B
Bloved
Guest
Why are Muslims so critical of the bible? Especially since the quran was put together in such disorder and dubiously kept until it was made into a book? If it was the word of God why was it being eaten by a goat?
- Status
J
jakasaki
Guest
It’s like the old school bully… you know…
“my daddy is bigger & better than your daddy… nah… nah… nahhhhhh…”
They need to discredit the Bible, fill it with corruption as in “corrupted by man’s hand” in order to make their koran bigger & better…
“my daddy is bigger & better than your daddy… nah… nah… nahhhhhh…”
They need to discredit the Bible, fill it with corruption as in “corrupted by man’s hand” in order to make their koran bigger & better…
S
supertubos
Guest
Your questions is terrible.
do you realize that the religious wars are all among the Monotheistic Religions? Muslims, Jews, Christians…
Each one thinks His own is the Right One.
Like me: I think and I am sure and I am certain that my certitude is true that the Catholic Church is the Only One which possesses the way to the Lord and that Other Religions go to God through Jesus Christ, who founded the true Church, the Catholic Church.
Peace among religions is a fundamental issue of our times…
J
JacquesMaritain
Guest
Hi Bloved:
This is a bizarre story, indeed. If we are to believe the Hadiths (interpretations and additions by Arabic scholars on what the Koran teaches), we read this:
Sunan Ibn Majah, Book of Nikah, Hadith # 1934:
“Narrated Aisha The verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper.”
Aisha was one of Mohammed’s child brides, so I suppose the story has some legs, and the scholar in question is authentic (ie, it is a valid Hadith, supposedly believed by the faithful). I can’t read Arabic, though, so I can’t speak to the accuracy of the translation. Maybe there’s a problem there (it wouldn’t be the first time, as you get a lot of crazy things when you try to translate ancient languages). Fortunately for the Bible, we have a long tradition of critical examination of the meanings of text, and what I would call a “scientific” school of critical analysis of what the words mean (ie, they’re being studied/interpreted by independent sources who do not have a stake in the outcome, and so they have no need to bend the interpretations or muzzle debate). This is what they do in Biblical Criticism at the major universities.
So far as I can tell, there is very little of this sort of textual analysis (Quranic Criticism) done in Arab universities. That may be why there is such a profound difference between the two. It would also explain why Muslims are so critical of the Bible (there is an established tradition of Biblical criticism in free nations such as ours, which is largely absent in the Muslim world). On the other hand, many Christians are critical of the Koran (I believe the similarities in the two works come because much of the Koran was plagiarized from early Christian and Jewish literature, and I’m obviously unhappy with the Koran’s views of women, human rights, freedom and submission).
Jacques
J
jakasaki
Guest
I don’t believe the question is is “terrible”Your questions is terrible.
do you realize that the religious wars are all among the Monotheistic Religions? Muslims, Jews, Christians…
Each one thinks His own is the Right One.
Like me: I think and I am sure and I am certain that my certitude is true that the Catholic Church is the Only One which possesses the way to the Lord and that Other Religions go to God through Jesus Christ, who founded the true Church, the Catholic Church.
Peace among religions is a fundamental issue of our times…
Muslims are VERY critical of the Bible.
And when Uthman put out the recitations onto paper, he did not compile it in order.
It’s all jumbled up.
And yes, a goat did eat some parts of it.
B
Bohm_Bawerk
Guest
I believe many Muslims are critical about the Bible because they incorrectly believe that Protestantism is all of Christianity. As such, they make the mistake that all Christians adopt “sola scriptura” to biblical interpretation. And because of this, Muslims proceed to pick up bits and pieces to push forward their own point of view. For instance, Muslims would reject the idea of the Trinity on the grounds of “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).
The real crisis is not Muslims being critical of the Bible, but rather, that the Protestant way of interpreting the Bible has become the de facto standard of all Christian denominations, at the expense of Catholicism.
I actually personally believe that many Muslims would actually be devout Catholics if they understood that a) Catholics consider both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture; b) that the Church’s teachings has not changed - not even once - over the course of 2000 years. The apparition of Our Lady at Fatima (the place bearing the name of Muhammaed’s daughter, coincidentally, if I’m not mistaken) indicates that God probably has a plan for Muslims, although we don’t know what. But that’s just me speculating
.
H
hn160
Guest
Give me a break, why do Catholics always try to blame Protestants for everything. Muslims have been killing and trying to convert Christians long before the Reformation. To a Muslim, Christians are heretics to be converted or killed. If God has a plan for Muslims, it is for Hell. There is only one way to the Father, that is through faith in Christ, period.I believe many Muslims are critical about the Bible because they incorrectly believe that Protestantism is all of Christianity. As such, they make the mistake that all Christians adopt “sola scriptura” to biblical interpretation. And because of this, Muslims proceed to pick up bits and pieces to push forward their own point of view. For instance, Muslims would reject the idea of the Trinity on the grounds of “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).
The real crisis is not Muslims being critical of the Bible, but rather, that the Protestant way of interpreting the Bible has become the de facto standard of all Christian denominations, at the expense of Catholicism.
I actually personally believe that many Muslims would actually be devout Catholics if they understood that a) Catholics consider both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture; b) that the Church’s teachings has not changed - not even once - over the course of 2000 years. The apparition of Our Lady at Fatima (the place bearing the name of Muhammaed’s daughter, coincidentally, if I’m not mistaken) indicates that God probably has a plan for Muslims, although we don’t know what. But that’s just me speculating
K
kylemccloughan
Guest
Amen.
B
Bohm_Bawerk
Guest
Funny how you didn’t constructively criticize my post but resorted to hyperbole and the red herring of “There is only way to the Father, that is through faith in Christ”, as if my post mentioned anything contrary to that.
My original post still stands. When there is a free-for-all in interpretation to the Bible, you get Muslims adopting the same approach to criticize the Bible to advance their point of view that segments of it allegedly indicate the denial of Trinity, the coming of Muhammad, the rejection of the divinity of Jesus Christ and so forth. Now, had many of them understood the importance of authority, and probably patristics (although that would be asking for too much probably lol
), this wouldn’t be an issue, and they’ll find that the Bible is not contradicting itself. The gauntlet is now thrown down to you to explain why Muslims aren’t justified to make such conclusions when their own interpretation leads them to make such conclusion? When you get users saying there are “33,000+” Protestant denominations for this very reason, they’re wrong. They should have perhaps said “33,001+” to include what appears to be sola scriptura from the Muslims.Another danger lies in biblical literalism, and it’s another reason why Muslims seem to be critical of Christianity. Muslims often argue that the Quran is inimitable and without a single error, but Christianity must necessarily be false because of different biblical translations (e.g. KJV, ESV, DRB, etc). This further advances their view that Christians and Jews (i.e. “the People of the Book”) received revelations from God that were corrupted over time, and it is only the Quran that has managed to be preserved from the influence of corruption. Again, seems to me more like criticism of Protestantism than Catholicism. How can Muslims explain that the Church has had consistent teachings over the course of it’s 2000+ years on Earth?
Not everyone is out on a Protestant witch hunt. It’s unfortunate you may have had some bad experiences with certain Catholics in your life, but not all Catholics are like that. Here are a just a couple of my recent opinions on Protestants (do I sound like I’m out to get you?):
Thread #1: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=571678
Post 59: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8078264&postcount=59
Make your own conclusion.
A
abucs
Guest
I think most Muslims don’t bother criticising the Bible. Perhaps somewhere along the line they are told the Bible is a corruption but they mainly aren’t bothered to look into it.
For the Muslim apologist, there is little option but to criticise the Bible.
The Bible predates the Koran and is written by authors eithers directly involved or by members of communities that were involved in what is described.
Since it conflicts with the Koran in many instances the obvious judgement would be that the writers of the Koran got it wrong.
But since Islam, unlike Christianity, is solely dependent on the sacred Koran which comes from Allah, then the Bible must be corrupted otherwise Islam is founded on a mistake.
For the Muslim apologist, there is little option but to criticise the Bible.
The Bible predates the Koran and is written by authors eithers directly involved or by members of communities that were involved in what is described.
Since it conflicts with the Koran in many instances the obvious judgement would be that the writers of the Koran got it wrong.
But since Islam, unlike Christianity, is solely dependent on the sacred Koran which comes from Allah, then the Bible must be corrupted otherwise Islam is founded on a mistake.
S
seeker57
Guest
From the discussions I have had with Muslims, they tell me they believe the Bible to be corrupted because so many things have been added, subtracted, etc., while the Quran is, according to them, uncorrupted and the actual word of God.
That is why they get so upset about buring Qurans.
Peace,
Seeker
That is why they get so upset about buring Qurans.
Peace,
Seeker
F
Frere
Guest
Yes, moreover, I think this is rooted in the DNA of islam because when Mohammad started it all, his view of Christianity was conditionned by the heretic movements of his time in Arabia.I believe many Muslims are critical about the Bible because they incorrectly believe that Protestantism is all of Christianity. As such, they make the mistake that all Christians adopt “sola scriptura” to biblical interpretation. And because of this, Muslims proceed to pick up bits and pieces to push forward their own point of view. For instance, Muslims would reject the idea of the Trinity on the grounds of “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one” (Deuteronomy 6:4).
The real crisis is not Muslims being critical of the Bible, but rather, that the Protestant way of interpreting the Bible has become the de facto standard of all Christian denominations, at the expense of Catholicism.
I actually personally believe that many Muslims would actually be devout Catholics if they understood that a) Catholics consider both Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture; b) that the Church’s teachings has not changed - not even once - over the course of 2000 years. The apparition of Our Lady at Fatima (the place bearing the name of Muhammaed’s daughter, coincidentally, if I’m not mistaken) indicates that God probably has a plan for Muslims, although we don’t know what. But that’s just me speculating
Everything the Koran says about Christians actually do apply more or less to those heretical movements. Mohammad must have thought that they are all there is of Christianity.
These Christians did not have the Pope, but only Scriptures and some Tradition. The Bible was developping and Mohammad must have been talking about the Bible by what the Koran call ‘the book’.
When the Pope and the Magisterium are disregarded, all that’s left is the Bible, and Mohammad noting the inefectiveness of the Bible to explain faith by itself and keep people’s unity, he started assuming things about it and compiling them in the Koran.Personnal interpretations of the Bible were already producing multiple Christian churches/sects/movements. Their scriptures had to be corrupted in order to allow all this divisions to happen. He introduced a new type of Scripture and way of handling it. For him this was the perfect solution, and it had to be from God. Recitiations straight from heaven and not open to interpretations.
The fact is Islam is really a Sola Scripture Tradition. I know about the Sunnah, but these are not as equal to Scripture as it is in the Catholic Tradition for example. Because of its root on a Book, Islam and Muslim see everything through ‘books’. They can’t conceive of a revelation without a book, as if God is bound on books. It is with this presumption that they approch the Bible. They expect it to show the Christian Faith as the Koran shows the Muslim Faith. They expect the Bible to compete with the Koran. But I don’t even think they should be compared.
As I like to say, the Koran can be better compared to one of the book of St. Augustine or St. Thomas Aquinas, for these reasons:
- they are written by one person
- they are written in one period of history
- they are covering the relationship of God and man and religions.
God bless
H
hamba2han
Guest
I do not understand why Christians should feel perplexed when Muslims are critical of the Bible since the obvious fact of the matter is that there is no Christian in the world who can answer the question of ‘Who wrote the Bible?’
100% faith in a book which is based on no tangible evidence whatsoever is not a good thing as far as Muslims are concerned.
The Qur’an that we have today is, after all, living proof of the existence of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) since all the reports from his companions that the Qur’an came from his lips alone and no one else is easily verifiable.
By comparison, can Christians honestly say that the Bible is indisputable proof of the existence of Jesus Christ (pbuh)?
100% faith in a book which is based on no tangible evidence whatsoever is not a good thing as far as Muslims are concerned.
The Qur’an that we have today is, after all, living proof of the existence of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) since all the reports from his companions that the Qur’an came from his lips alone and no one else is easily verifiable.
By comparison, can Christians honestly say that the Bible is indisputable proof of the existence of Jesus Christ (pbuh)?
S
supertubos
Guest
I dont even know what terrible is in English I think it is different from terrific… But I meant it goes deep into the heart of monotheists wars…We in Iberia Peninsula were not soft on the Muslims. Our nation Portugal was created fighting them for centuries…But were they the first to begin invading the Peninsula by Gibraltar in 711 if I am right and the only way of dialogue with them was to cut each other’s throats, There is a famous Portuguese warrior that bears the name “muslims-killer”, in the 11th century and in the Qoran it is said that the Peninsula should be Muslim !!!..
B
Bohm_Bawerk
Guest
Hello Hamba2han,
The reason why no Christian can answer the question of “who wrote the Bible” is because the question is inherently flawed. The Bible is not a single book. It is a collection of books compiled into one. Indeed, the very word “bible” comes from the Greek word meaning “the books”. For example, the Book of Psalms is written by several Psalmists (some estimate as many as 70+), with one of the most notable Psalmist being King David. What used to happen during such an era was that lesser known authors who contributed to its production would attribute it to a more prominent figure; so the Book of Psalms is generally attributed to King David, even though he himself did not write all of it.
No one denies that Muhammad existed. He certainly did exist. But the Quran is not divinely inspired because at the death of the last apostle (St. John the Apostle around 100 A.D.), all public revelation ceased. Public revelation is what God had revealed to Mankind, through Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the oral teaching of Jesus Christ handed down to his disciples who in turn handed it down to the early Church Fathers). When public revelation ceased, God had revealed all He needed to reveal on the matters of faith, morals and salvation.
The Quran was completed in 632 AD, which is 532 years after the death of the last apostle and when God had said all He needed to say to Mankind. Therefore, we can conclude that the Quran is not from God. After all, St. Paul tells us: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!” (Galatians 1:8). One would think St. Paul’s advice is especially pertinent to Muhammad, who claimed he received a message from the angel Gabriel.
Yes, the Bible is indisputable proof of the existence of Jesus Christ. Not only that, but historical evidence from the writings of Josephus (a Jewish man who would have obviously wanted to deny Jesus’ existence) indicates to us that Jesus was a real man. He is credited as being one of the first to record the existence of Jesus Christ outside of the Gospels.
Hopefully that helps. I ought to read more on Islam since my memory has gone a bit rusty
H
hamba2han
Guest
I respect your devotion to your faith but I must say that just about every point that you made in your post in based on the assumption that everything that is either written in the Bible or taught by the Church must be the truth and therefore anything in the Qur’an which contradicts the Biblical account must be false.Hello Hamba2han,
The reason why no Christian can answer the question of “who wrote the Bible” is because the question is inherently flawed. The Bible is not a single book. It is a collection of books compiled into one. Indeed, the very word “bible” comes from the Greek word meaning “the books”. For example, the Book of Psalms is written by several Psalmists (some estimate as many as 70+), with one of the most notable Psalmist being King David. What used to happen during such an era was that lesser known authors who contributed to its production would attribute it to a more prominent figure; so the Book of Psalms is generally attributed to King David, even though he himself did not write all of it.
No one denies that Muhammad existed. He certainly did exist. But the Quran is not divinely inspired because at the death of the last apostle (St. John the Apostle around 100 A.D.), all public revelation ceased. Public revelation is what God had revealed to Mankind, through Sacred Scripture (the Bible) and Sacred Tradition (the oral teaching of Jesus Christ handed down to his disciples who in turn handed it down to the early Church Fathers). When public revelation ceased, God had revealed all He needed to reveal on the matters of faith, morals and salvation.
The Quran was completed in 632 AD, which is 532 years after the death of the last apostle and when God had said all He needed to say to Mankind. Therefore, we can conclude that the Quran is not from God. After all, St. Paul tells us: “But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned!” (Galatians 1:8). One would think St. Paul’s advice is especially pertinent to Muhammad, who claimed he received a message from the angel Gabriel.
Yes, the Bible is indisputable proof of the existence of Jesus Christ. Not only that, but historical evidence from the writings of Josephus (a Jewish man who would have obviously wanted to deny Jesus’ existence) indicates to us that Jesus was a real man. He is credited as being one of the first to record the existence of Jesus Christ outside of the Gospels.
Hopefully that helps. I ought to read more on Islam since my memory has gone a bit rusty
It is a situation which I often face when discussing with especially Christians on matters of faith and so I have to say that it would be pointless to engage in a discussion which is based entirely on circular logic with regard to which between the Bible and the Qur’an is the Truth.
My own view is that Muslims and Christians should not look too hard at differences between our faiths but to instead look at the things we share i.e. the love for Jesus Christ (pbuh) and the belief in the Commandments… hence my interest in the things that Jesus (pbuh) says in the New Testament.
And BTW, Muslims are not big fans of Paul and so we are not very interested in the things that he says in the NT.
B
Bohm_Bawerk
Guest
It’s not based on any assumption at all, but is based on a knowledge that rests on firm philosophical rigour. Now it is indeed true that one is committing “circular logic”, but then for us to jettison ourselves out of that situation, we have to ask ourselves, “What makes Catholicism true, and Islam false; or what makes Islam true, and Catholicism false”. That’s worthy of thread in its own right as it’s beyond the scope and purpose of this thread.
C
Caged
Guest
No one really knows which religion is the “correct” one if any. We choose for ourselves which one we believe to be right. It doesn’t matter how much evidence you see promoting your own faith because every other religion will see evidence promoting theirs. We just can’t know. So arguments and even friendly discussions about whose is better are pretty pointless.
M
MartinJordan
Guest
I beg to differ here. It’s clear as day that Islam has got it wrong about Ishmael and his “near sacrifice” by his father Abraham. From there itself is where Islam begins…and therefore a false start IMO. Either they should have joined Judaism or Catholicism.
MJ
F
Frere
Guest
Don’t be so sure.
It is true that some appear more sure simply out of fanaticism, but not all who seem sure are fanatical.
It is possible to know when you are in the true religion, and be sure of that.
God bless
- Status