Islam The Injil is the New Testament.

[Ken Rank]

Are you just stupid or what, this has been shown to you time and time and time again, can you not learn from the many people who have correct you false belief of history.
remember you great quote when defending the Quran, you said
"It's not the interpretation it's about the context. If you want to understand a book, you can't cut peaces out of context and ask questions. You need to know about language, environment, circumstances, history to understand the context of a statement."

Start applying your own standards and you my stop embarrassing the Islamic faith.

Derailing the thread (a little) was bad, calling people stupid is good?

 

[Ken Rank]

Ken
with respect I have asked you to keep your conversion to the thread topic and again I see you discussing textual criticism and thus purposefully derailing answers to the question at hand.

You are welcome to start your own thread if this is what you wish to discuss.

Regards Doug

I will leave the thread Doug. But... while I agree my last post was off topic (my apologies) it was >>YOU<< who commented on the Arabic NT first and I simply responded with information that would make the case against that. So really... this was the first time. In any event, I will not reply in this thread again.

 

[Limo]

Are you just stupid or what,

Do you call me stupid ?

I'll not pay it back,
I can say about you more but I'll not,
Allah told us in Quran to debate with good words and to say to people like you سلاما peace up on you

End of discussion with you

 

[Limo]

Derailing the thread (a little) was bad, calling people stupid is good?

This is normal when people can't reason their belief and don't have a logical response

 

[Limo]

And how dose this support you case for the NT been authenticated by Muhammad in the Quran?

Why do you ask a stupid ?
I told you end of discussion

 

[DWA2DAY]

Do you call me stupid ?

I'll not pay it back,
I can say about you more but I'll not,
Allah told us in Quran to debate with good words and to say to people like you سلاما peace up on you

End of discussion with you

Hi Limo
Please accept my apologies for saying you were stupid this was not right and unfair of me to do so.

Regards Doug

 

[Limo]

Hi Limo
Please accept my apologies for saying you were stupid this was not right and unfair of me to do so.

Regards Doug

Apology accepted.
Regards

 

[Sammy-San]

In college I had a friend from Qatar who was a devout Sunni. He claimed that the original manuscripts of the Christian scriptures were kept in Mecca. He had read them in Arabic. I bought him a Bible in Arabic (American Bible Society version) and he remarked how differently it read. We studied the gospel of John together.

So Injil and Gospel aren't the same, but Injil is the name for the belief of a lost gospel?

 

[Niblo]

So Injil and Gospel aren't the same, but Injil is the name for the belief of a lost gospel?

Yes. The Injil and the four Gospels are not one and the same...although there may well be traces of the former in the latter. The Sermon on the Mount, for example (at the very least, elements of that Sermon, passed down by oral means..and then written down). Possibly.

 

[Jadis40]

You either misunderstood him or he tells lies. I never heard about this copy.
If there are original copies of Injiil, it would be in Hebrew or Aramaic or Syriac.
The oldest know Arabic Translation is called Mt. Sinai Arabic Codex 151, was created in ACE 867.

May be ancient Arab Christians have their Arabic copies but no trace for it now.
Regards

Except what we call the New Testament was not originally written in Hebrew, Aramaic or Syriac. The original copies were written in Greek - specifically koine Greek. Greek during those days would be equivalent to English today, in that a lot of people have it as either their first language or know it as a second language. It was a carry-over from Alexander's conquest and during the 1st Century A.D. It was the language of scholarship.

Also the idea that the original copies were kept in Mecca is just a fairy tale.

 

[DWA2DAY]

Yes. The Injil and the four Gospels are not one and the same...although there may well be traces of the former in the latter. The Sermon on the Mount, for example (at the very least, elements of that Sermon, passed down by oral means..and then written down). Possibly.

If this is your truth then by implication you are denying your very own teaching of Mohammad who in the Quran confirms held the gospel / Ingil in his hands.
Therefore you need to show how, were, who and when it has changed since Mohammed had it? As I can show it has not.
However Islam fails to account for this or answer this question?

THEREFORE ISLAM IS FALSE.

See post # for references.

 

[Niblo]

If this is your truth then by implication you are denying your very own teaching of Mohammad who in the Quran confirms held the gospel / Ingil in his hands.
Therefore you need to show how, were, who and when it has changed since Mohammed had it? As I can show it has not.
However Islam fails to account for this or answer this question?

THEREFORE ISLAM IS FALSE.

See post # for references.

Hi Doug.

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.

There is no doubt that the New Testament Gospels were written after the lifetime of Yeshua (radi Allahu ‘anhu). Therefore they cannot be the ‘ʾInjīl’ mentioned in the Qur’an. 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).

It is quite clear from this verse that Yeshua (radi Allahu ‘anhu) was given the ʾInjīl (Gospel) complete; how else could it have been ‘a guidance, light and confirmation of the Torah’?

Have a great day, and very best regards.

 

[DWA2DAY]

Hi Doug.

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.

There is no doubt that the New Testament Gospels were written after the lifetime of Yeshua (radi Allahu ‘anhu). Therefore they cannot be the ‘ʾInjīl’ mentioned in the Qur’an. 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).

It is quite clear from this verse that Yeshua (radi Allahu ‘anhu) was given the ʾInjīl (Gospel) complete; how else could it have been ‘a guidance, light and confirmation of the Torah’?

Have a great day, and very best regards.

Please get real, read your Quran together with the Tafsir and answer the question? Reinterpretation and gymnastic do not apply in the real world. Mohammed had access to the Bible as we know it, it was taught to him by his nice or cousin as per your traditions. The only person you fooling is your self.
All reference are in post # 1.

secondly if we accept what you are saying is true then the quran contradicts itself. since the Quran claims it is free from contradiction and preserved by Allah, then Quran by your argument is then contradictory and false and therefore not the revelation of Allah but that made up by Mohammad.

 

[Niblo]

The only person you fooling is your self.
All reference are in post # 1.

In post 1 you write:

‘From the above Surahs it clear states the Injil or Gospels (Mathew Mark Luke and John) was given to Jesus by Allah. It further states the Injil is a book just as the Quran and the Torah are books that were sent down by Allah.’

My question is simply this: How could the Injil be the four the Gospels, when they did not exist until decades after Yeshua’s ministry had ended?

It would be great if you could provide an answer to this question.

PS: I don't know where the 'Attached Files' box below this text has come from. It is not part of my reply to you.

 

[Jadis40]

To answer the question - yes, there is no denying that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were written after Jesus was born, crucified, resurrected and his ascension back into Heaven. They were written as a way of having a record of what had happened while Jesus was on the earth. The general consensus is that Paul's letters were written first, and the first Gospel written was Mark. But they are still records of the "gospel" which simply means "good news". Gospel, in Christianity, means the whole of what Jesus Christ did in his sacrificial death upon the cross, his resurrection, and a restoration of a relationship with God through belief in what Christ did for us. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are records of those events.

But this "Injil" you speak of has never existed. Jesus was an observant Jew, and the only scriptures he would have had were what we call the Old Testament, which included the Torah, Psalms, writings of the prophets and Proverbs.

 

[DWA2DAY]

In post 1 you write:

‘From the above Surahs it clear states the Injil or Gospels (Mathew Mark Luke and John) was given to Jesus by Allah. It further states the Injil is a book just as the Quran and the Torah are books that were sent down by Allah.’

My question is simply this: How could the Injil be the four the Gospels, when they did not exist until decades after Yeshua’s ministry had ended?

It would be great if you could provide an answer to this question.

PS: I don't know where the 'Attached Files' box below this text has come from. It is not part of my reply to you.

Ok Nibilo, Let me take you through the eight steps to prove to you how wrong your faith is.

Step 1
Do you agree that Isa was a prophet of Islam like Moses and Abraham and that Allah gave him the Ingil. Reference to surah 19:23-33 and 42:13.

Answer YES or NO

Step 2
Isa had Jewish followers that converted to Islam. Referance Surah 3:52 and 5:111.

Answer YES or NO

Step 3
Allah promises that these believers will be superior to disbelievers and will be here till the resurrection. Reference Surah 3:55

Answer YES or NO

Look forward to your reply. Then we can move on to the next steps.

 

[Niblo]

To answer the question - yes, there is no denying that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were written after Jesus was born, crucified, resurrected and his ascension back into Heaven. They were written as a way of having a record of what had happened while Jesus was on the earth. The general consensus is that Paul's letters were written first, and the first Gospel written was Mark. But they are still records of the "gospel" which simply means "good news". Gospel, in Christianity, means the whole of what Jesus Christ did in his sacrificial death upon the cross, his resurrection, and a restoration of a relationship with God through belief in what Christ did for us. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are records of those events.

But this "Injil" you speak of has never existed. Jesus was an observant Jew, and the only scriptures he would have had were what we call the Old Testament, which included the Torah, Psalms, writings of the prophets and Proverbs.

An excellent answer.

I would not expect you, as a Christian, to accept the existence of the Injil. This is an article of Faith for the Muslims. Your essential point is quite clear, though: The Injil is not the Gospels. In this regard, you and I are one

 

[DWA2DAY]

An excellent answer.

I would not expect you, as a Christian, to accept the existence of the Injil. This is an article of Faith for the Muslims. Your essential point is quite clear, though: The Injil is not the Gospels. In this regard, you and I are one

If this is what you say is true, then you your self are stating the Quran is false and corrupted. Reference Surah 5:43-46, 3:3, 3:48, 5:47, 5:68, 5;110, 7:157, 9:111, 48:29.
This asked the question what else do you wish to ignore from the Quran. Make a decisions! Either your Holy Book is a direct revelation from Allah which must be followed or is is not?
You can not have it both ways, when and if it suits your argument.

I still wait your reply to post #56. But I expect you will not answer as you are aware the result is Islam fail;s and is proved a false religion.

 

[Niblo]

There are those who argue that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) copied the Qur’an from other sources; either from the Apocrypha or from the Bible itself.

The first problem with this argument is that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) was illiterate and could not copy what he could not read. Had he been literate his enemies - the pagan Arabs in Mecca - would have wasted no time in exposing him. His literacy would have been all too easy to prove. There is no record of any such accusation.

However, let us assume that he could, indeed, read and write.

There is no evidence whatsoever that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) could understand any language other than Arabic. The first Arabic translation of what Christians call the ‘Old Testament’ was not produced until some two hundred years after his death. The first Arabic translation of the ‘New Testament’ did not appear until a thousand years after his death.

Sidney Griffith writes:

‘All one can say about the possibility of a pre-Islamic, Christian version of the Gospel in Arabic is that no sure sign of its actual existence has yet emerged.’ (‘The Gospel In Arabic: An Enquiry Into Its Appearance In The First Abbasid Century’).

Ernst Würthwein writes:

‘With the victory of Islam the use of Arabic spread widely, and for Jews and Christians in the conquered lands it became the language of daily life. This gave rise to the need of Arabic versions of the Bible, which need was met by a number of versions mainly independent and concerned primarily for interpretation.’ (‘The Text Of The Old Testament, 1988’).

It is clear that no Arabic translations of the Bible or the Apocrypha existed during the lifetime of Muhammad (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam).

There are those who argue that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) obtained his source material - not from written sources directly - but from other persons.

Two such people are cited. The first is Waraqa Ibn Nawfal (a pagan turned Christian). He is reported (in Sahih al-Bukhari) to have had a conversation with the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) shortly after the latter’s first encounter with the Angel Gabriel. The Prophet was looking for an explanation of what he had seen and heard. Ibn Nawful is reported to have answered: ‘This is the same one (Gabriel) who keeps the secrets whom Allāh had sent to Moses. I wish I were young and could live up to the time when your people (the pagans of Mecca) would turn you out.’

The Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) then asked: ‘Will they drive me out?’ Waraqa replied in the affirmative and said: ‘Anyone who came with something similar to what you have brought was treated with hostility; and if I should remain alive till the day when you will be turned out then I would support you strongly.’

Bukhari tells us that Ibn Nawfal died a few days after this conversation. The claim that he taught the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) is bunkum.

The second person cited is Salman the Persian, a Zoroastrian who converted to Christianity, and who journeyed to Syria to learn more about his religion. From there, he travelled to the Hijaz. He was seized; sold into slavery; and taken to Madinah; where, eventually, he met the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam).

This meeting took place after more than two-thirds of the Qur’an (including the stories of those Prophets mentioned in the Bible) had already been revealed. Salman was so impressed by the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam), and by his Message, that he became a Muslim.

The burden of proof rests with those who say that the Prophet (sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam) authored the Qur’an. Let them present their proofs.

 

[Niblo]

Ok Nibilo, Let me take you through the eight steps to prove to you how wrong your faith is.

Step 1
Do you agree that Isa was a prophet of Islam like Moses and Abraham and that Allah gave him the Ingil. Reference to surah 19:23-33 and 42:13.

Answer YES or NO

Step 2
Isa had Jewish followers that converted to Islam. Referance Surah 3:52 and 5:111.

Answer YES or NO

Step 3
Allah promises that these believers will be superior to disbelievers and will be here till the resurrection. Reference Surah 3:55

Answer YES or NO

Look forward to your reply. Then we can move on to the next steps.

In šāʾ Allāh I shall attempt to answer these question - fully - due course.