The following article is a response to the false assertions made by Osama Abdallah in
his article found here.
Osama tries to demonstrate that both the Judeo-Christian and Muslim sources claim that
the Holy Bible is corrupt and unreliable. Osama begins by misapplying the following
passages:
Introduction: We must first of all know that the entire Bible is corrupted
and unreliable and is mostly filled with man-made laws and corruption! GOD Almighty
Said: "`How can you say, "We [the Jews] are wise, for we have the law of
the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?'
(From the NIV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
The Revised Standard Version makes it even clearer:
"How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold,
the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie.
(From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"
In either translation, we clearly see that the Jews had so much corrupted the Bible
with their man-made cultural laws, that they had turned the Bible into a lie!
See Also Deuteronomy 31:25-29 where Moses peace be upon him predicted the corruption/tampering
of the Law (Bible) after his death.
The Book of Moses predicted that the Law (Bible) will get corrupted. The Book of Jeremiah which
came approximately 826 years after did indeed confirm this corruption.
RESPONSE:
First, Osama misapplies the passage in Deuteronomy since it says absolutely nothing
about corruption to the Law. Here is the passage in question:
"he gave this command to the Levites who carried the ark of the covenant of the
Lord : Take this Book of the Law and place it beside the ark of the covenant of the
Lord your God. There it will remain as a witness against you. For I know how rebellious
and stiff-necked you are. If you have been rebellious against the Lord while I am still
alive and with you, how much more will you rebel after I die! Assemble before me all
the elders of your tribes and all your officials, so that I can speak these words in their
hearing and call heaven and earth to testify against them. For I know that after my death
you are sure to become utterly corrupt and to turn from the way I have commanded you.
In days to come, disaster will fall upon you because you will do evil in the sight of the
Lord and provoke him to anger by what your hands have made."
Deuteronomy 31:25-29
We challenge Osama to show us anywhere in this passage where God says that the Law
would be corrupted after the death of Moses. The passage is simply stating that much like
the Israelites were disobedient to God's Law even while Moses was present with them,
they would continue to disobey after Moses was gone. And much like the Law was available
in an uncorrupt form during Moses' time, despite Israel's unfaithfulness, the Law would
continue to remain intact even after the death of Moses. So we see that this passage says
nothing about corruption to the Torah.
Second, is it true that Jeremiah was claiming that the text of the Law had been corrupted?
Or was Jeremiah stating that the Law had been misinterpreted through the written interpretation
of the scribes? To find the answer let us look at the overall context of Jeremiah, as well as
the entire context of the Holy Bible:
"Say to them, This is what the LORD says: If you do not listen to me
and follow MY LAW, which I have set before you, and if you do not listen to
the words of my servants the prophets, whom I have sent to you again and again (though
you have not listened) then I will make this house like Shiloh and this city an object of
cursing among all the nations of the earth." Jeremiah 26:4-6
How could Israel follow the Law, i.e. the Torah, if it had been corrupted? This
presupposes that the Torah was uncorrupt and available during the time of Jeremiah.
Since Jeremiah wrote Jeremiah 8:8, who better than he to tell us the precise meaning
of the passage in question? That Jeremiah appeals to the Law of Moses throughout
his book demonstrates quite clearly that the Prophet did not believe that the scribes
had corrupted the actual text of the Torah.
The prophet Daniel provides additional support:
"In the first year of Darius son of Xerxes (a Mede by descent), who was made ruler
over the Babylonian kingdom- in the first year of his reign, I, Daniel, understood from
the Scriptures, according to the word of the LORD given to Jeremiah the prophet,
that the desolation of Jerusalem would last seventy years. So I turned to the LORD and
pleaded with him in prayer and petition, in fasting, and in sackcloth and ashes."
Daniel 9:1-3
Daniel is reading Jeremiah 25:11, 12 and 29:10 where God predicts that Israel would be
taken into captivity to Babylon for 70 years. After reading this, Daniel continues to pray
and says:
"Therefore the curses and sworn judgments WRITTEN IN THE LAW OF MOSES,
the servant of God, have been poured out on us, because we have sinned against you. You
have fulfilled the words spoken against us and against our rulers by bringing upon us great
disaster. Under the whole heaven nothing has ever been done like what has been done to
Jerusalem. JUST AS IT IS WRITTEN IN THE LAW OF MOSES, all this disaster has come
upon us, yet we have not sought the favor of the LORD our God by turning from our sins and
giving attention to your truth." Daniel 9:11b-13
In order for Daniel to appeal to what was written in the Law of Moses an uncorrupt
Torah must have been available during the time of Daniel. Furthermore, after having read
Jeremiah Daniel never concludes that the Torah had been corrupted, but appeals to it
as the inspired word of God. This would be a strange conclusion for Daniel to come to
if Jeremiah 8:8 indeed meant that the text of the Torah had been corrupted during
Jeremiah's time. Therefore, seeing that Daniel was a contemporary of Jeremiah and had
an uncorrupt copy of the Torah in his possession conclusively proves that the Torah
existed in an unadulterated form during Jeremiah's time.
"They read from the Book of the Law of God, making it clear and
giving the meaning so that the people could understand what was being read ... On the
second day ... they gathered around Ezra the scribe to give attention to the words of
the Law. They found written in the Law, which the LORD had commanded
through Moses, that the Israelites were to ... Day after day, from the first day to the last,
Ezra read from the Book of the Law of God ..." Nehemiah 8:13-14,18
This occurred approximately 430 B.C., nearly 180 years after Jeremiah's temple
address, which took place in 609 or 608 B.C. (see Jeremiah 26:1). Again, in order for Ezra
the scribe to be able to both read from the Law of Moses and expound it presupposes
that a true, uncorrupt copy of the Torah was available at that time.
Furthermore, the Lord Jesus and his followers quoted from the Torah as we know it
today and never assumed that it was corrupt (cf. Matthew 4:4,7,10; 22:31-32; 1 Timothy 5:18).
In fact, Jesus claimed that the Torah as it exists would not pass away until all was fulfilled:
"I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter,
not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything
is accomplished." Matthew 5:18
In light of the preceding factors, the only plausible contextual meaning is
that the scribes were misleading the people either through their oral traditions
and/or the writing down of erroneous interpretations of the Law. A similar
situation existed in the time of the Lord Jesus Christ:
"Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem
and asked, Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't
wash their hands before they eat! Jesus replied, And why do you break
the command of God for the sake of your tradition? ... Thus you nullify the
word of God for the sake of your tradition. You hypocrites! Isaiah was right
when he prophesied about you: "these people honor me with their lips, but their
hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught
by men."" Matthew 15:1-3,6b-9
It is therefore quite plausible that Jeremiah was rebuking the scribes for their traditions
that lead people astray from the word of God. That this is the more plausible meaning
becomes evident in light of what immediately follows:
"The wise will be put to shame; they will be dismayed and trapped. Since
they have rejected the word of the LORD, what kind of wisdom do they have."
Jeremiah 8:9
Finally, even if this passage were referring to the actual corruption of the text, this
would only be referring to the copies that were in the possession of the scribes. This
wouldn't apply to all the copies of the Torah, copies that were in the possession of
godly men like Daniel. These men faithfully read, cherished, applied and preserved
God's holy word.
Amazingly, it is the Quran that admits to its very own corruption:
"Like as We sent down on the dividers Those who made the Quran
INTO SHREDS." S. 15:90-91
Scholar in Islamic studies Alphonse Mingana comments on this passage:
"Finally, if we understand correctly the following verse of Suratul-Hijr (xv. 90-91):
As we sent down upon (punished) the dividers (of the Scripture?) who broke
up the Koran into parts, we are tempted to state that even when the Prophet was
alive, some changes were noticed in the recital of certain verses of his sacred book.
There is nothing very surprising in this fact, since Muhammad could not read or write,
and was at the mercy of friends for the writing of his revelations, or, more frequently, of
some mercenary amanuenses." (Mingana, "Three Ancient Korans", The
Origins of the Koran - Classic Essays on Islams Holy Book, ed. by Ibn Warraq
[Prometheus Books, Amherst NY, 1998], p. 84; bold emphasis ours)
Mingana records the Muslim reaction to Uthman b. Affan's burning and wholesale
destruction of primary, competing Quranic codices:
"The book, drawn up by this method, continued to be authoritative
and the standard text till 29-30 A.H. under the caliphate of 'Uthman. At this time the
wonderful faithfulness of Arab memory was defective, and according to a general
weakness of human nature, the Believers have been heard reciting the verses of
the Koran in a different way. This fact was due specially, it is said, to the hundreds of
dialects used in Arabia. Zaid was again asked to put an end to these variations which
had begun to scandalize the votaries of the Prophet. That indefatigable compiler,
assisted by three men from the tribe of Quraish, started to do what he had already done
more than fifteen years before. The previous copies made from the
first one written under Abu Bakr were all destroyed by special order of the caliph:
the revelation sent down from heaven was one, and the book containing this revelation must
be one. The critic remarks that the only guarantee of the authenticity of the Koran is the
testimony of Zaid; and for this reason, a scholar who doubts whether a given word has been
really used by Muhammad, or whether it has been only employed by Zaid on his own
authority, or on the meagre testimony of some Arab reciters, does not transgress the
strict laws of high criticism. If the memory of the followers of the Prophet has been
found defective from the year 15 to 30 A.H. when Islam was proclaimed over all Arabia, why
may it not have been defective from 612 to 632 C.E. when the Prophet was often obliged to
defend his own life against terrible aggressors? And if the first recension of Zaid
contained always the actual words of Muhammad, why was this compiler not content with
re-establishing it in its entirety, and why was the want of a new recension felt by
'Uthman? How can it be that in the short space of fifteen years such wonderful
variants could have crept into the few copies preceding the reign of the third caliph that
he found himself bound to destroy all those he could find? If 'Uthman was certainly
inspired only by religious purposes, why did his enemies call him THE TEARER OF
THE BOOKS and why did they fasten on him the following stigma: He found the Korans
many and left one; HE TORE UP THE BOOK? ..." (Ibn Warraq, p. 84-85; bold and
capital emphasis ours)
Mingana, in his article The Transmission of the Koran, cites Muslim historian
al-Tabari:
"... Ali b. Abi Talib, and Uthman b. Affan wrote the Revelation
to the Prophet; but in their absence it was Ubai b. Kab and Zaid b. Thabit who wrote
it. He informs us, too, that the people said to Uthman: The Koran was in
many books, and thou discreditedst them all but one; and after the Prophet's
death, People gave him as successor Abu Bakr, who in turn was succeeded by
Umar; and both of them acted according to the Book and the Sunnah of the Apostle
of God - and praise be to God the Lord of the worlds; then people elected Uthman
b. Affan WHO ... TORE UP THE BOOK." (Ibn Warraq, p. 102;
bold and capital emphasis ours)
We therefore see that it is the Quran that has been corrupted, a fact admitted by both
Muslim and non-Muslim sources alike.
OSAMA
Did Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him really recognize the Bible as an error-free
book?
The sections of this article are:
1- Did Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him really recognize
the Bible as an error-free book?
2- What about the Jews whom the Prophet punished according
to their Mosaic Law?
RESPONSE:
The quick answer is yes. Muhammad did recognize the Holy Bible as an error free book,
as we will now seek to demonstrate.
OSAMA
Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him never recognized the Bible as an error-free book:
Narrated AbuNamlah al-Ansari: "When he was sitting with the Apostle of Allah
(peace_be_upon_him) and a Jew was also with him, a funeral passed by him. He (the Jew)
asked (Him): Muhammad, does this funeral speak? The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said:
Allah has more knowledge. The Jew said: It speaks.
The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) said: Whatever the people of the Book
[Jews and Christians] tell you, do not verify them, nor falsify
them, but say: We believe in Allah and His Apostle. If it is false, do not confirm it, and if it is
right, do not falsify it. (Translation of Sunan Abu-Dawud,
Knowledge (Kitab Al-Ilm), Book 25, Number 3637)"
RESPONSE:
Not only has Osama misapplied passages of the Holy Bible, but he has also misapplied
and misinterpreted the preceding Muslim tradition. The tradition says absolutely nothing
about the text of the Holy Bible. It simply refers to statements made by the Jews and
Christians that may or may not have been correct. Yet the issue of the validity of the
text of the Holy Bible is simply not addressed. We will have more to say about this below.
OSAMA
The following two Sayings of our beloved Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him were sent
to me by Yusif 65 may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him:
Narrated Ubaidullah: "Ibn 'Abbas said, 'Why do you ask the people of the scripture
about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer
and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that
the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and
wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain.
Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything?
No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed
to you!' (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an
and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)"
RESPONSE:
This tradition seems to convincingly prove that Ibn Abbas did believe that the text of
the Holy Bible had been corrupted. That is of course until we consider his views in context.
Note what Ibn Abbas is reported to have also said regarding the Holy Bible:
Mujahid, Ash-Sha'bi, Al-Hassan, Qatadah and Ar-Rabi' bin Anas said that,
<who distort the Book with their tongues.>
means, "They alter (Allah's Words)."
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. However, the people misguide
others by addition and false interpretation, relying on books that they wrote themselves."
Then,
<they say: "This is from Allah," but it is not from Allah;>
As for Allah's books, THEY ARE STILL PRESERVED AND CANNOT BE CHANGED."
Ibn Abi Hatim recorded this statement ... (Tafsir Ibn Kathir Abridged, Volume 2,
Parts 3, 4 & 5, Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, verse 147
[Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore;
First Edition: March 2000], p. 196; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Here is the full quotation of Al-Bukhari regarding Ibn Abbas' view of the Bible:
Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitaab Al-Tawheed, Baab Qawlu Allah Taala,
"Bal Huwa Quraanun Majeed, fi lawhin Mahfooth" (i.e. in Sahih al-Bukhari,
Book "The Oneness of God", the Chapter on Surat Al-Borooj (no. 85), Verses 21,
22 saying, "Nay this is a Glorious Qur'an, (Inscribed) in a Tablet Preserved.")
we find in a footnote between 9.642 and 643:
"They corrupt the word" means "they alter or change its meaning."
Yet no one is able to change even a single word from any Book of God. The
meaning is that they interpret the word wrongly. [... and he continues to speak about
how the Qur'an is preserved ...]
This is the Tafseer (commentary) of Abdullah Ibn Abbas, one of the Sahaba (companions)
and Mohammed's cousin. His opinions (because he is a Sahabi (companion) are held to be
above the opinions and commentaries of all other Sheikhs who are not Sahaba.
Since Ibn Abbas' above reference to "They corrupt the word" quotes part
of Sura 4:46, it is not only a commentary on Sura 85:22, but also on the meaning of the
Quranic charge against the Jews of corrupting the scriptures.
(Source)
This supports the view that Ibn Abbas's comment refers to the misinterpretation of
the text and to the concoction of false revelation, which the Jews then tried to pass off
as revelation. It does not refer to the actual corruption of the Holy Bible itself. This
is further supported from the very same hadith cited by Osama. In the above hadith,
Ibn Abbas is purported to have said:
"... You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has
told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture
and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, It is from
Allah, to sell it for a little gain ..."
The above citation seems to refer to the following Quranic passages:
"So woe to those who write the Book with their hands, and then say,
This is from Allah, that they may sell it for a little price. So woe to them
for what their hands have written, and woe to them for their earnings." S. 2:79
This seems to imply Biblical corruption until we look at its original context:
"Can you (O men of faith) still earnestly desire that they (the Jews) will believe
in you? And verily a party (fariq) among them hear the Word of God, then they
pervert it knowingly after they have understood it. And when they meet the believers
they say, We believe, but when they meet each other in private they say,
Why do you tell them what God has revealed to you (in the Torah), that they may
engage you in argument about it before their God? What do you not understand?
Do they not know that God knows what they conceal and what they make public? Among
them are unlettered folk who know the Scripture not except from hearsay.
THEY BUT GUESS." S. 2:75-78
Once the passage is read in its proper context, we discover that it is not speaking of
Jews and Christians corrupting their Holy Book, but rather unlettered Jews who were
ignorant of the content of the scriptures and falsified their own revelation for gain.
Here is the other passage that Ibn Abbas seems to be referring:
"There is among them a section who distort the Book WITH THEIR TONGUES:
(As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book;
and they say, That is from Allah, but it is not from Allah. It is they who
tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!" S. 3:78
Here, the changes and distortion refers to a misinterpretation of the text, i.e.
"with their tongues". The people were evidently reciting or quoting certain
things and passing it off as being part of the actual text. This view is in accord with
Al-Bukhari's citation of Ibn Abbas, where the latter stated that the Jews changed and
distorted the apparent meanings of the scriptures, yet the text remained unchanged.
Some Muslims have tried to undermine Al-Bukhari's tradition regarding Ibn
Abbas' view of the Holy Bible by stating that the former provided no chain of
transmission in which the authenticity of the report can be assessed. This attempt of
evasion will not solve the problem for the Muslims. It is often claimed that Al-Bukhari
was the most careful collector of Muslim traditions, omitting thousands of hadiths that
did not meet his strict specifications of authenticity. Note the following comments to the
English translation of Al-Bukhari's hadith collection:
It has been UNANIMOUSLY AGREED that Imam Bukhari's work is the most
authentic of all the other works in Hadith literature PUT TOGETHER.
The authenticity of Al-Bukhari's work is such that the religious learned scholars of
Islam said concerning him: "The most authentic book after the Book of Allah
(i.e., Al-Qur'an) is Sahih Al-Bukhari." ...
Before he recorded each Hadith he would make ablution and offer two Rakat
prayer and supplicate his Lord (Allah). Many religious scholars of Islam tried to find fault
in the great remarkable collection- Sahih Al-Bukhari, BUT WITHOUT SUCCESS.
It is for this reason, they UNANIMOUSLY AGREED that the most authentic book after
the Book of Allah ISSahih Al-Bukhari. (Translation of the Meanings of
Summarized Sahih Al-Bukhari, Arabic-English, translated by Dr. Muhammad Taqi-ud-Din Al-Hilali,
Islamic University, Al-Madina Al-Munawwara, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; compilation: Al-Imam
Zain-ud-Din Ahmad bin Abdul-Lateef Az-Zubaidi [Maktaba Dar-us-Salam Publishers &
Distributors, Riyadh-Saudi Arabia, 1994], pp. 18-19; bold and capital emphasis ours)
The following citations are taken from the Islamic Awareness team's response to
Andrew Vargo's criticism of Imam Bukhari's collection:
* The two sahh
collections did not gather the totality of the authentic ahdth as proved by
al-Bukh
r's testimony: "I have not included
in my book al-Jmic but what is authentic, and I left out among the authentic for fear of [excessive] length.(Footnote 2)"
Footnote 2 says:
He
[al-Bukhr] meant that he did not mention all the turuq [parallel chains of transmission] for each and every hadth.[1]
To reiterate this in elementary English for the neophyte,
Imm al-Bukhr selected only a few authentic ahdth from his vast
collection. However, he left out certain traditions, despite their authenticity, simply to
avoid excessive length and repetition in his
al-Jmic
(a discussion about which is given below). If anything, the privilege to make
such a gesture is highly complimentary to the authenticity of the Islamic traditions.
In another tradition, Imm al-Bukhr is also reported to have said:
He said, I heard as-Sa
c
dn say, I heard some of our companions say, Muhammad Ibn Ism
c
l said: I selected/published
[the
content of]
this book - meaning
the Sahih book - from about 600,000 hadths/reports. Ab Sa
c
d al-Mln informed us that
c
Abdullh Ibn
c
Udayy
informed us: I heard al-Hasan Ibn al-Husayn al-Bukhr say: "I
have not included in my book
al-Jmi
c but what is authentic, and I left out among the authentic what I could
not get hold of."
[2]
And:
Imm al-Bukhr's collection of ahdth was maintained to be
authentic on account of his authority,and it has been maintained as authentic ever
since. The neophyte's assertion, that Imm al-Bukhr regarded almost 99% of
his own collection as spurious, is among the most rash and foolhardy statements ever dared
by a Christian missionary. On the contrary, the 7,397 refers to the number of hadths
that Imm al-Bukhr chose to include in his al-Jmic and left out many authentic
narrations from his vast collection for the fear of excessive length.
Regardless, we will quote the famous trial of Imm al-Bukhr to show
how
Maqlub[8] (changed, reversed) ahadth can be identified with ease by a scholar of hadth:
The famous trial of al-Bukh
r by the scholars of Baghdad provides a good example of a Maqlb
isnd. The traditionists, in order to test their visitor, al-Bukhr, appointed ten men, each with ten ahdth. Now, each hadth
(text) of these ten people was prefixed with the isnd of another. Imm al-Bukhr listened to each of the ten men as they narrated their ahdth
and denied the correctness of every hadth. When they had finished
narrating these ahdth, he addressed each person in turn and recounted to him
each of his ahdth with its correct isnd. This trial earned him great
honour among the scholars of Baghdad.[9]
(Source: http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/bukhari.html; bold and italic emphasis ours)
In light of all this, the fact that Al-Bukhari included this tradition implies that this report
met Al-Bukhari's strict specifications and he was therefore convinced of its reliability.
If we also add to the equation the following Quranic references regarding Jews and
Christians who knew their scriptures and would not dare falsify it, then the claim of Bible
corruption becomes even more untenable:
"And there are, certainly, among the People of the Book, those who believe in God,
and that which has been revealed to you, in that which has been revealed to them,
bowing in humility to God. They will not sell the signs of God for miserable gain.
For them is a reward with their Lord, and God is swift in account." S. 3:199
"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
Finally, a careful reading of S. 2:75-78 shows that the Jews were also accused of
falsifying the Quran. The claim that a party (fariq) among the Jews heard the Word
of God, then perverted it knowingly after they had understood it, seems to be an echo of
the following passage:
"Seest thou not those unto whom a portion of the Scripture hath been given, how
they purchase error, and seek to make you (Muslims) err from the right way? Allah knoweth
best (who are) your enemies. Allah is sufficient as a Guardian, and Allah is sufficient as
a Supporter. Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say:
We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not and Listen to
us! distorting with their tongues and slandering religion. If they had said:
We hear and we obey: hear thou, and look at us' it had been better for them, and
more upright. But Allah hath cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, save a
few. O ye unto whom the Scripture hath been given! Believe in what We have revealed
confirming that which ye possess, before We destroy countenances so as to confound them,
or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-breakers (of old time). The commandment of Allah
is always executed." S. 4:44-47
Yusuf Ali comments on S. 4:44-47:
"... A trick of the Jews was to twist words and expressions, so as to ridicule
the most solemn teachings of the Faith. Where they should have said, We
hear and we obey, they said aloud, We hear, and whispered,
We disobey. Where they should have said respectfully, We
hear, they added in a whisper, What is not heard, by way of
ridicule. Where they claimed the attention of the Teacher, they used an
ambiguous word apparently harmless, but their intention disrespectful."
(Ali, The Holy Qur'an, p. 194, f. 565)
And,
"... Ra'ina if used respectfully in the Arabic way, would
have meant Please attend to us. With the twist of their tongue, they
suggested an insulting meaning, such as O thou that takest us to pasture!,
or in Hebrew, Our bad one!" (Ibid, f. 566)
If Osama's logic is valid, then we are forced to conclude that the Jewish perversion
of the Quran by their tongues meant that they corrupted the text of the Quran as well.
In light of the preceding considerations, Ibn Abbas' statement regarding the
distortion of the previous scriptures can only be referring to the misinterpretation of
the text and to the writing of false books passed off as the word of God. It has nothing
to do with an actual corruption of the text itself.
(NOTE- We would like to clarify our use of Al-Bukhari. Our quotation from Al-Bukhari
regarding Ibn Abbas, as well as the other Muslim sources regarding Al-Bukhari's credibility,
doesn't imply that we accept the claims being made. Rather, we are simply pointing out
that the hadiths as they stand do not support the Muslim claims of Bible corruption.
Whether these hadiths actually stem from the time of Muhammad is highly doubtful. The
fact that Al-Bukhari and others believed they were authentic, only serves to refute those
Muslims who try to undermine certain hadiths such as the one regarding Ibn Abbas's
positive view of the Holy Bible.)
OSAMA
Narrated Abu Huraira: "The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew
and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah's Apostle said (to the Muslims). 'Do
not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, 'We believe in Allah
and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.' ' (Translation
of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 460)"
RESPONSE:
Carefully note what is actually being said:
Narrated Abu Huraira: "The people of the Book used to read the Torah IN
HEBREW and then explain it IN ARABIC TO THE MUSLIMS. Allah's Apostle said (to
the Muslims). 'Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say,
'We believe in Allah and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.'
(Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9,
Book 92, Number 460)"
Muhammad is not attacking the reliability of the Holy Bible, but rather is rejecting
the Arabic explanation of the Hebrew Bible by the Jews. Since Muhammad couldn't
read Hebrew, he couldn't tell whether the Jews were accurately and honestly explaining
the Hebrew text in the Arabic language. It is little wonder that the former warned
his community regarding the Jews' explanation. So we again see Osama misapplying
his own Muslim sources.
OSAMA
As we clearly see in the above Sayings of our beloved Prophet peace be upon him, we
see that the source that the Jews and Christians use (i.e. the Bible or any other religious
source such as their Popes', Rabbis or other religious people's verdicts) must be ignored
because it is not reliable. As we've seen in the above introduction, the man-made
scribes (laws) had corrupted the Bible and turned it "into a lie" (Jeremiah 8:8).
Please visit According to Islam, why did GOD
Almighty allow for the Bible to get corrupted?
Just who were the real authors of the Bible?
Today's Books and Gospels' authors of the Bible are UNKNOWN. See the comments that
prove that from the Theologians and Historians of the NIV Bible from the NIV Bible itself!
Just why in the world should I believe in today's Bible?
RESPONSE:
As we have shown, the above sayings of Muhammad DO NOT support biblical corruption.
If anything, the reverse is true. Osama not only misapplies biblical citations, but does the
very same thing with his own Muslim sources.
Please read the following rebuttals to Osama's distortions and misquotations:
[1],
[2],
[3],
[4].
And here are a few others for good measure:
[1], [2].
OSAMA
What about the Jews whom the Prophet punished according to their Mosaic Law?
The following was sent to me by brother Johnny Bravo;
may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him.
The missionary argument is that Islamically the Bible is accurate because Prophet
Muhammed peace be upon him ruled according to one of its law. This is indeed very
funny. Christian Missionary, Sam Shamoun, after distorting dozens of verses from the
Holy Quran and amazing his with his funny interpretations, informs his readers:
"Our usage of the Quran does not imply our belief in its authority nor its
inspiration. We quote it solely for the sake of convincing the Muslims of the Bible's
authority and authenticity as a fact confirmed by their religious text."
http://answering-islam.org/Shamoun/aboutbible.htm
RESPONSE:
We have already begun responding to Bravo's erroneous claims and gross misuse
and misapplication of scholarly sources. To read some of the rebuttals please go here
[1], [2],
[3], [4],
[5].
More responses are scheduled to appear later. Lord Jesus willing, we will also be
responding to Bravo's false assertions regarding the views of Abu Ghazali and
Ibn Taimiyyah on the issue of biblical corruption.
OSAMA
Precisely! Similarly, the ruling of stoning applied to the Jew and Jewess
according to the Jewish scriptures also does not imply that the entire text of the Jewish
Christian scriptures is authentic and pristine. Prophet Muhammed peace be upon him
was *also* using it as his evidence against the Jews. Yes there were many addition and
deletion in the Jewish scriptures, they were corrupted, but despite their corruption, they
still contained enough truth in them to lead any person to Islam. Thus, had the Jews
followed their own book, they would have had no other choice but to become Muslims
because their book still contained enough truth therein to lead a person to Islam. The
problem with the Jews was that they didn't even bother to follow that which they
themselves considered to be Divinely revealed by Allah.
The punishment for stoning for example is the authentic revelation from Allah which
we find intact in even the present day Jewish scriptures, but these Jews during the time of
Prophet Muhammed peace be upon him did not bother to follow this Law revealed by Allah.
Had they applied all the laws and commandments in their scriptures, never mind the
corruption, they would have had no choice but to become Muslims.
RESPONSE:
Bravo commits the fallacy of false analogy. Bravo has falsely assumed that Muhammad
appealed to the Torah of his day in the same way that I have appealed to the Quran. Yet
this is clearly false. Whereas I do not believe that the Quran is the word of God, Muhammad
did believe in the Torah as the revealed word of God. Muhammad also believed that the Torah
of his day was the pristine word of God, as we have already shown and will show again shortly.
Bravo has assumed that Muhammad believed that the Torah of his day was not in its pure
pristine form, and then proceeds to read this erroneous and unproven assumption into
his reading of the traditions. Yet neither Bravo nor Osama has supplied us with any proof
for their erroneous assertion. As we will now see, Muhammad clearly believed that the
Torah of his time was the original Torah given by God to Moses.
OSAMA
Well known commentator Ibn Kathir, explains:
"These Hadith's (Saying of Prophet Muhammad in Arabic) state that the Messenger
of Allah peace be upon him issued a decision that conforms with the ruling in the Tawrah, not
to honour the Jews in what they believe in, for the Jews were commanded to follow the Law
of Muhammad peace be upon him only. Rather, the Prophet peace be upon him did this
because Allah commanded him to do so.
He asked them about the ruling of stoning in the Tawrah to make them admit to what the
Tawrah (Torah) contains and what they collaborated to hide, deny and exclude from
implementing for all that time. They had to admit to what they did, although they
did it while having knowledge of the correct ruling. What made them go to the
Prophet peace be upon him for judgement in this matter was their lusts and desires, hoping
that the Prophet peace be upon him would agree with their opinion, not that they believed
in the correctness of his judgement."
[Tafsir Ibn Kathir Abridged. Volume 3. Pg. 182. Darussalam Publishers and
Distributors. 2000]
Sheikh Abdurrahman Abdul-Khaaliq states:
"The Torah, the Old Testament, and the Gospel, the New testament, still contain
some truth and guidance that can be evidence against Jews and Christians. If they
implemented their laws, Jews and Christians would believe in the Prophet Muhammad's
message, confirming what was sent before him, and thus would follow the guidance and
light. Muhammad was sent down with clear evidence to his truthfulness and he followed the
path of the Prophets before him, who were sent to the Jews and the Christians."
[Sheikh Abdurrahman Abdul-Khaaliq. "The Bible's Testimony that Jesus is the
Slave-Servant, and Messenger of Allah." pg. 8. The Daar of Islamic Heritage 1994]
RESPONSE:
Nothing stated by Ibn Kathir comes close to proving that Muhammad believed that the
Torah had been changed. In fact, when we take into consideration the following citations,
the reverse is actually true:
"Salih b. Kaisan from Nafi, freedman of Abdullah b. Umar from Abdullah
b. Umar, told me: When the apostle gave judgement about them HE ASKED FOR A TORAH.
A rabbi sat there reading it having put his hand over the verse of stoning. Abdullah
b. Salam struck the rabbis hand, saying, This, O prophet of God, is the verse
of stoning which he refused to read to you. The apostle said, Woe to you Jews! What
has induced you to abandon the judgement of God WHICH YOU HOLD IN YOUR HANDS?
They answered: The sentence used to be carried out until a man of royal birth and
noble origin committed adultery and the king refused to allow him to be stoned. Later
another committed adultery and the king wanted him to be stoned but they said No, until
you stone so-and-so. And they did away with all mention of stoning. The apostle
said, I am the first to revive the order from God AND HIS BOOK and to
practice it. They were duly stoned and Abdullah b. Umar said, I was among
those that stoned them. (Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad [Oxford
University Press, Karachi], p. 267; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Notice that Muhammad asked FOR A TORAH, not a corrupted Torah. Muhammad claims
that he is the first to revive what is in GOD'S BOOK, AND PRACTICES WHAT IT ENTAILED.
Would Bravo or Osama dare enter a Synagogue and claim that they practice what the Torah in
the hands of the Jews commands regarding adultery, since it is GOD'S BOOK? Or would they
rather claim that the Torah in the possession of the Jews has been tampered with? It is clear
that they would opt for the latter, which only demonstrates that THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING
THE EXAMPLE OF THEIR PROPHET, since he clearly believed that the Torah in his possession
was true and uncorrupt.
The following tradition provides addition evidence for the existence of an
uncorrupt Bible:
"When the Christians of Najran came to the apostle the Jewish rabbis came also
and they disputed one with the other before the apostle. Rafi' said, You have no
standing, and he denied Jesus and the Gospel; and a Christian said to the Jews,
You have no standing and he denied that Moses was a prophet and
denied the Torah. So God sent down concerning them: The Jews say the
Christians have no standing; and the Christians say that the Jews have no standing,
and yet they read the scriptures. They do not know what they are talking about. God
will judge between them on the day of resurrection concerning their controversy,
i.e. each one reads IN HIS BOOK THE CONFIRMATION OF WHAT HE DENIES,
so that the Jews deny Jesus though THEY HAVE THE TORAH in which God required
them BY THE WORD OF MOSES TO HOLD JESUS TRUE; while IN THE GOSPEL
IS WHAT JESUS BROUGHT IN CONFIRMATION OF MOSES AND THE TORAH
HE BROUGHT FROM GOD: so each one denies WHAT IS IN THE HAND OF THE
OTHER." (Guillaume, p. 258; bold and capital emphasis ours)
Ibn Ishaq clearly states that the TORAH OF MOSES and the GOSPEL OF JESUS
were both extant and in the HANDS of the Jews and Christians of Muhammad's time.
"Rafi b. Haritha and Sallam b. Mishkam and Malik b.
al-Sayf and Rafi b. Huraymila came to him [Muhammad] and said: Do you not allege
that you follow the religion of Abraham and believe in the Torah WHICH WE HAVE and
testify that it is the truth from God? He replied, CERTAINLY, but
you have sinned and broken the covenant CONTAINED THEREIN and concealed what
you were ordered to make plain to men, and I dissociate myself from your sin. They said,
We hold by WHAT WE HAVE. We live according to the guidance and the truth
and we do not believe in you and we will not follow you. So God sent down concerning
them: Say, O Scripture folk, you have no standing until you observe the Torah and
the Gospel and what has been sent down from your Lord. What has been sent down to thee
from they Lord will assuredly increase many of them in error and unbelief. But be not sad
because of the unbelieving people." (Guillaume, p. 268; bold and capital
emphasis ours)
Here was a great opportunity for Muhammad to claim that the Torah had been changed.
Instead, he claims to believe in the Torah available at his time. He calls it "Allah's Book".
Would he have called it Allah's book if it contained much corruption by the hand of men?
Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar:
A group of Jews came and invited the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) to Quff.
So he visited them in their school.
They said: AbulQasim, one of our men has committed fornication with a woman;
so pronounce judgment upon them. They placed a cushion for the Apostle of Allah
(peace_be_upon_him) who sat on it and said: Bring the Torah. It was then brought.
He then withdrew the cushion from beneath him AND PLACED THE TORAH ON IT
saying: I BELIEVED IN THEE and in Him Who REVEALED THEE.
He then said: Bring me one who is learned among you. Then a young man was brought.
The transmitter then mentioned the rest of the tradition of stoning similar to the one
transmitted by Malik from Nafi'(No. 4431). (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 38, Number 4434)
The respect and love shown to the Torah only serves to expose Bravo's and Osama's
desperate attempts of evading the indisputable fact. Muhammad didn't say to bring him
a corrupted Torah, nor did he say that he believed in the Torah before it had been corrupted.
Rather, he affirms that the Torah in his possession was that which God had revealed. It is
little wonder that he placed it on a cushion, showing it the very same respect that he would
give to the Quran. Again, we need to ask if whether Bravo or Osama would do likewise,
taking a modern copy of the Torah and place it on a cushion as a sign of respect? If not,
then they only demonstrate that they truly do not follow the example of their prophet.
OSAMA
So there we go. It is worth noting that the Quran does not mention any
"Bible" or "Mathew", "Mark", "Genesis",
"Numbers" etc. The Quran only mentions the Tauraat revealed to Musa
(Moses) peace be upon him and the Injeel (Gospel) revealed to Esa (Jesus) peace be upon
him. Not any Gospel "according to Mathew" etc. The Quran is MUHAYMIN
over the previous scriptures (5:48), meaning criteria, watcher-over, control, guardian,
dominant, trustworthy, witness, rectifying etc. So whatever agrees with the Quran we
accept that we reject whatever disagrees with the Quran. The present day Jewish
Christian scriptures may contain truth in them, we do not deny that, however their also
contain the words of man and errors, interpolations and deletions. A Muslim is
commanded to use the Quran as the judge (5:48) to separate the truth from falsehood.
Please visit According to Islam, why did GOD
Almighty allow for the Bible to get corrupted?
Just who were the real authors of the Bible?
Today's Books and Gospels' authors of the Bible are UNKNOWN. See the comments that
prove that from the Theologians and Historians of the NIV Bible from the NIV Bible itself!
Just why in the world should I believe in today's Bible?
RESPONSE:
Even though it might be true that the Quran does not directly mention Matthew or Mark,
it does refer to Genesis and Numbers as well as alluding to the Bible. That mention is
made of the Torah is proof that the Quran is in fact referring to Genesis and Numbers,
since these books constitute the Torah of Moses. The Quran also refers to the Kitab
(Book), which is the Arabic equivalent of "Bible", as even Muhammad Asad
realized in his translation:
"... And so We have cast enmity and hatred among the followers of the Bible ..."
S. 5:64 (Asad, The Message of the Qur'an [Dar Al-Andaulus, Gibraltar, rpt. 1994],
p. 157; bold emphasis ours)
"If the followers of the Bible would but attain to [true] faith and
God-consciousness, we should indeed efface their [previous] bad deeds, and indeed
bring them into gardens of bliss;" S. 5:65 (Ibid.; bold emphasis ours)
The reference to the "Book" of the Jews and Christians would naturally
include all the books listed within it, such as the Pentateuch, the four Gospels etc.
Interestingly, the Quran actually quotes from both Numbers and Mark, referring
to them as the Torah and the Injil respectively:
"Muhammad is the messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong
against Unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other. Thou wilt see them bow
and prostrate themselves (in prayer), seeking Grace from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure.
On their faces are their marks, (being) the traces of their prostration. This is their similitude
IN THE TAURAT; and their similitude IN THE GOSPEL IS: like a seed which sends forth its
blade, then makes it strong; it then becomes thick, and it stands on its own stem, (filling)
the sowers with wonder and delight. As a result, it fills the Unbelievers with rage
at them. Allah has promised those among them who believe and do righteous deeds
forgiveness, and a great Reward." S. 48:29
This passage claims that there is a description of Muslims IN the Torah and the Gospel,
implying that these books were extant during Muhammad's time. Interestingly, A. Yusuf
Ali claims that the description of Muslims in the Torah and the Gospel is an allusion to
Numbers 16:22 and Mark 4:27-28:
"... In the Book of Moses, which is now found in a corrupt form in the Pentateuch,
the posture of humility in prayer is indicated by prostration: e.g. Moses and Aaron
fell upon their faces, Num. xvi. 22." (Ali, The Holy Qur'an
- Meaning and Translation, p. 1400, n. 4916; bold emphasis ours)
Ali erroneously claims that the Pentateuch only contains portions from the Book of
Moses, and that it is not the actual revelation given to Moses, despite the fact that the
verse itself claims that Moses' Torah WAS AVAILABLE during the time of Muhammad!
Aside from his erroneous claim, Ali indirectly testifies that the book of Numbers is part
of the Torah given to Moses!
Ali continues:
... The similitude in the Gospel is about how the good seed is sown and grown
gradually, even beyond the expectation of the sower: "the seed should spring
and grow up, he knoweth not how; for the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the
blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the earth"; Mark, iv 27-28 ...
(Ibid., n. 4917; bold emphasis ours)
This again presumes that the Gospel of Mark formed part of the Gospel that the Quran
claims was sent down to Jesus.
Finally, S. 5:48 and the Arabic word MUHAYMIN does not support biblical corruption,
as we have already demonstrated in this article.
That Bravo and Osama can only repeat outdated arguments which have been thoroughly
addressed, further indicates the weakness of their case against the integrity of the Holy Bible.
We will be following up this rebuttal with an examination of the issue of stoning in
Islam, and its relevance to the corruption of the Quran.
Until then, we continue to remain in the service of our risen Lord and eternal Savior
Jesus Christ forever, by God's sovereign grace. Amen. Come Lord Jesus. We love you
forever, risen Lord of eternal glory.
In this post I will share some of the biblical evidences, which led the first Christians to the conclusion that the one true God is Triune by nature.
One True God
The Bible is clear that there is only one uncreated God who created and sustains all creation. The name
”Accepting James White’s Challenge to Provide an Exegesis of 1 John 5:1"
The following is Dr. David W. Allen's refutation to internet reformed apologist James R. White's butchering of 1 John 5:1 for the purpose of forcing his calvinistic misreading into it.
