline, the effort will be worth it.
“Those who anoy Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and in the hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating punishment.” Surah 33:57
I will use either one of these ways to explain:
Present Context: Context of the verse where it is now situated e.g. Surah 33:verse 57, it should be expplained in the context of verses 56-58.
Context of the Entire Section (Rukuh): Using the entire section beginning from verses 53-58
Context of the entire Surah: Studying the entire Surah from beginning point by point explaination, e.g. Surah 33 verses1-73.
Context of Theme: Using all the Quran to explaination, e.g. also adding the verses 28-33 of the Surah 33, and various other verses to explain the accurate meaning
Quranic Context: Using all the Quran has whole to reach a understanding
Historical Context: Historical reasons behind why the verse was revealed.
Meaning of a Word in various different Contexts: the word used in verse 57 for “indah” means in the present context “to anoy” can mean, to vex, to hurt or injure phisically, to insult, to ill-treat by slander.
Quranic Criteria Context: meaning the Criterion, reffering to the Quran
In order to solve the contradictions you will have to use atleast one or two of these methods to the two purposed contradictory verses. The only contradictions I want you to explain to me are in your doctrine of Tri-unity, that’s all, you can use any method that I have outlined in here, and I have out-lined at the beginning of this response, what will sufficently explain to me or to any human being the soundness of this doctrine.
YOU EITHER PROVE TO ME HOW CAN GOD BE, HUMAN AND GOD AT THE SAME TIME:
Wthout Using Your Gibrish
Without Contradiction Logic
With Out Contradicting Bible
It amazes me when Muslims say things like, the bible is not worth the ink its written on etc... when all they do is try to find prophecies concerning Mohammed within this "false" book, why?
With regard to the Muslim looking for prophecies in the OT, NT, to prove the prophethood of Muhammed (pbuh), I don’t thing this is a good practice, first of all we all are forcing our own interpretations on the text, Christians use deut 18:18 to argue there case that Jesus is the coming prophet, and the Muslims have a very strong case with regards this prophecy against Christians, but Jews debunk both of the sides with there contextual explanations. Its got to such a crappy level that one side is saying, Moses either had less/more hair on his head then Muhammed/Jesus, therefore none of them was like Moses, Moses blinked more/less then Jesus/Muhammed there fore none of the two are like Moses, if such is the level of discussion, then why bather with it.
Now should the Muslims be looking for the prophecies in the OT NT, I think yeah, why should we be looking for it, because God has a Justice system, and he will not judge people without first giving them the chance to believe or disbeleive in something, so the punishement will be according to their beleife of disbeleif. God has saved some genuine prophecies in the Bible for those who are searching fo the truth can find the truth from their own books but the standard of discussion should not be gutter level, a honest and objective study should be the attempt not a desperate atttempt to score any prophecy to their respective prophets. I my self feel that Deut 18:18 and one prophecy in the New Testament which begins withs “I have many things to say unto you but ye can not bear them now for how be it when the spirit (prophet) of the truth shall come he shall kind you into all the truth, for what so ever he shall …” these two prophcies are heavily on the side of the Muslims, I do have if’s and but’s about Deut 18:18, but I have not received yet one statifying explanation regarding what Jesus prophecised about the prophet of the truth, thus I am convinced that this is reffering to the advent of prophet Muhammed (pbuh)
No Muslim with a little knowledge of Quran will say everything in the Bible is false, infact the Quran says it’s a watcher over the previous books, could be reffering to Gospel of Matthew Mark Luke, John, Acts and so on, it confirms what is right in them and rejects whats false in them, doesn’t mean that this verse is reffering to the Book of Jesus, or Arabic Injeel of Esa, it says books, it could either reffer to all the books which claim to be religious including OT and NT books, or any other religious books. And a Watchers job is to guard its boundry from intruders, and point out and alarm the others if he finds anything suspicious, this is what the Quran does, it only guards the boundaries of Tawheed (One-ness of Allah) it alarms its readers of the suspicious things, it provides evidence against the intruders to make sure that they are properly judged, it secures its self.
I believe Jesus said I was only sent to the last sheep of Israel, because the Quran confirms this historical fact that he was only sent to the Israels, so the portion of the Bible which says Jesus said that he is only for Jews, according to Quran is genuine in its meaning, they might not be the exact words what Jesus said, but the implications of this words found in the Gosple is authentic. Now if Quran gives authenticity to one part verse of the bible does that mean all the Bible is authenitic? Quran has I am aware of in only in one other place instructs the Rasool-Allah to enquire of the Jews regarding the Exodus, but it could be more, I am not sure about that.
Mohammed used to say to the Christian of his day “Go and look at your Bible, your Bible will tell you what I’m saying is true. “ He appeals to the Bible at least twenty five times, the lesser will always appeal to the greater or that which is equal. Today we have the same Bible that Mohammed was pointing to in his day. It has not changed, so why is there such a conflict not only in these areas but also in so many other crucial teachings?
Ok you state that he appealed to the Jews some 25 times to go and check their scripture, but the reason for his apealing was not because he wasn’t sure about his revelation, he was sure the but Jews where challenging him, tellling him that Quran was false, he got it wrong, Muhammed (pbuh) in order to answer their criticism was told by Allah to tell the Jews (what the Quran has already revealed) for example about the exodus is also mentioned in the OT, it was not Muhammed ignorant, it was the Jews ignorant of their own scripture, and they where critcising Quran saying its wrong here, while there own book OT had the very same thing in it, so he tells them go and wrestle with your book first them come and tell me mine is wrong.
Lets suppose, because Quran confirms one verse of Bible that means all the Bible is of God, what about Quran then doesn’t the Quran say, Jesus was sinless, doesn’t the Quran say Jesus performed miracles, Jesus was born of a virgin, jesus raised the dead, does it mean all the Quran is from God, are you prepared to conceed that all the Quran is from God, just because few verses are also saying the same thing about Jesus has your Bible?
Thirdly you state that you have the same Bible has in the time of Muhammed (pbuh), that’s a lie, first of all the verse on trinity for there are three that bear record in heaven father son and the holy spirit is found to be a later inserition in the text, the scholars suggest that it was a side note on some of the early manuscripts which by exident or deliberately was inserted in the New Testament, but now it has been removed from some versions of the Bible, secondly Bible is not same because catholics have some 8 books more then protestants in their canon, they consider what the Protestants call appochrypha has inspired by Holy Spirit, the Nestorian Christians of Indian state of Kerala still to this day have 22 books of the New Testament, whats known has Peshitta Version, the Greek Orthodox church has all of the books accepted by the Roman Catholic church, plus I Esdras, the Prayer of Manasseh, Psalm 151, and 3 Maccabees. The Slavonic canon adds 2 Esdras, but designates I and 2 Esdras as 2 and 3 Esdras. Other Eastern churches have 4 Maccabees as well, yet all this difference in your Bible, but still some how you maintain that Gospel to this day is same has it was in the time of Muhammed.
That’ts not it, back in mid 18th century there took a debate between a member of hereticacl sect Shia Rafzi, Rahmatullah Kairanvi, with Rev Pfander of Germany. Very well known Orientalist Sir William Muir was present in the audience has moral support for Pfander, out come of that debate was hullimating for Christians of India and Christians of the World. After the event there was a book published by Kairanvi against Christianity, which he sites evidence to prove that there have been many Additions, Omissions, Deletations to the present Bible. The book is called Izhar-ul Haq.
The Quran Confirms the Bible Has Never Been Corrupted, lets have a look at the Quran and see what it says. It is assumed that "changing words from their context" implies that the previous scriptures have been tampered with.
In the words of Allah the Mighty Wise says: “Faha-tuh burhana qum, inqun-tum sadi-qeen” Bring forward your proof if you speak truth … this is a demand for you to bring forward your evidence against the book of Allah, and also for me to bring my evidence against your faith.
Bismillah (In the name of Allah)! Before I start to give you the evidence, I will tell you the method of explanation I am going to use. Al-Furqan Context, or in the Context of the Criterion, there is in the Quran a entire Surah 25 dedicated to this Criterion, telling us what that Criterion is. Let me sumarise the Criterion for you, Allah says:
Verse 1: Blessed is He Who sent down the Criterion to His Servent that it may be an admonition to all Creatures.
The Quran is the Criteria that was sent to Allah’s Servent Muhammed Rasool-Allah, and we will use the Quranic Critera to prove that Quran neither does endorse the Christian Bible nor does it endore the Jewish Bible.
Surah 4:171: “O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of God aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of God, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in God and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for God is one God (Wala Taqoolu Salasah): Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is God as a Disposer of affairs.”
Surah 4:157: “That they said (in boast), "We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Apostle of God";- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not:-“
Commentary: My understanding of the ayah is that Quran says those who differe from the Quran are full of doubts and they are without certain knowledge, to me this show to me on personel level, that it is reffering to the state of the Christian books, and the confusion they have caused in the early period of Christianity, Christians quite literally had hudereds of sects all of these sects had many conflicting believes, many bibles, many differing opinions. But the best example would be of author of Luke, he putting aside all the previous Gosples states that he is writing his gospel to make sure that what they are being taught is the truth, and even his truth acertaining criteria is not been given by him, to show what criteria what method, he used to accept some traditions and reject others, so even his work is mare conjecture, now coming to the last part of the ayah “but they only fallow conjecture” perhaps reffering to the books of Christian Bible, because most of these are based on conjucture, so in my opinion, the accurate meaning wrould be calling the gosples and all the boooks of Christian Bible including apochrypha has mere conjucre, Allah knows best!
Surah 9:30: The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God. That is a saying from their mouth; (in this) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!
Surah 5:46: And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear God.
Commentary: Allah states that the Gospel was sent to Jesus, not to Mark Mathew, Luke, John, etc; the Quran reffers to the Gospel of Jesus, if you have it, bring forward, lets analyze it, because his gospel will agree fully with the Quranic Criteria, if it disaggrees then we know its not his Gospel it’s a forgery.
Surah3:59: The similitude of Jesus before God is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was.
Surah 112: Say: He is God, the One and Only; God, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him.
Surah 98: “Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence,- An apostle from God, rehearsing scriptures kept pure and holy: Wherein are laws (or decrees) right and straight. Nor did the People of the Book make schisms, until after there came to them Clear Evidence. And they have been commanded no more than this: To worship God, offering Him sincere devotion, being true (in faith); to establish regular prayer; and to practise regular charity; and that is the Religion Right and Straight. Those who reject (Truth), among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures. Those who have faith and do righteous deeds,- they are the best of creatures. Their reward is with God: Gardens of Eternity, beneath which rivers flow; they will dwell therein for ever; God well pleased with them, and they with Him: all this for such as fear their Lord and Cherisher.”
Commentary: The Surah begins with indicating that people of the book (Jews & Christians) would not have abondened there old ways, religion and there old practical life style until they had received a Clear-Evidence against them, and this clear evidence was Messenger of Allah, who would rehearse to them (Jews, Christians, and to the Polythiests) scripture kept pure and holy, which is indication that Christians and Jewish scriptures where not Pure and Holy, and this Messenger was going to bring the Laws Right and Straight, there was need for the Laws that where right and Straight because Jewish Laws of Old Testament where not Right and Straight. Then the surah goes on to say “Those who reject among the people of truth and among the polythiests will be in hell-fire to dwell therein.” Indicating that neither do the Jews have any special bond between them, nor for the Christians is any special treatment on the day of Judgement, no salvation through Jesus, you simply would go to hell if you deny the truth, the Quran.
Conclusion: “Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of God … Say not "Trinity" : desist: it will be better for you: for God is one God … but they killed him not, nor crucified him … The Jews call 'Uzair a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the son of God … ) they but imitate what the unbelievers of old used to say. God's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth! … We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light … The similitude of Jesus before God is as that of Adam; He created him from dust, then said to him: "Be". And he was … He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him … ,- An apostle from God, rehearsing scriptures kept pure and holy.”
If any verse of the Gospel of Jesus goes against summary given or any other part of the Quran, then it is assumed that the Gospel of Jesus has been changed, but When I say Gospel of Jesus I am not reffering to the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, or anyother New Testament book, strickly reffering to the book of Jesus that was given to him by Allah. This is the Criterion of Allah, now if you feel comfertable you can even apply this to your Own Bible, and see what colour it turns out it.
Several responses are in order. First, even if this were the case this would only be referring to the Jews, and even then, not all of the Jews
First of all are you here to defend the Jewish Bible or New Testament, we are not discussing the Jewish or Christian character, if they where pious or devils incarnate, what we need to discuss is the application of the message of the Quran, is it limited to one group Jews & Christians in Makkah or Madinah or is the message of the Quran universal. Surah 34 verse 28, states that Muhammed Rasool-Allah is a prophet sent to all the mankind, has a Universal prophet, therefore his teaching are not for one group of people, but to all mankind, and this includes all the Jews, Christians, Hindu’s, Budhists, Sikhs, has worthy of receiving the message of Quran. And has a result of this Universality of the Quranic message Allah no where in the Quran when giving a Command reffers to anyone by name, for example the very first verse of the Quran revealed was “Iqra bismi rabbik-allah zee khalaq …” means “Read in the name of your Lord …” in its historical context in it was revealed to Muhammed (pbuh) instructing him to read, but had Allah said “O Muhammed! Read in the name of your Lord …” that would have restricted the command for Muhammed (pbuh), thus it woould not have been obligation on me to learn, educate my self. In the same way no where the Quran mentions the name of the Christian sect it is reffering to, because if it reffered to a particular sect then for the rest would have easy excuse “this doesn’t reffer to us” but Allah keeping in mind the Universality of the Quran did not use any word which made a verse stick to only one group of people, nation, tribe, colour of people, family, or sect.
“The Quran testifies that there were many from the People of the Book who wouldn’t deal falsely with God’s Word: "Not all of them are alike. Some of the People of the Book are an upright people. They recite the signs (or verses) of God in the night season and they bow down worshipping. They believe in God and the last day. They command what is just, and forbid what is wrong and they hasten in good works, and they are of the righteous. S. 3:113-114 “
With due respect to your exposition I would like to point out the correction, the Quran does not talk about the Bible nor Gospel of Jesus, nor does it say many will not deal falsely with God’s word. The context of the ayah 113 is from verses 110 to 117.
Surah 3:110: “Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in God. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.“
Surah 3:113: ”Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right): They rehearse the Signs of God all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration.”
First of Allah is saying the best of the people raised for mankind are the Muslims, and those Muslims are the best of mankind those who enjoin the good and forbid what is wrong, then Allah goes on to say If Jews and Christians had faith it would have been better for them but MOST of them are perverted transgressors, but there are few who are of a upright character, good character, but they pray to Allah in adoration and with sincerity, they fast and five charity and do good works, but there failure to do have faith in Allahs Quran, will lead them to fire of hell, and then Allah goes on to say all they spend in charity, all there good is like a harvest which is only destroyed by a frosty weather, indicating that all of there good actions are washed away just because they don’t have righteous faith if the deen of Islam. Allah knows best!
Nowhere in the Surah Allah mentions anything about Jews or Christians fiddling with book, Allah is talking about there character. May Allah guide you to the path of truth.
"Of the people of Moses there is a section who guide and do justice in the light of truth ... After them succeeded an (evil) generation: They inherited the Book, but they chose (for themselves) the vanities of this world, saying (for excuse): ‘(Everything) will be forgiven us.’ (Even so), if similar vanities came their way, they would (again) seize them. Was not the covenant of the Book taken from them, that they would not ascribe to Allah anything but the truth? AND THEY STUDY WHAT IS IN THE BOOK. But best for the righteous is the home in the Hereafter. Will ye not understand? As to those WHO HOLD FAST BY THE BOOK and establish regular prayer, - never shall We suffer the reward of the righteous to perish." S. 7:159, 169-170 A.“
Again you are twisting the words of the Quran to reinterpret them according to your own preconceived believes, now I am beginning to suspect that you are not doing this ingnorance but deliberately, in attempt to lead me astray, if that’s your mentality then you are debating with a wrong person, because you will not succeed in any of your ideas that you have planned, but anyway the next response from you will show your real intentions, sincere or devilish, all will be revealed. Any how I will explain to you both verses of the Quran accurately has they supposed to be understood.
Surah 7:159: Of the people of Moses there is a section who guide and do justice in the light of truth.
Surah 7:160: We divided them into twelve tribes or nations. We directed Moses by inspiration, when his (thirsty) people asked him for water: "Strike the rock with thy staff": out of it there gushed forth twelve springs: Each group knew its own place for water. We gave them the shade of clouds, and sent down to them manna and quails, (saying): "Eat of the good things We have provided for you": (but they rebelled); to Us they did no harm, but they harmed their own souls.
Surah 7:161: And remember it was said to them: "Dwell in this town and eat therein as ye wish, but say the word of humility and enter the gate in a posture of humility: We shall forgive you your faults; We shall increase (the portion of) those who do good."
Surah 7:162: But the transgressors among them changed the word from that which had been given them so we sent on them a plague from heaven. For that they repeatedly transgressed.
In this section of the Quran nothing abouth the Torah is mentioned, Quran mentions that they where given a word which they where ask to say and enter the gate in humility, but some among them changed the word to something else, therefore Allah punished the companions of the Moses. Another point it is not reffering to the Jews of Prophet Muhammed’s (pbuh) era, it was reffering to the people of Moses, his imedient fallowers, secondly every mulism believes that has long Moses was present with Jewish people the Torah was unchanged, uncorrupted, but when Moses died the Torah, was corrupted by the rebellious transgressors, which I will clarify in the next refference.
Surah 7:168: We broke them up into sections on this earth. There are among them some that are the righteous, and some that are the opposite. We have tried them with both prosperity and adversity: In order that they might turn (to us).
Surah 7: 169: After them succeeded an (evil) generation: They inherited the Book, but they chose (for themselves) the vanities of this world, saying (for excuse): "(Everything) will be forgiven us." (Even so), if similar vanities came their way, they would (again) seize them. Was not the covenant of the Book taken from them, that they would not ascribe to God anything but the truth? and they study what is in the Book. But best for the righteous is the home in the Hereafter. Will ye not understand?
Bismillah! Ayah begins with telling the reader that the bani-Israel was dispersed all over the world, and they where tried with prosperity and adversity, because Allah wanted them to return to the right path, but after those people a evil generation succeeded there predecessors who began to indulge them selves of the worldly matters and use to say in excuse that we will get everything , then Allah goes on to ask has not the covenant of the book taked away from them, here Allah has posed a question to the reader, and the answer has to be contemplative and not just a afirmative or negation, a thought full response would be yes the covenant was taked away from the bani israel, because if the covenant was still with Israel then the Quran itself would not have been revealed, and the Torah still would have been in the hands of the Jews. And the reason the covenant was taken of the book was taken away from them was to prevent the evil generation from ascribing falsehood to Allah, and then Allah reminds the evil generation of the Jews that the life of hereafter is better then in this world.
The passage says nothing about changing words from the text of Scripture. In fact, when we consult the earliest Muslim views we soon discover that the Jews were accused of changing words by misinterpreting the text.
This is half baked truth the Jews where charged with altering text of the Torah, concealing the passages of Torah, distorting the meaning, they where also charged with twisting the words of the Quran not only Torah. Just before I proceed further I would like to explain to you that there are many Hadiths which use the word Torah when reffering to the Old Testament, the reason behind this was that the term Old Testament was not used by the Arab Jews they reffered to the Old Testament has Torah, so when Rasool-Allah reffered to the Old Testament has Torah, it doesn’t mean that he is reffering to the Torah of Moses, because Torah of Moses only included the Laws regarding eating, drinking, crime and punishment, what is not reffered or then reffered has the Torah has nothing to do with Moses, these books are not written by Moses at all infact the books of Old Testament bear wittness to this fact them selves, many places it is written Moses said this and God said that, but if Moses had written the first five books of old Testament then he would have wrote, I said this to God, and God said to me, the style of the Old Testament indicates that it was written by someone else a third person, who has left his imprint on the Old Testament.
Another thing was that Islam didn’t change the words, Islam didn’t concot new words to explain the difference, but it changed its meaning, forexample the word shariah means, teming a wild horse, or training a wild horse for practical use, but Islam gave this word a New dimention, a new meaning, civilising a human being making human a sensiable creature, or the word Jihad was used to mean a struggle, but Islam gave it a new definition according to the context of the word, it meant millitary struggle, struggle with human’s own urges, strugggle with pen, struggle with mouth, these all new meanings where accociated with Jihad after the revelation of Quran.
Now getting to the point, in case you thought I was going to sidestep the main issue. In the same way Islam also added new dimentions to the word Torah, Torah of Jews, and Torah of Moses, when we have a hadith which states that Torah has been altered, then it is taken to mean the Jewish Torah, when a hadith says that Torah is still preserved and no one can change the words of Allah in Torah, it means it is reffering to the original Torah of Moses. I hoope this explains to you well what I am getting at.
The matter here I will explain further is that I am not a hadith expert, infact my knowledge of hadith is nil, almost to none. But what ever little I know about it I will use it in here, and if I need corrections I will make later.
Before a Hadith can be used has a peace of evidence to prove anything few things are needed to be pointed out. A Hadith has to be Authentic, with a sound Isnad (chain of Transmission), in aggreement with Quran, the majority opinion regarding the Hadith, if a Hadith lacks any of the above it will be considered false and will be rejected totally, no second thought given unless case is proven with clear arguments against it.
Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn 'Abbas said that the Ayah means they alter and add although none among Allah's creation CAN REMOVE THE WORDS OF ALLAH FROM HIS BOOKS, THEY ALTER AND DISTORT THEIR APPARENT MEANINGS. Wahb bin Munabbih said, "The Tawrah and Injil REMAIN AS ALLAH REVEALED THEM, AND NO LETTER IN THEM WAS REMOVED." Then,