Revealed messages and texts found within Islam

[WuXiaoXia]

Hi all. I wanted to introduce myself a bit before I explicate any further. I’m a theology major from New England who will be graduating soon. Because of that I have had a fair share of access to a lot of information on various faiths that I think a few of you might find worthwhile to read. Every now and then I would like to share insights with you all that you might not have realized reading the usual spill on message boards.

This topic I wanted to discuss with those on here deals with the previously revealed messages of God that came before the Koran. The most famous of these messages would be the Torah and the Gospel but the Koran makes mention of more “messages” sent down by God that are not mentioned by name.

It seems to me that many Muslims and non-Muslims take for granted the idea within Islam that all messages that came before the Koran were corrupted textually and therefore have been invalidated by that textual error and the coming of the Koran.

A lot of people here seem to have the impression that this is the one golden rule when relating to the previously revealed books. I wanted to share with you all though that there really isn’t a golden rule or ruling found in Islam to support this idea. Many Muslims might give you the impression that this is a pivotal part of their theology but it is merely opinion that was formulated by jurist or Islamic scholar. In Islam there is the space to have various conflicting opinions on various topics and this is one such example.

Another reading of the Koran would bring up the fact that it is not the actual text that has been corrupted** but it is the interpretation of the text that is at fault. ** Since the text has to pass through human interpretation and guidance this isn’t such a far fetched idea. We know by looking at our history that we’ve had religious leaders who have been far from the ideal of being peace loving brothers and sisters.

You all have to remember that Islam prides itself on the oneness of God. Any distortion of this concept is a direct distortion of the majesty and greatness of God. When human’s interpret the texts with their own personal vanity in mind or singular pursuit then the text no longer serves its original calling: leading others to realize the singularity of God.

Anyways I just thought it would be good to share this concept with you. Next time you hear a Muslim or non-Muslim say that all previous messages or texts have been corrupted by the coming of Islam and the Koran just remember that the opinion isn’t a golden rule or necessarily correct.

In this trying times many Muslim’s feel threatened by conflicting faiths and ideologies and try to spin their texts in a way that can give them an advantage. It is standard ideology found within proselytizing no doubt.

 

[IbnFiktur]

While you are correct that there is significant room for difference in interpretation in Islamic theology (as with any religion), I do not believe that there is any evidence in the Qur’an to indicate that Muhammad viewed the Injil (singular word meaning “Gospel”) to be a book in the physical sense. Muhammad didn’t even view the Qur’an as a book in the physical sense.

The use of the term “Injil” as a singular, coherent entity implies a use similar to what we Christians might call the “Gospel Message,” ie the good news. It is not at all clear that Muhammad had on hand a New Testament that we would recognize (and it’s not likely that there was one in Arabic), as he lived on the fringes of the Christian world where unorthodox interpretations abounded.

In any event, I think you’re right in encouraging a broader view of Muslim theology, but generally off-the-mark in your interpretation of how Muhammad might view the Injil. It is possible that you’re correct, but based on the evidence we have of Muhammad’s life, times, geographical circumstances, and revelations, there isn’t credible reason to view his understanding of “Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John” as authentic scripture… indeed, it’s not terribly evident that he was familiar with these specific books and tellings of Christ’s life at all.

 

[jesus4ever]

what annoys me the most and i would say alot of other people is that if it says thou shall not kill then why kill christians and non muslims. God gave us free will and no one has the right to force others to join something they know is not the right path.

the other thing i can not understand is why would the same angle which appered to the virigin mary and tell her she would concive a child and he would be the sons of the most high would then appear to mommed (speeling) and say that we cathoilics have got it all wrong. that to me is wrong from the start.

Just 2 points i had.

 

[IgnatianPhilo]

While you are correct that there is significant room for difference in interpretation in Islamic theology (as with any religion), I do not believe that there is any evidence in the Qur’an to indicate that Muhammad viewed the Injil (singular word meaning “Gospel”) to be a book in the physical sense. Muhammad didn’t even view the Qur’an as a book in the physical sense.

I think one verse which may indicate he understood it as being a book, is a specific verse in which the people of the gospel are told to follow what is written therein. That they should look therein their own text. I’ve always thought based on this that the quran therefore indicates an understanding of the gospel as being a real book.

 

[IbnFiktur]

I think one verse which may indicate he understood it as being a book, is a specific verse in which the people of the gospel are told to follow what is written therein. That they should look therein their own text. I’ve always thought based on this that the quran therefore indicates an understanding of the gospel as being a real book.

If you have it off the top of your head, could you refer me to the specific aya?

A lot of the discussion will probably boil down to pre-Islamic Arabic etymology. In other words, what the term “Kitaab” (translated in modern Arabic as “book”) would have meant to Muhammad at that time. I’m not convinced that it held that meaning in Muhammad’s mind or society, which was almost totally pre-literate. Kitaab in the context of the Qur’an refers to “revelation.” Jews and Christans are said to have been given “Al-Kitaab” (The Book, in the singular), but surely this is not meant to imply that they were given a single (identical) book, but rather that they were given “revelation from God.”

In the same sense, Muhammad’s revelations were not a “book” in the literal sense, and the Qur’an wasn’t standardized as a single, uniform, physical “book” until well after his lifetime.

 

[Celtic_Maiden]

what annoys me the most and i would say alot of other people is that if it says thou shall not kill then why kill christians and non muslims. God gave us free will and no one has the right to force others to join something they know is not the right path.

the other thing i can not understand is why would the same angle which appered to the virigin mary and tell her she would concive a child and he would be the sons of the most high would then appear to mommed (speeling) and say that we cathoilics have got it all wrong. that to me is wrong from the start.

Just 2 points i had.

Talking about “Thou shall not kill” if one is a Moslem and you dont believe in your religion the Quaran says you should kill the person if they want to change to say be a Christian , obviously Thou shall not kill from the basic 10 Commandments dont apply here, plus the Quaran teaches to hate Christians and Jews and kill them if needs be, Mohammed was a Prophet of War, death, destruction, and evil, look at the things they are doing in Pakistan and accusing innocent Christians of tearing up the Quaran, again look at the probllems in Nigeria because half of the Country is Moslem and the other half Catholic, the Moslem population have blown up Catholic Churche’s , have we blown up any Mosque’s(no) they want to impose Sharia law on the Catholics, do the Catholics wont to impose that they should drink by law (no). A violent, ungodly religion.