What does Islam make of the Qumran find?

[mercygate]

This should be a short thread.

How does the Islamic claim that the Jewish scriptures were “corrupted” square with the Dead Sea Scrolls, which pre-dated the Qu’ran by centuries, were untouched for nearly two thousand years, and show remarkably little deviation from the Jewish Scriptures as known from the Masoretic text?

 

[inJESUS]

claim the Jews corrupted the new findings as well . Jokes aside, no idea. Interesting question.

 

[inJESUS]

I remember having read an Islamic answer to the fact that in the Qumran scriptures, there were interpretations written about 2 Messiah : one priestly and one military. Hence some jumped to the conclusion that the second Messiah must be Muhammad which is strange because Muhammad was neither considered a Messiah, and Muslims do believe the Messiah Jesus will come again to judge so it is not about 2 messiahs but about 2 appearances of the same Messiah, with different roles.

I have not read any comments regarding the corruption mantra so i’ll be waiting as well for an answer.

 

[rpp]

As with all problems of logic that Islam confronts, they simply pretend it does not exist.

Islamic philosophy does not require that there be consistency with faith and reason. They can be at odds because God is arbitrary and capricious.

Thus, if facts contract faith, the facts can be still be treated as a piece of information that does **not **have to be reconciled with the faith.

This is one of the reasons they can claim, with a straight face that despite the fact the fact the the Prophet Mohamed died in Medina, he ascended to Heaven that night from the Jerusalem, several hundred miles away. The physical impossibility of him moving that distance in such a short period of time (they do not claim Divine assistance). does not need to be explained. One must islam (literally “submit”) to the belief.

This is not to say that Muslims are not rational people. No not at all. But only that the Islamic faith can tolerate logical and rational inconsistencies with the observed world. This is something that Christianity cannot tolerate.

 

[exoflare]

I brought it up with one of my Muslim friends once, and he didn’t try to deny it or anything. But I don’t think it really made an impression on him either. It was more like he just didn’t want to think about it any more than he had to.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

There is no claim in the Quran the Bible is all corrupt and totally different. Regardless, the Torah, the Jewish Law, had been corrupted by rabbis. Jesus said the same.

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

 

[Kadaveri]

The Islamic claim isn’t that such-and-such scripture has been changed, rather that the Jews wrote the scripture with their own hands and said it was from God. Try reading something like Documentary Hypothesis (link).

 

[hamba2han]

The Dead Sea Scrolls mention not one but rather of two messiahs to come, the first would be a priestly messiah whereas the second would be a temporal messiah.

There can be little doubt of course that Jesus (pbuh) is the priestly messiah… but who do Christians think is the temporal or kingly messiah to come that the Dead Sea Scrolls also foretold?

In any case, Muslims view the Qumran documents in much the same light as we view the Gospel of Barnabas i.e. although interesting to read, they are however definitely NOT “scriptures” to place our faith in because we just do not know who wrote them.

 

[swariffin]

The Dead Sea Scrolls mention not one but rather of two messiahs to come, the first would be a priestly messiah whereas the second would be a temporal messiah.

There can be little doubt of course that Jesus (pbuh) is the priestly messiah… but who do Christians think is the temporal or kingly messiah to come that the Dead Sea Scrolls also foretold?

In any case, Muslims view the Qumran documents in much the same light as we view the Gospel of Barnabas i.e. although interesting to read, they are however definitely NOT “scriptures” to place our faith in because we just do not know who wrote them.

Dear Hamba2han,

If you don’t even know the writer, on what ground that you agreed on at least some of its writings. In this case, it is a coincident that some of the writing of the dead sea scroll you believe to be in accordance with your faith. BTW, do you know who wrote the gospel of barnabas? Faith cannot be based on co-incidences without proper contemplations, analysis, comparisons, and tests. Who said that there will be 2 messiahs? What if, if those 2 messiahs are not in agreement (they are human, right?). Who gave the distinction of priestly and the kingly messiahs? Why only 2, not 3, 4, 5,…?

 

[hamba2han]

Actually, the prophecy of the Dead Sea Scrolls that there will be two messiahs to come ties in rather nicely with what Jesus (pbuh) is reported to have said in the Gospel of Barnabas.

When we read the Gospel of Barnabas, we find that when the Jews ask Jesus (pbuh) whether he is “the messiah” he replies that he is not “the messiah” that they are expecting.

This is because he understood their question. They were not asking him for his title, rather, they wanted to know whether he was the one who would finally fulfill all of their prophesies of leadership, power, and grandeur that they had been waiting for so many centuries. For this reason, he told them that he was not “the messiah”, but that “the Messiah” they were waiting for would not come until later. He was referring to the SECOND messiah in their prophesies. (the Jews had expectations of three prophecies to be fulfilled)

In the Bible we read of the test that the Jews applied to Jesus (pbuh) in order to ascertain his truthfulness. The Jews had a prophecy that required Elias to come before Jesus (pbuh): “Elias verily cometh first” (Mark 9:12). They had not seen Elias yet so there was still doubt as to Jesus (pbuh) being the Messiah. Jesus, however, responded to them that Elias had already come but that they did not recognize him.

In Matthew 17:12-13 we read: “But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not…Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist”.

John, however DENIES the claims of Jesus (pbuh). This is one of the Christian’s “dark sayings of Jesus” that their scholars have yet to reconcile and we will leave this matter for them to work out among themselves.

In John 1:19-21 we read **"And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who art thou?. And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the christ. And they asked him, What then? ART THOU ELIAS? And he saith, I am not. ART THOU THAT PROPHET? And he answered, No”. **

We notice that there are three distinct prophecies here:
Elias, … Messiah, … That prophet.

The Jews were therefore not waiting for two prophecies, but three and this can be further clarified by reading John 1:25:

**"And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be:

a) not the Christ,
b) nor Elias,
c) neither that Prophet?" **

“That prophet” could not be Jesus (pbuh), because that would make the third question in both verses redundant; nor can we believe that “that prophet” is the holy ghost, did John look like a ghost? Further, we must remember that “that prophet” can not apply to any prophet before the time of Jesus (pbuh) because at the time of Jesus (pbuh) the Jews were still waiting for all three.

Notice how when we let the Bible speak for itself, without forcing the holy spirit or other supernatural meanings on it in the commentary, or forcing three questions to be only two, how clear these verses become.

It is quite obvious from the above verses that the followers of Jesus (pbuh) recognized that the Jews were waiting for three prophesies to be fulfilled.

The Bible, to one degree or another, confirms that both the first and second prophesies were fulfilled. However, it provides no logical explanation for the third prophesy.

And so, what this means is that when Jesus (pbuh) says that he is not the “messiah” in the Gospel of Barnabas, this does not at all diminish the verisimilitude of the Gospel of Barnabas since the Dead Sea Scrolls does indeed mention that there will be two messiahs to come.

 

[inJESUS]

There is no claim in the Quran the Bible is all corrupt and totally different. Regardless, the Torah, the Jewish Law, had been corrupted by rabbis. Jesus said the same.

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

Jesus was not talking about textual corruption. Jesus read the Jewish scriptures.

 

[inJESUS]

Hamba, is Muhammad considered a Messiah?

 

[hamba2han]

Hamba, is Muhammad considered a Messiah?

If we are to assume that they are authentic, both the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Gospel of Barnabas were written before the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

Therefore, this means that it is entirely besides the point what the Qur’an says about who the Messiah is but rather, what really matters here is the belief or perception then of the people who wrote these “scriptures” about what the term ‘messiah’ means.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

… In John 1:19-21 we read **"And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, “Who art thou?. And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the christ. And they asked him, What then? ART THOU ELIAS? And he saith, I am not. ART THOU THAT PROPHET? And he answered, No”. **

We notice that there are three distinct prophecies here:
Elias, … Messiah, … That prophet.

The Jews were therefore not waiting for two prophecies, but three and this can be further clarified by reading John 1:25:

**"And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be:

a) not the Christ,
b) nor Elias,
c) neither that Prophet?" **

“That prophet” could not be Jesus (pbuh), because that would make the third question in both verses redundant; nor can we believe that “that prophet” is the holy ghost, did John look like a ghost? Further, we must remember that “that prophet” can not apply to any prophet before the time of Jesus (pbuh) because at the time of Jesus (pbuh) the Jews were still waiting for all three.

I must admit, that’s interesting. I’ve never thought about that too much before.

Notice how when we let the Bible speak for itself, without forcing the holy spirit or other supernatural meanings on it in the commentary, or forcing three questions to be only two, how clear these verses become…

:ehh: ehh, that’s a bit of cheap shot. But the rest of the post is interesting, eventhough not convincing; I admit - it sent me rushing through Google.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Jesus was not talking about textual corruption. Jesus read the Jewish scriptures.

Jesus and the Quran refer to endless loopholes created to excuse sin. Like the current one about atheism being an ok thing. The letter vs. the spirit of the law.

 

[swariffin]

Actually, the prophecy of the Dead Sea Scrolls that there will be two messiahs to come ties in rather nicely with what Jesus (pbuh) is reported to have said in the Gospel of Barnabas.

Dear Hamba2han,

First, who made the conclusion about the prophecy in the dead sea scroll? Dead sea scroll is (1) just another copy of some of the OT documents, (2) the deuterocanonical book existed in the Septuagint, but written in Hebrew (but rejected by non catholic Christian because it was written in Greek, and now Dead Sea Scroll proves that such deotero books also exist in Hebrew), and (3) some laws and regulations of the essenian people living in the Qumran region.

Second, Jesus mentioned that John the Baptist is greater than any people born by human female, and yet John the Baptist considered himself unworthy in front of Jesus. (Mat 11:11). So, John the Baptist is greater than Moses, Elijah, and any other Prophets mentioned in the OT.

 

[Reuben_J]

There is no claim in the Quran the Bible is all corrupt and totally different. Regardless, the Torah, the Jewish Law, had been corrupted by rabbis. Jesus said the same.

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

You are right. The Quran does not say that the Bible is corrupted. It is the modern day Muslims who say so after finding out that some Quranic verses do not square up with the facts in the Bible.

It is true that some rabbis or priests do interpret the Holy Scripture errorneously tinged with personal motive and agenda. This also holds true for Muslim clergies too. But it does not make the Bible or the Quran to be corrupted, because no one can change the content of public document. Any changes would be spotted by the general public who are followers of the religion respectively.

But when you have documented evidence that the Scripture is being changed, like when Caliph Uthman burnt the original copies of the Quran, people know about it till this day.

 

[Reuben_J]

The Islamic claim isn’t that such-and-such scripture has been changed, rather that the Jews wrote the scripture with their own hands and said it was from God.

Then whatever Muslims say about the Gospel of Jesus is utterly nonsense. Because the understanding of this is that Jesus wrote a Gospel, a scripture that’s not being followed by the present Bible.

 

[Reuben_J]

In any case, Muslims view the Qumran documents in much the same light as we view the Gospel of Barnabas i.e. although interesting to read, they are however definitely NOT “scriptures” to place our faith in because we just do not know who wrote them.

We understand Muslims’ position on this. However, this is twisted logic, a standard you don’t apply to your own Quran. We are talking about the authenticity of the Scripture, not who were writing it.