S
- Status
A
Angelos
Guest
Do not Jews - according to your beloved Koran - accept both Torah and the Psalms as revelation? If your interpretation of the word Kitaab is correct, which book does Koran talk about while calling Jews as the people of the book? Torah or the Psalms?
Christians accept three of the books on your list, but do you deny that fact because your Scripture uses the word Kitaab in singular form while referring to Christians? The word Bible is a collective term given by Christians to all the books of the Old and New Testament. When you Muslims claim that the Bible is corrupt, do you use the Jewish concept of Scripture or the Christian concept of Scripture?This final argument of yours is actually the funniest of all! When I used the word “all the books they have and read”, I did not mean gnostic gospels or other heretical sources because everyone knows that Jews and Christians distinguish canonical scripture from the non-canonical one!
(BTW the word Scripture means written things! Thus there is nothing such as written scripture. All non-canonical books were written too. Your comments cannot distinguish apocryphal writings from canonical ones since both were written indeed although some of them were authorised and some not.)
Accordingly, the word Book in the Koran confirms all the books, meaning the canonized parts of the Bible.
Final question: If we Christians separated all the books of the Bible and worked them into 3 books under the names Tawurat, Zabuur, and Injeel, would you come to believe that they are the original revelation?
Peace,
Angelos N.B.
A
Angelos
Guest
I have to remind you, dear sister, that the Koran is no authority or arbitrator for me! If that chapter refutes that notion of mine, I refute the entirety of that chapter
They were not able to find such a teacher because they never looked for one! Being pagans, why would they be interested in the writings of a monotheistic community anyway? They did not have the same dreams as Mohammad!
Peace,
Angelos N.B.
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
You’re missing the point. I’ll try to use as few words as possible: People of the Book means people who were given (through Messengers) revelation. There are five books–the scrolls of Abraham, the Law of Moses, the Psalms of David, the Gospel of Jesus, and last of all the Qur’an. Given any of the above.
But they have them, and they have read them.
Eh? No such thing as written scripture? Or do you mean that it in fact only redundant. Recall how the Qur’an is called “Al-Kitaab” by Allah–despite the fact that it wasn’t compiled into a single volume until after the lifetime of Muhammad.
Being written hardly matters. The point is ONLY what has been revealed.
Again, no it doesn’t. It confirms that revelation came before it–and what the revelation actually was. That revelation is NOT “the Bible” but rather that revelation is the scrolls of Abraham, the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel (and the Qur’an of course.)
No.
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
The very fact that the chapter was revealed and the circumstances of its revelation are a proof against what you say. So they very fact that it exists refutes you. Your attempt at cleverness on the other hand… well, I won’t say.
The Quraysh knew about the Jews, that the Jews had received scripture. They actually wrote a letter to the Jews in Yathrib to ask if this guy Muhammad was a prophet or not. The Jews sent back three questions to determine the answer… and Surat al-Kahf was teh answer to their questions.
I guess you don’t know this story.
A
Angelos
Guest
You are being evasive now by not answering any of my questions but repeating the frozen statements you have already posted. Last time we discussed this issue, we focused on the word BOOK rather than on the word PEOPLE.
The Koran also mentions a third group of people - apart from Jews and Christians -: Saabi. Who was their messenger and what book were they revealed through that messenger? Further, how can the Koran call Christians People of the Book since the Injeel was supposedly revealed to Jews only, now that Jews and Christians r being different groups of believers.
Your example has nothing to do with redundancy! Now you are losing energy.
However, the Koran makes no distinction between the written scripture of Jews/Christians at that time and the supposed revelation as it is clear in the verse saying “They are reading what we have given them”
What happened to the scrolls of Abraham? One part of God’s revelation no more exists today?
How can you distinguish that unknown/unseen revelation you believe from the Bible? You personally can. The Koran will not help you since it never states - even implies - that the Jewish/Christian Scripture of the time is not the same as the supposed revelation. If you want me to think otherwise, give me verses from the Koran.
Peace,
Angelos N.B.
A
Angelos
Guest
The very fact that the chapter was revealed?
Do not confuse beliefs with facts please! You try to prove something to me through something else I refute.How rational is that tactic indeed! I refute all your so-called facts as fiction You mean the Quraysh were secret followers of Judaism? Flash news of the day!The Quraysh knew about the Jews, that the Jews had received scripture. They actually wrote a letter to the Jews in Yathrib to ask if this guy Muhammad was a prophet or not. The Jews sent back three questions to determine the answer… and Surat al-Kahf was teh answer to their questions.
Actually, the fact that the Quraysh could question the Jews about Mohammad makes it clear everyone at that time knew Mohammad had great relations with Jews and went to them to learn about the Torah. Mohammad was a member of Quraysh anyway!
Peace,
Angelos N.B.
F
FCEGM
Guest
OTC, it is your faith that believes it was revealed. The only established fact is that it was written - just as was the Book of Mormon, e.g., - but it is not an established fact that its source is God’s revelation to Muhammed anymore than the BoM is God’s revelation to Joseph Smith.
Further, Catholicism rejects the idea that Christianity’s adherents are a people of the book or that it is a religion of the book. Referencing a homily by St. Bernard of Clairvaux the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: "The Christian faith is not a religion of the book. Christianity is the religion of the Word of God, not a written and mute word, but incarnate and living, " Nbr. 108]. The Incarnation of the Word of God in Jesus Christ (not in the pages of a book) makes all the difference.
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
Peace.
*Those who believe (in the Qur’an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians, Christians, Magians, and Polytheists,- Allah will judge between them on the Day of Judgment: for Allah is witness of all things. *
You might be thinking of two other ayaat where Allah mentions the Sabians specifically–but in the same aya it says any who believed and work righteousness.
The reason they can be called People of the Book is that Jesus was given the Gospel. And the disciples of Jesus said according to the Qur’an “Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Messenger; then write us down among those who bear witness.” (3:53)
Eh? I’m not trying to be evasive. I tried to explain why “Book” (in “People of the Book”) doesn’t mean Bible.
It mentions other groups too.
I don’t know.
*Those who believe (in the Qur’an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians, Christians, Magians, and Polytheists,- Allah will judge between them on the Day of Judgment: for Allah is witness of all things. *
You might be thinking of two other ayaat where Allah mentions the Sabians specifically–but in the same aya it says any who believed and work righteousness.
In fact, the word used for “Christians” is Nasaara. The Qur’an says, “those who call themselves nasaara” (i.e., those who call themselves Christians). It says “From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them:”(5:14)
The reason they can be called People of the Book is that Jesus was given the Gospel. And the disciples of Jesus said according to the Qur’an “Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Messenger; then write us down among those who bear witness.” (3:53)
Actually the Qur’an does make distinctions. It says about Jesus, “And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Law and the Gospel,” (Al-Kitaab, Al-Hikmah, Al-Tawrat, al-Injeel). I’m not familiar with the verse you try to be quoting, however.
Nobody knows what happend to them, and yes. That is why God sent the Qur’an–the last and final revelation–the one that is preserved.
The criterion (thing used to distinguish) is the Qur’an. Basically, if something agrees with the Qur’an, Muslims accept it as true. If it disagrees with the Qur’an, Muslims reject it, as false. If neither, Muslims won’t say one way or the other.
“They (i.e. Jews and Christians) changed words from their contexts and forgot a good part of the message given to them, and you will continue to find them -except a few among them- bent on new deceits…” (5:13)
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
I really can’t argue with you if you don’t even know what you’re takling about.The very fact that the chapter was revealed?
Of course not. They knew that the Jews had received scripture before. They weren’t Jews themselves. When Muhammad claimed to be a Prophet in the same tradition–they asked the Jews what they thought about him.
They sent an envoy to the Jewish tribes in Yathrib (a completely different city). Muhammad had not been studying with them, didn’t have any real relations with them. Their envoy to Yathrib was supposed to ask if they thought that Muhammad could be the real prophet he claimed to be, or if he was an imposter. The Jews acknowledged he COULD be a true prophet and offered the Quraysh a test–three questions to ask him. Surat al-Kahf answers those questions.
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
What does “OTC” mean? Of course I believe that the Qur’an was revealed, and of course I know that non-Muslims don’t believe that. The point rather is how the surah came to be, to answer the questions–that shows the divine origin.
Maybe the Qur’an isn’t talking about Catholics when it says People of the Book… hmm… have you thought of that?
LOL. The idea is that some people have received revelation. If you want to deny that… go ahead. Not gonna hurt my feelings.
A
Angelos
Guest
What makes you reach the conclusion that Mohammad was not studying with them, did not have any relations with them? Yathrib’s being a different city? No way! It is related in Islamic history that Mohammad travelled a lot due to being a businessman of that era. Mohammad would never be able to pass that test since Jews would definitely ask him to work a miracle, which he could not do throughout his life.
Peace,
Angelos N.B.
F
FCEGM
Guest
It means “on the contrary”.
Perhaps it shows it to to your satisfaction, but not to the satisfaction of those who disagree that the Koran or any part of it IS of divine origin. So, it remains a belief, not a fact. (Which, btw, was “Angelos’” point to you as well.)
Only if Muslims follow the more insane predilections of some Fundamentalist Christians who don’t consider Catholics to be Christians. But that, of course, would be the answer to the problem Muslims have in the Catholic denial of Christians being “People of the Book” - you’d think God would know something like that.
I never said or implied that I denied some people have received revelation; I do say, however, that some people who claim to have received revelation didn’t.
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
Peace.
Of course not. The fact that people would have KNOWN if he had been studying with Jews. The Jews would have known, so would the Meccans. But there is no evidence of that. In fact, if he were studying with Jews, why not take their religion? Why start teaching other things? It frankly doesn’t even make sense.
Actually, it is only “related in Islamic history” that he traveled twice. Once as a young boy in a caravan when he met a Christian monk who thought he was going to be a prophet. And then again for the woman who became his wife–she comissioned him to drive a caravan. That makes two occasions.
Oh but he did work miracles. More importantly though, the test was to answer these questions–which he did!
A
Angelos
Guest
But this does not change the fact that Sabians are a different community of believers similar to but not identical with Jews and Christians! What made them different? What was the thing that separated them from the idolaters and magicians, polytheists?
But you forget that according to the Koran the Gospel (Injeel) was given to the Jews, not to Christians! More, how can the Koran keep calling Christians the people of the Book if they no more have the supposed revelation with them?
No distinction here! It is only that Mohammad mistakenly assumes the Gospel has the same form as the revelation supposedly given him! Here we get back to the original problem: the conventional Islamic theory of distortion results from the discrepancy between the Bible and the Koran in both form and content. However, the major and overriding issue is the content. As you previously and honestly confessed, you would still be putting forward the same allegations of distortion even if Jewish and Christian Scripture were identical to the Koran in form!
Jews and Christians changing which words from their right places? How much does it affect the original text? It is not even clear in that verse if the distortion is associated with the word of Allah! Not all words are words of the Book or Allah as you must be guessing. More, verbal modifications do not matter at all since the text remains intact!
I would suggest you read the following verses too:
2: 121. Those unto whom We have given the Scripture, who read it with the right reading, those believe in it. And whoso disbelieveth in it, those are they who are the losers.
2: 41. And believe in that which I reveal,** confirming that which ye possess already**, and be not first to disbelieve therein, and part not with My revelations for a trifling price, and keep your duty unto Me.
2: 89 And when there cometh unto them a scripture from Allah, **confirming that in their possession **- though before that they were asking for a signal triumph over those who disbelieved - and when there cometh unto them that which they know (to be the truth) they disbelieve therein. The curse of Allah is on disbelievers.
5 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.
28: 49 Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Then bring a scripture from the presence of Allah that giveth clearer guidance than **these two **(that) I may follow it, if ye are truthful.
I can see no verses supporting your claims of corruption.
Peace,
Angelos N.B.
A
Angelos
Guest
Some people prefer making innovations instead of following in the footsteps of others! If Mohammad had converted to Judaism, he would never have gained the things he dreamed of getting! Besides, he did not like every certain tenet of Judaism as it is clear from the fact that he stole Abraham from Jews and tried to be the Moses of Arabs! There is also no evidence that he was not studying with the Jews or an idolater friend of his taught him the Torah
Only twice? Hmm, he did not work hard then
He wrought miracles that are not found in the Koran, he always followed monotheism, which is never found in the Koran…What kind of questions were they? Please post them for me next time. I want to see if those Jews were good teachers knowing what kind of questions must be posed to Mohammad.
Peace,
Angelos N.B.
R
Rocky
Guest
**" Christian" influences ? Christian presence before “Islam” **
The Nasara among pre-Islamic Arabs
The Koran does talk about “nasara” in Arabic. Some authors think that the word designates CHRISTIANS, without any further details. Others, struck by the strange beliefs attributed to the “nasara” by the Koran, think that “NASARA” designates Jewish Christian sects, especially Ebionites, Gnostics, Nazarenes who - either coming ethnically from a Jewish extraction or “converted” to such sects (like Waraqah bin Nawfal according to Ibn Hisham).
In fact, the Koran seems to describe the “nasara” as :
1- holding both the Torah of Moses (Mussa) and the Injil of Issa (Gospel of Jesus
2-- believing only in “the Injil”, the one and only Gospel, apparently the “Evangelium juxta Hebraeos”
3- of Hebrew or Aramaic Gospel attributed to Matthew,
4- by the Ebionites.
5- forbidding to eat pork; perhaps keeping also the sabbath, but probably circumcision.
6- denying the divinity of Christ (other times, both the Koran and the nasara seem to affirm it).
The Ebionites had both streams.
OTHER scholars say that those “nasara” were NON-Chalcedonian Christians like Jacobites, nestorians, monophysists - respectively denying the humanity of Christ, the two natures in Him .
The authors who think that the “NASARA” of the Koran designates more or less or/ and pseudo christian sects especially of Jewish origin and affiliation, believe that Christians children of the Church , in our Christian orthodoxy, are called “RUUM” ÉϘ (“byzantines”) by the Koran.
It is risky to affirm categorically that “Islam” underwent the influence of this or that sect, however it seems likely that :
1- the Koran denied the divinity of Christ due to ebionite and arian influence.
2- the Koran confused between divinity and humanity of Christ due to the nestorian influence.
3- the Koran denied the crucifixion of Christ due to the gnostic docetes who claimed that Jesus had only the appearance of a body, cf. the apocryphal (or pseudepigraphic) Gospel of Peter.
4- the Koran criticized “Christians” for believing in three gods : Allah, Issa and Mary - perhaps due to the existence of a “marianistic” heresy.
Basic references about the various sects and heresies in the early Church : St. Iraeneus : “Adversus Haereses” St. Epiphanus, Bishop of Salamina (Cyprus) :“The Panarion” (All the schisms).
Fr. Louis Shikho , “The Nasara among pre-Islamic Arabs”.
al-bushra.org/Madros/islam/.html
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
Peace.
2:79 Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:“This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.
I’m afraid I fail to see the point here. I don’t know who the Sabians were–do you? If I don’t even know who they were how could I say what made them different? The point of the ayah which I quoted was that everyone is going to be judged by Allah, regardless of their religion.
I forgot what? The Injeel was given to Jesus. The Injeel was given to Jesus. The Injeel was given to Jesus. Jesus was sent to the Jews. Jesus was sent to the Jews. Jesus was sent to the Jews. The people who accepted the Gospel became Christians. The people who accepted the Gospel became Christians. The people who accepted the Gospel became Christians.
Ah the point is that they have SOME of it.
Not really. It’s generally assumed that the Qur’an was the only revelation given to man which was, in fact, VERBATIM from God. The Gospel was rather a message given to Jesus which he taught the people. So in that sense, a lot more like ahadith.
No it doesn’t. The conventional Islamic theory of distortion results from the Qur’an saying so.
Huh? The reason I put forth the allegations of distortion is because the Qur’an says so. Not terribly elaborate on my part, honestly. You asked would I still believe it if the same text of the Bible (which has been distorted and added to and forgotten etc) had been rearranged and called by new names. I believe the Qur’an. It’s that simple. You didn’t say anything about the Jewish or Christian scripture being identical to the Qur’an in form, not until now–and it’s not something that could ever happen.
The words in their scripture. Do you want me to give an example? You won’t like it…
Absolutely impossible to say. But Christians managed to take the teachings of Jesus and begin to worship him… I would say that is a pretty drastic effect on the original message. (Remember of course that TEXT is not necessariliy ORIGINAL.)
This is a kind of lame way to dance around the argument. A minute ago you rejected I had even put forth such an ayah and now you try to conceal its meaning. Oddly enough, exactly what Christians are accused of doing.
Not really. How many people do you know who actually make a habit of reading the entire Bible, for example, cover to cover? Truth is that people can be easily misled by quoting just a few verses out of their context. And typically that’s what people get in church anyway–the same verses recycled, and they don’t necessarily get the context much less the rest of the text.
Okay, I read them. Do you believe them to be the Word of God? Unless you do I’m not sure why I need to discuss them with you.
Trying again to ignore the obvious, are you? Here is another one for you
2:79 Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:“This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.
S
Sister_Amy
Guest
Peace.
What you are doing is called speculating.
16:103 We know indeed that they say, “It is a man that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.
There is no evidence that he didn’t build a spaceship and fly to Jupiter when he was 4 years old either. Please have a little common sense.
What you are doing is called speculating.
16:103 We know indeed that they say, “It is a man that teaches him.” The tongue of him they wickedly point to is notably foreign, while this is Arabic, pure and clear.
How would you know?
Indeed!! What purpose would it serve for his “miracles” to appear in the Qur’an? Miracles are only good for the people who can see it. Today in 2008 we cannot witness those miracles–they are useless to us. The Qur’an however is an everlasting miracle. It is a miracle which induced me to embrace Islam so I will attest to that. It has miracles of the unseen–knowledge of things which weren’t revealed before, or that Muhammad wouldn’t have known except by revelation from God. Those are the relevant miracles. Not feeding crowds, or providing them water to purify with, milking a goat that had no milk, splitting the moon, etc. By the way though, splitting the moon is in the Qur’an, as is the night journey (israa’) to Jerusalem.
When you’re ready.
A
Angelos
Guest
You definitely do so! As far as I remember, last time we were discussing the People of the Book, not the judgment of every creature by Allah. Your posts are not consistent with each other: from the analysis of the concept of BOOK to the PEOPLE of the book, now finally to universal JUDGMENT. I fail to understand what you are trying to get at.
This means many people who were not Jewish subsequently became the People of the Book because they believed in the prophet of Jews? Now it is clear that the phrase People of the Book does not necessarily mean a community who was given divine revelation.
Saying that they have SOME of it with no reference to the Koran illustrates how you Muslims confuse your pesonal comments with your Scripture!
Here again you do not follow the claims of the Koran, but of Muslim scholars. Was Gospel like ahadith? Why does your Allah say He revealed the Gospel then? Delete Injeel from your previous list of Allah’s books
There was no such need for Jewish and Christian Scripture to be identical to the Koran in form since the concept of dictation versus inspiration came through Mohammad’s wishful thinking! The point I m trying to make here is this: you Muslims would not believe in the Bible even if it had been identical to the Koran in form! Then why the need and zeal to prove the distortion theory by making comparisons between the Bible and the Koran on the sole basis of form?
- Status