To Muslims: why believe in a reinterpreted Bible

[CompSciGuy]

I was talking to a friend who grew up in a Muslim school, and he said that in the Muslim school they were taught a lot of stories about the same characters in the Bible as us except that the stories were changed a little here and there to give a different meaning. I don’t know if this is true, but from what I understand, Muslims do believe that the Old and New Testaments have truth to them, but are corrupted, and the Quran is the “uncorrupted” version of the truth. My question is this. Why believe someone who says to the Christians and Jews “you guys have it all wrong, here’s how it really happened” giving a new, “uncorrupted” version of the OT/NT accounts, when there is no evidence of the beliefs being promulgated in this new “uncorrupted” version prior to its writing? It is one thing to reject the writings as untrue, it is another thing to rewrite them. It seems to me that if the NT or OT are corrupted then whatever truth they ever had has been lost and cannot be recovered, and even if it somehow is (in your case, revelations through the prophet Mohammad) then there should be evidence that what he is saying is true, other than his claim to have divine revelation. Think about it. If Jesus were only a prophet and did not claim to be the Son of God, then someone would have written something about it at the time. The only accounts we have are that he claimed to be the Son of God and that he died on the cross and resurrected. If it happened differently, then it would have had to be recorded at the time in order for it to be reliable, not six hundred years in the future.

 

[elwill]

I was talking to a friend who grew up in a Muslim school, and he said that in the Muslim school they were taught a lot of stories about the same characters in the Bible as us except that the stories were changed a little here and there to give a different meaning. I don’t know if this is true, but from what I understand, Muslims do believe that the Old and New Testaments have truth to them, but are corrupted, and the Quran is the “uncorrupted” version of the truth. My question is this. Why believe someone who says to the Christians and Jews “you guys have it all wrong, here’s how it really happened” giving a new, “uncorrupted” version of the OT/NT accounts, when there is no evidence of the beliefs being promulgated in this new “uncorrupted” version prior to its writing? It is one thing to reject the writings as untrue, it is another thing to rewrite them. It seems to me that if the NT or OT are corrupted then whatever truth they ever had has been lost and cannot be recovered, and even if it somehow is (in your case, revelations through the prophet Mohammad) then there should be evidence that what he is saying is true, other than his claim to have divine revelation. Think about it. If Jesus were only a prophet and did not claim to be the Son of God, then someone would have written something about it at the time. The only accounts we have are that he claimed to be the Son of God and that he died on the cross and resurrected. If it happened differently, then it would have had to be recorded at the time in order for it to be reliable, not six hundred years in the future.

CompSciGuy
i think that you can testify the claims of quran about the bible from the bible itself and form the history of church and history of the writers of the bible itself

you don’t need to believe in what quran says blindly , actually you shouldn’t

you asked many questions here
Why believe someone who says to the Christians and Jews "you guys have it all wrong?

first of all you have to understand that muslims believed in mohammed (pbuh) as a prophet in the first place and consequently they believed in whatever he said ( story of jesus pbuh in just one aspect )
the correct question is why we believed in his prophethood

anyway i think that christians dosn’t have it all wrong , our problem is about your understanding for trinity and for the son- father relationship
and we can argue about these thing from the bible itself if you want

secondly . i think that every thing was recored in the fact , thats why you need to search about histroy of church and search about the writings which banned by the church and about the different cannons and sect which existed in the first 3 centuries , etc

 

[KathleenGee]

Thirdly, Muslims should not believe their teachers, thinking they know and understand the Bible and the beginnings of Christianity, our founders and early teachers.

They don’t. The Bible is gravely misinterpreted by Muslim imams that do not bear witness to history events and fact.

 

[Esdra]

I was talking to a friend who grew up in a Muslim school, and he said that in the Muslim school they were taught a lot of stories about the same characters in the Bible as us except that the stories were changed a little here and there to give a different meaning. I don’t know if this is true, but from what I understand, Muslims do believe that the Old and New Testaments have truth to them, but are corrupted, and the Quran is the “uncorrupted” version of the truth. My question is this. Why believe someone who says to the Christians and Jews “you guys have it all wrong, here’s how it really happened” giving a new, “uncorrupted” version of the OT/NT accounts, when there is no evidence of the beliefs being promulgated in this new “uncorrupted” version prior to its writing? It is one thing to reject the writings as untrue, it is another thing to rewrite them. It seems to me that if the NT or OT are corrupted then whatever truth they ever had has been lost and cannot be recovered, and even if it somehow is (in your case, revelations through the prophet Mohammad) then there should be evidence that what he is saying is true, other than his claim to have divine revelation. Think about it. If Jesus were only a prophet and did not claim to be the Son of God, then someone would have written something about it at the time. The only accounts we have are that he claimed to be the Son of God and that he died on the cross and resurrected. If it happened differently, then it would have had to be recorded at the time in order for it to be reliable, not six hundred years in the future.

Well, first of all, very interesting thread!

Second, same goes for LDS in this case.

Third: Actually there ARE accounts younger than 600 A.D.: Shortly after Jesus death there arose, beside the catholic Church many “heresies” which teach that Jesus didn’t die on the cross - among them Gnosticism, Arianism etc.
Where do you think Muhammed got this idea from? If I remember correctly, it was Arianism or Gnosticism. So actually, Muhammed probably never spoke with orthodox catholic Christians, but only Christian heretics and Jews. No wonder that the Qu’ran is so strange in our eyes…

These “heretic” texts about Jesus can still be read today, they’ve been translated into many languages.

If you are interested, I can send you a copy of a pdf file I created with nearly every “heretic-Christian” writing that’s available in the net. (But unfortunately many parts are in German…).

in Christ,

 

[CompSciGuy]

CompSciGuy
i think that you can testify the claims of quran about the bible from the bible itself and form the history of church and history of the writers of the bible itself

Can you elaborate on this please?

you don’t need to believe in what quran says blindly , actually you shouldn’t

you asked many questions here
Why believe someone who says to the Christians and Jews "you guys have it all wrong?

first of all you have to understand that muslims believed in mohammed (pbuh) as a prophet in the first place and consequently they believed in whatever he said ( story of jesus pbuh in just one aspect )
the correct question is why we believed in his prophethood

I’d like to know the answer to this question as well.

anyway i think that christians dosn’t have it all wrong , our problem is about your understanding for trinity and for the son- father relationship
and we can argue about these thing from the bible itself if you want

Gladly. If you want evidence for the Father-Son relationship and the divinity of Christ from the Bible, you need look no further than John Chapter 1 (In the beginning was the word). It says it very plainly. Also go on to read the rest of John’s gospel, it is very clear from the text that Jesus claimed to be more than just a prophet.

secondly . i think that every thing was recored in the fact , thats why you need to search about histroy of church and search about the writings which banned by the church and about the different cannons and sect which existed in the first 3 centuries , etc

Ok. So this gives some insight then, Mohammad’s claims were not made up by Mohammad but were based on heresies. I suppose then you should ask yourself why you believe the writings of heretics who did not know Jesus over the words of the apostles who did know him. I know that there exist heretical groups that have broken away from traditional Sunni Islam; suppose that I were to listen to them and use their doctrines to form a new religion. That is basically what Mohammad did with Christianity.

Again I repeat, if the apostles lied, or if the Church corrupted the gospel, then we have to believe that the meaning of the gospel is lost and no reliable source exists. The early heretical writings did not come from Jesus nor his apostles. The ones that do claim to be can be shown to be false.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Second, same goes for LDS in this case.

I totally agree, I just didn’t mention it because 1. I didn’t think Muslims would appreciate being compared with LDS and 2. I was going to keep the topic related to Islam. But I do see a very obvious connection there as well

If you are interested, I can send you a copy of a pdf file I created with nearly every “heretic-Christian” writing that’s available in the net. (But unfortunately many parts are in German…).

in Christ,

I am interested; I doubt that I will read them all but it would be good to have for reference. I’m sure that most of the early ones are covered by Irenaeus in “Against Heresies.”

 

[noobio]

Where do you think Muhammed got this idea from? ,

The infancy gospel of Thomas.

Infancy Gospel of Thomas III. 1 Now Jesus made of that clay twelve sparrows

The Quran Says

5:110 And Behold you made out of clay as it were a figure of a bird, by my leave and you breathed into it and it became a bird.

Also, the story of Jesus talking when he was a infant is also from a other Gospel.

 

[noobio]

CompSciGuy

anyway i think that christians dosn’t have it all wrong , our problem is about your understanding for trinity and for the son- father relationship
and we can argue about these thing from the bible itself if you want

Actually, the bible makes it clear that the Father has a releationship to the Son.Jesus is called the “son” many times.

A voice came from the cloud, saying, “This is my Son, whom I have chosen; listen to him.”.
Luke 9:35

Suddenly a voice came -from heaven saying, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”
Matthew 3:17

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

John 3:16

The concept of the trinity can be found in scripture.

The Son is God (John 1)
The Father is God ( Romans 1:7)
The Holy Spirit is God ( Acts 5:3-4)

All of these persons are ONE God, and all of these persons are fully divine.

 

[Dragonslayer]

Think about it. If Jesus were only a prophet and did not claim to be the Son of God, then someone would have written something about it at the time. The only accounts we have are that he claimed to be the Son of God and that he died on the cross and resurrected. If it happened differently, then it would have had to be recorded at the time in order for it to be reliable, not six hundred years in the future.

If Jesus was merely a prophet and not the son of God, it would mean the whole of Christianity is based on a lie, and our whole Catholic faith would be based on a lie.It would be rendered invalid. Why would someone say that, especially six hundred years after eye witness accounts say something different?

*1 John 4:1-3 ”Do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God, and every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God—this is the spirit of the Antichrist.” *

 

[noobio]

If Jesus was merely a prophet and not the son of God, it would mean the whole of Christianity is based on a lie, and our whole Catholic faith would be based on a lie.It would be rendered invalid. Why would someone say that, especially six hundred years after eye witness accounts say something different?

What is more surprising is that it would take God about 600 years to correct a false religion, that people died for and truly believed.

 

[campope]

I do not know much about other religions since I am not apart of a religion myself. I’m just in a relationship. But here is what I do know. I know that the bones of Muhammad are in Medina; the bones of Confucius are in Shantung; the cremated bones of Buddha are in Nepal. Thousands take pilgrimages to worship at their tombs. But in Jerusalem there is a cave cut into the rock. This is the tomb of Jesus- and it is empty.

God Bless

 

[CompSciGuy]

I do not know much about other religions since I am not apart of a religion myself. I’m just in a relationship.

ARRRGGGH
You’ve pushed my buttons. If you are a CHRISTIAN and you believe in the Bible and God and a specific set of doctrines about God (which all Christians do) then I’m sorry but that’s a religion! Don’t say “I’m not religious I have a relationship” because it’s not true and I know you’re trying to appeal to the secular crowd by saying this but it’s not working! I know because I used to be an agnostic and of all things Christians would say we would mock that “not a religion, a relationship” line the most because it was so cheesy and lame and obviously contrary to the truth. Don’t redefine terms to your liking you will only confuse people.

Sorry to go on a rant.

But here is what I do know. I know that the bones of Muhammad are in Medina; the bones of Confucius are in Shantung; the cremated bones of Buddha are in Nepal. Thousands take pilgrimages to worship at their tombs. But in Jerusalem there is a cave cut into the rock. This is the tomb of Jesus- and it is empty.

God Bless

I should also mention, there are no bones of the Blessed Virgin Mary either. Just a thought for those who don’t believe in the Assumption.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Dragonslayer;8306866:

If Jesus was merely a prophet and not the son of God, it would mean the whole of Christianity is based on a lie, and our whole Catholic faith would be based on a lie.It would be rendered invalid. Why would someone say that, especially six hundred years after eye witness accounts say something different?

What is more surprising is that it would take God about 600 years to correct a false religion, that people died for and truly believed.

That is the point I am trying to make. It is never reliable for someone to come along and “correct” a religion especially if there is no evidence for the “corrections” in the past. The texts upon which Muslims rely are themselves these “corrected” versions so it’s not so much Mohammad making stuff up, it’s Mohammad basing his beliefs off of writings of people who made stuff up. If the gospels are corrupted, then there is no hope for Christianity, nothing can really be relied upon.

 

[campope]

ARRRGGGH
You’ve pushed my buttons. If you are a CHRISTIAN and you believe in the Bible and God and a specific set of doctrines about God (which all Christians do) then I’m sorry but that’s a religion! Don’t say “I’m not religious I have a relationship” because it’s not true and I know you’re trying to appeal to the secular crowd by saying this but it’s not working! I know because I used to be an agnostic and of all things Christians would say we would mock that “not a religion, a relationship” line the most because it was so cheesy and lame and obviously contrary to the truth. Don’t redefine terms to your liking you will only confuse people.

Sorry to go on a rant.


I should also mention, there are no bones of the Blessed Virgin Mary either. Just a thought for those who don’t believe in the Assumption.

Haha ARRRG you catholics get to me sometimes… Maybe she was maybe she wasn’t… The Bible does not say. neither is it important wether she was or not and either way it isn’t that big of a deal. She was certainly a great saint, but she also shouldn’t be worshiped. just admired. And christianity is more of a relationship than a religion… One difference between the two is that every religion is man made. Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism, and liberal Christianity all involve man’s interpretation of faith. When you start worshiping with another man’s credo, you are dangerously close to religion, not biblical Christianity. Many of these religions have a manual (Koran, Book of Mormon, the writings of Buddha) to go along with the true word of God. As a Christian, I refuse to worship with any man’s rules other than those of the God man, my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. God is explicit about not taking away or adding anything to His word found in the bible.

 

[christosdavid]

When I did the “Quest for the historical Jesus” at Uni the Qu’ran was dismissed as an ahistoric account.

There is more evidence for the death of Jesus (contra certain parts of Islam) than any other historical event known. Particularly for a “nobody” that everyone knew that “Christ” had been crucified by the Roman institution in Judaea.

The Resurrection has good circumstantial evidence including eyewitness accounts and numbers of up to 500 at a time. It will only be ever believed by those who believe in the supernatural, however, and as a one off event cannot be proven or even placed in probability categories.

Islam is supernatural but cannot comprehend the nature and mission of Jesus. Which is why it cannot comprehend the Trinity. Hebrews says that (2:14-15)" Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death - that is, the devil - and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death."

Immanuel saved us and is now our high priest, with the blood from his once for all sacrifice.

without this revelation of God (Heb.1:1-3; John 1:1,2,14,18) which is continuing through history, Islam will be stuck at Abrahamic covenant and the Patriarchal promises. Where Jesus is recorded as saying that Abraham was glad to see him (Jn.8:56).

 

[CompSciGuy]

Haha ARRRG you catholics get to me sometimes… Maybe she was maybe she wasn’t… The Bible does not say. neither is it important wether she was or not and either way it isn’t that big of a deal. She was certainly a great saint, but she also shouldn’t be worshiped. just admired.

Good thing we don’t worship her.

And christianity is more of a relationship than a religion… One difference between the two is that every religion is man made. Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, Mormonism, and liberal Christianity all involve man’s interpretation of faith. When you start worshiping with another man’s credo, you are dangerously close to religion, not biblical Christianity. Many of these religions have a manual (Koran, Book of Mormon, the writings of Buddha) to go along with the true word of God. As a Christian, I refuse to worship with any man’s rules other than those of the God man, my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. God is explicit about not taking away or adding anything to His word found in the bible.

There you go again. Redefining the word “religion.” Let me give you the dictionary definition from dictionary.com:

1. "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. "
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

By these definitions, esp. by number 1, Christianity is clearly a religion. Whether or not a relationship is involved doesn’t take away from the fact that it is a religion. Redefining the word “religion” will not make Christianity look more appealing to the world, it will just confuse people.

Have you ever called into question your Bible-only believism?

 

[christosdavid]

Its pretty clear that the Bible (cf. James 1:26-7) says we ought to have religion, and it ought to be good, merciful, charitable and godly.

Or is James the Just’s letter only made of straw?

 

[campope]

Good thing we don’t worship her.

There you go again. Redefining the word “religion.” Let me give you the dictionary definition from dictionary.com:

1. "a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. "
2. a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

By these definitions, esp. by number 1, Christianity is clearly a religion. Whether or not a relationship is involved doesn’t take away from the fact that it is a religion. Redefining the word “religion” will not make Christianity look more appealing to the world, it will just confuse people.

Have you ever called into question your Bible-only believism?

Rules will naturally come with having a relationship with Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ did not come and die on the cross to get us to stop sinning. He came to set us free from sin. He came, not to put our focus on sin, but to take our focus off of it. The distinction is huge and the consequences even bigger. We are now dead to sin; dead to the law. It is fulfilled. If you got killed in a car accident and you were at fault, would the officer give you a ticket? No, you’re dead - a ticket is pointless. We are dead to the law.

God wants our focus to be on Him, not on the rules. I don’t lay down a law against my girlfriend. We have a relationship, we love each other, and learn and grow together. Rules don’t make that relationship work, love does. God wants the same thing to be true with the relationship He has with us. He wants it to be about love, not sin, not punishment, not getting it right every time, but learning and moving forward. “And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Cor 13:13) Love is mankind’s greatest motivator. If anything stirs the heart of man, it is the desire for love. You see it everywhere - movies, books, music, poetry, art. We were made for relationship, and the beginning of any successful relationship is God.

 

[CompSciGuy]

Rules will naturally come with having a relationship with Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ did not come and die on the cross to get us to stop sinning. He came to set us free from sin. He came, not to put our focus on sin, but to take our focus off of it. The distinction is huge and the consequences even bigger. We are now dead to sin; dead to the law. It is fulfilled. If you got killed in a car accident and you were at fault, would the officer give you a ticket? No, you’re dead - a ticket is pointless. We are dead to the law.

God wants our focus to be on Him, not on the rules. I don’t lay down a law against my girlfriend. We have a relationship, we love each other, and learn and grow together. Rules don’t make that relationship work, love does. God wants the same thing to be true with the relationship He has with us. He wants it to be about love, not sin, not punishment, not getting it right every time, but learning and moving forward. “And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Cor 13:13) Love is mankind’s greatest motivator. If anything stirs the heart of man, it is the desire for love. You see it everywhere - movies, books, music, poetry, art. We were made for relationship, and the beginning of any successful relationship is God.

OK great because I have a relationship with Jesus too. Now can we get back on topic please

 

[campope]

OK great because I have a relationship with Jesus too. Now can we get back on topic please

You started it