All Muslim arguments against Biblical Christianity answered
Every teaching of Biblical Christianity is based on the Gospel, also known as Injeel. The Quran teaches that it is still reliable in the 7th century AD[1] and Christians[2] are commanded to judge by the book[3] in their possession!
Comparisons between copies of the Gospel from that time and those of today, show that they are substantially identical![4] Therefore, all Muslims who argue against Biblical Christianity contradict the Quran in Surah 3, verses 3 to 4, Surah 5, verses 46 to 47, 66 and 68 and Surah 7, verse 157.
Here are more details and replies to Muslim objections:
The Quran mentions the Gospel in 12 verses[5]:
-Surah 3:3-4 affirm the inspiration, authority and preservation of the Gospel[6] and the Torah.[7] They are a guidance for mankind. Those who disbelieve in those revelations will have a severe punishment. The Quran confirms, what was “before it”, not just in time but when the Arabic, “ma bayna yadayhi” (= between his or its hands), is used as idiom it can mean “in his (or its) presence.”[8] Therefore, those books could not have been corrupted, shortly after their revelations, since they would have failed as a guidance and were still present in Muhammad’s time.
-Surah 3:48; 5:110 confirm that Allah taught Jesus both, the message, revelation of the Torah and the Gospel.[9]
-Surah 3:65 confirms that the Torah and the Gospel were given by God after Abraham.
-Surah 5:46-47 uphold that Jesus came to confirm the Torah that was “before it.” As mentioned before, it is not just in time but, “ma bayna yadayhi”, in his (or its) presence.” If the Torah was changed by the time of Jesus, surely, he would have told his contemporaries. Instead, he confirmed it and legalised some of what had been forbidden to Jews according to Surah 3:50.
The Torah from the time of Jesus is substantially the same as today when compared with manuscripts known as “Dead Sea Scrolls.”[10] They cover the entire Hebrew Bible except Esther and are mostly dated from 3rd to 1st century BC.
The people of the Gospel are commanded by Allah to judge by what is revealed in the Gospel, not in the Quran, otherwise thy are defiantly disobedient, immoral. This assumes they still had the Gospel since a fundamental principle in ethics says “ought” implies “can.”
-Surah 5:66-68 mention a common theme in Quran that many people of the book, the Torah and the Injeel, do not believe and are not reverent. Had they observed those books, as some did, they would have been blessed. This is only possible if the correct books were still available. The problem is disobedience of the Torah and the Gospel, not corruption of the texts.
-Surah 7:157 alleges the messenger of Islam is described in prophecies found in the Torah and the Gospel that is with them (Arabic: ʿindahum). Therefore, they cannot have been corrupted.
-Surah 9:111 claims Allah promises paradise in the Torah, the Gospel and the Quran to those who fight in his way. Such an important promise can only be checked in a sensible way if the previous Scriptures are still available and uncorrupted.
-Surah 48:29 continues to appeal in the present tense to the Torah and the Gospel (their likeness in the Gospel is . . .) for confirmation of its teachings. For that to happen those books must be still available and reliable. As a further example, the Quran affirms that Jesus is al-Masih – the Messiah – but never defines what the term means, the unique Anointed King. Nowhere in the Qur’an does Jesus rule, unlike in the Injeel (Acts 2:33,36). The supposedly ‘clear’ Quran does not make it clear what the Messiah is. The lack of definition points to the fact that the Qur’an assumes its readers/listeners were familiar with the term from the Bible – indicating the dependency of the Qur’an upon the Bible. If the Quran is dependent on the Bible that the former’s readers/listeners had, this proves that the true Torah, Zabur and Injeel were still extant at the time of the emergence of the Quran. Since only the Bible as we know it today was then extant, this further proves that the Bible has not been changed.
Surah 57:27 affirms again that Allah gave the Gospel to Jesus, placing kindness and mercy into the hearts of those who follow him. Those who believed got their reward but many disobeyed. He criticised them for inventing monasticism and not obeying the command to seek his contentment. In all 12 verses where the Gospel is mentioned in the Quran, Christians are never accused of corrupting their Scriptures![11]
Furthermore, these verses also confirm the reliability of the previous Scriptures:
-Surah 2:41, 2:97, 2:174, 2:213, 5:44, 6:92, 10:37, 35:31, 37:37: How can the Quran confirm the previous Scriptures if they were changed?
-Surah 4:136: How can this command be kept if the previous books were changed?
-Surah 6:34, 10:64, 18:27: The previous books are also the word of Allah. How, when, why, by whom could they have been changed? Different people in different countries would have to collaborate with each other to do such a blasphemous thing. Some of the teachings in the Scriptures are complex and not easy to understand. Would people who intend to corrupt Scriptures not take such parts away to make it easier to believe? There is no clear verse that says the Injeel has been corrupted.
-Surah 10:94: How could Muhammad have asked those who have been reading the Scripture before him, in case of doubt, if they were changed? Would that not be a very risky thing to do since how would one know what parts have been corrupted? By the time Surah 10:94 was written, the Scriptures were established and spread in many different places in the world.
-Surah 12:104: How can the Quran be a reminder, if one can forget the previous books? Who would know what they were reminded of, if the previous books were forgotten?
Surah 16:43-44, 21:7 How could followers of previous books have knowledge if their Scriptures were changed?
Some Jews in Muhammad’s time were reprimanded because they tried to write verses on paper, claiming them to be part of the Torah. They concealed passages and twisted their meaning orally.[12] Nevertheless, it would have been impossible for them to actually change all the written Torahs. By the 7th century AD there were thousands of manuscripts in circulation and numerous translations were made in various countries.
It has been established that the Quran confirms the reliability of the Bible. Some hadith, written at least one hundred years after the events agree with that, others disagree[13]. When the latter is the case, then such hadith are declared to be unreliable.
While the Quran confirms the reliability of the Bible, it also goes against main Christian teachings. Therefore, it contradicts itself and Islam is false. If the Bible would not be reliable anymore, Islam would still be false because the Quran says the Bible is reliable. Since there is no way to escape this Islamic dilemma, you are now effectively a non-Muslim and I hereby invite you into Biblical Christianity. The Good News (Injeel) can be summarised as:
God is Holy, Loving and Just. Starting with Adam and Eve, everyone has disobeyed against Him. To satisfy all his attributes, God Himself paid our punishment of death in Jesus! Repent and believe in Jesus to get guaranteed cleansing from your shame, a fulfilled life now and spend eternity with God in heaven!
Do please let us know if you agree with the last paragraph. We can then help you in your new life as a follower of Jesus according to the Injeel. We aim to put you in touch with a local community of believers, God willing. Feel free to contact us for comments and questions too: info@christianityexplained.net
——————————————————
Appendix
Questions Muslims ask – a summary of answers
Ibn Kathir, the classical Muslim Quran commentator wrote about Surah Al ‘Imran 3:48:
And Allah will teach him the Book and Wisdom the Law and the Gospel.
It seems that what is meant by Book here is writing. Tafsir al-Quran il-‘Azeem.
The Sunni Muslim website Islam Question and Answer continues under its general supervisor: Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid:
But we do not have any evidence that the revelation was written down at the time of ‘Isa (peace be upon him). The fact that the Gospel is called “a Book” in the Holy Quran does not indicate that it was written down on pages at the time it was revealed. The fact that it is called a Book only refers to that which is with Allah in al-Lawh al-Mahfooz (the Preserved Tablet), or that it was something that could be written. This also applies to the Holy Quran, as Allah calls it a Book. Rather it was transmitted verbally as well as being written down randomly on skins and parchments. In fact it was not a compiled Book until the time of Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allah be pleased with him). Indeed, Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And even if We had sent down unto you (O Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)) a message written on paper so that they could touch it with their hands, the disbelievers would have said: ‘This is nothing but obvious magic!’” [6:7]
al-Tahir ibn ‘Ashoor said in his commentary on Surat Maryam: 30:
The Scripture refers to the law which is usually written lest it be subject to change. The word Scripture is applied to the Law of ‘Isa (peace be upon him) just as it is applied to the Quran. Al-Tahreer wa’l-Tanweer.
Similarly the Christians do not believe that there is a book that was written by the Messiah or one of his disciples during his lifetime that was lost after that.
The great scholar al-Tahir ibn ‘Ashoor says in al-Tahreer wa’l-Tanweer, commenting on the tafsir of Surat Al ‘Imran:
With regard to the Gospel, this is the name of the revelation that was sent to ‘Isa (peace be upon him) and was compiled by his companions.[1]
To answer this question accurately it is important to let Christian primary sources and early Christian communities throughout the world define the meaning of the name given to their book.
The Arabic word Injeel (إنجيل) is derived from the Syriac Aramaic word awongaleeyoon (ܐܘܢܓܠܝܘܢ). It is found in Mark 1:1 of the Syriac translation of the Bible, known as Peshitta (common) from the end of the 3rd century AD[2]. Both words originate from the Greek euangelion (Εὐαγγέλιον) of the New Testament where it means Good News. In old English it was known as gōdspel or evangel and in modern English as Gospel.[3]
The Injeel is known as the Gospel. Besides containing a fourfold section known as Gospel, 23 additional and equally inspired writings are also part of the Injeel. All of them were written approximately within 60 years after the physical ministry of Jesus on earth. These 27 writings are included in the New Testament part of the Bible. They were first completely listed by Origin, a church father in about 250[4] AD and are identical with today’s, 21st century copies. Here is evidence for this definition of the Injeel, universally accepted among Christians:
Injeel or Gospel occurs about 77 times in the New Testament. The message in it, whether spoken or written, is called the Gospel (Mark 1:1, Romans 16:25,26, 1 Thess. 1:5). Hazrat Isa committed his Injeel into the hands of his followers to write down and publish throughout the world.
Various historical documents clearly show that the early church used the word Gospel as a title for all or part of the New Testament long before Islam arrived:
F.F Bruce, Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester, England, wrote: At a very early date it appears that the four Gospels were united in one collection. They must have been brought together very soon after the writing of the Gospel according to John. This fourfold collection was originally known as “The Gospel” in the singular, not “The Gospels” in the plural; there was only one Gospel… Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, (35-107 AD, a disciple of the Apostle John mentioned in the Gospel) refers to “The Gospel” as an authoritative writing, and as he knew more than one of the four “Gospels” it may well be that by “The Gospel” sans phrase he means the fourfold collection which went by that name.[5]
About other books in the New Testament Bruce writes: The corpus Paulinum, or collection of Paul’s writings, was brought together about the same time as the collecting of the fourfold Gospel. As the Gospel collection was designated by the Greek word Euangelion, so the Pauline collection was designated by the one word Apostolos…[6]
A Hadith of great reliability shows that the prophet of Islam credited wahi (divine Inspiration) to one of the Apostle Paul’s writings:
Abu Huraira told that after God’s messenger had stated that God most high has said, “I have prepared for my upright servants what eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has entered into the heart of man,” he added, “Recite, if you wish, ‘No soul knows what comfort has been concealed for them'” (Bukhari and Muslim)[7].
This is close to what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:8-9, a book that is part of the New Testament: None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. However, as it is written: “What no eye has seen, what no ear has heard, and what no human mind has conceived”— the things God has prepared for those who love him.
Toward the end of the second century, Irenaeus an early church father, wrote: The Word (Jesus) gave to us the Gospel in a fourfold shape, but held together by one Spirit.[8]
In the fourth century AD, Chrysostom, another church father, wrote: We assert, therefore, that, although a thousand Gospels were written, if the contents of all were the same, they would still be one, and their unity no wise infringed by the number of writers. — Whence it is clear that the four Gospels are one Gospel; for, as the four say the same thing, its oneness is preserved by the harmony of the contents, and not impaired by the difference of persons.[9]
Augustine, one of the most famous early church fathers wrote in the fourth century: “For I ask them, is it good to take pleasure in reading the Apostle? or good to take pleasure in a sober Psalm? or good to discourse on the Gospel? They will answer to each, ‘It is good’“.[10]
Christian theologian B.B. Warfield sums up the whole topic under discussion well when he writes:
The earliest name given to this new section of Scripture was framed on the model of the name by which what we know as the Old Testament was then known. Just as it was called “The Law and the Prophets and the Psalms” (or “the Hagiographa”), or more briefly “The Law and the Prophets,” or even more briefly still “The Law”; so the enlarged Bible was called “The Law and the Prophets, with The Gospels and the Apostles” (so Clement of Alexandria, “Strom.” vi. 11, 88; Tertullian, “De Præs. Hær.” 36), or most briefly “The Law and the Gospel” (so Claudius Apolinaris, Irenæus); while the new books apart were called “The Gospel and the Apostles,” or most briefly of all “The Gospel.” This earliest name for the new Bible, with all that it involves as to its relation to the old and briefer Bible, is traceable as far back as Ignatius (A.D. 115), who makes use of it repeatedly (e.g., “ad Philad.” 5; “ad Smyrn.” 7).[11]
The Injeel mentions a number of groups of false teachers who preached a different spoken Gospel[12] message from the one given by Jesus. His early followers clearly refuted them as described in various parts of the New Testament.
Starting from the second century AD a number of different written pseudo Gospels emerged.[13] Early Christians did not accept them based on the content of the Injeel that had been completed and widely circulated by the first century AD already.
Muslims faced a similar situation. In Mohammad’s time and afterwards different people claimed to be prophets with various revelations. They were refuted by his followers.[14]
The Quran rightly denies a number of false teachings that were sadly taught incorrectly among some Christian communities at the time of Muhammad. However, the actual text of the Injeel is not questioned. Here are a few examples:
Most Muslims who attend Quran classes from a very young age are reading in their holy book that Christians allegedly worship three gods, that Mary is one of those gods[15], that God is Jesus[16] and that Jesus is the son of God in a physical sense.[17]
As a result, Christians are understandably looked at as polytheists, blasphemers, as people who hold false understandings, who are not to be obeyed[18] and who are cursed[19] by God. No wonder Muslims are not interested in the Injeel.
The above mentioned descriptions found in the Quran and consequently taught by Imams in the mosques, of course, do not accurately reflect the Biblical teaching.[20] It has been held by the Christian church throughout the world, well before the beginning of the Islamic religion in the 6th century. However, the comments in the Quran may well be a justified reaction to false teaching held by some isolated heretic Christian cults, operating and being known in the Middle East at that time.[21]
Sunnis, Shias, Ahmadis, Ishmaelis, etc. hold many different opinions regarding the interpretation of the teachings found in the Quran. However, they would never accuse each other of not possessing the unchanged or a different Quran. Why then is this accusation made against Christians?
It is true that the Injeel, the early church fathers and all New Testaments Bibles used in all churches throughout the world clearly teach the death of Jesus Christ on the cross and his resurrection on the third day for the forgiveness of our sins. This is the central teaching[22] held by all Christians everywhere from the very beginning until today. As a matter of fact, without this belief it is impossible to be called a Christian.
There are a number of verses in the Quran that confirm the death of Jesus:
Behold! Allah said: ‘O Jesus! I will take thee (Arabic: ‘mutawaffika’) and raise thee to Myself…’ (Surah 3, Ali ‘Imran, 55, also Surah 5, Al Ma’idah, verse 117)
The translation of ‘mutawaffika’ in this verse is disputed among Muslim scholars. The word and its derivation are found over 25 times in the Quran. (see 2:234,240; 3:55,193; 4:15,97, 5:117; 6:61; 8:50; 10:46,104; 12:101; 13:40; 16:28,32,70; 22:5; 32:11; 40:67,77; 47:27) In all but two places they imply death or are associated with it. In the two exceptions (6:60, 39:42) the context reveals that ‘mutawaffika’ figuratively means slumber. This is not the case in the two verses that speak about the death of Jesus (3:55, 5:117)!
If Jesus did not die Surah 19, Maryam, verse 31 would not make sense. There Jesus allegedly said, ‘…and hath enjoined on me Prayer and Charity so long as I live:’ According to the traditional Muslim view, Jesus was taken up to heaven alive. But nobody can seriously believe that he still gives alms up to this day!
The following Hadith about the day of judgement, collected by Al-Bukhari is further proof that Jesus died:
On the authority of Ibn Abbas: The Prophet of Allah said, ‘…Then I will say as the pious slave Jesus, son of Mary, said: ‘And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them. When you caused me to die (‘tawaffaytani’) you were the watcher over them, and you are a witness to all things…'(see, Bukhari, Nuhammad Ibn Ismail. Sahih of al-Buhari, trans. Muhammad Muhsin Khan, New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan, 1984, vol. 3, number 3263. See also vol. 4, number 4349, 4463.)
Since the prophet of Islam referred to himself with the same phrase (‘tawaffaytani’) Jesus is said to have used in Surah 5, Al Ma’idah, verse 117 it becomes clear that the prophet of Islam, who died, confirms that Jesus also died! A further confirmation is found in Surahs 10, Yunus, verse 46, 13, Al Ra’d, verse 40, and 40, Ghafir, verse 77 where basically the same term that is used for Jesus’ last moments, ‘natawaffayannaka’ meaning, ‘we indeed cause you to die’ is applied to Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) From our study so far we can say with certainty that the death and resurrection of Jesus is a fact, even in the Quran.
There is only one reference in the Quran that appears to say when Jesus did not die. It is found in Surah 4, Al Nisa, 157-159:
That they said (in boast) ‘We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah’- But they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for a surety they killed him not- Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself; and Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise- And there is none of the People of the Book but must believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Judgement he will be a witness against them.’
This passage, like all the others concerning the end of Jesus’ life on earth in the Quran, is unclear. It is not surprising therefore, to find a number of interpretations concerning it. However, to say that the crucified one ‘was somehow or other taken for Christ’[23] would turn the Holy and Righteous God into the greatest deceiver of all! From a Christian point of view it is totally unacceptable to think that He would be responsible for misleading 1.7 billion people who call themselves Christians today! Some Muslims will say, ‘Allah can do whatever He wants. If it pleases Him, to mislead all the Christians, He has the right to do so!’ However, they are not willing to use the argument of God’s sovereignty, when they study the Christian concept of the Trinitarian God who sent Jesus to die on the cross for sinners.
Muslims like Ahmad Deedat[24] and the Ahmadiyyas give new meanings to a number of verses from the Biblical account on the death and the resurrection. According to them Jesus was crucified but he did not die on the cross, he only swooned. By coming up with these unsubstantiated theories they actually contradict Surah 4, Al Nisa’, verse 157 which is traditionally interpreted to mean that he was not crucified:
…But they killed him not, nor crucified him…
To justify their position they say that the words in the Quran ‘…nor crucified him…’ mean that Jesus did not die as a result of the crucifixion (See the Ahmadiyya version of the Quran with footnotes, Volume 2, page 583). They think that to be crucified means to be killed and since Jesus only swooned he was not crucified in the sense that he did not die from it. Verses like the one in Acts 2,23 proves them wrong. There we read that the words ‘to crucify’ (=to nail on a cross) do not necessarily mean ‘to kill.’ If it was not so why would Peter have been inspired by God to say:
‘This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.’
If the words “nailing him to the cross” would be equal to “death” there would be no need for one or the other! (See also Acts 5:30) In retrospect it is truly amazing how people like Ahmad Deedat who even contradict their own Quran are still tolerated by the Muslims community in general to represent their religion through past debates and in literature. Only God knows how much damage they have done to thousands of souls.
How then should we interpret Surah 4, Al Nisa’, verses 157-159 in the light of what has been said so far? In Muhammad’s time Muslims were commanded to seek advice in a particular question from those who possess the previous Scriptures, the Jews and the Christians. (Surah 16, Al Nahl, verse 43; Surah 21, Al Anbiya, 7) Therefore, it is surely right to do it in this case as well.
The Jews were boasting THEY had crucified and killed Jesus because they were convinced he was a false prophet. Against their arrogance verse 157 says, ‘THEY slew him not nor crucified him, but it appeared so unto them.’ The Biblical accounts tell us that Jesus was not killed by the Jews in the last instance, but because God brought about his deliberate and well-thought out plan. In Acts 2:23 we read:
‘This man (Jesus) was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked man, put him to death by nailing him to the cross.’
It only appeared to the Jews that they successfully killed Jesus whereas in reality God, in his sovereignty, even used those wicked people in order to bring about his purposes. The emphasis is not that the Jews killed Jesus but that God allowed them to do so! Verse 157 seems to speak out against this wrong, boastful emphasis only not against the fact that Jesus was killed.
Verse 158 speaks about the ascension of Jesus, when he was taken up to be with God which is well documented in the Injeel (Luke 24:50-51, John 6:62, Acts 1:9-11, 1 Timothy 3:16) and undisputed by both Muslims and Christians. However, Muslims who believe that Jesus was just a messenger, will have to answer the following question: ‘Mere men may only be able to go to Paradise. Since it is created Allah will not be there because he is completely separate from his creation according to Islam. Does not the fact that ‘Allah raised Jesus up unto himself’ proof that Jesus was more than just another prophet?’
Verse 159 seems to say that none of the Jews will believe in Jesus before they die and on the day of resurrection it will be too late for them to change their minds. The Torah, Zabur, and the Injeel agree unanimously that Jesus died for our sins on a cross nearly 2000 years ago and that he was raised up to life again! (Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, Matthew 26:26-28; 27:50) Secular history too confirms the bedrock of Christianity, the death and resurrection of Jesus. The names of the historians are Pliny, Cornelius Tacitus, Thallus and particularly Josephus, a Jewish general who defected to the Romans and wrote the Jewish history for them. (Antiquitates indaicae, Vol. 18, III: 3)
From about 1465 collections of Hadith, Muslim scholars have singled out six as being the correct ones. They are here listed in the order of importance:
Al-Bukhari, he put his collection together 246 years after the prophet’s death. From 6000,000 Hadith he selected 7200 (1.2%!). The choices were made according to the judgement of one individual. Muslim, he put his choices together 251 years after the prophet’s death. Al Tirmize, he chose them 269 years after the prophet’s death. Abu Daud selected his version 265 years after the prophet’s death. Abu Abdir Rahman presented his collection 293 years after the prophet’s death.[25]
Therefore, the picture they present has to be treated with some caution. Here are a number of hadiths that support the fact of the unchanged Injeel:
“Khadija [his wife] then accompanied him [The Prophet – PBUH] to her cousin Waraqa …, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew[26] as much as Allah wished him to write.” Al-Bukhari Vol 1, Book 1, No 3
Nrrated by Khaithama bin Abi Sbra: I came to Madinah and I asked Allah for a righteous companion, so He pointed me to Aba Hurayra, so I sat and told Him: i asked Allah to make it easy for me to find a righteous companion فوُفّقتَ لي . H said to me, from where did you come from? I said: From Koofah, I came looking got good and ask for it. So Abu Hrairah said: Don’t you have among you Sa’d bin Malik the one who’s Du’a is accepted? and Ibn Mas’ood صاحب طهور رسول الله ونعليه ? and Hudhaifah the companion of the secret of the Prophet? And Ammar the one Allah saved from the Shaitan on the tongue of the Prophet(وعمار الذي أجاره الله من الشيطان على لسان نبيه)? And Salman the owner of the two books (meaning the Injeel and the Quran).
Mishkat, Hadith 6424, Narrated by Attirmidhy
Narrated by Ziad bin Lubaid: The Prophet recalled something and said: That is the time when the knowledge goes. I asked: and how would the knowledge go when we read the Quran and we teach it to our children and our children read it until judgement day? The messenger replied: Oh Ziad, Your mother has lost you! I saw you from among the most understanding men in Madinah, don’t the Jews and Christians read the Tourat and the Injeel and don’t understand what is in it?
Mishkat, Hadith 277, Narrated by Ahmad and Ibn Majah
All truth is God’s truth, wherever it may be found. For example, there is truth in tabloid newspapers but not all of their content is true. Similarly, all things found in the Quran that do not contradict the Injeel can be quoted. A wise person tests all information but only holds on to the correct one.
The Injeel, also known as the New Testament canon (list of books) is the same in all Bibles. Therefore, this question does not affect the point of this article. The Old Testament (OT) canon is different. Protestants use the same canon as Jesus and the Jews of His time – nothing after the 5th century BC was accepted, as there were no prophets after that time. The Roman Catholic OT canon has books written after the 5th century BC. The only valid canon is that of Jesus and the Jews of 1st century Israel. Essentially the same applies to the Orthodox churches. The Ethiopian Coptic Church has a very wide canon, reflecting its historical isolation.
It is important to realise that the Christian understanding of inspiration and revelation is different from the Islamic understanding. The former believe that Jesus is the perfect Word of God, that the original manuscripts of the Bible were perfect and that copies of the Bible contain variations. The same is the case with every other ancient book, including the Quran. Textual criticism[27] has established that while none of the Biblical variants affect any doctrines, the Islamic understanding of revelation (no words have changed) is wrong since many variants in the Quran exist. At times they change the meaning[28] of the text.
Summary
It has become clear throughout this study[29] that the Injeel is a revelation from God given to Jesus for his followers. It was available during the time of the prophet of Islam. He appealed to it several times because it has been preserved from any change.
The Injeel is not a book that got lost soon after it was given. According to Islamic commentators, along with the Quran it is called a book because it either refers to the preserved tablet which is with God, or to indicate it was something that could be written. In both cases the various sayings were eventually written down by the companions at a later date.
The book itself and early history prove that the name Injeel was used interchangeably for either the spoken or written down message of Jesus Christ, the Gospel or all other writings of the New Testament Bible together.
Similar to Islam there were false teachers claiming a different message and later producing different writings. However, they were clearly refuted and not accepted by the true followers.
The Quran rightly denies a number of false beliefs held by a few Christians in the 7th century. They have been clearly identified as heresies, held by a minority. The fact that the Bible was most probably only translated into Arabic after the Quran was written down[30] may have contributed to the spread of false teachings among Arabic speaking Christians.
For example, the Injeel itself has never commanded anybody to believe in three separate gods, that Mary was one of them, God is Jesus, or that Jesus is the physical son of God.
It can also be argued that the Quran rightly states it was only made to appear to the Jews as if they successfully killed Jesus in the last instance. In reality, it was God in his sovereignty who even used those wicked people in order to bring about his purposes.[31]
Similarly, the fact that various Muslims groups interpret the Quran differently, does not lead them to accuse each other of having a different Quran that had been changed. To conclude the latter from the former is not logical when talking about either, the Injeel or the Quran.
All truth is God’s truth, in whatever book, newspaper or online article, etc. it may be found. Therefore, it should not be looked at as an inconsistency or contradiction when followers of Jesus quote certain verses from the Quran. If they confirm Biblical, secular historical or any other facts, Quranic verses can be used by people other than Muslims, without any problems.
Conclusion
The Quran indeed confirms the Injeel to be unchanged in the seventh century AD. For Muslims that means it was reliable in the centuries before, right from the beginning when it was written by the end of the first century AD.
It has been preserved in more manuscripts than any other ancient work. The Injeel counts over 5,800 complete or fragmented Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin manuscripts and 9,300 manuscripts in various other ancient languages (e.g. Syriac, Slavic, Gothic, Ethiopic, Coptic Armenian). The dates of these manuscripts still in existence range from c. 125 to the introduction of printing in Germany in the 15th century.
Most scholars agree that all the manuscript are 99.5% identical in content, with the differing .5% attributed to minor variations such as spelling or copy mistakes. These variations are not seen to affect the meaning or interpretation of any major doctrine and are usually given referenced in footnotes in most of today’s bibles.[32] The Quran too faces similar issues when comparing various Arabic versions with one another.[33]
We have complete Injeels since about 300 AD[34] and Gospel books from 5th to 16th century AD[35] in various places of the world. It would not have been possible for some bad Christians to agree on the changes to be made. Even if those in Arabia had made changes, the difference between their copies and those of their brothers would become obvious.
When all the early Injeels are compared with today’s editions there is no substantial change. All agree most certainly on the central message about Jesus Christ, his physical death and resurrection. Even some early Muslims approved of it. They were known as Ikhwan al-Safa, or the Brethren of Purity. [36]
Would God allow His word to be changed? Imagine a thief who breaks into a house to take stuff and put other stuff in instead. Think of a rich, watching owner who has all the latest security systems and man power at his disposal. Would he not intervene successfully to protect his possessions?
For Muslims too it was unimaginable that God could be so weak as not to protect his word. Only in the 11th Century AD, about 400 years after the Quran was written down, the idea that the Injeel was changed was first proposed by Ibn Hazm. In his book Kitab al-faslfi-l-l-milal wa-l-ahwa’wa-l-nihil, Book of Religious Communities and Sects he argued that it would be the only solution to his perceived contradictions and incomplete chain of tafsir for the New Testament books. Although such objections were easily answered, sadly this view has prevailed among many but not all[37] Muslims to the present day.
An acceptance of the confirmation of the Quran that the Injeel has not changed will significantly alter the discussions between Christians and Muslims. Now the actual content of the Injeel can finally be looked at. To find out the reason why it is called ‘Good News’ will enable both communities to keep the main thing the main thing:
How to honour God by finding peace with Him, one another and how to live life to the full as it was designed by God. To Him alone be glory, honour and praise!
Here is a link to a summary of the contents of the Injeel:
christianityexplained.net/Injeel-summary
Jesus Christ said in the Injeel:
‘Anyone who chooses to do the will of God will find out whether my teaching comes from God or whether I speak on my own.’ (John 7:17)
“Are you prepared to choose to do God’s will and follow his truth, even if it leads you outside your traditions? If the truth is more important to you, then you will find out whether his teaching is from God. Ask him now to show it to you.”
For questions and comments please contact:
info@christianityexplained.net or speak to other practicing Christians.
—————————————————–
Endnotes covering pages 1 -2
[1] https://islamqa.info/en/85280
[2] britannica.com/topic/Peshitta This was probably the translation of the Injil around in the time of Muhammad since a number of words used in the Quran to describe details of Biblical stories are from the Syriac language.
[3] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_in_Islam
[4] michaeljkruger.com/what-is-the-earliest-complete-list-of-the-canon-of-the-new-testament/
[5] The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 1943, p. 23.
[6] Ibid., p.25.
[7] 110 Ahadith Qudsi (Sacred Hadith) Hadith no: 26: ahadith.co.uk/chapter.php?cid=144&page=3&rows=10
[8] Harrison, Introduction to the New Testament, p. 99.
[9] Schaff, A Select Library of Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church: First Series. vol. 8, p. 7.
[10] The Confessions of St.Augustine, p. 144.
[11] The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, p. 413.
[12] Galatians 1, 1 John 2:18-27 The context (Galatians 3:1, 6:12) makes it clear that these false teachers believed Jesus died on the cross and rose again but either disputed the meaning of it or tried to avoid persecution. They did not come with writings.
[13] biblestudytools.com/encyclopedias/isbe/apocryphal-gospels.html
[14]rightfulreligion.com/en130_false-claimants-of-prophethood-in-islam lists those who claimed to be a prophet during Mohammed’s time as: Musailama al-Kazzab: caused numerous troubles among Muslims, had many followers, eventually surrendered along with supporters in Al-Yamam battle, led by Abu Bakr, and was killed. Sajah al-Kahenah and his wife, Sajah al-Kahenah: she reversed position after husband had been killed. Saf son of Sayyad: claimed he was Prophet when on threshold of adolescence, was initially believed to be false messiah, later repented and embraced Islam. Tulayha son of Khwailid: later repented, returned to fold of Islam. Aswad al-Ansi: was based in Yemen, killed by companions of Prophet. Claimants to prophethood after Mohammad’s death:
Al Mizra Abbas: In 1233 AH/1818 CE he appeared in Tehran, Iran, died in Palestine. Saleh son of Tarif Burghwati: claimed prophethood and Mahdihood in 125 AH. After ruling over his people for 47 years, in 174 AH he abdicated the throne in favour of his son. Abu Mansoor ‘Eessa: claimed prophethood and Mahdihood in 341 AH and ruled over his people for 28 years. Al-Harith son of Sa’id: claimed prophethood during reign of Umayyad caliph, Abd al-Malik son of Marwan. A number of royal soldiers were suspected of supporting him, was executed in 698-699 CE.
Mahmud son of al-Faraj: appeared in 849-850 in Samara CE with claim that a Quran was revealed to him through angel Gabriel, had some followers in Samara and Baghdad, was executed on orders of caliph, al-Mutawakkil. Mohammed son of Sa’id: considered one of four infamous forgers of hadith, distorted hadith: “I am the seal of prophets and there is no prophet after me” by adding: “unless Allah wills {otherwise}”, claimed prophethood for himself, was executed on orders of Abbasid caliph, Abu Jafar al-Mansoor. Bab: Mizra Ali Muhammad was predecessor of Bahaullah, initially declared himself the “Bab” (Gate) to the Mahdi, eventually progressed into other claims, was embraced by the Shaykhis sect of Shi’a , who were then renamed “Babis”, he declared himself to be Shi’ite’s hidden Mahdi. Afterwards, he moved on to call himself Nuqtiyiula, declaring that Quran and Muslim Shari’a were now abrogated. Shi’a and Sunni scholars condemned him and Bab faced series of imprisonment, trials, and indignities before being shot dead by a firing squad in 1850.
Bahaullah: Mizra Hussein Ali Nuri, self-proclaimed successor to Bab, another claimant to prophecy. In 1863 Hussein Ali, a prominent member of the Babi group, declared himself to be person whom God will make manifest, whom Bab had foretold, took name Bahaullah (Glory of God) and formed new religion, Bahai faith. Was banished from Persia, imprisoned in Akka-Palestine. Wrote main work, Kitab-ul-Aqdas (Most Holy Book), developed doctrine of Bahai faith into comprehensive teaching. Elijah Muhammad: succeeding Wallace Dodd Ford, was another in the line of prophets, founded the convoluted belief system based on ideas extracted from everything from Christanity to Masonry to Islam in Detroit, Michigan in 1930s, referred to it as “Nation of Islam”. Kareem Agha Khan: In early 1970s, another claimant to prophecy appeared within Ismaili sect, who proclaims himself to be a manifestation of God on Earth and a spokesman for Allah. Rashid Khalifa: he came from Egypt, and claimed there to be an intricate numerical pattern to the Qur’an revolving around number 19 in 1974. Because of this, he claimed to be Messenger of God, alongside Prophets Ibraheem (Abraham) and Muhammad, founded the group called “United Submitters International”, rejecting hadeeths of Prophet, denounced ayats 9:128-129 of Qur’an, was Imam at Tuscon Mosque, Arizona for many years, stabbed to death there 1990.
Mizra Ghulam Ahmad: appeared in India to quell resistance against British colonialists, claimed to be Messiah as similitude of Prophet ‘Eessa, the Mahdi, a Prophet, a Messenger, and the second advent of Prophet Mohammed simultaneously. Mahmood Mohammed Taha: false claimant to prophecy, based in Sudan, beheaded in 1985.
Jasmin: potentially false claimant to prophethood, appeared in 1998 in Bosnia, claiming War of Bosnia and Herzegovina was Battle of Armageddon, claims he is Messiah.
[15] Sura 5:73-75,116
[16] Surah 5:17
[17] Surah 6:100-101, Surah 72:3
[18] Surah 25:52, 26:151, 33:1, 68:8, 76:24.
[19] Surah 9:30, Surah 1:7, Surah 2:159 (receited at least 17 times as part of daily Muslim prayers)
[20] For correct understanding of these teachings see: christianityexplained.net/explainedto/muslims/index.html
[21] http://www.ccel.org/ccel/wace/biodict.html?term=Collyridians
[22] 1 Corinthians 15:1-20
[23]‘The Meaning of the Quran’ by Maududi, Islamic Publications, Pakistan, 1992, commentary on Surah 4, Al Nisa’, verse 157
[24]See, ‘Crucifixion or Crucifixion?’, H.M Bageel see, ‘Christian Muslim Dialogue’
[25] ‘Dictionary of Islam’ by T.P. Hughes, Asia Publishing House, London, 1988, pages 639-646
[26] Other traditions say ‘Arabic.’ See: Volume 6, Book 60, #478, Volume 9, Book 87, #111as found here: sahih-bukhari.com/Pages/results.php
[27] https://www.britannica.com/topic/textual-criticism
[28] https://www.faithbrowser.com/versions-of-the-quran/
[29]For a list of many more studies on this subject see: answering-islam.org/Quran/Bible/
[30] hts.org.za/index.php/HTS/article/view/2726/4932
[31] For more details see: christianityexplained.net/explainedto/muslims/8.html
[32] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_manuscript
[33] youtube.com/watch?v=m6Zc67FrpWU As of July 2017 Arabic scholars have found 45,377 differences within the 26 Qur’ans they are looking at.
[34] blogs.bl.uk/digitisedmanuscripts/2012/12/new-testament-from-oldest-complete-bible-available-online.html Online version: bl.uk/turning-the-pages/?id=b00f9a37-422c-4542-bfbd-b97bf3ce7d50&type=book
[35] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_Book#Significant_gospel_books
[36] oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e994 For details see especially Leirvik, Oddbjørn. 2010. Images of Jesus Christ in Islam. London. p. 79
[37] Al-Ghazali is one such exception. He argued in his 12th century work Excellent Refutation of the Divinty of Jesus that the Gospels were still authoritative but misinterpreted by the Christians. For details see: Leirvik, Oddbjørn. 2010. Images of Jesus Christ in Islam. London: Continuum. p. 118
[1] https://www.alim.org/surah-info/3/
[2] Some contemporary Muslims tried to argue that those Christians were only the Ebionites who had the true Gospel. This is wrong for several reasons: 1. The Ebionites were heretics according to mainstream Christians. 2. The sect seems to have existed only into the 4th century. Therefore, Surah 5:47, spoken to contemporary Christians cannot apply to them. 3. Contrary to the Gospel and the Quran, Ebonites did not believe in the virgin birth of Jesus, in eating meat, holy poverty, ritual ablutions. 4. the Gospel of the Ebionites was said to have been written in the second century AD. None of this text has survived. This is contrary to the true Gospel that dates back to the first century AD. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ebionites
[3] See tafsir Ibn Kathir, (early Islamic commentary): https://quran.com/5:47/tafsirs/en-tafisr-ibn-kathir
[4] It is highly unlikely that the Scriptures could have been altered after the death of Muhammad for the following reasons:
-The first translations of the Injil were made beginning at the end of 2nd century AD into the Syriac, Latin, and Coptic languages. Any attempts to change the Scriptures in the 7th century, the advent of Islam, would
have been found out quickly.
-By 600 A.D., Christianity had spread into Asia, Africa, and Europe. There is no evidence of a worldwide council that met for the purpose of altering the Scriptures.
-Since Muslims revere the Holy Books too, converts from Judaism and Christianity would have retained the true texts; however, such texts are nowhere to be found.
-Manuscripts still exist from the 2nd to 7th centuries (Muhammad lived in the 6th and 7th century). These manuscripts line up with today’s translations of the Scriptures and any variant readings (none changes a doctrine) are noted and accepted by the Quran, Surah 5:47 etc., as reliable. For more details see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDFA-FXhKz0: Is What We Have Now What They Wrote Then? By Dr. Daniel B. Wallace, executive director of Center for the Study of New Testament Manuscripts: https://www.csntm.org/ (search here, adjusting filters on the left to centuries and books you are looking for: https://manuscripts.csntm.org/ especially consult codices Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, since they have the complete texts of the Gospels and both date to the 4th century: https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/ https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.gr.1209 https://apologika.blogspot.com/2014/04/comparing-bible-and-quranic-manuscripts.html https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/the-big-question-what-is-the-codex-sinaiticus-and-what-does-it-reveal-about-the-bible-1734439.html https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/ https://abramkj.com/2012/12/27/new-scholarly-edition-of-the-greek-new-testament-2/ (see “the critical apparatus” a kind of shorthand.) https://www.jdavidstark.com/ecm-for-acts-online/
[5] What follows is based on Dr David Wood’s video, “What the Quran REALLY Says about the Gospel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46e7bfIlauE&t=849s
[6] The Injeel is the Arabic equivalent of the Greek word ‘euaggelion’. It is normally understood as the Gospel of Hazrat Isa (Surah 57, Al-Hadid, verse 27). However, the Injeel also includes the rest of the books that are found in today’s, 21st century New Testament of the Bible for the following reasons:
In the fourth century AD, Chrysostom wrote, “We assert, therefore, that, although a thousand Gospels were written, if the contents of all were the same, they would still be one, and their unity no wise infringed by the number of writers. — Whence it is clear that the four Gospels are one Gospel; for, as the four say the same thing, its oneness is preserved by the harmony of the contents, and not impaired by the difference of persons” (Schaff, A Select Library of Nicene and Post- Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church: First Series. vol. 8, pg. 7.)
F.F Bruce, Rylands Professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis at the University of Manchester, England, wrote: “At a very early date it appears that the four Gospels were united in one collection. They must have been brought together very soon after the writing of the Gospel according to John. This fourfold collection was originally known as “The Gospel” in the singular, not “The Gospels” in the plural; there was only one Gospel… Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, refers to “The Gospel” as an authoritative writing, and as he knew more than one of the four “Gospels” it may well be that by “The Gospel” sans phrase he means the fourfold collection which went by that name. (“The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?” 1943, pg. 23.) About other books in the New Testament Bruce writes:
“The corpus Paulinum, or collection of Paul’s writings, was brought together about the same time as the collecting of the fourfold Gospel. As the Gospel collection was designated by the Greek word Euangelion, so the Pauline collection was designated by one word, Apostolos… (Ibid., p.25.) Augustine, one of the most famous early church fathers wrote in the fourth century, “For I ask them, is it good to take pleasure in reading the Apostle? or good to take pleasure in a sober Psalm? or good to discourse on the Gospel? They will answer to each, ‘It is good’.” (The Confessions of St.Augustine, pg. 144.)
This is close to what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 2:9, a book that is part of today’s New Testament: “But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.” Christian theologian B.B. Warfield sums up the whole topic under discussion well when he writes:
“The earliest name given to this new section of Scripture was framed on the model of the name by which what we know as the Old Testament was then known. Just as it was called “The Law and the Prophets and the Psalms” (or “the Hagiographa”), or more briefly “The Law and the Prophets,” or even more briefly still “The Law”; so the enlarged Bible was called “The Law and the Prophets, with The Gospels and the Apostles” (so Clement of Alexandria, “Strom.” vi. 11, 88; Tertullian, “De Præs. Hær.” 36), or most briefly “The Law and the Gospel” (so Claudius Apolinaris, Irenæus); while the new books apart were called “The Gospel and the Apostles,” or most briefly of all “The Gospel.”
This earliest name for the new Bible, with all that it involves as to its relation to the old and briefer Bible, is traceable as far back as Ignatius (A.D. 115), who makes use of it repeatedly (e.g., “ad Philad.” 5; “ad Smyrn.” 7). (“The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible”, p. 413.)
Maududi, a modern Islamic commentator thinks that only the spoken words of the todays Gospels are still reliable (see https://www.alim.org/quran/tafsir/maududi/surah/3/?ayah=3) Even if his assertion was correct the words of Jesus in these passages alone would disprove that theory by contradicting the Quran: Mark 10:45: “. . .give his life as a ransom for many.” Mark 9:30-32: He said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise.”
[7] The Tawrat is the Arabic equivalent of the Hebrew word ‘Torah’. It is normally understood as the law that was revealed to Hazrat Musa (Surah 5, Al Ma’ida, verses 47-48a). However, the Tawrat also includes the rest of the books that are found in todays, 21st century Bible, the Old Testament, for the following reasons:
Such a conclusion is supported by a hadith (Mishkat Al-Masabih, vol. 2, p. 1237) that tells of a similar occasion. Ka’b is reported as quoting the Tawrat with sayings that find their parallels in the book of Isaiah (chapter 42) rather than the books revealed to Hazrat Musa. Isaiah is part of the Nevi’im (Prophets) the second division of the Hebrew Bible. ‘Zabur’ is the Arabic equivalent of the Hebrew word ‘zimra’, translated as “psalm” and has the meaning “song, music”.
When the Quran mentions the Zabur, it is probably a reference to the third division of the Hebrew Scriptures, known as the Writings, or Kethubim. It begins with the Psalms and, along with the first two divisions, the Torah and the Nevi’im (Prophets) has been recognized by Jews since about 450 BC (Talmud: Bava Basra 14b-15a, Rashi to Megillah 3a, 14a) until today, by Jesus (Luke 24:44) and by early church fathers. Igantius, for example, was a disciple of the Apostle John who is known as one of Jesus’ first followers. (See Ignatius in, “ad Philad.” 5 +6; “ad Smyrn.” 7) This church leader has therefore an excellent ‘Isnad’. The Arabic word means ‘chains of narration’. They determine the authenticity of a saying by being closely related to the one who made it in the first place.
What is meant by the phrase, “that which the Prophets received”? The Quran mentions Job (4:163), Solomon (2:102), Jonah (4:163), Ezekiel [or possibly Isaiah] (21:85), and Ezra (9:30). These are biblical prophets whose books are not lost but found in the Old Testament. It would make little sense to say one believes in revelations that are not available and therefore not known anymore. It is very likely that Surah 3, Ali’Imran, verse 48 refers to those books when it says: “And He [God] will teach him [Isa] the Scripture and wisdom, and the Torah and the Gospel.”
Maududi, a modern Islamic commentator speculates, based on 2 Kings 22:8-13, that the Torah remained unchanged only until the first destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians in about 587 BC. (https://www.alim.org/quran/tafsir/maududi/surah/3/?ayah=3) This contradicts the teaching of the Quran in Surah 3:48 where Jesus is said to have been taught the Torah. If it was changed then surely, he would have told his contemporaries. Instead, he confirmed it as we know it today. Furthermore, the following links explains it well, https://www.mesora.org/torahlost.html: (all links were accessed in July 2024)
“Do you ask if the Torah was forgotten by King Yoshiyahu? He would not have been able to recognize this scroll as a Torah. He would not have known what the Torah was. Or do you ask if the Jews forgot the Torah? The Radak explains that during Menashe’s reign, the Jews pursued idolatry and ceased from following Torah. This continued until King Menashe repented. It does not mean they forgot what Torah was. It means they abandoned Torah. Could you imagine that our history, in any civilization would be blotted out or forgotten? That the event at Mt. Sinai would also be forgotten? Rebelliousness does not cause one to forget. If we suggest that many did forget Torah, we still see Menashe repented and did not forget. We see the Torah was never abandoned permanently. Repentance means that one knows what to return to.”
https://jewinthecity.com/2021/07/is-it-true-that-the-torah-was-lost-and-then-found/:
“Some people would have you believe that the Torah had been completely forgotten during the reign of King Menashe but that really doesn’t make any sense. Yes, he destroyed Torah scrolls where he found them but we’re talking about a pre-industrial, agrarian society. It would have been child’s play for a private individual to hide a small item like a sefer Torah somewhere in his house or on his property. There’s simply no way the ancient Judean government could have destroyed every privately-owned sefer Torah in every community throughout the country when much more advanced forces like the Nazis and the Communists failed in comparable goals. So, yes, many people might never have seen a Torah but that’s a far cry from national unfamiliarity with such things.
So what did happen that was so significant? The answer is in the text. II Kings 22:8 doesn’t say that they found a Torah scroll, it says they found the Torah scroll, i.e., the original manuscript that was dictated to Moshe, from which all later Torah scrolls were copied. This would have been a significant find then just as it would be today. So why was Yoshiyahu so shaken up? According to tradition, the scroll they found was rolled to the Tochacha, the rebuke in Deuteronomy 28, which describes the punishments for disregarding God’s laws. This was taken as a negative sign, which is why they sought a prophet’s guidance.
It should be noted that, in his later years, Menashe repented of his evil ways and served God (II Chronicles 33) and that Yoshiyahu was religiously observant even before the Torah was discovered in the Temple (II Chronicles 34). Neither of these things required the discovery of a Torah scroll in the Temple because the ways to observe the Torah were never lost.
The case for Ezra introducing (or re-introducing) the Torah is even flimsier. In Nehemiah 8, we are told how Ezra taught the Torah to the nation. On the second day of Rosh Hashana, the leaders of the people went to Ezra for instruction. Verse 14 tells us, “They found written in the Torah how Hashem had commanded through Moshe that the children of Israel should dwell in booths for the feast of the seventh month.” In other words, they “discovered” Succos, ergo Ezra introduced the Torah.
Poppycock.
Ezra brought the exiles back from Babylonian exile and spearheaded the reconstruction of the Temple. Obviously, lots of people forgot lots of Torah in exile but, again, individuals not being aware of something doesn’t mean that it has been completely forgotten. I could fill Madison Square Garden with Jews who never heard of Succos but that doesn’t mean that nobody observes it. It means that these individuals were unaware – nothing more and nothing less.
Consider also verse 17: “The entire congregation of returnees from exile made booths and dwelled in the booths; since the time of Joshua the son of Nun until that day the children of Israel had not done so, and there was great joy.” We understand that verse to mean that, since the time of Joshua, the Jews hadn’t celebrated a Succos as festively as the returnees from exile did in the time of Ezra. Even if you wanted to suggest that it means that Jews didn’t observe the holiday at all, you’d have to concede two points: (1) the verse could be understood to suggest that this was the first time since Joshua that the “entire congregation” observed Succos but that doesn’t mean that nobody observed it and (2) it was certainly observed in the time of Joshua, so Ezra certainly couldn’t have introduced it!
Ezra is credited with a lot of great things. He standardized the versions of Hebrew script used for religious and secular purposes. He corrected textual errors made by well-meaning but misguided predecessors. He absolutely restored individual laws that were widely forgotten (see Talmud Succah 20a). But he didn’t introduce or re-introduce the Torah as a whole because such a thing has never been forgotten. https://aish.com/the-torahs-rediscovery-in-josiahs-time/
See also: https://www.answering-islam.org/BibleCom/jer8_8_ss.html
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/tpc/2-kings-22.html
[8] These were physical scrolls/books being read in the Churches. In all likelihood they were copies of the Syriac Peshita. It was canonized by the 4th century AD and present in Arabia by the 6th. Every biblical name in the Quran is a Syriac translation. In addition, there are Syriac words found in it.
Other verses where the same phrase is found are: Surah Fatir, 35:31, Yunus, 10:37, Yusuf, 12:111, Al-Ahqaf, 46:29-30, Ali `Imran, 3:3. It needs to be translated word for word to give the sense of the present tense which it has. Sometimes it is understood literally as, “between or in his hands”. Usually it is an idiom for “in his presence”, or “in his power”, or “in his possession”, or “at his disposal”. Examples are “The words are between your hands”, meaning “you have the floor” or “you may speak”. “No weapons are between his hands”, meaning “he is unarmed”. Surah Saba, 34:12 speaks of Solomon and “the Jinns who worked between his hands”. Yusuf Ali translates this passage as “worked in front of him”, but in a note he explains, the Jinns “worked under his eyes”.
[9] Jesus was not given a physical book. Similarly, Muhammad was not given a physical book either. Surah 2:2 uses the word “book” in the sense of message, law. Ibn Kathir a classical Quran commentator from the 14th century said:
It seems that what is meant by Book here is writing. Tafsir al-Quran il-‘Azeem. But we do not have any evidence that the revelation was written down at the time of ‘Isa (peace be upon him). The fact that the Gospel is called “a Book” in the Holy Quran does not indicate that it was written down on pages at the time it was revealed. The fact that it is called a Book only refers to that which is with Allah in al-Lawh al-Mahfooz (the Preserved Tablet), or that it was something that could be written. This also applies to the Holy Quran, as Allah calls it a Book. Rather it was transmitted verbally as well as being written down randomly on skins and parchments. In fact it was not a compiled Book until the time of Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allah be pleased with him). Indeed, Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And even if We had sent down unto you (O Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)) a message written on paper so that they could touch it with their hands, the disbelievers would have said: ‘This is nothing but obvious magic!’” [6:7]
Al-Tahir ibn ‘Ashoor said in his commentary on Surat Maryam:: 30: The Scripture refers to the law which is usually written lest it be subject to change. The word Scripture is applied to the Law of ‘Isa (peace be upon him) just as it is applied to the Quran. Al-Tahreer wa’l-Tanweer.
Similarly, the Christians do not believe that there is a book that was written by the Messiah or one of his disciples during his lifetime that was lost after that.
[10] https://www.britannica.com/topic/Dead-Sea-Scrolls
[11] The only charge regarding the Injeel that was made against Christians is that they forgot part of their covenant in Surah 5:14. This means what they do have is still correct. Forgetting something does not mean that the Injeel did not contain it but that they could not remember what was written in it.
[12] Surah Al-An`am, 6:89-92, Hud, 11:110, Al-Baqara 2:40-44, , 85, 89-90, 97, 101, 140, 146, 159, 174, Ali `Imran, 3:69-71, 75, 78, 113-114, 199, Al-Ma’ida, 5:13-14, 44-51, Al-Nisa’ 4:44-47. At any rate, it is important to note that the Quran describes good Jews and Christians (Al-Hadid, 57:26-27) who certainly would never have changed their Scriptures, even if bad ones were attempting to. The latter could at best only have succeeded locally in Saudi Arabia. However, there were already thousands of manuscripts in the original languages.
[13] It appears that different companions (or sub-narrators) inserted their own opinion on the Bible into the hadith. For example: -Omar brought the Taurat to Muhammad, he got red-faced and stayed quiet in the Mosque. -The Prophet put his hand on the Bible and said “I will follow thee.”(Abu Dawud) -Abu Hurairah quotes various Torah verses.
For more information on the subject please visit:
https://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Bible/ibnabbas_bukhari.htm
https://www.answering-islam.org/Shamoun/tahrif.htm
https://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/Injeel_what_kind.html
https://www.answering-islam.org/authors/adams/early_islam_bible.html
