Islam The Injil is the New Testament.

[DWA2DAY]

The Quran makes the following statements about the Injil or Gospels (Defined as the New Testament books called Mathew Mark, Luke and John), to avoid any confusing or claim of misrepresentation of the context of the Quran on the part of the reader I have added the Tafsir (Arabic word for exegesis) :-

Surah 5:46
46 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 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).
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
And We caused Jesus son of Mary to follow in their that is the prophets’ footsteps confirming the Torah before him; and We gave to him the Gospel wherein is guidance from error and light an exposition of the rulings confirming musaddiqan is a circumstantial qualifier the Torah before it the rulings contained therein and as a guidance and an admonition to the God-fearing.

Surah 57:27
27 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. But monasticism they invented - We ordained it not for them - only seeking Allah's pleasure, and they observed it not with right observance. So We give those of them who believe their reward, but many of them are evil-livers.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
Then We sent to follow in their footsteps Our messengers and We sent to follow Jesus son of Mary and We gave him the Gospel and We placed in the hearts of those who followed him kindness and mercy. But as for monasticism namely abstention from women and seclusion in monasteries they invented it an innovation on their part — We had not prescribed it for them We did not enjoin them to it; but they took it on — only seeking God’s beatitude. Yet they did not observe it with due observance for many of them abandoned it and rejected the religion of Jesus and embraced the religion of their then king. However many of them did remain upon the religion of Jesus and they believed in our Prophet when he came. So We gave those of them who believed in him their reward; but many of them are immoral.

Surah 19:30
30 He spake: Lo! I am the slave of Allah. He hath given me the Scripture and hath appointed me a Prophet,
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
He said ‘Lo! I am God’s servant. He has given me the Scripture namely the Gospel and made me a prophet.

Surah 3:3
3 He hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before it, even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
He has revealed to you O Muhammad s the Book the Qur’ān enveloped by the truth with veracity in what it announces confirming what was before it of Books; and He revealed the Torah and the Gospel

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. Expanding on this the Quran continues with the following set of statements regarding the Injil:-

Surah 5:47
47 Let the People of the Gospel judge by that which Allah hath revealed therein. Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are evil-livers.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
We said So let the People of the Gospel judge according to what God has revealed therein of rulings a variant reading of wa’l-yahkum ‘let them judge’ is wa-li-yahkuma making it a supplement to that which is governed by the previous verb ātaynāhu ‘We gave to him’. Whoever does not judge according to what God has revealed — those are the wicked.

Surah 5:68
68 Say O People of the Scripture! Ye have naught (of guidance) till ye observe the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto you from your Lord. That which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) from thy Lord is certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them. But grieve not for the disbelieving folk.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
Say ‘O People of the Scripture you have no basis in religion on which to rely until you observe the Torah and the Gospel and what was revealed to you from your Lord’ by implementing what is therein including believing in me Muhammad s. And what has been revealed to you from your Lord of the Qur’ān will surely increase many of them in insolence and disbelief because of their disbelief in it; so do not grieve for the disbelieving folk if they do not believe in you in other words do not be concerned with them.

Surah 7:157
157 Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
those who follow the Messenger the uninstructed Prophet Muhammad s whom they will find inscribed in their Torah and Gospel in name and description enjoining them to decency and forbidding them indecency making lawful for them the good things which were forbidden to them by their Law and making unlawful for them the vile things such as carrion and the like and relieving them of their burden their onus and the shackles the hardships that they used to bear such as the requirement to kill oneself as a repentance and the severing of that part that had come into contact with any impurity. Then those who believe in him from among them and honour revere him and help him and follow the light that has been revealed with him namely the Qur’ān they are the ones who will prosper’.

Surah 6:114
114 Shall I seek other than Allah for judge, when He it is Who hath revealed unto you (this) Scripture, fully explained? Those unto whom We gave the Scripture (aforetime) know that it is revealed from thy Lord in truth. So be not thou (O Muhammad) of the waverers.
Tafsir al-Jalalayn
114 "Shall I seek a judge other than God, when He is the One who revealed to you the Book, explained in detail?" Those to whom We gave the Book know that it is the truth revealed from your Lord. So do not be of those who doubt.


The above verses make clear that the Injil is the book of the Christians. Thus the following can derived from the Quran as fact.

· The Injil refers to the New Testament.

· The book that is with them and which they believe in is the bible as the Christians had in the 7th century when Muhammad was alive. Therefore the bible we have today.

· The author of the Quran even gives a warning the Christians to fully obey (the Torah and) the Injil that they have.


Problem #1

When we look at the New Testament, the book which is the Scripture of the Christians, we see that it nowhere makes the claim that it is a book that was "given to Jesus". Christians and Muslims will agree the New Testament consists of several books that were written by followers of Jesus (under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) AFTER the ascension of Jesus. Most defiantly not a book handed to Jesus, if no mention of this is made in the New Testament Manuscript, historical teaching of the early Church or ant tradition we know off we are left with one of two choices:-


Therefore, the Injil can EITHER be a book given to Jesus,

OR

It can be the book that the Christians hold as they Holy Scriptures.

But It Can Not Be Both.


Reconciling Problem #1

Muhammad was unlettered, that is could not read or write and apparently assumed that the Scripture of the Christians (and Jews) would be very similar to the Quran, the book which he thought he received from Allah. However, Muhammad was clearly ignorant of the matter. The essential nature of the Quran and the Bible are very different. A book "given to Jesus" in a similar way as Muhammad claims to have received the Quran does not exist and Christians have never claimed that such a book existed at any time.

Therefore the claim of Surah 5:46 (and we bestowed on him the Gospel) is merely a wrong idea that sprang from the mind of Muhammad.


Problem #2

Muslims claim the Injil has been lost, and would be a point for consideration if the author of the Quran made only statements like those found in Surah 5:46 and 19:30. Muslims could have said the Injil of Jesus was simply lost or Jesus indeed received such a book but, somehow, it disappeared. Further Muslims also could have claimed that the New Testament clearly is something very different from the Injil as defined by the Quran, and could have concluded that therefore they do not believe in the Christian New Testament since the Quran does not endorse it.

However, if we follow the Islamic faith and tradition the Quran id Allahs word unchanged and perfect thus we cannot avoid the balance of the statement in the Quran about the Injil. The Quran identifies the Injil as the Scripture of the Christians.

Therefore, since the Injil is the book of the Christians, the Quran makes a blatantly wrong claim about the basic nature of the Injil. It neither is nor ever was a book given to Jesus.


Reconciling Problem #2

How could this error arise in the mind of Muhammad? As with other so called revelations Muhammad imposes his own ideas into the Quran. He may have heard statements like in the first verse of the Gospel according to Mark:

“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, ...”

And mistakenly thought that this meant the same as the book presented to him in the cave by the spirit of a Angel of light. Therefore Muhammad projected his own experience of receiving revelation of a book (the Quran) on Jesus and simply assumed that the book of Jesus that was held sacred by his followers must also have been a book given to Jesus (like the sacred book of the Muslims is the book given to Muhammad). However, Muhammad was wrong about this, and this mistake exposes the Quran as a forgery. The Quran is not divine revelation but a collection of mistaken assumptions by its author.

But the Bible is Corrupted!

Muslim are open about that anything that contradicts the Quran is a fabrication, false or corrupted. But this does not solve problem. Here are two reasons why this is not a solution:-

Firstly, the Quran never claims that the Injil is corrupted. There are certain accusations against the Jews, but no charge that the Christians corrupted their Scripture.

Secondly, no Christian says there are not scribble and transmission errors in the Bible, however non that effect the message and or doctrines of faith. Most defiantly none that would explain the fundamental difference in the nature of the Quran and New Testament.

For illustration: The Quran is (allegedly) a book that was "sent down" from Allah to Muhammad. It was (supposedly) not written by Muhammad but given to him by Allah. On the other hand, the Hadith are memories of the companions and followers of Muhammad, formulated and written up by Muslims long after the death of Muhammad. They are their recollection of what Muhammad said and did.

Would it be possible for anyone to change the Quran (the book given to Muhammad) into a collection of hadiths without the Muslim community realizing that their scripture had changed into something entirely different?

Without doubt, the Muslim answer will be a resounding NO. But if that is impossible for the Muslim book and community, why would any Muslim think that this would have been possible in the Christian community? Originally, the Christians had a "book given to Jesus" but one day they woke up and their scripture had turned into a collection of writings by followers of Jesus and nobody realized the change, and nobody protested against it? Believing such a theory demands a lot of blind faith in the Quran. It is impossible. Anyone with the least bit of common sense will have to conclude that this cannot possibly have happened, and this implies that the author of the Quran simply made an error regarding the nature of the Christian Scripture.

Therefore we can conclude the Injil is the same as the New Testament of Mohammad’s time, Textual history confirm since 600AD to date there are no changes in the New Testament, this is confirmed in silence as the Quran does not state the bible is corrupted. Thus the Quran support the Bible of the Christians as we have it today as authentic and the scripture used by Christians.

 

[Truth light]

There is no reference to the Bible in the Quran whatsoever. The Quran mentions the Taurat and the Injil .
The Injil is translated as the Gospel revealed to prophet Jesus. The Gospel given to Jesus, NOT Matthew, Luke or John.

It is not that the Christians have changed the original, but rather they have the wrong book, altogether.

 

[DWA2DAY]

There is no reference to the Bible in the Quran whatsoever. The Quran mentions the Taurat and the Injil .
The Injil is translated as the Gospel revealed to prophet Jesus. The Gospel given to Jesus, NOT Matthew, Luke or John.

It is not that the Christians have changed the original, but rather they have the wrong book, altogether.

Prove it then as this is not what your Quran says. See post #1
Failing which we have no choice but to accept the Quran's view as th truth.

Regards Doug

 

[Ken Rank]

When we look at the New Testament, the book which is the Scripture of the Christians, we see that it nowhere makes the claim that it is a book that was "given to Jesus".

But the Bible is Corrupted!

Between this post and another I just read from you, Doug, I am wondering if you were honest when you checked "Christian" in your profile. But I could be reading you wrong and will assume your intentions are true and address the above.

Why would Yeshua have claimed the NT, written AFTER his death, be something that was given to him? What was given to him in terms of Scripture was the Torah and Prophets, and he taught from them alone and showed how they pointed to him. The NT begins by giving 4 independent accounts of Yeshua's life and then we see more in terms of history (Acts, the beginning of the movement after Yeshua) and then letters... sent by disciples to certain people or places to cover specific subjects. They are not trumping the Torah or Prophets, they are sharing the essence of them in letters to people who are in the nations and under secular rule. And I say that last part because it is part of the context... Yeshua wasn't living in a Torah-led nation... he was living in a Roman occupied nation that ruled according to their laws. Yes they could do more of Torah than we could today as they were still in the land, still had a Temple, and had SOME autonomy given to them by Rome... but the letters sent out that we see after Acts are void of all of those things. So no new religion was started... when proper context is applied we can see how it appears as if there was.

 

[Dave-W]

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.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Thus the Quran support the Bible of the Christians as we have it today as authentic and the scripture used by Christians.

Except for the part about Jesus being the Second Person of the Trinity and therefore God Himself.

That sort of destroys the idea you present.

 

[Ken Rank]

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.

I would highly doubt the original gospels were written in Arabic because Aramaic was the language of the day in Judea. But also, because so many other writings from that time and area... like certain DSS writings or the Targumim, were Aramaic or Hebrew. I would think at the worst we are looking at one Hebrew (Matthew) one Aramaic (John) and two Greek (Luke and Mark) manuscripts. If Eusebius was correct, a man who would have certainly had a Greek bias.... the Luke was written by Paul in Hebrew and translated by Luke into Greek, and Mark was written by Peter in Hebrew and translated into Greek by Mark. That would make 3 gospels Hebrew and John in Aramaic.

I realize that wasn't your point, guess I just felt like talking.

By the way, some folks I study with have heard of a place in the Middle East that claims to have late first century copies of the gospels. We THINK they might have been in a museum in Iraq that was destroyed by war. Hope not... will update as we learn more.

 

[Dave-W]

I would highly doubt the original gospels were written in Arabic because Aramaic was the language of the day in Judea.

Of course they were not written in Arabic. That is just another lie perpetrated on the islamic people.

like certain DSS writings or the Targumim, were Aramaic or Hebrew.

Targums were all in Aramaic, and were written to help people who could not read Hebrew proper.

 

[Ken Rank]

Of course they were not written in Arabic. That is just another lie perpetrated on the islamic people.

Targums were all in Aramaic, and were written to help people who could not read Hebrew proper.

I realize that on both counts.

 

[Limo]

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.

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

 

[Dave-W]

You either misunderstood him or he tells lies.

Since he seemed completely surprised by the text and intrigued by the differences, I doubt either scenario.

 

[DWA2DAY]

Between this post and another I just read from you, Doug, I am wondering if you were honest when you checked "Christian" in your profile. But I could be reading you wrong and will assume your intentions are true and address the above.

Hi Ken
for the record I ticked christian because they do not have a box "follow of Christ" If you feel I need to be corrected, by all means I am open to all comments, especially if it will better my relationship with Christ.

Reading your post I think you have approached this from the wrong direction. Keep in mind this is a Islam / Christian thread and post #1 is written based on objections Muslims have with the New Testament.

Read post #1 again it may make more sense.

Regards Doug

 

[DWA2DAY]

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.

Wow, if this is the case it would be a wealth of information of the scholars.

Regards Doug

 

[DWA2DAY]

Except for the part about Jesus being the Second Person of the Trinity and therefore God Himself.

That sort of destroys the idea you present.

Yea right, you got me there, what I mean to say is the the denial of the existence of a New Testament by Muslims is confirmed in the Quran. Not the theology.
I have re read post #1 I think it makes it clear it is about the Scripture called the New Testament and not theology. So it does not destroy the idea I present at all. May be a second read with some understanding would clear this up?

Regards Doug

 

[DWA2DAY]

I would highly doubt the original gospels were written in Arabic because Aramaic was the language of the day in Judea. But also, because so many other writings from that time and area... like certain DSS writings or the Targumim, were Aramaic or Hebrew. I would think at the worst we are looking at one Hebrew (Matthew) one Aramaic (John) and two Greek (Luke and Mark) manuscripts. If Eusebius was correct, a man who would have certainly had a Greek bias.... the Luke was written by Paul in Hebrew and translated by Luke into Greek, and Mark was written by Peter in Hebrew and translated into Greek by Mark. That would make 3 gospels Hebrew and John in Aramaic.

I realize that wasn't your point, guess I just felt like talking.

By the way, some folks I study with have heard of a place in the Middle East that claims to have late first century copies of the gospels. We THINK they might have been in a museum in Iraq that was destroyed by war. Hope not... will update as we learn more.

Please do not derail the thread topic.
You are welcome to open and new thread to discuss various bible translations.

Regards Doug

 

[DWA2DAY]

Of course they were not written in Arabic. That is just another lie perpetrated on the islamic people.

Targums were all in Aramaic, and were written to help people who could not read Hebrew proper.

Please do not derail the thread topic.
You are welcome to open and new thread to discuss various bible translations.

Regards Doug

 

[Ken Rank]

Hi Ken
for the record I ticked christian because they do not have a box "follow of Christ" If you feel I need to be corrected, by all means I am open to all comments, especially if it will better my relationship with Christ.

Reading your post I think you have approached this from the wrong direction. Keep in mind this is a Islam / Christian thread and post #1 is written based on objections Muslims have with the New Testament.

Read post #1 again it may make more sense.

Regards Doug

Will do. And follower of Christ is fine I too am not so aligned to the mainstream picture Christianity presents today. I am not judging those within it, I am not saying they do not belong to God... but we are born into a religion that I am not so sure appears all that much like the faith as it was in the first century. In fact, at that time is was widely considered a sect of Judaism.

Will re-read with a fresh eye. Blessings.

 

[Ken Rank]

Please do not derail the thread topic.
You are welcome to open and new thread to discuss various bible translations.

Regards Doug

I wasn't... I was making a point that substantiated the claim made by you (I believe it was) that an original Arabic NT is preposterous.

 

[DWA2DAY]

Will do. And follower of Christ is fine I too am not so aligned to the mainstream picture Christianity presents today. I am not judging those within it, I am not saying they do not belong to God... but we are born into a religion that I am not so sure appears all that much like the faith as it was in the first century. In fact, at that time is was widely considered a sect of Judaism.

Will re-read with a fresh eye. Blessings.

Ken, If I may offer the following advice, the Bible is you guide full stop. Read it daily pray and make sure what ever you do is moving closer to Jesus Christ daily. We will stumble and get it wrong but that why we carry a cross for Christ. Just grow ask, question read pray, chew the meat and spit out the bones.
With regard to the other, and in the same manner you confront me, check them correct them, its our duty to do this to our brother see Mathew 18 and then 7:21 this is the trap to avoid.
Jesus was not polite about salvation, tomorrow is to late, besides you have Gods spirit inside you so know you can not go wrong. Unless of cause you are not listening, and again if you are and you make a mistake so what learn and move on. After all you are a joint heir in the Kingdom of God it will be sad if you the only one at the party.

Regards Doug

 

[DWA2DAY]

If there are original copies of Injiil, it would be in Hebrew or Aramaic or Syriac.

Limo you have been correct on this twice in another thread. Why are you making this idiotic statement again. The injil or gospels were written in Greek.

You either misunderstood him or he tells lies.

Why on earth would some lie about this. Its his personal account of a first hand situation. Oh yes I forgot anything to do with Jesus you say is a lie. Sorry I forgot this.

I have just shown you in post #1 that the New Testament as we know it to day is supported by the Quran. Since you have no comment on this I assume you are in agreement. If not and if you can add value to post #1 I would love to hear your view.