Muslim objections to the Bible

[Reuben_J]

famdigy:

According to Christian Belief, wasn’t that account which is different inspired by God? if that is so then why didn’t God take time to make sure that account is in line with the rest?, why didn’t God protect the writer from making that mistake. The difference doesn’t change anything in the message, I get it, really. But why is there a difference at all if it was Divinely inspired?

Good question. Again bear in mind that the Gospel is a report by a witness to be read by targeted audience. A witness in a Christian’s sense can be eye-witness or someone who experienced the power of the resurrection Jesus.

Simply speaking there is no material mistake in the Bible but different writers saw the story differently from his perspective. And that was how he reported it. The story did not change however. Thus the question of mistake does not arise.

God surely will prevent the mistake if really there is. This protection is promised by Jesus for the Church – the gate of hell will not prevail against it. And that include untruth.

The guarantee of the truth is when a person is inspired by the Holy Spirit, God Himself. The Holy Spirit operated through the body, the Church that had been promised to prevail against all elements that seek to destroy it. Untruth is one of those elements.

famdigy:

John Mill, was the first person to print and publish the bible when the printing press was invented. When John set out to print the Bible, he came across many different manuscripts of the Bible, each manuscript contradicted the other, and so the problem for John was that he didn’t know which manuscript to print. So what he did was to print the bible, and then attach footnotes at the bottom of the page listing the differences between the manuscript.

Wikipedia quotes
“Mill’s work noted over 30,000 discrepancies between some 100 extant New Testament manuscripts. His work was attacked by Daniel Whitby and Anthony Collins. Whitby’s Examen claimed that Mill had destroyed the validity of the text; Collins received a reply from Bentley (Phileleutherus lipsiensis). Bentley defended Mill noting essentially that Mill was not responsible for the differences between the various MSS, he only pointed them out. Bentley further noted that Christendom had indeed survived despite the errors, essentially asserting that Whitby’s attacks were unfounded”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mill

Manuscripts. You mean translations. Muslims find it difficult to distinguish between translations and the originals.

The Church is a continuous institution since the time of the apostles of Jesus. It is uninterrupted in its existence and operation. The Bible is the written message but it was the Church that decided which writings were authentic or rather inspired. The Gospel message was not lost contrary to what Muslims like to think. To give a simple analogy – think of the sahaba of Mohammad. Anyone who adulterated the Bible would surely be picked out at once.

Maybe you should find out from the Vatican for a more reliable source. Maybe some of the Catholics here can help you with that.

famdigy:

The question again, why did God allow for 30,000 discrepancies in his Inspired word?
Honestly I’ve never heard of that and I don’t think it ever exist.

this begs the second question, if God allowed for 30,000 discrepancies between the NT manuscripts, how do you know that the manuscripts themselves didn’t contain errors, additions, or omissions in the message?

Because after all, we don’t have any of the originals of the NT books, what we have are copies of copies of copies. If a mistake was made in the first copy, that mistake is carried on by the 2nd copy, and then a few more mistakes are added and copied again in a 3rd copy and so on and so forth.

Someone have to point out the 30,000 discrepancies first before I can comment on this. Otherwise it would be merely commenting on assumption which in reality never exist or in reality a misconception of the understanding of the Bible.

BTW there 30,000 original manuscripts kept in church archives and museums available today that testify to the consistency of the Bible.

 

[utunumsint]

According to Christian Belief, wasn’t that account which is different inspired by God? if that is so then why didn’t God take time to make sure that account is in line with the rest?, why didn’t God protect the writer from making that mistake. The difference doesn’t change anything in the message, I get it, really. But why is there a difference at all if it was Divinely inspired?

Because the writers were writting to different audiences. Matthew to Jews, Luke to Greeks, Marc Romans, and John to Ephesians. They inconsistencies are to be expected because God used human beings to convey his message. I also believe that the inconsistencies can be explained based on different perspectives on the event. As I writter, I know that I can be asked to write an account of an event, and have another writer do the same work in a completely different way. That does not invalidate my account or the other writer’s account, but makes them complimentary, enhancing the amount of detail available to consider when shaping a mental picture of the event in our minds.

On another point, imagine there are fourty words spoken, and three general points described using those fourty words. The first point would have specific meaning to the Jews, but the second and third would be more interesting to Greeks and Romans. So Matthew, writting to the Jews, focus’ his account on the first point, but ignores the other two, while Marc and Luke do not focus on the first message, but only on the second and the third. Are they inconsistent? Yes. But the three messages are in fact true.

John Mill, was the first person to print and publish the bible when the printing press was invented. When John set out to print the Bible, he came across many different manuscripts of the Bible, each manuscript contradicted the other, and so the problem for John was that he didn’t know which manuscript to print. So what he did was to print the bible, and then attach footnotes at the bottom of the page listing the differences between the manuscript.
Wikipedia quotes
“Mill’s work noted over 30,000 discrepancies between some 100 extant New Testament manuscripts. His work was attacked by Daniel Whitby and Anthony Collins. Whitby’s Examen claimed that Mill had destroyed the validity of the text; Collins received a reply from Bentley (Phileleutherus lipsiensis). Bentley defended Mill noting essentially that Mill was not responsible for the differences between the various MSS, he only pointed them out. Bentley further noted that Christendom had indeed survived despite the errors, essentially asserting that Whitby’s attacks were unfounded”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mill

The question again, why did God allow for 30,000 discrepancies in his Inspired word?
this begs the second question, if God allowed for 30,000 discrepancies between the NT manuscripts, how do you know that the manuscripts themselves didn’t contain errors, additions, or omissions in the message?

There were multiple unauthorized translations of the bible at the time, corrupting the text to a large extent. Some are better than others. The Catholic church’s translation at the time was that of Jerome from the 4th century called the Vulgate. Since then there have been discoveries of even earlier texts to draw from and textual criticism has evolved to compensate for any changes or additions. However, the problems discovered have been small.

As to the original manuscripts, we have multiple quotations from the bible from early church fathers from the first and early second century. All of the New Testament bible texts were quoted by them except for a few. This allows us to authenticate many of the passages based on their quotations.

Because after all, we don’t have any of the originals of the NT books, what we have are copies of copies of copies. If a mistake was made in the first copy, that mistake is carried on by the 2nd copy, and then a few more mistakes are added and copied again in a 3rd copy and so on and so forth.

That is why textual criticism has evolved as a discipline. Going to the earliest text can help reduce such errors. However, what has been found is a remarkable continuity between copies.

Why did God allow this to happen? Because he gave these books to human beings. They are transmitted to us through human beings. Error does crop up, but I believe the essential Gospel message has not been corrupted at any point in history.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Benjamin8o8]

Why did God allow this to happen? Because he gave these books to human beings. They are transmitted to us through human beings. Error does crop up, but I believe the essential Gospel message has not been corrupted at any point in history.

God bless,
Ut

wow, that`s exactly what I wanted to say, but just not in those educated words

 

[SteveLohr]

Famdigy-
Thank you for your honest questions. It is good that you are asking such questions, because it shows that you are searching for the Truth. Hopefully, I can help answer some of your questions. If you have additional questions regarding the historical accuracy of the Gospels, I humbly invite you to take a look at an outline I prepared on this topic. It can be found here:
geocities.com/stevelohr2001/jesus-factorfiction06242008.html

I also have a powerpoint at this website:
geocities.com/stevelohr2001/

Because of the length of this response, I’m breaking this reply into two messages

Regarding your statement about the alleged contradictions in the Bible. For ease of citation, I have put your statements in bold font:

Both Matthew(21:18) and Mark (11:12) relate the story of Jesus’s cursing of a fig tree. However, there is a clear discrepancy between the two stories. Matthew says that Jesus
cursed the fig tree [after] cleaning the temple and turning away those who traded there.
Contrary to this, Mark says that Jesus cursed the fig tree [before] cleaning the temple and
turning away those who traded there.

The Gospel of Mark was not written in chronological order. Papias said in 130 CE that he had been told by the Apostle John that the gospel was attributed to Mark, “the interpreter of Peter.”

Mark indeed, since he was the interpreter of Peter, wrote accurately, but not in order, the things either said or done by the Lord as much as he remembered. For he neither heard the Lord nor followed Him, but afterwards, as I have said, [heard and followed] Peter, who fitted his discourses to the needs [of his hearers] but not as if making a narrative of the Lord’s sayings’; consequently, Mark, writing down some things just as he remembered, erred in nothing; for he was careful of one thing - not to omit anything of the things he heard or to falsify anything in them. (Note: this is from “Fragments of Papias, VI.” A copy of this can be found at ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-01/anf01-43.htm)

In other words, Mark was not necessarily writing in chronological order, but in thematic order. Therefore, it is not surprising that there is an alleged contradiction in chronology, as Mark was not interested in chronology, but it relaying the teachings of Jesus.

 

[SteveLohr]

The story of cleaning the temple, which is told by Matthew in [21:12] and by Mark in [11:15], is a story of the same event but told differently by Matthew and Mark. How can God’s words contradict each other?

These passages are cited below:

Matthew 21:10-13 ( NIV )
When Jesus entered Jerusalem, the whole city was stirred and asked, “Who is this?”
The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.”
Jesus entered the temple area and drove out all who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves.
“It is written,” he said to them, “‘My house will be called a house of prayer,’ but you are making it a ‘den of robbers.’” (The Holy Bible, New International Version, 1st ed. )

Mark 11:15-18 ( NIV )
Jesus entered Jerusalem and went to the temple. He looked around at everything, but since it was already late, he went out to Bethany with the Twelve.
The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry.
Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs.
Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.” And his disciples heard him say it.
On reaching Jerusalem, Jesus entered the temple area and began driving out those who were buying and selling there. He overturned the tables of the money changers and the benches of those selling doves,
and would not allow anyone to carry merchandise through the temple courts.
And as he taught them, he said, “Is it not written: “‘My house will be called a house of prayer for all nations’ ? But you have made it ‘a den of robbers.’”
The chief priests and the teachers of the law heard this and began looking for a way to kill him, for they feared him, because the whole crowd was amazed at his teaching. (The Holy Bible, New International Version, 1st ed. )

Presumably, you are raising the issue of the cleaning of the temple occurring on Monday instead of Palm Sunday in Mark as opposed to Matthew. However, as we saw above, Mark is not written in chronological, but thematic order. Matthew, even more so than Mark, is written in a thematic order. Matthew appears to alternate events and teaching. See xenos.org/ministries/crossroads/OnlineJournal/issue1/synoprob.htm#Ref9 citing Donald Hagner, Matthew 1-13: Word Biblical Commentary, and John Wenham, Redating Matthew, Mark & Luke, (IVP, 1992), p.101-109

As can be seen, there is no contradiction. Both passages state that Jesus entered Jerusalem, and drove out the money changers. The only alleged disagreement is whether this occurred on Palm Sunday or the next day. But note that neither Matthew or Mark are making a statement on what day this occurred-They both simply state that it occurred after Jesus entered Jerusalem, and both agree on what happened. Accordingly, there is no discrepancy between the authors.

 

[SteveLohr]

**According to the Gospel of Mark [11:12], Christ cursed the fig tree and his disciples, including Peter, knew [the day after] that it had dried up when they saw it dry up on their way
backtotown[11:20].

The opposite is to be found in the Gospel of Matthew. He tells that all the events took place in [the same day]; the tree dried up immediately and the disciples saw what happened and said: how did the fig tree dry up immediately? When? [21: 18-20].**

This alleged discrepancy is basically part of the same “discrepancy” regarding the clearing of the temple. The same arguments I make in that response likewise apply to this point.

**According to the Gospel of Mark [14: 32-43], Jesus was caught in a place called Gethsemane. However, in Luca’s bible [22: 29-47], Jesus was caught on the Mount of Olives!

Gethsemane and Mount of Olives are geographically different areas, as shown in Mark 14:26-32, first Jesus and the disciples were at the mount of olives where he spoke to them about denying him, from there they went to Gethsemane. Therefore Gethsemane and Mount of Olives are not the same place!

How come there is such contradictory information concerning the place where Christ (Peace be upon him) was caught?**

These passages are reproduced below:

Mark 14:31-36 ( NIV )
But Peter insisted emphatically, “Even if I have to die with you, I will never disown you.” And all the others said the same.
They went to a place called Gethsemane, and Jesus said to his disciples, “Sit here while I pray.”
He took Peter, James and John along with him, and he began to be deeply distressed and troubled.
“My soul is overwhelmed with sorrow to the point of death,” he said to them. “Stay here and keep watch.”
Going a little farther, he fell to the ground and prayed that if possible the hour might pass from him.
“Abba, Father,” he said, “everything is possible for you. Take this cup from me. Yet not what I will, but what you will.” (The Holy Bible, New International Version, 1st ed. )

Luke 22:29-47 (NIV)
And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me,
so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
“Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift you as wheat.
But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”
But he replied, “Lord, I am ready to go with you to prison and to death.”
Jesus answered, “I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know me.”
Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?” “Nothing,” they answered.
He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’ ; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.”
The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.” “That is enough,” he replied.
Jesus went out as usual to the Mount of Olives, and his disciples followed him.
On reaching the place, he said to them, “Pray that you will not fall into temptation.”
He withdrew about a stone’s throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed,
“Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”
An angel from heaven appeared to him and strengthened him.
And being in anguish, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground.
When he rose from prayer and went back to the disciples, he found them asleep, exhausted from sorrow.
“Why are you sleeping?” he asked them. “Get up and pray so that you will not fall into temptation.”
While he was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him,
but Jesus asked him, “Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?” (The Holy Bible, New International Version, 1st ed. )

This alleged discrepancy is easily resolved by noting that the Garden of Gethsemane is in fact physically located on the Mount of Olives, at the bottom of the slope. Thus, there is no discrepancy. Just as you might say that you live in Canada or North America without contradicting yourself, so the gospel writers likewise can use the Mount of Olives and the Garden of Gethsemane interchangeably.

 

[SteveLohr]

Regarding your point on the accuracy of the translations, you stated:

**The problem for me (and I’m not the only one) with the belief that bible text is inspired by God is that we don’t have the originals of those texts today.

Bart Ehrman, Author of Misquoting Jesus makes the point in the followings words

"There are a lot of mistakes in the bible, contradictions, discrepancies, different points of view, different authors who have different things to say about fundamental issues. About who Jesus is, who God is, what salvation is.**

First, your argument about the alleged inadequacy of manuscript support for the Bible is, IMHO, more readily applicable to the Quran. However, that is a discussion we can have in another thread. The fact is that their is excellent evidence for the textual accuracy of modern Bibles. Nearly complete copies of the books of the New Testament exist from approximately 200 years after the death of Jesus. For instance, the Rylands Papyrus. Dated 117-138. The Bodmer Papyrus II contains most of John. Is dated 150-200 CE.
Contains approx. 66% of John. The Chester Beatty Papyri contain all of the Gospels. Is dated approx. 250 C.E., with portions may be dated to the 1st Century. The Codex Vaticanus contains nearly entire Bible. Written in CE 325-350. Codex Sinaiticus is a complete copy of the New Testament, dating from approximately 340 CE. CodexEphraemi (400’s CE). Located at Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris. This contains the entire New Testament except II Thessalonians and II John.
However, the bibliographic evidence for the Bible is even better. Relying only on quotations from early (2-3 cent. AD) writers, one researcher was able to reconstruct the entire New Testament except for 11 verses.
Further, the accuracy of the Bible can be verified by the sheer number of manuscripts we can compare modern translations to. There are 5366 Greek New Testaments that have been catalogued, and an additional 9000 manuscripts in Syriac, Coptic, Arabic and Latin. Based on the wealth of manuscripts, one researcher (Wenham) belives that the overall biblical text is 99.99 percent pure, without any of the differences affecting doctrine. Other researches disagree, saying that the text is merely 98.33 percent pure. (Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Apologetics, pg. 532).

 

[Sam_777]

Famdigy-
Thank you for your honest questions. It is good that you are asking such questions, because it shows that you are searching for the Truth. Hopefully, I can help answer some of your questions. If you have additional questions regarding the historical accuracy of the Gospels, I humbly invite you to take a look at an outline I prepared on this topic. It can be found here:
geocities.com/stevelohr2001/jesus-factorfiction06242008.html

I also have a powerpoint at this website:
geocities.com/stevelohr2001/

And thank you Steve for your effort and those detailed posts. :hug1:

 

[sedonaman]

…
I would be more worried about the question, “Was Mohammad a real prophet?” According to the O/T, Numbers 12:6 identifies a true prophet of God. The Qu’ran (very conveniently) does not contain the Hebrew O/T book of Numbers, even though Islam recognizes Moses as being a prophet of God.

 

[sedonaman]

…
This Islamic understanding of Scripture is incompatible with the Catholic understanding. It is the equivalent to Sola Scriptura, and we all know what that did to Christianity. In Islam, it was defined and accepted from the beginning, thus one needs only the Quran to understand revelation. Sola Scriptura is the norm in Islam.

I think this is a good answer. Muslim posters in this forum are proud to claim that the Qur’an has not changed one single dot in 1,400 years, as though one dot one way or the other would invalidate the whole book. To hang one’s faith on such a minor detail as whether Jesus cursed a fig tree before or after the Temple incident boggles my mind. Why not re-open the debate on how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? What all this smacks of is religious fundamentalism, of which Islam apparently is rife with.

 

[SteveLohr]

I’m not sure I accept the Muslim claim that the Quranic text has not changed since it was originally dictated by Mohammed. However, I would acknowledge that the text has remain preserved since Uthman issued the authorized version around 656 AD. The problem is that all other varient copies of the Quran were destroyed at that time, so it is impossible to evaluate how accurate the current text is to the original Quranic texts. See generally answering-islam.org/Green/uthman.htm

 

[sedonaman]

I’m not sure I accept the Muslim claim that the Quranic text has not changed since it was originally dictated by Mohammed. However, I would acknowledge that the text has remain preserved since Uthman issued the authorized version around 656 AD. The problem is that all other varient copies of the Quran were destroyed at that time, so it is impossible to evaluate how accurate the current text is to the original Quranic texts. See generally answering-islam.org/Green/uthman.htm

I agree with everything you have said here, but the point is not that we do not accept their claim, but that Muslims believe it.