57 replies »

1. There is zero evidence that God has revealed the Quran. Allah was the deity of the Meccans to whom they attributed three daughters. Muhammad reinvented this deity as the only true God without partners. He then identified this deity with the god of the Torah. There is however absolutely no evidence whatsoever for the Muslim claim that the Torah was once a pure Islamic text. In addition the overwhelming testimony of the Islamic Sources is that the Torah existing during Muhammad’s time was authentic scripture. If the Torah has not been corrupted from a once purely Islamic text then Islam is a lie. “Produce your evidence if you should be truthful”.

   Reply

   • Zero evidence? Quran is free from any scientific error.Only a book revealed by God could be free from scientific errors at that time despite the fact that many scientific misconceptions were prevailing then.

     Reply

2. You said “There is zero evidence that God has revealed the Quran.” which is absolutely false and baseless.
   Qur’an says
   [10. Surah Yunis: Ayah 37]
   “And this Quran is not such as could be forged by those besides Allah, but it is a verification of that which is before it and a clear explanation of the book, there is no doubt in it, from the Lord of the worlds.”
   [4. Surah Nisaa: Ayah 82]
   “Do they not then meditate on the Quran? And if it were from any other than Allah, they would have found in it many a discrepancy.”

   You said Allah was the deity of the Meccans to whom they attributed three daughters. Again it’s a false accusation. As we read in the Qur’an

   Have ye seen Lat. and ‘Uzza, And another, the third (goddess), Manat? 
 (53:19-20)

   Yet if we just continued reading a little further, we would then read:
   What! For you the male sex, and for Him, the female? 

Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! 

These are nothing but names which ye have devised,- ye and your fathers,- for which Allah has sent down no authority(whatever). They follow nothing but conjecture and what their own souls desire!- Even though there has already come to them Guidance from their Lord! 

(53:21-23)

   So when we read on, the verses go on to explicitly refute such a notion, that Allah has daughters. The verses say that such a claim is a corruption, something some people have said with no authority, and something that they wanted.
   In essence, this was something made up by some of the Arab pagans, they had dozens and dozens of idols (360), and they would ascribe certain things upon these idols, which obviously meant nothing, these were things they invented to make themselves feel better. And so for these 3 idols in specific, the pagans decided to label them as the daughters of Allah, to give a special place for the 3 idols. As the Quranic verse says, they did it for their own desires.
   The most important point however is the Quran denies what the pagans have ascribed to God, denying that he has daughters, and that the pagans simply made this up with no authority from God.
   In conclusion, Allah has no daughters.

   You said There is however absolutely no evidence whatsoever for the Muslim claim that the Torah was once a pure Islamic text.
   Again this is a false and baseless accusation.
   As we read in the Qur’an

   “Lo! We did reveal the Torah, wherein is guidance and a light, by which the
   Prophets who surrendered (unto Allah) judged the Jews, and the rabbis and
   the priests (judged) by such of Allah’s Scripture as they were bidden to
   observe, and thereunto were they witnesses.” [Qur’an 5 : 44]
   “Who revealed the Book which Moses brought, a light and guidance for mankind, which ye have put on parchments which ye show, but ye hide much (thereof), and by which ye were taught that which ye knew not yourselves nor (did) your fathers (know it)? Say: Allah….” [Qur’an 6: 91]

   “We gave unto Moses the Scripture, and We appointed it a guidance for
   the Children of Israel, saying: Choose no guardian beside Me.” [Qur’an 17 : 2]

   You said Torah existing during Muhammad’s time was authentic scripture. Again same stuff.

   Al-Hakim related in Al-Mustadrak the following Hadith…

   Abu Abdullah Muhammad Ibn Abdullah As-Saffar told us: Ahmad Ibn Mahdi Ibn Rustum Al-Asfahani told us: Mu’azh Ibn Hisham Ad-Distwani told us: my father told me: Al-Qasim Ibn ‘Awf Ash-Shaybani told me: Mu’azh Ibn Jabal – radiya Allahu ‘anhu – told us that he went to Sham and saw the Christians prostrate to their Bishops and priests and saw the Jews prostrate to their Rabbis and scholars. He said, “Why do you do this?” they answered, “This is the greeting of Prophets (peace be upon him)”. I said, “We better do this to our Prophet”. Allah’s Prophet – salla Allahu ‘alaihi wa sallam – said, “They lied about their Prophets just as they distorted their Book. If I were to command anyone to prostrate to anyone, I would command woman to prostrate to her husband for his great right upon her. No woman will taste the sweetness of Faith till she does her husband’s rights even if he asks herself while she is on a Qutub” (Al-Hakim commented, “This hadith is authentic according to standards of Al-Bukhari and Muslim, but they did not relate it” This hadith was also related by At-Tabarani in “Al-Mu’jam Al-Kabir” vol. 8, p.31 but it includes An-Nahhas Ibn Fahm who is a weak narrator. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal related it with a sound chain of transmission in his Musnad vol. 4, p. 381 (online source) with the following chain: ‘Abdullah told us: my father (Ibn Hanbal) told me: Mu’azh Ibn Hisham told us: my father told me: Al-Qasim Ibn ‘Awf – a man from Al-Kufa, one of Bani Murra Ibn Hammam – told me: Mu’azh Ibn Jabal – radiya Allahu ‘anhu – told us that .. and mentioned the hadith. This hadith has been authenticated by Ibn Hajar Al Haytami in his Majma’ Al Zawaaid, Volume 4, page 312. He said of the narrators in the chain ‘their men are men of authenticity’ )

   Notice that the Prophet peace be upon him is saying that the Christians and Jews distorted their books JUST AS they lied about their Prophets. The context of the situation is that the Christians and Jews said that bowing down to their priests and rabbis was the greeting of the Prophets. This is a forgery and a lie. Thus if they were to corrupt their books in the same way they would have made up lies in the Torah and Gospel by introducing false statements into it.
   The Bani Israel wrote a book, they followed it and left the Torah. (This hadith was reported in Tabarani’s Al Mu’jam Al Awsat and was authenticated by Sheikh Nasr Al Deen Al Albani in hisSilsila Al Ahaadeeth Al Saheeha, hadith no. 2832.)

   The Prophet peace be upon him also said…The Bani Israel as a long time passed and their hearts became hardened, they invented a book from themselves. It took over their hearts and their tongues. (This hadith was reported in Al Bayhaqi’s Shu’b Al Eemaan, Volume 2, no.439. Sheikh Nasr Al Deen Al Albani has authenticated this hadith in his Silsila Al Ahaadeeth Al Saheeha, hadith no. 2694.)

   The Prophet peace be upon him elaborates more…

   The Bani Israel wrote a book, they followed it and left the Torah. (This hadith was reported in Tabarani’s Al Mu’jam Al Awsat and was authenticated by Sheikh Nasr Al Deen Al Albani in his Silsila Al Ahaadeeth Al Saheeha, hadith no. 2832.)

   I hope things are now bit clear to you 🙂

   If i have done any mistake May ALLAH forgive me.

   Reply

3. Quran 15:19-23 is simply confirming what I said i.e. that before Islam Allah was a Meccan deity with three daughters. This is the deity that Muhammad reinvented and identified with the god of the Jews. I do understand that Muhammad, who is the sole witness for Allah’s existence, condemned and rejected this notion of deity in his Quran.

   You have totally failed to produce any evidence whatsoever for the claim that the Torah was once a purely Islamic text. Your “evidence” consists of quotations from the Quran – the very book whose veracity is in question. I believe its called “begging the question”.

   One of the main reasons why the majority of the Jews repeatedly and consistently rejected Muhammad was because his Quran contradicted their Torah. Can you then cite any evidence which shows that Muhammad even once, during his 23 years of prophethood, countered their rejection by telling them that their Torah was seriously corrupt? Could there ever have been a better time to tell them that their Torah was seriously corrupt? Can you cite any evidence which shows that Muhammad’s Jewish contemporaries were ever aware of or understood that he was making such a charge against their Book?

   If Muhammad had accused the Jews of textually corrupting the Torah then this would have been the biggest bone of contention between them. Can you cite any evidence to show that this was the case?

   Can you cite any evidence to show that the Jews ever contested or rejected the charge of corruption against their Scripture? Did they ever ask Muhammad to produce evidence which proved that they had corrupted the Torah? Did they ever ask him to produce any evidence which proved that the Torah was originally a pure Islamic text? Did Muhammad ever provide any convincing evidence for either of these claims?

   Is it credible that Muhammad could have for 23 years condemned the Jews for having corrupted the Torah without the Jews EVER becoming aware of it?!

   Muhammad threatened the Jews with eternal damnation for rejecting his claim of divine selection. However since the Torah seriously undermines and contradicts Muhammad’s Quran, he, like today’s Muslims, could have tried to convert the Jews by giving them proof that their Book was not only seriously corrupt but also originally a pure Islamic text. The Jews could not be expected to accept such a claim and abandon their Torah simply because Muhammad CLAIMED it was corrupt. He would have needed to have provided them with some irrefutable and credible evidence to support such a claim..

   SURELY MUSLIMS WOULD AGREE THAT IF ALLAH IS A JUST GOD THEN HE CANNOT SEND DISBELIEVERS INTO HELL TO BE TORTURED FOREVER WITHOUT FIRST HAVING GIVEN THEM UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE FOR WHAT HE IS ASKING THEM TO BELIEVE.

   Quran 2:111 …”Produce your proof, if you should be truthful.”

   Given that his credibility hung upon this absolutely critical and decisive issue we would have expected Muhammad to have made his position on the reliability of the Torah known to the Jews in the clearest manner possible. Also given the unthinkable consequences with which those who reject Muhammad are threatened with we would have expected him to have made his views on this issue repeatedly and continuously crystal clear throughout his 23 year ministry and in a language no Jew or anyone else could fail to understand. The possibility of mistake or doubt must not exist in a matter where the consequences are so vast and dreadful.

   Even IF Muslim apologists could prove the claim that the Torah has been corrupted, intellectual integrity should compel them to admit that this claim was ‘astonishingly’ never presented in any exchange or debate to the Jews by Muhammad. Neither did Muhammad ever offer any evidence to support such a claim.

   Had Muhammad accused the Jews of corrupting the Torah a debate would have undoubtedly erupted between them. It would have been their biggest bone of contention, the mother of all arguments in seventh century Medina. It would have dwarfed all other issues. The Rabbis were not debate-shy and could even be scathing and derogatory towards Muhammad and his religion as the Islamic Sources attest. However we find no debate between them over THIS particular issue.

   Although corruption of “previous scripture” may be the biggest bone of contention between Muslims and Christians today, the fact is, it was a total non-issue between Muhammad and the Jews.

   Can you cite any evidence to show that Muhammad even once went to the Jews and offered them indisputable or any evidence to support the contention that their Torah was textually corrupt?

   Can you tell us what was the Jewish response to the supposed charge against the textual integrity of their Book? The truth is there never was any Jewish response because this charge was never presented to them.

   Why do we never find in the Islamic Sources anything like:

   Debate: Can We Trust Today’s Torah? Muhammad v Jewish Rabbis

   There can only be one answer: The trustworthiness of the Torah was never an issue between Muhammad and the Jews.

   The majority of seventh century Jews, who were averse to idolatry, would have required more than an eloquent Quran to abandon their beloved Torah and circumambulate and prostrate towards a House full of idols or kiss a stone. They would have required undeniable, irrefutable and indisputable proof that the Torah was originally a pure Islamic text. Neither Allah nor Muhammad came up with any evidence whatsoever for such a claim and neither have today’s Muslims.

   You need to explain why, unlike today’s Muslims, Muhammad in 23 years never once told the Jews in any exchange or debate between them that the Torah was textually corrupt? Is it credible that the most crucial and critical issue in a Muslim v Jewish debate was NEVER touched upon during years of exchanges? Are we to believe that the core issue in the Muhammad v Jews debates was NEVER addressed? Islam is simply not credible nor does it make any sense.

   The only credible explanation for the absence of debate over this issue is that it was NOT an issue.

   By far the overwhelming evidence is that Muhammad affirmed the Torah in total. The charge of corruption is a later development in the history of Islam, concocted to save Islam from the Quran.

   Reply

4. You said Quran 15:19-23 is simply confirming what I said i.e. that before Islam Allah was a Meccan deity with three daughters. This is the deity that Muhammad reinvented and identified with the god of the Jews.
   I have refuted your arguments that ALLAH was not a Meccan deity with three daughters.
   And by the way your reference is wrong coz Ch 15 verse 19 to 23 is as below
   (15:19) We stretched forth the Earth, and set mountains firmly upon it, and caused to grow therein every kind of vegetable in balanced measure.
   (15:20) And We provided therein means of sustenance for you and for many other creatures for whom you do not provide
   (15:21) There is not a thing whose treasures are not with Us, and We send down each thing in appropriate measure
   (15:22) It is We Who send the fertilising winds: then We send down’ water from heaven, and then We give it to you to drink; and it is not you who hold the store of this wealth.
   (15:23) It is We Who give life and death and We will be the inheritors of all.

   You Said, You have totally failed to produce any evidence whatsoever for the claim that the Torah was once a purely Islamic text. Your “evidence” consists of quotations from the Quran – the very book whose veracity is in question. I believe its called “begging the question”
   I have given you the evidence from the Qur’an and Hadith that Torah was once a pure and that which was given to Prophet Moses. It’s just your mental reservation and biasness that is holding you back to accept the truth.
   You said The trustworthiness of the Torah was never an issue between Muhammad and the Jews. Well back then there were many conversations but at present you can Check out this video between sadat anwar and alex kerimli For CAN WE TRUST TODAYS TORAHhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmmZtwfUtmI

   Al-Husayn ibn Salam was a Jewish rabbi in Yathrib [Madinah] was the first jew who converted to Islam during Prophet’s time. If the prophet hadn’t convinced him that jews scriptures was corrupted then he wouldn’t have been convert to Islam. Moreover there were many jews who converted to Islam back then.

   Muslims believe in the revealed books of Allah. This includes the Quran (the final revelation to Mankind, Allah’s love letter to humanity) and the earlier books of revelation given by Allah to his various messengers over time. While all of Allah’s messengers and Prophets received divine revelation some Prophets were given an actual book or oral type of revelation. Those messengers who were given these books were referred to as the messengers of Allah. The Quran notes five such books of revelation: The Book given to Prophet Abraham [1], the Book given to Prophet Moses (The Torah or Law) the book given to King David (The Psalms) and the Gospel given to Prophet Jesus and finally the book given to Prophet Muhammad (The Quran). This can be found in the Quran in several places:

   Or do they envy mankind for what Allah hath given them of his bounty? but We had already given the people of Abraham the Book and Wisdom, and conferred upon them a great kingdom. (Quran 4:54)

   ….and to David We gave the Psalms (Quran 4:163)

   And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him: We sent him the Gospel: therein was guidance and light, and confirmation of the Law that had come before him: a guidance and an admonition to those who fear Allah. (Quran 5:46)

   Now what does the Quran mean when it says Abraham, Moses, David and Jesus (peace and blessings be upon all of them) all got their individual books? The Quran means that these books were revealed to their messengers in their original form (probably meaning as an oral message). So these books were given to the four messengers of Allah, directly by a revelation from Allah. After these messengers received these revelations, some messengers like Abraham, Moses and David wrote these revelations down and others didn’t like Jesus. After Abraham, Moses and David died, the book of Abraham was lost, The Torah of Moses was corrupted and badly edited as time went on and most of the Psalms of David were written by unknown writers. As for the Gospel, well as soon as Jesus left the earth—the New Testament was badly corrupted by unreliable oral traditions, growing legends, fictional forms and cheats and frauds who were pretending to be apostles of the original church (like Paul of Tarsus).

   The Quran says that the current Torah, Psalms and Gospel (the New Testament) have been badly corrupted. Numerous passages of the Quran refer to man’s distortion and alterations of the previous books of revelations from Allah. These passages in the Quran note that the received books by the People of the Book, The Jews and the Christians, do not conform to the original revelations that were given to Moses, David and Jesus. The following verses from the Quran are among the more direct in addressing this distortion of the prior books of Allah.

   Can ye (o ye men of Faith) entertain the hope that they will believe in you?- Seeing that a party of them heard the Word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it… Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. (Quran 2:75,79)

   There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, “That is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah: It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it! (Quran 3:78)

   And remember Allah took a covenant from the People of the Book, to make it known and clear to mankind, and not to hide it; but they threw it away behind their backs, and purchased with it some miserable gain! And vile was the bargain they made! (Quran 3:187)

   But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them- barring a few – ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind. From those, too, who call themselves Christians, We did take a covenant, but they forgot a good part of the message that was sent them: so we estranged them, with enmity and hatred between the one and the other, to the day of judgment. And soon will Allah show them what it is they have done. (Quran 5:13-14)

   No just estimate of Allah do they make when they say: “Nothing doth Allah send down to man (by way of revelation)” Say: “Who then sent down the Book which Moses brought?- a light and guidance to man: But ye make it into (separate) sheets for show, while ye conceal much (of its contents): therein were ye taught that which ye knew not- neither ye nor your fathers.” Say: “Allah (sent it down)”: Then leave them to plunge in vain discourse and trifling. (Quran 6:91)

   The Hadith (sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad in Islam) as well point out to Biblical Corruption. Consider these hadith:

   Narrated Abu Huraira: The people of the Scripture (Jews) used to recite the Torah in Hebrew and they used to explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. On that Allah’s Apostle said, “Do not believe the people of the Scripture or disbelieve them, but say:– “We believe in Allah and what is revealed to us.” (2.136) (Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 12)

   Narrated Ubaidullah: Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah’s Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, ‘It is from Allah,’ to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!” (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)

   Narrated ‘Ubaidullah bin ‘Abdullah: ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas said, “O the group of Muslims! How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about anything while your Book which Allah has revealed to your Prophet contains the most recent news from Allah and is pure and not distorted? Allah has told you that the people of the Scriptures have changed some of Allah’s Books and distorted it and wrote something with their own hands and said, ‘This is from Allah, so as to have a minor gain for it. Won’t the knowledge that has come to you stop you from asking them? No, by Allah, we have never seen a man from them asking you about that (the Book Al-Qur’an ) which has been revealed to you. (Bukhari Volume 9, Book 93, Number 614)

   So the first hadith is saying that as long as the Torah agrees with the Quran, it is to be believed however if the Torah doesn’t agree with the Quran then it is not to be believed. Some Christian apologetics only quotes the second Bukhari Hadith #614 to point out that Islam doesn’t have anything to say about Biblical corruption. But this hadith too is saying that the Bible is corrupt. When it says changed some of Allah’s books, it means the Torah, Psalms and the Gospels and that the Bible is not reliable and Muslims shouldn’t go to the people of the scripture since their books are now distorted. Also pay attention to the hadith #461 I quoted. The hadith states that the Jews AND the Christians had distorted and wrote the scripture with their own hands that was given to them. In other words their books were not the same ones given to Moses and Jesus and that’s what the Quran 3:3 is speaking about… the orginal books of Prophets Moses and Jesus which we clearly don’t have today.

   Critical scholars today are generally in agreement that the sources of the Pentateuch were 4 separate documents written in different times by different authors. These source documents were called the J (Jehowah/Yahweh), E (Elohim) D (Deuteronomic), and the P (priestly), documents. Internal evidence shows that “J” originated from the southern kingdom of Judah and was the earliest to be documented around 900BC; “E” was written in the northern kingdom of Israel probably about a century or so later. The “D” document is dated to about 700BC. The documents were then combined into one by the priesthood, who added their own “Priestly” tradition to it, during the Babylonian exile (after 560 BC). We are not concerned here with the basis of this theory as our purpose is simply to show that it could not have been written by Moses-a fundamentalist bedrock belief. For more on this read Anderson, A Critical Introduction to the Old Testament.

   The gospels are not eyewitness accounts

   -Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School

   Some scholars say so many revisions occurred in the 100 years following Jesus’ death that no one can be absolutely sure of the accuracy or authenticity of the Gospels, especially of the words the authors attributed to Jesus himself.
   -Jeffery L. Sheler, [2]

   Even the Biblical book of Jeremiah clearly states that the scribes of the ancient Israelites altered the revealed scriptures given to the Israelites by Allah, and thus changed them “into a lie”.

   ” ‘How can you say, “We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD,” when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? (Jeremiah 8:8 New International Version)

   You said Can you cite any evidence which shows that Muhammad’s Jewish contemporaries were ever aware of or understood that he was making such a charge against their Book?
   Evidence From The Prophet’s Conversation With The Jews

   The Jews brought [to the Prophet peace be upon him] a man and a woman among them who committed adultery. The Prophet peace be upon him said, “Bring the two most knowledgeable men from amongst you.” The Jews brought the two sons of Suriyya, and the Prophet peace be upon him asked them, “What punishment do you find in the Torah regarding these two?” They said, “In the Torah, we find that if four men testify that they saw his male organ in her womb, similar to when the eyeliner is inserted inside the eyeliner container; in this case they are stoned.” The Prophet peace be upon him said, “What made you stop stoning?” They said, “Our kingship (meaning Jewish) was taken from us and we hated killing.” The Messenger of Allah asked for four witnesses and they brought four men who testified that they saw his penis in her womb like the eyeliner is inserted in the eyeliner container. The Messenger of Allah ordered that the two [adulterers] are stoned. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith no. 3862, Source. Sheikh Albani declared this hadith authentic in Sunan Abu Dawud, hadith no.4452)

   Indeed, we do find in the Old Testament today that adulterers are to be killed (Leviticus 20:10). But nowhere do we find anything about four witnesses (interestingly Islam teaches this) or any eyeliner.
   This is indirect proof that this section of the Torah has been distorted with.
   Another one
   Narrated by Al Fultaan ibn A’asim:
   Do you bear witness that I am the Messenger of Allah? He said: No. The Prophet peace be upon him said: Do you read the Torah? He replied back: Yes. Then the Prophet peace be upon him asked: and the Gospel? The man replied: Yes. The Prophet peace be upon him then asked: The Qur’an? The man replied back: No. The Prophet peace be upon him replied back: By He Whose Hand my soul lies, if I willed I would read it. Then the Prophet peace be upon him pulled the man and asked: Don’t you find me in the Torah and Gospel? The man replied back and said: We find someone who is similar to you and your Ummah (community) and from the place where you were brought up and we were hoping that you would be from amongst us. When you rose up (as a Prophet) we were afraid that it would be you. However, we looked and saw that it wasn’t you. The Prophet peace be upon him replied back asking: Why is that? The man said: From him will be 70,000 of his followers from his community who will have no judgment passed on them nor punishment but you have a simple number of men following you. The Prophet peace be upon him replied back: By He Whose Hand my soul lies it is me and it is referring to my Ummah (community). And they are more than 70 thousand, 70 thousand, 70 thousand. (This hadith has been declared authentic by Sheikh Albani in Saheeh Al Muwaarid,page or hadith no. 1765)
   Note how the man informed the Prophet peace be upon him that one of the signs of the Prophet to come according to the Torah or Gospel is that the Prophet will have 70,000 followers who will enter paradise with no judgment passed on them. Where do we see this in today’s Torah or Gospel? Nowhere. Thus indicating that it has been removed from the text, which in turn implies textual corruption.

   The View of Ibn Abbaas (d. 68 A.H.) on Torah and Gospels
   Saheeh Bukhari
   Volume 9, Book 93, Number 613:
   Narrated ‘Ikrima:
   Ibn ‘Abbaas said, “How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about their Books while you have Allah’s Book (the Qur’an) which is the most recent of the Books revealed by Allah, and you read it in its pure undistorted form?”
   Volume 9, Book 93, Number 614:
   Narrated ‘Ubaidullah bin ‘Abdullah:
   ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbaas said, “O the group of Muslims! How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about anything while your Book which Allah has revealed to your Prophet contains the most recent news from Allah and is pure and not distorted? Allah has told you that the people of the Scriptures have changed some of Allah’s Books and distorted it and wrote something with their own hands and said, ‘This is from Allah, so as to have a minor gain for it. Won’t the knowledge that has come to you stop you from asking them? No, by Allah, we have never seen a man from them asking you about that (the Book Al-Qur’an ) which has been revealed to you.

   Ibn Hazm describes the above narrations as…
   The soundest Isnad (chain of transmission) or ascription to Ibn Abbaas, which is exactly our view. There is no difference between the companions on this matter. (Ibn Hazm, Al-Fasl fi’l Milal, Volume 2, p. 3, cited here)

   Here we see that Ibn Hazm reinforces the fact that Ibn Abbaas truly held this position and that even the companions of the Prophet peace be upon him held the same position as well. Thus, there was a consensus amongst the companions that the Christians and the Jews had textually corrupted their scriptures.

   Reply

5. You said Your “evidence” consists of quotations from the Quran – the very book whose veracity is in question.

   If you are not ready to accept Our sources and doubt it..then why are you asking for Islamic sources. First get o’er your prejudices and mental reservation then ask for evidence.

   Reply

6. sheikh al-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah and some of his students showing corruption of the Torah and the Injil in hands of Jews and Christians to dispel any doubt regarding the views of this grand scholar of Islam.

   Sheikh-ul-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah (661-728 AH) says:
   The Torah and the Injil that are present nowadays are not those that were presented by the prophets Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them both). The transmission of the Torah was discontinued when Jerusalem was ruined and the children of Israel were evacuated. It was mentioned that the person who dictated it to them was a man called ‘Uzir (Ezra). Some people claimed he was a prophet but others say that he was not a prophet and that a copy of the Torah had been compared to an old copy found with him. It was also said that a copy was brought from Morocco. But all these tales do not prove that the words of this Torah are authentic, nor do they disprove the mistakes in some of them, as was the case in other books copied by more than one person.

   It is likely that the transmission of two, three or four persons may contain some mistakes. They committed a previous mistake regarding Christ himself when they confused him with the man who had been crucified.
   What we mean here is that Christians do not have a reliable authentic transmission from Christ concerning the exact wordings of the Injil or a reliable transmission for most of their religious laws. This is also applicable to the Jews who also do not have authentic transmission for the wordings of the Torah or the prophecies of their prophets. On the other hand, Muslims have authentic clear chains of transmitters for the Qur’an and the Sunnah, which contain facts known to non-specialized as well as specialized people.
   (Ibn Taimiyyah, Al-Gawab Al-Sahih, 1/310)

   Ibn Kathir (701-773 AH), the student/disciple of Ibn Taimiyyah, says:
   Our Sheikh the notable Imam Abul-‘Abbas Ibn Taimiyyah said: As for those who argued that it [the Torah] is entirely corrupted from beginning to end without sparing one letter, they are mistaken. Also, those who argued that nothing has been corrupted are mistaken. The truth is that alteration and change had reached it and they [the Jews] manipulated its words with additions and omissions as they manipulated its meanings. This is well recognized on pondering and may be explained in another occasion, and Allah knows best….

   I [Ibn Kathir] say: As for the Arabic Torah in their hands, no sane person doubts its alteration, textual corruption, change of stories and words, additions and obvious clear omissions. Glaring lies and extreme errors are so abundant in it. As regards what they recite with their tongues and write with their pens, we have no access to, but it is assumed they are dishonest liars who frequently invent forgeries against Allah, His Messengers and Books.

   Sulaiman ibn Abdul-Qawi al-Tufi (657-716 AH), the student/disciple of Ibn Taimiyyah, notes:
   Be acknowledged that these Scriptures [of Jews and Christians] are unreliable because we consider them corrupted and changed. Yes, alteration have not involved them entirely, but reached them after all. That is why our Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: (( Do not believe the People of the Book and do not deny them. Say: “We believe in Allah and what has been revealed to us and what has been revealed to you. Our God and your God is One, and to Him we have submitted.” )).
   He prohibited believing them for fear of that they may tell us something that is definitely corrupted, and disbelieving them for fear of that it may be not corrupted.
   (Sulaiman ibn Abdul-Qawi al-Tufi, Al-Intesarat Al-Islamiyyah, 1/230-232)

   and says:
   Moreover, the same way they [i.e., Jews and Christians] do not consider our Book reliable, we do not consider their Books reliable. This is actually prior because their Books are older and much subjected to mistranslation on the contrary of our Book.(ibid., 1/232)

   and says:
   Additions and omissions do not reach it [the Qur’an] on the contrary of the Torah and the Injil as I have seen myself in the two Scriptures regarding contradiction and discrepency and noted in my commentary on the two Scriptures.
   (ibid., 1/294)

   and says:
   We believe that the Qur’an is the truth, and the Torah whom you use against us, not the one given to Moses, is falsehood and fabrication.
   (ibid., 1/341)

   and says:
   The general answer is lack of trust in these Scriptures due to their antiquity, translation from one language to another and suspicion in honesty of Jews and Christians [in preservation] especially regarding the Injil for I explained in my commentary on it our excuses of non-trust in it concerning difference and contradiction.
   (ibid., 1/350)

   Al-Tufi is the author of “Ta’aliq ala Al-Anajil”, i.e., Commentary on the Gospels, in which he explained that the Gospels in hands of Christians are not the Injil revealed to Jesus (peace be upon him). They are merely stories from his biography written by those whose names are mentioned in the beginnings of these Gospels, so they are actually their words, not God’s, in addition to few words of Jesus (peace be upon him). They actually admit that these Gospels are not inspired.
   Then, he noted that if Jesus (peace be upon him) saw what they wrote about him, he would pray to Allah to turn them into monkeys and pigs! (confer pages 2, 3, 6, 7, .. etc..)

   Regarding the present Torah, the famous american historian Jewish, Max Dimont (August 12, 1912–March 1992) recognized himself:

   “There are two versions of many, many other events, as the perceptive reader of Old Testament may have noticed. Are we dealing with two versions of the same story, or with two different stories merged into one ?” (Jews, God and History, New American Library, 2nd edition, p. 28).

   “The final fusion of the Five Books of Moses, called the Pentateuch, occurred around 450 B.C. – in other words, not until eight to sixteen hundred years after some of the events narrated in them took place. Is it not reasonable to suppose that in that period of time [i. e. before 450 B.C.], before there were any written records, many changes and alterations must have occurred as the stories and legends were handed down orally from generation to generation ?” (Ibid., p. 31).

   “As a second move toward forging a national religious and spiritual Jewish character, Ezra and Nehemia decided not only to revise the Book of Deuteronomy but to add to it four other Books of Moses. Under their direction, priest and scholar labored diligently to fuse the most important of the divergent Mosaic documents, including the Deuteronomy of Josiah, into the five books of the Pentateuch, namely, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. All Five Books of Moses were now made divine. From here on, no deletions, changes or additions to the Pentateuch could be made, nor have any been made” (Ibid., p. 63).

   Reply

7. @ Hamza Azfer

   RE: “These are nothing but names which ye have devised,- ye and your fathers”

   Not only did the Meccans devise the names Lat, Uzza and Manat, they also devised the name Allah! Muhammad simply took their god and reinvented him without daughters.

   Quran 5:44 and 6;91 assume that the Torah existing in the seventh century was authentic. Since this Torah seriously contradicts the Quran, Islam cannot be true.

   This is the only Hadith that I know of which appears to talk about textual corruption of “previous scripture” Muslims must however ignore a mountain of evidence from the Quran and countless other Hadith to maintain that Islam teaches that the Torah was textually corrupt. The fact that you have to resort to such sparse “evidence” for your charge of corruption whilst ignoring the great and overwhelming testimony of the rest of the Islamic Sources which contradicts this charge shows how utterly desperate your position is.

   The two other Hadith you quoted do not appear to talk about corruption of already existing scripture.

   In addition there is absolutely no historical or archaeological evidence for the Muslim charge of corruption i.e. that later Jews corrupted the Torah given to Moses by Allah in 1440 BC.

   Can you cite a single secular or independent Old Testament scholar who believes that later Jews corrupted the Torah written by Moses in 1440 BC?

   Can you cite a single recognized independent (i.e. neither Jewish nor Christian) Old Testament scholar who has found credible evidence for the Muslim claim that there once existed a Torah that taught purely Islamic doctrine?

   Can you cite a single independent scholar who believes that the present Torah has evolved from or is a corruption of a once purely Islamic text?

   Can you cite a single independent scholar who believes that Judaism has evolved from Islam?

   There is absolutely no evidence for the claim that there once existed a Torah which taught purely Islamic doctrine.

   You need to provide real evidence to support your arguments and not just quote a book whose credibility you have yet to prove.

   Reply

8. First of all let me clear that you are giving your own subjective opinion with zero reference. And, you say to me That produce documents if you are truthful. Huh!!
   I have provided a lot but, your mental reservation and biasness is holding you back.

   You said Not only did the Meccans devise the names Lat, Uzza and Manat, they also devised the name Allah! Muhammad simply took their god and reinvented him without daughters.
   This is again a subjective opinion of yours and Prophet Muhammad didn’t invent anything coz he got the revealation From ALLAH thru Archangel Gabriel. Surely if you had knowledge of Islam then you would know that the Names of Allah are in fact His Attributes such as (Ar-Raheem- The Merciful, al-Khaliq- The Creator, al-Wadood- The Loving etc.) you should have known that the major pagan-god names included Hubal (the name of the pagan’s most famous idol), Manat, Uzza etc and none of these are the Names of Allah. The Names of Allah are His attributes and these Names were not the names of any pagan-idols. Allah is the Arabic personal name for God. W.Montgomery Watt tells us that Arab Christians, Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant use Allah as the word for God. In fact he goes on further and teaches us the word Allah is similar to the New Testament ho theos and both simply mean ‘the god’ . The meaning of Allah as ‘God’ is also confirmed by Karen Armstrong .

   You said You need to provide real evidence to support your arguments and not just quote a book whose credibility you have yet to prove.
   I believe just like many Muslims around the world and many Non-Muslim Scholars who believe Qur’an to be a Divine Revealation and It’s Authentic one. The perverted Teachings Of todays Torah in itself is a proof that it’s been corrupted.

   You said Quran 5:44 and 6;91 assume that the Torah existing in the seventh century was authentic. Since this Torah seriously contradicts the Quran, Islam cannot be true.

   This is totally your subjective opinion and the allegation is baseless.

   the verse 5:44 tells the Jews that all the Prophets were muslims (submitters to God) whereas the Jews had deviated from islam (submission to God), and true to their chauvinistic sectarianism, were content with remaining merely ‘Jews’.
   And, in the verse 6:91 commentary, it is quite evident that this statement comes from the Jews. Since the Prophet (peace be on him) had asserted that he was a Prophet and that a Book had been revealed to him, the unbelieving Quraysh and other polytheists of Arabia naturally used to approach the Jews and the Christians – who believed in the Prophets and in the Scriptures – and tried to solicit a candid answer from them as to whether God’s words had indeed been revealed to Muhammad (peace be on him). Whatever answer they gave was then disseminated on all sides by the active opponents of the Prophet (peace be on him) in order to create revulsion against Islam. This is the reason for mentioning, and then refuting, this statement by the Jews, which had been used by the opposition as an argument against Islam.
   One might wonder how a Jew, who believes in the Torah as a revealed Book of God, could say that God had revealed nothing to anyone. At times blind obstinacy and bigotry cause people to resort to arguments which strike at the roots of their own belief. These people were bent upon denying the prophethood of Muhammad (peace be on him), and this fanaticism had come to dominate them so much that they went so far as to deny the very institution of prophethood.
   To say that peopte have not formed any proper estimate of God means that they have erred grossly in assessing His wisdom and power. Whoever says that God did not reveal knowledge of Reality and the code for man’s guidance has fallen into one of two errors. Either he considers it impossible for man to become the recipient of God’s revelation, and this constitutes a gross misjudgement of God’s power, or he thinks that even though God has equipped man with intelligence and with the power to act as he chooses, He has nevertheless made no arrangement for his guidance, but has left him in this world altogether unguided and thus conferred upon him the right to behave in any way he likes. This is obviously a misjudgement of God’s wisdom.
   The revelation of the Torah to Moses (peace be on him) is adduced by way of evidence since the Jews, to whom this response is addressed, believed that it had been revealed. It is obvious that their recognition of the Torah as the Book revealed to Moses negated their standpoint that God had never revealed anything to any human being. Their belief in the Torah at least proved that revelation to man is possible, and had actually taken place.
   So your allegation that existing in the seventh century was authentic is a rubbish one.

   Now,lets make it simpe,
   I have given Verses from Qur’an in my above two comments that says TORAH was corrupted.
   I have given you the Hadith wherein Prophet asked us not to Believe in Jewish Scriptures nor disbelieve.
   Prophet also stated that their scriptures are corrupted conversation with contemporary jews back then.
   I have also given You the Prophet’s Closest companion Ibn Abbas (R.A.) WHO ALSO BELIEVE Torah was corrupted.

   Now to wrap it up am gonna state 3 peoples who are church fathers and scholars Statement that Torah was indeed corrupted Long Before Prophet Muhammad. And these scholars died before Prophet.

   Here I highlight some of the corruptions made by the Jews in the Old Testament and how early Christians accused the Jews of corruption.
   The first example is Justin Martyr(an early church father who died at about 150 AD) says in his dialogue with Trypho, a Jew:
   Chap. LXXII. — Passages Have Been Removed by the Jews from Esdras and Jeremiah.
   And I said, “I shall do as you please. From the statements, then, which Esdras made in reference to the law of the passover, they have taken away the following: ‘And Esdras said to the people, This passover is our Saviour and our refuge. And if you have understood, and your heart has taken it in, that we shall humble Him on a standard, and….. thereafter hope in Him, then this place shall not be forsaken for ever, says the God of hosts. But if you will not believe Him, and will not listen to His declaration, you shall be a laughing-stock to the nations.’…… And again, from the sayings of the same Jeremiah these have been cut out: ‘The Lord God remembered His dead people of Israel who lay in the graves; and He descended to preach to them His own salvation.’
   So Justin Martyr here is explicitly accusing the Jews of corrupting the Old Testament by hiding some verses talking about salvation. But is it that easy that verses are removed from the Bible?

   Let’s see what John Chrysostom (church father who lived in the fourth century) says in his Homilies on Gospel Matthew when he came to the verse quoting the Old Testament” which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.”:
   And what manner of prophet said this? Be not curious, nor overbusy. For many of the prophetic writings have been lost; and this one may see from the history of the Chronicles. For being negligent, and continually falling into ungodliness, some they suffered to perish, others they themselves burnt up and cut to pieces. The latter fact Jeremiah relates; the former, he who composed the fourth book of Kings, saying, that after a long time the book of Deuteronomy was hardly found, buried somewhere and lost. But if, when there was no barbarian there, they so betrayed their books, much 56 more when the barbarians had overrun them. For as to the fact, that the prophet had foretold it, the apostles themselves in many places call Him a Nazarene. ”
   So simply John Chrysostom is not just accusing the Jews of being negligent who are not caring for their books, but also of destroying their own books. If these are accusations made by Christians, who are supposed to share the Jews their belief in the Old Testament, how could Muslims trust the Jews and consider that they were really honest and followed God’s commandment to keep Hi s books, not to add or remove or replace?

   Not only that, we can see another interesting account by Adam Clarke, a Christian commentator where he shows another intentional corruption made by the Jews against the Samaritans. He said in his commentary on Deu 27:4 –“Set up these stones – in Mount Ebal – So the present Hebrew text , but the Samaritan has Mount Gerizim. Dr. Kennicott has largely defended the reading of the Samaritan in his second dissertation on the present state of the Hebrew text , and Dr. Parry has defended the Hebrew against the Samaritan. Many still think Dr. Kennicott’s arguments unanswerable, and have no doubt that the Jews have here corrupted the text through their enmity to the Samaritans. “
   So here again Adam Clarke didn’t just accuse the Jews for corrupting the manuscripts due to their hostility with Christians only, but also they did the same with Samaritans, and with Muslims when they changed the name of Abraham’s offered son to Isaac.
   These may be just some examples of what I have seen from Christian writings, and for sure if we dug more through various books, we may find more issues showing other issues.

   Reply

9. @ Hamza Afzer

   You said

   Check out this video between sadat anwar and alex kerimli For CAN WE TRUST TODAYS TORAHhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmmZtwfUtmI

   I have actually submitted many, many comments in response to this video addressed to Anwar Sadat. I did not however receive a single reply. If you check out the comments section of this video yourself you will see what I mean.

   Sorry about the incorrect reference.I will address some of your other points later.

   Reply

10. @ Hamza Afzer

    Quran 46:10 is one of the Quran’s most suicidal verses.

    Say, “Have you considered: if the Qur’an was from Allah , and you disbelieved in it while a witness from the Children of Israel has testified to something similar and believed while you were arrogant… ?” Indeed, Allah does not guide the wrongdoing people.

    Allah is saying that a Jew (ibn Sallam?) has testified that the Quran is similar to the Torah and as a result has believed. Notice that ibn Sallam testified to the SIMILARITY between the two books and not DIS-similarity.

    Allah is arguing that this Jewish testimony that the Quran is SIMILAR to the Torah constitutes UNDENIABLE evidence for these Arabs that the Quran has a divine origin. Allah condemns these Arabs as arrogant and wrongdoers for rejecting this evidence and threatens to deprive them of his guidance.
    .
    The only Torah that ibn Sallam could have compared the Quran to was the one that existed in the seventh century. THIS TORAH HOWEVER TESTIFIES THAT THE QURAN IS A COMPLETE FRAUD FROM START TO FINISH!

    In addition Allah’s argument is completely flawed. This (superficial) similarity between the Quran and the Torah was not undeniable evidence even for the Jews,who actually accepted the divine origins of the Torah, since their Torah seriously contradicted the Quran. So how could this similarity between the Quran and the Torah be undeniable evidence for the Arabs who did not believe in the Torah in the first place?!

    Allah needed first to convince the Arabs of the divine origins of the Torah and THEN argue that its similarity to the Quran was evidence for the latter. Allah expected the Arabs to simply accept the divine origins of the Torah and then accept the Quran on the basis of ibn Sallam’s testimony that the two books were similar.

    So first, Allah was wrong when he told the Arabs that the Quran was similar to the Torah. Second Allah was wrong to say to the Arabs that the Quran’s similarity to the Torah was undeniable evidence for the divine origins of the Quran,because he needed first to prove to them the divine origins of the Torah.
    .
    Quran 28:48. But (now), when the Truth has come to them from Ourselves, they say, “Why are not (Signs) sent to him, like those which were sent to Moses?” Do they not then reject (the Signs) which were formerly sent to Moses? They say: “Two kinds of sorcery, EACH ASSISTING THE OTHER!” And they say: “For us, we reject ALL (such things)!” emphasis added.

    Notice that these Arabs rejected MUHAMMAD’S claim that the two books ASSIST EACH OTHER!!! –Compare 46:10.

    Had Muhammad admitted the truth i.e. that the Torah existing in the seventh century seriously contradicted and undermined the validity of his Quran, the Arabs would had no need to reject the Torah. Little did these Arabs know that Muhammad’s claim that the Torah confirmed his Quran was bogus in the first place.
    .
    The Arabs who were mainly illiterate had very little interest in the Torah until Muhammad started telling them that it confirmed the divine origins of his Quran. They were not now rejecting the Torah in order to reject Judaism, no, they were rejecting the Torah in order to reject Islam! It should be remembered that the only Torah that these Arabs could have rejected was the Torah that existed in the seventh century..THIS can be the only Torah that Allah in Quran 28:48 is condemning these Arabs for rejecting, along with the Quran.

    Quran 46:10 and 28:48 give the lie to the Muslim claim that the Quran only confirms the non-existent “Torah of Moses” or the “Torah in Heaven”.

    Quran 28:49 is equally fatal to Islam but I will comment on that another time.

    Reply

11. The Hadiths you quoted in an attempt to show that the Jews were aware that Muhammad was accusing them of having corrupted the Torah do nothing of the sort. Your attempt proves how bereft you are of any real evidence

    Quran 2:79 does not talk about corrupting already existing scripture. This verse is talking about some Jews who wrote a book and passed it off as divine scripture. This is similar to what the Meccans were saying about the Quran i,e, “Allah has sent down nothing” by which they meant that Muhammad was composing verses and then passing them off as scripture..

    In addition Quran 2;79 must be interpreted in the light of the overwhelming testimony of the Quran which is that the Torah existing in the seventh century was authentic.

    You said

    If you are not ready to accept Our sources and doubt it..then why are you asking for Islamic sources. First get o’er your prejudices and mental reservation then ask for evidence.

    This is so basic I am almost lost for words! Let me try to explain this to you. When Muslims, for example, ask Christians to show anywhere from the New Testament where Jesus says “I am God”, it would be silly for the Christian then to expect the Muslim to accept the entire New Testament as pristine scripture.

    Similarly when I ask you to show me something from the Islamic Sources you cannot then expect me to accept all of your scriptures as gospel truth. These are simply the rules of debate. I hope this makes things a bit clearer.

    Muslim apologists try to convey the impression that Modern Bible Scholarship is damaging to the credibility of the Bible yet not the Quran The truth is that this scholarship is absolutely lethal to the credibility of Islam.There is absolutely no historical or archaeological evidence for the Muslim charge of corruption.

    The question you need to ask is not “Can we trust today’s Torah? but rather “Is today’s Torah a corruption of an original and pure Islamic text?” or “Does today’s Torah have its origins in an original and pure Islamic text?”. Because if the Torah was never an Islamic text then regardless of whether it has been corrupted or not, Islam is a lie.

    Since Muslims are totally unable to provide any REAL evidence for the Islamic origins of the Torah, they try to ‘prove” this Islamic origin by showing that the Torah contains contradictions, anachronisms, moral flaws etc!!! However it simply does not follow that a book that contains contradictions, anachronisms, duplicates or moral flaws must originally have been a pure Islamic text. Desperate Muslim apologists are forced to resort to this fallacious reasoning because there is zero evidence that the Torah originally taught pure Islamic doctrine..

    According to Anwar Sadat the Documentary Hypothesis is today the most dominant hypothesis among scholars concerning the composition of the Torah. According to this Hypothesis, however, no part of the Torah existed in written form before approximately 950 BC!!! If that is true then it proves that Moses did not write any part of the Torah thus falsifying Islam. You really need to quote scholars who do not refute your own religion.

    In addition there is zero evidence that a book called the Injeel has ever existed or that Jesus and his followers rejected the Torah existing in the first century as corrupt.

    Reply

12. Quran 3:78. There is among them a section who distort the Book with their tongues: (As they read) you would think it is a part of the Book, but it is no part of the Book; and they say, “That is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah. It is they who tell a lie against Allah, and (well) they know it!

    This verse does not allege textual corruption, but it does assume that these seventh century Jews possessed “Allah’s Book”. You cannot distort a Book you do not HAVE!

    Quran 3:187 This verse says nothing about the textual corruption of the Torah.

    The Quran is not Allah’s love letter to humanity on the contrary the Quran is an expression of Muhammad’s burning hatred for those who refused to succumb to his fraud.

    RE: Quran 5:46 “And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary…”

    Can you cite a single Independent New Testament scholar whose research has led him to conclude that Jesus or his early followers were Muslims?

    Jesus would never have recognized Allah as a proper name for his god. Jesus’ own name contains the name of his god, YHWH as its divine element and means “Salvation is from YHWH”. The Torah gives YHWH as its god’s one and only proper name. This name according to the Torah is eternal and for every generation.(Exodus 3:15)

    Quran 5:13-14 does not say anything about the textual corruption of the Torah.

    I am prepared to accept that Ibn ‘Abbaas held that the Torah had been textually corrupted although I have not seen any evidence that he held this view DURING the time of Muhammad. I am also prepared to concede that later Muslim scholars also taught that the Torah was textually corrupt.

    Reply

13. @ Hamza Afzer

    Quran 6:91.

    No just estimate of Allah do they make when they say: “Nothing doth Allah send down to man (by way of revelation)” Say: “Who then sent down the Book which Moses brought?- a light and guidance to man: But ye make it into (separate) sheets for show, while ye conceal much (of its contents): therein were ye taught that which ye knew not- neither ye nor your fathers.” Say: “(Allah) (sent it down)”: Then leave them to plunge in vain discourse and trifling.

    In order for seventh century Jews to make into sheets the Book which Moses brought, conceal much of the Book which Moses brought and learn what they and neither their fathers knew not from the Book which Moses brought, they needed to HAVE the Book which Moses brought!!!

    Quran 6:91 assumes that the Torah in the possession of seventh century Jews was authentic scripture.

    Quran 5:44.

    It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah.s will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah.s book, and
    they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.

    Allah after commenting at some length on the Torah, tells SEVENTH CENTURY JEWS:

    “…therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price.”

    This can only be a warning to these Jews to not sell verses (“my signs”) FROM THE TORAH HE HAS JUST DESCRIBED i.e. THE TORAH BY WHICH THE PROPHETS JUDGED. This is the only Torah Allah mentions. There is absolutely no mention of any other Torah.

    There is not the slightest hint that Allah is telling the Jews to ‘SELL NOT MY SIGNS’ from a Torah different from the one that he has just described!!!

    Unlike today’s Muslims, Allah NEVER makes a distinction between a corrupt Torah and an authentic one. Allah knows of only one Torah and no other.

    Quran 5:44 assumes that the Jews possessed an authentic Torah.

    You said:

    “…the Jews had deviated from islam…”

    Can you then provide any convincing evidence for this claim? Can you cite a single INDEPENDENT Old Testament scholar who has found credible evidence for the claim that Judaism evolved from Islam? Can you cite a single independent scholar whose research has led him/her to conclude that the early Israelites were Muslims?

    Nearly all Old Testament scholars fall into three categories i.e. Jewish, Christian and Independent. The majority of scholars are Independent.

    That Muhammad received revelations from Allah is a matter of faith. That the Meccans before Islam worshipped a god called Allah to whom they attributed three daughters is a an almost universally accepted FACT!

    “Pre-Islamic Meccans

    Meccans worshipped him (Allah) and Al-lāt, Al-‘Uzzá, Manāt as his daughters.” (Wikipedia)

    Please note that it is NEVER my intention to give unnecessary offense. Although I recognize that in a debate of this nature where people’s cherished beliefs are challenged some offense unfortunately is unavoidable.

    Reply

    • i quote this verse

      “Sahih International: And they did not appraise Allah with true appraisal when they said, ” Allah did not reveal to a human being anything.” Say, “Who revealed the Scripture that Moses brought as light and guidance to the people? You [Jews] make it into pages, disclosing [some of] it and concealing much. And you were taught that which you knew not – neither you nor your fathers.” Say, ” Allah [revealed it].” Then leave them in their [empty] discourse, amusing themselves.”

      it says ,”taj3aloona HU qaraatisa”

      CAN A ‘QARAATISA ‘

      CONTAIN the entire TORAH ?

      is the “hu” refering to ALL of the “al KITAAB” mentioned in the above verse?

      is the verse REALLY TALKING ABOUT CONCEALING AND HIDING or is it TALKING about how ‘protected’ your CORRUPT torah is ?

      Reply

14. @ Hamza Afzer

    Re: Narrated Ubaidullah: Ibn ‘Abbas said,…“ (Bukhari Volume 9, Boo
    k 92, Number 461)

    Even though Ibn Abbas appears to be saying that the “previous scriptures” are textually corrupt, he is wrong if he is attributing this view to Allah, because the Quran assumes the authenticity of these scripture.

    I have not seen any evidence that Ibn Abbas held this view during Muhammad’s lifetime..Neither have I seen any evidence of other Companions ascribing to this view.

    You said

    “I have given you the Hadith wherein Prophet asked us not to Believe in Jewish Scriptures nor disbelieve”

    It cannot be easy having an unshakable faith in a prophet who says this about a scripture which declares said prophet to be a complete and utter fraud. .

    You said

    “They committed a previous mistake regarding Christ himself when they confused him with the man who had been crucified”.

    In modern scholarship, the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion are considered to be two historically certain facts about Jesus.[4][6] For example, James Dunn states that these “two facts in the life of Jesus command almost universal assent” and “rank so high on the ‘almost impossible to doubt or deny’ scale of historical facts” that they are often the starting points for the study of the historical Jesus.[4] Bart Ehrman states that the crucifixion of Jesus on the orders of Pontius Pilate is the most certain element about him.[7] John Dominic Crossan states that the crucifixion of Jesus is as certain as any historical fact can be.[8] Eddy and Boyd state that it is now “firmly established” that there is non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.[9] Craig Blomberg states that most scholars in the third quest for the historical Jesus consider the crucifixion indisputable.[5] Christopher M. Tuckett states that, although the exact reasons for the death of Jesus are hard to determine, one of the indisputable facts about him is that he was crucified.[10] (Wikipedia)

    The majority of even non-Christian New Testament scholars consider the crucifixion of Jesus to be the most certain element about him.

    Reply

    • “Jesus would never have recognized Allah as a proper name for his god. Jesus’ own name contains the name of his god, YHWH as its divine element and means “Salvation is from YHWH”. The Torah gives YHWH as its god’s one and only proper name. This name according to the Torah is eternal and for every generation.(Exodus 3:15)”

      show me one verse in the torah where yhwh said he will KILL himself or GET killed before he could RELEASE from his punishment

      show me where the torah uses the FOLLOWING words

      ” to save”

      “saviour”

      “salvation”

      “saving”

      in the sense that god HAD to kill himself / GET killed

      before he could save from his OWN punishment

      lets see what you can do here

      Reply

    • how do the jews RENDER , the name, using the following LETTERS, ALIF LAAM LAAM haa, in hebrew?

      Reply

15. “Jesus would never have recognized Allah as a proper name for his god. Jesus’ own name contains the name of his god, YHWH as its divine element and means “Salvation is from YHWH”. The Torah gives YHWH as its god’s one and only proper name. This name according to the Torah is eternal and for every generation.(Exodus 3:15)”

    now i want you to PROVE that the jews believe that SALVATION from yhwh , according to HOW “salvation” is used in HEBREW is like how christians understand it

    christians believe that god SAVED from his PUNISHMENT by turning his own PUNISHING powers on himself

    god got cooled off

    after a temporary weekend death he now is happy and will SAVE from his PUNISHMENT which he APPLIED on himself

    jews will ARGUE that EVERYTIME

    “salvation”

    “saviour”

    “saving”

    “to save” is used it is ALWAYS used in a context where warrior god yhwh is FIGHTING THE GUILTY sinners and saving his children.

    he did that through moses

    he did that through josuah

    but where did your religion come from

    when did god do himself over by getting done by PAGANS ?

    quote:

    •”Just stand still and you’ll see Adonai’s salvation that He is going
    to do for your today….”

    (Sh’mot 14:13)•”Adonai saved Yisraél from Egypt’s power that
    day….” (Sh’mot 14:30)•”Adonai set up a saviour for Yisraél—Otniyél
    ben K’naz, Kalév’s younger brother….”

    (Shoftim 3:9)•

    “Adonai set up a saviour for them—Éhud ben Géra the Binyamini, who had
    a deformed right hand….” (Shoftim 3:15)•”….and he, too, saved
    Yisraél….”

    (Shoftim 3:31)•”If You will save Yisraél through my hand, as You have
    spoken….” (Shoftim 6:36)•”….you didn’t save me from them….
    and, when I saw that you hadn’t saved me….”

    (Shoftim 12:2-3)•”Adonai saved Yisraél that day….” (Sh’muél Alef
    14:23)•”….so David saved the inhabitants of K’ilah…

    seriously think about the verse below

    .” (Sh’muél
    Alef 23:5)•”Adonai is my Light and my Salvation—
    Whom should I fear?
    Adonai is the fortress of my Life—
    Whom should I dread?
    If evil men approach me
    To devour my flesh—
    [When] my adversaries and my enemies [attacked] me—
    Wow! They stumbled and fell!
    If an army encamps against me
    My heart will not be afraid;
    If war breaks out against me—

    why should this writer FEAR a god who got PINNED to a cross?

    so your “saviour” is different from the torahs, right?

    Reply

16. christians admit that the language in the ot about yhwh being 1 god may not REally be monotheistic

    http://religionatthemargins.com/2011/07/the-most-heiser-yahweh-and-elyon-in-psalm-82-and-deuteronomy-32/

    Reply

17. @ Hamza Afzer

    You said:

    “In conclusion, Allah has no daughters.”

    Allah has no daughters because he does not exist. There is no more evidence for Allah’s existence than there is for his daughters’. The sole witness to Allah’s existence was Muhammad but his story is not remotely credible. Muhammad invented Allah to frighten and threaten those who rejected his fraud. If Allah exists then prove it.

    You need to understand that the Quran threatens those who reject its message with eternal damnation, but credible EVIDENCE must precede threats as a just God cannot expect anyone to accept a religion for which there is no evidence.

    Quran 2:111 …”Produce your proof, if you should be truthful.”

    Since Allah is the one making the threats it is incumbent upon him to produce credible evidence for that which he is asking us to believe.

    You said:

    “The Quran says that the current Torah, Psalms and Gospel (the New Testament) have been badly corrupted.”

    Allah knows of only one Torah and no other. Allah never makes a distinction between a “current” Torah, the “non-existent Torah of Moses” or the “Torah in Heaven”. Neither does Allah ever claim that the Torah has been textually corrupted. The opposite is in fact true.

    The only credible evidence you have presented for the charge of textual corruption is a lone Hadith i.e. (Al-Hakim related in Al-Mustadrak). This hadith however is contradicted by the entire Quran and countless other hadith.

    If the Torah of the seventh century was not corrupt then Muhammad was a fake. If this Torah WAS corrupt then why did Muhammad NEVER present this as an argument to the Jews, especially when they rejected him on account of the two books being contradictory?

    Considering that Muhammad was repeatedly claiming that his message confirmed the Torah, was it not of the utmost importance so as to avoid any confusion that he should have made it absolutely clear to the Jews that he was not confirming the Torah they possessed but only the ‘original’ Torah of Moses? How else were they supposed to know and understand that he was not claiming to confirm the book in their hands? There is absolutely no evidence that the Jews were ever aware of or understood that Muhammad was claiming to confirm a Torah other than the one they possessed.

    Given that the Quran threatens those who reject its message with unthinkable consequences, was it not of the utmost importance then that its message be understood correctly? Consequently we would have expected Muhammad to have made his message regarding the crucial issue of the reliability of the Torah repeatedly and continuously crystal clear throughout his 23 years of preaching. We would have expected Allah to have provided absolute and unmistakable clarity on such a decisive and critical issue. Then the Jews (and everybody else) could have understood clearly and without any ambiguity why the Quran proclaimed a message which was so different and alien from that of the book it repeatedly claimed to confirm. However if Allah in the Quran was really trying to tell us, as Muslims claim, that the Torah existing in the seventh century was seriously corrupt then he failed miserably. Muslim re-interpretation of the Quran makes Allah to be one of the worst communicators of all time because he ended up telling us the opposite of what he actually intended!

    Why did Muhammad never once admit, acknowledge or recognize the FACT that the Torah of the seventh century seriously contradicted and undermined the validity of his Quran? Why did Muhammad never once say to the Jews “Yes, your Torah and my Quran are seriously at odds but that is because your book is hopelessly corrupt”?

    Allah’s confirmation of the Torah existing in the seventh century has left Muslims in a very difficult position. The only way they can sustain their faith is to misinterpret the Quran and simply deny its endorsement of the Jewish book. This position becomes even more difficult when we consider that the Quran claims to be a book whose message is clear, detailed and fully explained. Yet the overwhelming testimony of the Islamic sources is the exact opposite of what Muslims wish us to believe.

    With regards to this consider the following:

    Qur’an 6:114—Shall I seek for a judge other than Allah, when He it is Who has sent down to you the Book fully explained?

    Qur’an 11:1—This is a Book, whose verses have been made firm and free from imperfection and then they have been expounded in detail.

    Qur’an 12:1—These are verses of the clear Book.

    Qur’an 16:89—And We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things . . .

    Qur’an 24:46—Certainly We have revealed clear communications, and Allah guides whom He pleases to the right way.

    Qur’an 27:1—These are verses of the Qur’an—a book that makes (things) clear.

    Qur’an 41:3—A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail . . .

    Qur’an 57:9—He it is who sends down clear communications upon His servant, that he may bring you forth from utter darkness into light.

    Even if we assume that the Torah has been corrupted Allah clearly, did not know anything about it.

    Reply

18. @ mrquestioner2013

    You quoted my comment but then did not respond to it. Instead you have asked me some questions of your own not directly related to my comment i.e.

    “show me one verse in the torah where yhwh said he will KILL himself or GET killed before he could RELEASE from his punishment”

    I did not say that YHWH states in the Torah that “he will kill himself”. Neither did I say that YHWH states in the Torah that “he will GET killed before he could RELEASE from his punishment”

    So why are you asking me questions about something I did NOT say? Why do you not instead address what I DID say? What was the point of quoting me if you had no intention of responding to what I said?

    Reply

    • your pagan god yhwh had a greater god called EL

      http://religionatthemargins.com/2011/07/the-most-heiser-yahweh-and-elyon-in-psalm-82-and-deuteronomy-32/

      here is part two

      http://religionatthemargins.com/2011/12/heiser-learning-michael-heisers-response-to-my-criticisms/

      it is your pagan god who was DOMINATED by ANOTHER god called el.

      Reply

19. @ mrquestioner2013

    Quran 29:46 And do not argue with the People of the Scripture except in a way that is best, except for those who commit injustice among them, and say, “We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you. AND OUR GOD AND YOUR GOD IS ONE; and we are Muslims [in submission] to Him.” Emphasis added

    Since Allah claims to be (YHWH) the god of the Jews, would it not then follow that Allah also claims to be the “pagan god yhwh (who) had a greater god called EL” and the “pagan god who was DOMINATED by ANOTHER god called el”?

    In the Torah Moses gives YHWH as the ONLY proper name for his deity.. This name is found there an amazing 1600 times.

    QUOTE:

    “Strictly speaking, Yahweh is the only ‘name’ of God. In Genesis wherever the word sem (‘name’) is associated with the divine being that name is Yahweh. When Abraham or Isaac built an altar ‘he called on the name of Yahweh’ (Gen.12:8, 13:4, 26:25).

    “In particular, Yahweh was the God of the Patriarchs, and we read of ‘Yahweh the God (Elohim) of Abraham’ and then of Isaac and finally ‘Yahweh, the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,’ concerning which Elohim says , ‘this is my name for ever’ (Exo.3:15). Yahweh, therefore, in contrast to Elohim, is a PROPER NOUN, the name of a Person, though that Person is divine. (New Dictionary of the Bible p.478).

    END OF QUOTE.

    Jewish theophoric names were often based on the name YHWH. For example Jesus’ real name was Yeshua which is a shortened version of Yehoshua which means “Salvation is from YHWH”. John the Baptist’ (identified by some Muslims with Yahya) is considered to be the forerunner of Jesus in the Gospels. His real name was Yochanan which means “YHWH is gracious” Also Zechariah‘s (Zakariya in the Quran) name means “YHWH remembers”. Since Jews often named their children after the name of their god, even the names of some Muslim prophets are based on the name YHWH!

    The following is a quote from Richard Elliot Friedman a scholar who is sometimes quoted by Muslims (as is Bart Ehrman) in an attempt to prove that the Bible has been corrupted. Friedman is one of the world’s most respected Old Testament scholars:

    “Now, the Bible pictures an Israelite-Jewish population and government there (in modern day Israel) starting in the 12th century B.C.E. and continuing until the end of the Bible’s history about 800 years later. But how do we know if this is true? As scholars, we can’t just say, “The Bible tells us so.” We need to see evidence that could be presented to any honest person, whether that person be religious or not, Jewish or Christian or from some other religion or no religion, or from Mars.

    In the first place, the land is filled with Hebrew inscriptions, so I begin with that. These are not just an occasional inscription on a piece of pottery or carved in a wall. Nor should we even start with one or two of the most famous archaeological finds. Rather, there are thousands of inscriptions. They come from hundreds of excavated towns and cities. They are in the Hebrew language. They include people’s names that bear forms of the name of their God: YHWH. This means names like:

    • Hoshaiah, which means “YHWH Saved”
    • Ahijah, which means “YHWH is My Brother”
    • Shemariah, which means”YHWH Watched”

    The inscriptions also refer to their kings. They include stamps and seals from official documents. They come from tombs where that land’s people were buried. They name people who are mentioned in the Hebrew Bible. They include wording that also appears in the Hebrew Bible. They reflect a widespread community whose dominant language was Hebrew, who didn’t eat pork AND WHO WORSHIPPED A GOD NAMED YHWH. (emphasis added)

    I happened to be present at the time of the discovery of another important inscription in Jerusalem. Right below the Church of Scotland in Jerusalem, in a Jewish tomb from the seventh century B.C.E., was a silver cylinder with the words inscribed in it:
    “May YHWH bless you and keep you. May YHWH make his face shine to you and give you peace.”

    It is the words of the Priestly Blessing in the Hebrew Bible (Numbers 6:24-26). That’s just one inscription. The distinguished scholar Jeffrey Tigay of the University of Pennsylvania sums up: “The names of more than 1,200 pre-exilic Israelites are known from Hebrew inscriptions and foreign inscriptions referring to Israel.” Of these, 557 have names with YHWH as their divine element, 77 have names with El.” (Does Israel Have No Roots There in History? R. E. Friedman.

    If there is one thing we know about the Israelites it is this: THEY WORSHIPPED A GOD CALLED YHWH!

    QUOTE:

    The documentary hypothesis attributes anthropomorphic descriptions of Yahweh, personal visits from Yahweh, and use of the personal name prior to Exodus 3 to the Jahwist source.[10] It is a misunderstanding of the documentary hypothesis to attribute all use of the personal name Yahweh to the hypothetical Jahwist source; the hypothetical Deuteronomist, Elohist, and Priestly source documents all contain numerous uses of the personal name Yahweh, but the Jahwist source document is the only one to use the personal name Yahweh prior to Exodus 3.[11] (Wikipedia).

    Along with Jewish and Christian scholars, independent scholars also agree that the Hebrew divine name for deity has ALWAYS been a part of the Torah.

    Reply

20. @ mrquestioner2013

    You said:

    “how do the jews RENDER , the name, using the following LETTERS, ALIF LAAM LAAM haa, in hebrew?”

    I assume this question is about the name “Allah”. If so then the answer is that I do not know, but I fail to see how this is relevant.

    There is absolutely no evidence that the Israelites EVER recognised “Allah” as a proper name for deity. There is however undeniable evidence that they recognised YHWH as the only proper name for their god. In the Jewish scriptures no name including Allah can rival YHWH in importance as the name for god.

    According to the Quran at the Burning Bush the god of Moses revealed himself by the name Allah:
    .
    Quran 20:14 “Verily, I am ALLAH: There is no god but I: So serve thou Me (only), and establish regular prayer for celebrating My praise. (emphasis added).

    However according to the Torah at the Burning Bush the god of Moses revealed himself by the name YHWH.

    Exodus 3:15 God also said to Moses, “Say to the Israelites, ‘YHWH, the God of your fathers—the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob—has sent me to you.’ “THIS is my name forever, the name you shall call me from generation to generation. (emphasis added)

    The archaeological, historical and literary evidence all show that the Israelites recognized YHWH as the one and only proper name for their deity. There is zero evidence that the Israelites ever recognized Allah as a proper name for deity. The Quran’s account of the name by which Moses’ god revealed himself at the Burning Bush lacks any credibility credible. If there is one thing we know about the Israelites it is this: THEY WORSHIPPED A GOD CALLED YHWH!!!

    The names of many Jewish prophets, not to mention millions of Israelites, also incorporated YHWH as their divine element. For example:

    Isaiah – From the Hebrew name יְשַׁעְיָהוּ (Yesha’yahu) meaning “YAHWEH is salvation”.
    Jeremiah – From the Hebrew name יִרְמְיָהוּ (Yirmiyahu) which meant “YAHWEH has uplifted”
    Joshua – From the Hebrew name יְהוֹשֻׁעַ (Yehoshu’a) meaning “YAHWEH is salvation”.
    Elijah – From the Hebrew name אֱלִיָּהוּ (‘Eliyyahu) meaning “my God is YAHWEH”.
    Obadiah – Means “servant of YAHWEH”
    Zecharia – From the Hebrew name זְכַרְיָה (Zekharyah) meaning “YAHWEH remembers”.
    Zephaniah – From the Hebrew name צְפַנְיָה (Tzefanyah) meaning “YAHWEH has hidden”

    Some of these prophets are quoted by some Muslims as evidence for Islam.

    Muslim prophets:

    Jesus – English form of Ιησους (Iesous), which was the Greek form of the Aramaic name יֵשׁוּעַ (Yeshu’a). Yeshu’a is itself a contracted form of Yehoshu’a meaning “YAHWEH is salvation”.

    Zechariah (Zakariya in the Quran). – From the Hebrew name זְכַרְיָה (Zekharyah) meaning “YAHWEH remembers”.

    Yahya (identified by some Muslims with John the Baptist, the son of Zechariah) English form of Iohannes, the Latin form of the Greek name Ιωαννης (Ioannes), itself derived from the Hebrew name יוֹחָנָן (Yochanan) meaning “YAHWEH is gracious”.

    The name YHWH is found in the Jewish scriptures a staggering 6823 times!!! It is only about this name that the god of the Torah says ‘THIS is my name FOREVER’!!! The Jewish scriptures NEVER recognise Allah as god’s name. Niether Allah or his prophet showed any knowledge of the Hebrew divine name for deity.
    At some stage in their history the Jews came to consider the name YHWH too sacred to pronounce. The penalty for uttering this name was death. There is no evidence that they ever considered any other name including Allah too sacred to pronounce. Neither is there any evidence that Jesus or his early followers opposed the Jews on the prohibition against pronouncing this name.

    Allah was the deity of the Meccans, the papa of three daughters whom Muhammad tried to pass off as the god of the Jewish scriptures.

    There is no religion more devoid of evidence for its claims than Islam.

    Reply

    • notice that you DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO read the TWO ARTICLES i LINKED to? you know why? because IT LITERALLY demolishes your claim that yhwh was the top daddy god in ancient israelite religion. yhwh had a DADDY called el .

      one cannot ADDRESS your nonsense here so lets have discussion in a place where there is NO MODERATION:

      http://unveiling-christianity.net/

      Reply

    • i look at this rubbish and all i can do is say , ” is this guy a moron, or what?”
      look, there are hebrew words which are of pagan origin. THERE ARE lots of greek words which are DEFINITELY of pagan origin and employed in the nt.

      just look at how the PAGAN greeks employed greek words in the new testament before new testament existed.

      it is possible that abraham’s name and moses’ name had roots in paganism . name of hebrew months and cities are of pagan origin.

      “Isaiah – From the Hebrew name יְשַׁעְיָהוּ (Yesha’yahu) meaning “YAHWEH is salvation”.
      Jeremiah – From the Hebrew name יִרְמְיָהוּ (Yirmiyahu) which meant “YAHWEH has uplifted”
      Joshua – From the Hebrew name יְהוֹשֻׁעַ (Yehoshu’a) meaning “YAHWEH is salvation”.
      Elijah – From the Hebrew name אֱלִיָּהוּ (‘Eliyyahu) meaning “my God is YAHWEH”.
      Obadiah – Means “servant of YAHWEH”
      Zecharia – From the Hebrew name זְכַרְיָה (Zekharyah) meaning “YAHWEH remembers”.
      Zephaniah – From the Hebrew name צְפַנְיָה (Tzefanyah) meaning “YAHWEH has hidden”

      Some of these prophets are quoted by some Muslims as evidence for Islam.”

      i told you that yhwh had a daddy called el.
      i am sure if you are BORN in a pagan family your family would give you a PAGAN name or name you after a pagan god who was FATHERED by the dominant El god.

      ““Yahweh is not a Hebrew name.” (Encyclopedia Brittanica, 11th Ed., Volume 15, page 321)

      Pastor Dr. Cohen G. Reckart says,

      “Yahweh is a guess name and is not the name of the true God. Yahweh as it is spelled is not a Hebrew name for God.”

      didn’t prophets have pagan parents who named them after pagan gods?

      yhwh the moon god:

      according to Ditlef Nielsen’s “pioneering scholarship” Yahweh must be a part of some astral outfit. According to the “traditional” and “pioneering scholarship” of Nielsen, Yahweh was actually a Moon-god and a part of the triad of Yahweh – Ba‘al – ‘Aštart. He says:

      The old Arabic iconless cult is also found among the Hebrews; as is the old Arabic triad of gods. In the triad Yahweh – Ba‘al – ‘Aštart, which was revered by the people during the era of the kings, Ba‘al is according to usual northern Semitic custom, the male Sun, and ‘Aštart the female Venus; but the original old Arabic form of the family of gods, where Venus is male and the Sun is the female mother-god, shows up in parallel; e.g., in the dream of Joseph (Genesis 39:9-10), in Yahweh’s wedding with the Sun and in the frequent female sex of the Šemeš (Sun).

      Yahweh, the main god of the triad, is in its original nature a distinctly old Arabic god figure. The name itself probably also occurs in Lihyanite inscriptions.

      In a triad where the other two gods are the nature gods, Sun and Venus, one would also expect to find the Moon, and indeed there is evidence that the Hebrew Yahweh originally was a lunar god. Of course, one cannot say that the Old Testament god who rules over nature is simply a lunar god, but many rudiments, in particular in the cult, show that it grew out of the same natural basis as the other folk gods and nature gods of the old Arabic culture.

      Just as the horse was the holy animal for the old Arabs (cf. page 227) and Hebrews (2 Kings 23:11), so was the bull the animal of the lunar good (cf. page 214). It is for this reason that Yahweh was depicted and worshipped in the shape of a bull, and its altar carries »horns« (Exodus 32:4ff, 1 Kings 12:28, Hosea 8:5).

      The night is always the sacred time and the time when Yahweh reveals himself. The festivals were originally moon festivals and are still tied to the lunar phases today. New moon and full moon were solemnly celebrated The waxing and waning moonlight is also reflected in the sacrifice by fire. For example, during the autumn festival (Numbers 29:12-32), 13 young bulls are sacrificed on the first day of the full moon, 12 on the second day, 11 on the third day etc., down to 7 animals on the 7th day. This week begins with the full moon and ends with the last quarter. One should note that 7 bulls are sacrificed just on the 7th day of the week, so that this scale really requires a sacrifice of 14 bulls on full moon at the 14th day of the lunar month, and that the number of bulls diminishes in parallel with the moon waning.

      Already 22 years ago, the author has shown evidence that with the old Arabs and Hebrews the Sabbath or weekly holiday was tied to the lunar cycle by bi-monthly leap days during new moon. The loss of this leap mechanism can apparently be explained with the fight against the lunar cult, just as Muhammad abolished solar times for religious festivals and solar leap days in the calendar for similar motives and to finally eradicate the solar cult.

      The terms used on the appearance of Yahweh are frequently the same astronomical terms as used for the appearance of the [new] moon, moon-rise, and moon-set; the whole religious symbolism is also a tell-tale sign of lunar origins.[92]

      quote :

      Mention must be made of the fact that Julius Lewy suggested a number of years ago on entirely different grounds that Ēl Šadday was the Moon-god Sin.[95] Not surprisingly, Andrew Key also noted that there existed traces of worship of the Moon-god Sin among the early Israelites.[96] A few words need to be said about the bovine symbolism of Yahweh in the Old Testament, a topic which has been widely discussed in the scholarly literature, especially one of the epithets of Yahweh, the “אביר (ʾabyr) of Jacob” (Genesis 49:24).[97] This is normally translated as the “mighty God of Jacob” or the “mighty One of Jacob”. However, literally and basically the word ʾabyr in Northwest Semitic languages such as Ugaritic means “bull”. The cognate in Ugaritic, a language written in cuneiform and closely related to Hebrew, is ibr[98] and is paralleled with two words, tr[99] and rum,[100] that mean “bull” and “buffalo”, respectively.[101] The root meaning may have been “mighty” or “powerful”, however, as we have observed, it is also the name of an animal.[102] The horned bull has implications of strength (hence the translation “mighty One”), warrior skills, fertility and youth. For this reason, the “ʾabyr of Jacob” is also translated as “the Bull of Jacob”.[103] That “the Bull of Jacob” refers to Yahweh in post-Mosaic times as well is clear from passages such as Isaiah 49:26, 60:16, and Psalm 132:2, where the ʾabyr of Jacob is paralleled with Yahweh. Commenting on the bovine symbolism of Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible, Moshe Weinfeld says:

      That the divine symbol of bull was associated with Bethel may be learnt from Genesis 49:24, where the term ʾabyr Jacob, ‘the bull of Jacob’, applied to the God of Israel, is coupled with ʾbn Israel, ‘the stone / rock of Israel’, in other words the massebah, of Bethel. For the bull / ram imagery in connection with God of Israel cf. Num 23:22, 24:8.

      One should however be aware of the fact that applying a symbol of a bull to God of Israel does not necessarily mean that the people believed that the bull represented YHWH himself. According to some scholars… the calf was considered the pedestal upon which YHWH was enthroned and thus was in parallel in function to the “cherubim” in Jerusalem. Bull pedestals of the god Baal-Hadad are also attested in the Hittite and Syrian iconography…[104]

      QUOTE:
      Where is the evidence in texts predating the seventh century BCE that biblical writers viewed Yahweh as a species unique? Heiser wants to point us to incomparability language. But all such language is applied to numerous gods throughout the ancient Near East, and in no case does it amount to anything like a claim for “species uniqueness.” The incomparability language is applied to gods who are clearly still subordinate to other deities, higher gods, or their progenitors.

      http://religionatthemargins.com/2011/07/michael-heiser-a-unique-species/

      scholarship son, scholarship

      tell me, why didn’t the ARAB jews RENDER yhwh’s non hebrew name in arabic? THEY had the FREAKIN letters, so why didn’t they do it? why instead did they CHOOSE LETTERS

      ALIF
      LAAM
      LAAM
      HA?

      quote:

      Thom Stark on July 19, 2011
      Indeed. Well, his attempt to argue that Yahweh is “species unique” in the early texts is demonstrably a failure. I’m not sure what he would do with 2 Kings 3:27, either, but he’d have to do something with it.

      http://religionatthemargins.com/2011/07/michael-heiser-a-unique-species/

      Reply

21. you WROTE:
    “Quran 2:79 does not talk about corrupting already existing scripture. This verse is talking about some Jews who wrote a book and passed it off as divine scripture. This is similar to what the Meccans were saying about the Quran i,e, “Allah has sent down nothing” by which they meant that Muhammad was composing verses and then passing them off as scripture..

    In addition Quran 2;79 must be interpreted in the light of the overwhelming testimony of the Quran which is that the Torah existing in the seventh century was authentic.”

    ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

    GROUP ONE, the Illiterates:

    And among them are unlettered ones who do not know the Scripture except in wishful thinking, but they are only assuming.

    the LITERATES who write THE BOOK:

    Yusuf Ali: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

    SO WE SEE TWO GROUPS OF PEOPLE

    IS IT ANY SURPRISE THAT KORAN USES “AL KITAB” IN 78 AND IN VERSE 79?

    THE LITERATES WHO CAN WRITE “AL KITAB” MUST KNOW THE “AL KITAB”

    THE ILLITERATES DON’T EVEN , I QUOTE, ” KNOW THE book” /”AL KITAB”

    “THE BOOK” IS ALWAYS USED IN KORAN FOR REVELATION.

    what other “the book” have jews USED in arabia which THEY CALLED “revelation from god”

    LOL

    QUOTE:

    memory transmission:

    However, this is a unique situation in which Ezra could indeed have planted a memory of God speaking to the people at Sinai. For in Nehemia 9:17, does it not say that the Israelites of Moses’ day did not remember the wonders God had performed only weeks before they arrived at Sinai? Doesn’t Nehemia 9 say that the people didn’t even remember to keep Sukkot from the time of Yahshua ben Nun to the day of Ezra? If they didn’t pass down the memories of these things, how can you be so sure that they passed down the memory of God speaking at Sinai?

    It seems obvious that upon our arrival in Jerusalem from the Babylonian captivity the people had little or no memory of the book of Moses. It would have been easy at that point to convince the people of many unverifiable legends.

    quote:

    Hilkiah the high priest said to Shaphan the secretary, “I have found the Book of the Law in the temple of the Lord.” He gave it to Shaphan, who read it. [2 Kings 22:8]

    King Josiah tears his clothes when he learns of this:

    When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law, he tore his robes. [2 Kings 22:11]

    Now this is the key point. After reading the Torah, they proceed to remove all aspects of idolatry and the occult:

    Furthermore, Josiah got rid of the mediums and spiritists, the household gods, the idols and all the other detestable things seen in Judah and Jerusalem. This he did to fulfil the requirements of the law written in the book that Hilkiah the priest had discovered in the temple of the Lord. [2 Kings 23:24]

    Now, if the Torah had never been lost, then they would have all known about the prohibition on idolatry in Deuteronomy 12:2. Clearly, they did not have the Torah memorised because they had to rely on the discovery of a written copy, and clearly, they had not seen the Torah in a very long time.

    end quote

    lot of writing must have been done based on conjecture and guess work .

    “This verse is talking about some Jews who wrote a book and passed it off as divine scripture.”

    MORON, it isn’t ” A BOOK” it is “THE BOOK” WHICH IS A SPECIFIC BOOK CALLED “AL KITAB”

    2 GROUPS OF PEOPLE , ONE DOESN’T KNOW IT AND ANOTHER WHO CAN READ AND WRITE must KNOW THE book/”al kitab”

    IT IS ABOUT KNOWING ABOUT ” AL KITAB” AND IT IS “AL KITAB ” THEY ARE TAMPERING

    “This is similar to what the Meccans were saying about the Quran i,e, “Allah has sent down nothing” by which they meant that Muhammad was composing verses and then passing them off as scripture..”

    Using your dumb logic IT SHOULD BE “A quraan”

    remember you said:

    “This verse is talking about some Jews who wrote A BOOK and passed it off as divine scripture.”

    BUT THE QURAN IS IDENTIFYING A SPECIFIC BOOK WHEN IT SAYS ” AL KITAB”

    HOW DO YOU KNOW “AL KITAB ” IN 78 IS NOT THE SAME “AL KITAB” IN 79?

    which OTHER BOOK did the jews have WHICH they WERE TAMPERING?

    it DOESN’T SAYING ANYTHING about INVENTING IT FROM SCRATCH , it is talking about AL KITAB WHICH IS WRITTEN .

    It is the SCRIBES who ARE writing “THE BOOK” AND THE SCRIBES ” KNOW THE BOOK”

    Reply

    • i quote

      Sahih International: And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, “This is from Allah ,” but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know.

      NOTICE HOW THIS LANGUAGE is missing FROM 2:79

      Yusuf Ali: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

      NOTICE YOU DON’T FIND

      “BUT IT IS NOT FROM THE BOOK” ?

      IF THE SCRIBE IS CORRUPTING “AL KITAB” THEN CORRUPTION IS PART OF “AL KITAB”

      so not ONLY do they TWIST words but they CONCEAL too, this is how they FOOL masses.

      Reply

22. @ mrquestioner2013

    I will respond to you but if you persist with personal insults then that will be the end of our debate.

    Reply

23. @ mrquestioner2013

    You said: HOW DO YOU KNOW “AL KITAB ” IN 78 IS NOT THE SAME “AL KITAB” IN 79?

    QURAN 2:78-79 . And there are among them Ummiyyin, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

    79. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

    Al Kitab in verse 78 is a book whose contents the Ummiyyin are ignorant of but the implication is that had they known its contents then they would have been better guided (as they then could have avoided their erroneous conjecture and seeing in it their own base desires). Verse 78 is saying that the Ummiyyin have gone astray because they were ignorant of the contents of this kitab. The knowledge of this book would have been beneficial to these Ummiyyin and the reverse has actually proven to be true. Nothing negative whatsoever is said about THIS book.

    Al Kitab in verse 79 is clearly a fabrication and must be rejected.

    Al kitab in verse 78 is pristine scripture. Al kitab in verse 79 is garbage. So the two books are different.

    If the two books in verses 78 and 79 ARE the same then what Allah is saying is that the Ummiyyin have strayed as a result of not knowing the book which the Jews have written with their own hands!!! And why would Allah be concerned about these Ummiyyin not knowing or understanding the book which the Jews have fabricated???

    Quote:
    Mujahid commented,

    “Allah described the Ummiyyin as not understanding any of the Book that Allah sent down to Musa, yet they create lies and falsehood.” Tafsir ibn Kathir

    This commentator agrees with me that verse 78 describes the Ummiyyin not KNOWING the ‘Torah of Moses’ as opposed to the book which the Jews wrote with their own hands. It is their “not understanding any of the Book that Allah sent down to Musa” that led them to “create lies and falsehood”.

    Al Kitab in verse 79 is obviously not “the Book that Allah sent down” because this Kitab, the Jews wrote with their own hands. So the two books are different. Verse 78 also assumes that “the Book that Allah sent down to Musa” existed in the seventh century. How else could Allah blame the Ummiyyin for not understanding or knowing any of “the Book that Allah sent down to Musa”?

    It should also be remembered that verse 79 says nothing about the Jews of corrupting changing of tampering with any book.

    There is also a difference of opinion among scholars as to the meaning of “ummiyyun” which in turn can alter the meaning of this verse because according to some commentators it does not necessarily mean “illiterates”. If that is true then this means that these verses could e referring to the SAME group of people.

    “Bell thinks ‘ummiyyun means belonging to the ‘ummah or community, while Blachere translates it as ‘Gentiles,’ in the sense of ‘pagan.’ For the French scholar it is clear that the word ‘ummi designates pagan Arabs, who, unlike the Jews and Christians, had not received any revelation and were thus living in ignorance of the divine law. Tabari does indeed quote some traditions that give this sense to the word ummi: according to Ibn ‘Abbas, ‘’ummiyyun (refers to) some people who did not believe in a prophet sent by God, nor in a scripture revealed by God; and they wrote a scripture with their own hands. Then they said to the ignorant, common people: “This is from God.”’ However, Tabari himself does not accept this interpretation, instead gives a totally unconvincing and improbable account of the derivation of the word: ‘I am of the opinion that an illiterate person is called ummi, relating him in his lack of ability to write to his mother (umm), because writing was something which men, and not women, did, so that a man who could not write and form letters was linked to his mother, and not to his father, in his ignorance of writing.’” (Warraq, “Introduction,” What the Koran Really Says, Language, Text & Commentary [Prometheus Books, 2002; ISBN: 157392945X], p. 44; underline emphasis ours) Quoted on Answering Islam.

    Reply

    • QUOTE:

      You said: HOW DO YOU KNOW “AL KITAB ” IN 78 IS NOT THE SAME “AL KITAB” IN 79?

      QURAN 2:78-79 . And there are among them Ummiyyin, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

      79. Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

      //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
      Al Kitab in verse 78 is a book whose contents the Ummiyyin are ignorant of but the implication is that had they known its contents then they would have been better guided (as they then could have avoided their erroneous conjecture and seeing in it their own base desires).
      //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

      this is your interpretation. if 79 , according to you is a “DIFFERENT book” then 78 COULD be a “different book” too and not the torah. maybe jews had many different books?

      the qur’aan in 78 could be saying , “your own book DISAGREES with your interpretation”

      a muslim can point out to an illiterate christian, who likes to read his desire/jesus, into the psalsms ,but the muslim says that the hebrew does not support his interpretation.
      that does not mean that the muslim believes that the text is “pristine”.

      you MADE up “DIFFERENT BOOK” in 79 so lets play your game.

      ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
      Verse 78 is saying that the Ummiyyin have gone astray because they were ignorant of the contents of this kitab. The knowledge of this book would have been beneficial to these Ummiyyin and the reverse has actually proven to be true. Nothing negative whatsoever is said about THIS book.
      //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

      there is nothing positive said about it either.

      Sahih International: And they say, “Never will the Fire touch us, except for a few days.” Say, “Have you taken a covenant with Allah ? For Allah will never break His covenant. Or do you say about Allah that which you do not know?”

      Yusuf Ali: And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

      they are READING thier FALSE belief into the book .

      so “who KNOW not the book”

      refers to those who say, ” never will the FIRE touch us, except for a few days ”

      “Al Kitab in verse 79 is clearly a fabrication and must be rejected.
      Al kitab in verse 78 is pristine scripture. Al kitab in verse 79 is garbage. So the two books are different.”

      the same SCRIBES who write “the book” in 78 are the SAME scribes who write the book 79?
      do the SCRIBES who write “the book” in 78 consider “the book” in 79 to be PART of the BOOK in 78?

      were the jews mixing their INVENTED books with “PRISTINE scripture” AND the qur’aan had CHOICE of words BUT STILL used “al kitab” and MADE no distinction/CHOICE OF WORDS?

      Sahih International: And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, “This is from Allah ,” but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know.

      NOTICE HOW THIS LANGUAGE is missing FROM 2:79

      Yusuf Ali: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

      NOTICE YOU DON’T FIND

      “BUT IT IS NOT FROM THE BOOK” ?

      IF CORRUPTION HAS BECOME PART OF YOUR BOOK, THEN QURAN DOES NOT NEED TO SAY ” BUT IT IS NOT FROM THE BOOK”

      IT IS from the book.

      their INVENTIONS ARE FROM THE BOOK.

      did the UNLETTERED ones who knew not “the book” assume that “the book” in 79 is PART of “the book” in 78?

      many christians who can’t read hebrew assume that isiah wrote isiah, but scholars who know isiaha know isiah is AUTHORED by different authors living at different times.

      “If the two books in verses 78 and 79 ARE the same then what Allah is saying is that the Ummiyyin have strayed as a result of not knowing the book which the Jews have written with their own hands!!!”

      ” And why would Allah be concerned about these Ummiyyin not knowing or understanding the book which the Jews have fabricated???”

      they won’t know corruption even if it slapped them in the face. even if the text was CORRUPT and the illiterates heard the CORRUPT text READ out aloud and TWISTED what they heard , wouldn’t the quran point it out to them that they are taking thier ideas and misleading many?

      lets assume an arab jew heard a verse from the corrupt torah read out aloud. he doesn’t know that it is NOT isiah who AUTHORED IT but some unknown jew living in a different year from isiaha. he takes his understanding(desire/conjecture) of his CORRUPT text and spread it to the others to mislead .

      ” And why would Allah be concerned about these Ummiyyin not knowing or understanding the book which the Jews have fabricated???”

      IF YOU AGREE THAT THE INVENTION IN

      Yusuf Ali: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

      CAN HELP ILLITERATE DO THE FOLLOWING

      “but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.”

      THEN U MUST AGREE THAT THE ARGUMENT CAN BE FLIPPED AND ONE CAN SAY THAT THE BOOK

      IN 78 IS CORRUPT TOO

      U CAN’T DISTINGUISH. your argument can be APPLIED back on you.

      Reply

    • we first need to understand what the qur’aan means when it says that “they write the book with their own hands….”

      does it mean the SCRIBES are writing ALL of it ? parts of it? the parts they are writing have become part of “the book” in 78?

      can desires and fabrications be seen in a textually corrupt text? of course.

      does the AUTHOR of the Qur’an, who says that the bible PROVES the qur’aan , when he revealed/wrote verse 78-79 , thinking that his book is the standard to judge ALL books, would he think that the corruption which enters the book is PART of the book or ANOTHER book which has become part of the book?

      quote:
      Yusuf Ali: Can ye (o ye men of Faith) entertain the hope that they will believe in you?- Seeing that a party of them heard the Word of Allah, and perverted it knowingly after they understood it.

      Yusuf Ali: And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

      Yusuf Ali: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

      so they can NOT only orally pervert the WORDS , but they can textually CORRUPT the words . like they would CORRUPT the words of god orally ( not ALL of it ) they CAN corrupt the words of god textually ( not all of it )

      your argument :

      ““If the two books in verses 78 and 79 ARE the same then what Allah is saying is that the Ummiyyin have strayed as a result of not knowing the book which the Jews have written with their own hands!!!”

      this assumes that ALL the text is CORRUPT .but i would argue , how does it UNDERSTAND, , ” they write the BOOK with their own hands…”

      ? does it mean textually CORRUPT ALL the book?
      parts of the book?

      if the quran knew that the TEXTUAL CORRUPTION was NOT part of “the book” in 78 , why didn’t it say

      something like

      “And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, “This is from Allah ,” but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know.”

      here it confirmed the words ” BUT IT IS NOT FROM the book” by saying ” BUT IT IS NOT FROM Allah”

      if the TEXTUAL CORRUPTION in 79 WAS NOT part of the BOOK in 78 , then it would say “but it is NOT from the book”

      Reply

24. @ mrquestioner2013

    You said: “tell me, why didn’t the ARAB jews RENDER yhwh’s non hebrew name in arabic? THEY had the FREAKIN letters, so why didn’t they do it? why instead did they CHOOSE LETTERS”

    ALIF
    LAAM
    LAAM
    HA?

    I do not know what YHWH’s non-Hebrew name in Arabic is and I do not think the Arab Jews knew either. I know the Jews did not recognize Allah as the proper name for their deity as the following narrative will show::

    Ishaq :263 “Abu Bakr went into a Jewish school and found many pupils gathered around Finhas, a learned rabbi. Bakr told the Jews to fear Allah and submit. He told them that they would find that Muhammad was an Apostle written in the Torah and Gospels. “Finhas replied, ‘We are rich compared to Allah. We do not humble ourselves to Allah. He humbles himself to us. We are independent of him, while he needs us. Why does YOUR god ask us to lend him money as your master pretends.’ Bakr was enraged and hit Finhas hard in the face. Were it not for the treaty between us I would cut off your head, you enemy of Allah. So Allah said, ‘They will taste Our punishment of burning.’” emphasis added.

    It is clear from learned Rabbi Finhas’ disparaging remarks that for him Muhammad’s Allah was nothing more than a pagan deity, whom Muhammad pretended was asking the Jews for a “beautiful loan”.

    Reply

25. You said:

    “didn’t prophets have pagan parents who named them after pagan gods? ”

    Why did not these prophets change their names to non-pagan names later? Did not the pagans who became Muslims change their names after conversion?

    This is your last chance if you cannot debate like a civilized person then then this will be my final last response to you.

    Reply

    • wait for the reply . in my reply i will look at how the arab jews would have understood the prolonged “ya” in jeremiah/iramiyaa and whether they would assume ALLAH is equivalent God worthy to be worshiped. so if ALLAH is the true god, then know point in redering a ‘Ya’ ‘jah’ (whats his name man AND how do you pronounce this “ya” ? )

      Reply

26. @ mrquestioner2013

    You quote me: “This is similar to what the Meccans were saying about the Quran i,e, “Allah has sent down nothing” by which they meant that Muhammad was composing verses and then passing them off as scripture..”

    and then say:

    Using your dumb logic IT SHOULD BE “A quraan”

    Let me give the full quote: Quran 2:79 does not talk about corrupting already existing scripture. This verse is talking about some Jews who wrote a book and passed it off as divine scripture. This is similar to what the Meccans were saying about the Quran i,e, “Allah has sent down nothing” by which they meant that Muhammad was composing verses and then passing them off as scripture..

    The point that I was making was that the accusation in Q2:79 was SIMILAR, not identical to what the Meccans were saying about the Quran. My position was that the Quran was accusing the Jews of composing verses and then passing them of as scripture and similarly the Jews were accusing Muhammad of making up verses and then passing them off as scripture. THAT was the similarity! You need to read more carefully, it could not be much clearer.

    In addition I have already shown that Quran 2 verses 78 and 79 cannot both be referring to the same book.

    We should not resort to personal insults if we cannot win an argument. If we cannot understand what the other side is saying then we should seek clarity. But most importantly, we must always try to maintain our discipline and let our evidence do the talking.

    Reply

27. You said:
    “Sahih International: And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, “This is from Allah ,” but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know. (3:78)

    NOTICE HOW THIS LANGUAGE is missing FROM 2:79

    Yusuf Ali: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

    NOTICE YOU DON’T FIND
    “BUT IT IS NOT FROM THE BOOK” ?
    End of quote

    Q3:78 does NOT say “BUT IT IS NOT FROM THE BOOK” it actually says “but it is not from Allah”

    Now both Quran 2:79 and 3:78 state that the Jews falsely claim that “This is from Allah” .Now in 3:78 the Quran explicitly denies that it is from Allah, but that is ALSO the obvious implication of verse 2;79 since we are told that what the Jew are claiming to be from Allah they have actually written with their own hands.

    Q2:78. And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

    This verse refers to the Ummiyyin who were Muhammad’s contemporaries so “the Book” here refers to the Torah that existed in the seventh century. It is obvious from the context of this verse that Allah considers this Book to be authentic scripture. This proves that Allah assumed that the Torah that existed in the seventh century was reliable. It is simply not credible that Allah wants the Ummiyyin to know or understand what he considers to be a hopelessly corrupt Book.

    Quote.

    Mujahid commented,

    “Allah described the Ummiyyin as not understanding any of the Book that Allah sent down to Musa, yet they create lies and falsehood.” Tafsir ibn Kathir

    The Ummiyyin ‘create lies and falsehood’ because of their ignorance of this Book. Knowing and understanding this Book would have led them to the truth. This Book therefore was not only available in the seventh century it was also authentic scripture.

    Reply

28. You said

    “THE BOOK” IS ALWAYS USED IN KORAN FOR REVELATION.

    If “al Kitab” is always used in the Quran for revelation then ‘al Kitab’ in 2:78 must also be REVELATION! Since Allah endorses this book then he in effect endorses the Torah that existed in the seventh century!

    Reply

    • NOTICE HOW THIS LANGUAGE is missing FROM 2:79

      Yusuf Ali: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

      NOTICE YOU DON’T FIND
      “BUT IT IS NOT FROM THE BOOK” ?
      End of quote

      Q3:78 does NOT say “BUT IT IS NOT FROM THE BOOK” it actually says “but it is not from Allah”

      Now both Quran 2:79 and 3:78 state that the Jews falsely claim that “This is from Allah” .Now in 3:78 the Quran explicitly denies that it is from Allah, but that is ALSO the obvious implication of verse 2;79 since we are told that what the Jew are claiming to be from Allah they have actually written with their own hands.//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

      the jews claim that the “al kitab ” they WROTE is from ALLAH

      the SCRIBES wrote down the torah/”AL KITAB” with their own hands

      they WROTE down the “al kitab” in verse 2:78
      (who else if not the SCRIBES?)

      they WRITE DOWN AL KITAB IN 78 AND 79

      jewish SCRIBES writing down your CORRUPT torah

      so they BOTH use their HANDS to write thier book AND BOTH call it “al kitab”

      There is , according to the jews WRITTEN torah and oral torah.

      now try to follow

      if 78 is “by the HAND of god”

      and 79 is not ” by the hand of god”

      one would easily understand that what they make up in 79 MUST be part of “the book” in 78

      SINCE “AL KITAB” IS, according to them “by the hand of god”

      verses AFTER MARK 16 ARE from the book of mark. until textual criticism proved that they are NOT from mark.

      textual CRITICISM proved they are not from god.

      BUT THEY ARE STILL PART OF MARK’S BOOK

      do you see ?

      PEOPLE THOUGHT THEY WERE FROM GOD AND mark WROTE THEM DOWN

      textual criticism proved they are not from mark or god , but they are PART of the book still.

      And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, “This is from Allah ,” but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know.

      we ALSO would THINK THAT “al kitab” in 78 IS PART of “the alkitab” in 79, why DIDN’T it use a DOUBLE CONFIRMATION that it is not , like this verse?

      “Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands”

      their WRITING is part of the BOOK. their writing is not FROM ALLAH but that DOES NOT MEAN it is not PART of “al kitab ”

      it is PART of “al kitab”

      AND people would think it is PART of “AL KITAB”
      how else do they make gains?

      because PEOPLE think it is part of ” al kitab”

      THE written torah is not an oral recitation.

      the people they are SELLING the written torah to are told , “this is from God”

      WHAT THEY ARE WRITING IS PART OF “AL KITAB”

      it is like THINKING that the verses after mark 16 were part of marks book only until textual criticism proved they were not .

      DO YOU FOLLOW? IF WE WOULD THINK THAT IT IS PART OF “AL KITAB” IT WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO SAY ” IT IS NOT PART OF THE BOOK”

      if their distortion can make one think that it is part of the book, then what about thier WRITINGS? THE obvious reason why the QUR’AAN did not say ” it is NOT part of the book” was because thier WRITINGS in 79 were PART of the book.

      now try to follow little more

      the jews say, ACCORDING TO you , that “AL kitab” in 78 is “from ALLAH”

      the jews say in 79 that “al kitab” is ” FROM ALLAH”

      Reply

    • why not try to understand ?

      so you agree now that “al kitab” in 79 and 78 is the same “al kitab” because quran defines “al kitab” as REVELATION from god and the jews are WRITING “al kitab” and call it “revealation from god” ?

      Reply

29. You said: “notice that you DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO read the TWO ARTICLES i LINKED to? you know why? because IT LITERALLY demolishes your claim that yhwh was the top daddy god in ancient israelite religion. yhwh had a DADDY called el”.

    Since Allah tries to convince us that he is YHWH he must then desperately want to be the “son of El”

    You said: “i told you that yhwh had a daddy called el”.

    So what? Is everyone under an obligation to accept everything you tell them? And why does your god pretend to be the one who is “fathered by El”?

    You said: “i am sure if you are BORN in a pagan family your family would give you a PAGAN name or name you after a pagan god who was FATHERED by the dominant El god”.

    I am pretty certain you were born into a stone-kissing pagan family worshipping a pagan god who is desperately trying to convince us that he is the “son of El”. In addition you follow a prophet who used to love trotting around a House full of idols, not to mention regularly bowing towards it.

    You said one cannot ADDRESS your nonsense here so lets have discussion in a place where there is NO MODERATION:

    I am happy with MDI. And if has not already, then it will soon become apparent to you on whose side the evidence is.

    You said your pagan god yhwh had a greater god called EL

    Why then does your god desperately wants us to believe that he is the pagan god who had a greater god called El.

    You said it is your pagan god who was DOMINATED by ANOTHER god called el.

    Then your god claims to be the pagan god who was dominated by another god called el.

    Re: Quran 6:91 No just estimate of Allah do they make when they say: “Nothing doth Allah send down to man (by way of revelation)” Say: “Who then sent down the Book which Moses brought?- a light and guidance to man: But ye make it into (separate) sheets for show, while ye conceal much (of its contents): therein were ye taught that which ye knew not- neither ye nor your fathers.” Say: “(Allah) (sent it down)”: Then leave them to plunge in vain discourse and trifling.

    You said it says ,”taj3aloona HU qaraatisa” CAN A ‘QARAATISA ‘CONTAIN the entire TORAH ?
    is the “hu” refering to ALL of the “al KITAAB” mentioned in the above verse?

    is the verse REALLY TALKING ABOUT CONCEALING AND HIDING or is it TALKING about how ‘protected’ your CORRUPT torah is ?

    I don’t know Arabic so I can not answer your question. Since you could have discussed this verse in its English translation why didn’t you? This verse is saying to the Jews, the Torah of Moses they have made into sheets but hide much of its contents. From this Torah the Jews learned what they and their ancestors did not know. The Torah these seventh century Jews had made into sheets and what they had learnt from it demolishes the myth that Muhammad was a prophet.

    Reply

    • “So what? Is everyone under an obligation to accept everything you tell them? And why does your god pretend to be the one who is “fathered by El”?”

      Allah
      Allah (English pronunciation: /ˈælə/ or /ˈɑːlə/; Arabic: الله‎ Allāh, IPA: [ʔalˤˈlˤɑːh] ( listen)) is the Arabic word for God (al ilāh, literally “the God”). The word has cognates in other Semitic languages, including Alah in Aramaic, ʾĒl in Canaanite and Elohim in Hebrew.

      http://unveiling-christianity.net/2014/05/11/bringing-world-renowned-scholar-assoc-prof-dr-reza-aslan-size/

      DEFINE COGNATE :

      In linguistics, cognates are words that have a common etymological origin. This learned term derives from the Latin cognatus (blood relative).[1]

      For example, the English words shirt and skirt are doublets; the former derives from the Old English sċyrte, while the latter is borrowed from Old Norse skyrta, both of which derive from the Proto-Germanic *skurtijǭ.

      SO DID ALLAH DOMINATE OVER YOUR GOD yhwh and father yhwh?

      Reply

    • WHICH arabic LETTERS would one USE to RENDER hebrew word FOR god “ELOAH” ?

      and why can’t ONE then use your own daft logic on you and change “eloah” to elowt /allat?

      Reply

30. You said: “notice that you DID NOT EVEN BOTHER TO read the TWO ARTICLES i LINKED to? you know why? because IT LITERALLY demolishes your claim that yhwh was the top daddy god in ancient israelite religion. yhwh had a DADDY called el”.

    Since Allah claims to be the god of the Israelites (bani Israil) which one of their gods then does he claim to be?

    Reply

31. You quote me:” Verse 78 is saying that the Ummiyyin have gone astray because they were ignorant of the contents of this kitab. The knowledge of this book would have been beneficial to these Ummiyyin and the reverse has actually proven to be true. Nothing negative whatsoever is said about THIS book.”

    And then say:

    “there is nothing positive said about it either.”

    Q2:78. And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

    Why does Allah want to tell us this and why do we need to know it? Does he just want to inform us that there is a group of people called the Ummiyyin who do not know a hopelessly corrupt and largely man-made book??? What is the point of that? Is it of paramount importance that Allah tell us that the Ummiyyin have read their false belief and conjecture into this hopelessly corrupt and largely man-made book??? What is the point of telling us all this?

    It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever!!! Even I give Allah more credit than this. The fact is that this verse only makes sense if al Kitab is referring to authentic scripture. Then Allah is saying that the Ummiyyin have an erroneous understanding and false ideas because they are ignorant of the Word of God.

    THIS MAKES SENSE!!!

    There is without doubt a connection between the Ummiyyin not knowing the Book and them seeing therein their own desires, their erroneous conjecture and their lies.

    Mujahid commented,

    “Allah described the Ummiyyin as not understanding any of THE BOOK THAT ALLAH SENT DOWN TO MUSA yet they create lies and falsehood.” Tafsir ibn Kathir (emphasis added)

    Note that this Muslim commentator did NOT say: “Allah described the Ummiyyin as not understanding any of the HOPELESSLY CORRUPTED AND LARGELY MAN-MADE BOOK yet they create lies and falsehood.”

    Such a statement would not make any sense at all.

    quote

    (And they but guess) means, “They lie.” Qatadah, Abu Al-`Aliyah and Ar-Rabi` said that it means, “They have evil false ideas about Allah.” Tafsir ibn Kathir.

    To say that the Ummiyyin do not know or understand the hopelessly corrupt Book, yet they lie or have false ideas about Allah does not make any sense either. The only interpretation that makes any sense is that the Ummiyyin do not know or understand the Book of Allah which is why they lie or are in error. I believe the Muslim commentators agree with me on this one.

    You said: . the same SCRIBES who write “the book” in 78 are the SAME scribes who write the book 79? do the SCRIBES who write “the book” in 78 consider “the book” in 79 to be PART of the BOOK in 78?

    I am not entirely sure what it is that you are asking here.

    I have not seen any evidence that the Jews ever wrote a book which they knew was not the Torah and yet they claimed that it was. I have not seen any historical evidence that what Allah is charging a group of Jews with in 2:79 actually happened. The fact remains however that Allah IS charging a group of Jews with writing SOMETHING which they are falsely claiming to be Scripture. However the overwhelming testimony of the Quran and Hadith assume the reliability of the seventh century Torah. In view of this it would be a total aberration on the part of the author of the Quran to say that the Torah was being corrupted by some seventh century Jews. Not only is there no explicit reference to corruption in verse 79, Muhammad never during the 23 years of his ministry said once to the Jews in any exchange or debate that their Torah was corrupt. I could probably even point to verses that came after 2:79 to show that Allah still considered the seventh century Torah to be authentic. The only real evidence I have seen for the charge of corruption from the Muslim sources is cited by Hamza Afzar in a response he made to me some time ago (i.e. Al-Hakim related in Al-Mustadrak the following Hadith).

    I will address some of your other points later if/when I can work out what they are!

    Reply

32. i am going to ask ALL the muslims here to share there OPINIONS.

    I will forget everything i have written and start from SCRATCH.

    002.079
    YUSUFALI: Then woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say:”This is from Allah,” to traffic with it for miserable price!- Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby.

    1. WHat are the jews using when they write thier al kitaab? memory or manuscripts?

    2. the christian thinks that al kitaab in 2:79 means al kitaab from the minds of men.

    3. if the quraan can call invented book al kitaab, then surely, following the reg’s logic, it can call CORRUPTED book al kitaab, right?

    4.And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, “This is from Allah ,” but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know.

    so the jews can orally alter scripture and make people think it is from al kitaab. the ILLITERATES would think that al kitaab in 2:79 is from ALLAH .if qur’aan KNEW that the WRITTEN torah did not CONTAIN corruption, why wouldn’t it use terms like ” it is not from al kitaab” it is ADDRESSING al kitaab WHICH is written and INVENTION/CHANGES must be PART of it.

    5. why would the quraan use ” al kitaab” for invented books , why would it give RESPECT to invented books by calling them “al kitaab” ?

    6. could this be a sign that what they are PASSING of as the kitab of ALLAH has ALLAHS words in it with ALONG with thier INVENTIONS?

    Reply

    • just read the verses again and i see that AL KITAAB in 78 is free/innocent from the assumptions opinions of the ILLITERATE

      and AL KITAAB in 79 is free from the assumptions/opinions of those who right about it.

      both verses are saying the jews are textually and orally CORRUPT.

      Reply

33. RE: Quran 2:78. And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

    There is only one meaning the Ummiyyin could understand from this verse; Allah is saying that they have strayed because they do not know or understand their Book.

    It is not credible that Allah is pointing the Ummiyyin to what he considers to be a hopelessly corrupt book for guidance. Why would Allah care if the Ummiyyin do not understand a book that is largely man-made? In fact Allah would not want the Ummiyyin to know and understand such a Book, he would rather they avoid it like the plague! Especially when you consider that anyone reading such a Book could end concluding that his prophet is a fraud!

    You said: “here is nothing positive said about it either”.

    The whole point of this verse is that Allah is condemning the Ummiyyin ignorance of this book. It is their ignorance of this book that has resulted in them seeing in this Book their own desires and their false conjecture. This they could have avoided had they known or understood the Book. Surely that is a positive statement about this Book.

    According to the Mulsim commentators I quoted previously Q2:78 means that the Ummiyyin “create lies and falsehood” and “they have evil false ideas about Allah” this is because they do not know and understand the Book. It is clear then that Allah would really like the Ummiyyin to know and understand this Book so they can avoid seeing therein their own desires, their futile conjecture and their evil lies.. That is the message of this verse. Their ignorance of the Book is the cause of their extremely serious errors. The knowledge and understanding of this Book is the key to avoiding these errors.

    Q2:78 identifies the cause of their error AND the solution to avoiding it. They need to know and understand this Book! The message of this verse is clear. Ignorance of this Book has led to a bad outcome. Knowledge of this Book would resulted in a good outcome.

    So they desperately need to know and understand this Book, the ignorance of which is causing them to sin. The only Book that Allah could have condemned the Ummiyyin for not knowing or understanding was the Torah that existed in the seventh century. So THIS is the Book according to Allah they need to know and understand to be on the straight path,

    Muslims might see this more easily if we substitute the Quran for al Kitab in this verse.

    “And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Quran, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture”.

    There is only one meaning the Ummiyyin in this scenario, would have understood from this verse; Allah is saying that they have strayed because they do not know or understand the Quran.

    Allah here then would be condemning the Ummiyyin for their ignorance of the Quran. It is their ignorance of the Quran that has resulted in them seeing in this book their own desires and their false conjecture. This they could have avoided had they known or understood the Quran.

    Ignorance of the Quran then in this scenario is very bad and knowledge of the Quran is very good. That then would have been a positive statement about the Quran.

    Reply

    • “It is not credible that Allah is pointing the Ummiyyin to what he considers to be a hopelessly corrupt book for guidance. Why would Allah care if the Ummiyyin do not understand a book that is largely man-made? In fact Allah would not want the Ummiyyin to know and understand such a Book, he would rather they avoid it like the plague! Especially when you consider that anyone reading such a Book could end concluding that his prophet is a fraud!”

      quote:
      according to the mufasireen, both verses are referring to ahl al-kitab. In the first case, Allah is saying that among them (ahl al-kitab) are the unlettered (either literally or metaphorically as in; they do not understand). Those who are unlettered are those who lie about the kitaab and have false understandings of it. The second verse is referring to a second category of ahl al-kitab, and they are the ones who actively call towards these lies and false understandings and they actively change the book (the torah)

      thats the trash they have and all they god. corrupt manuscripts and corrupt oral traditions which have been reduplicated again and again. it is as if the qur’aan is saying that the book with god is free from textual corruption and opinions of the jews.

      just read the verses again and i see that AL KITAAB in 78 is free/innocent from the assumptions opinions of the ILLITERATE

      and AL KITAAB in 79 is free from the assumptions/opinions of those who right about it.

      both verses are saying the jews are textually and orally CORRUPT.

      like a bloody IDiot , you right

      “It is not credible that Allah is pointing the Ummiyyin to what he considers to be a hopelessly corrupt book for guidance. Why would Allah care if the Ummiyyin do not understand a book that is largely man-made? In fact Allah would not want the Ummiyyin to know and understand such a Book, he would rather they avoid it like the plague! Especially when you consider that anyone reading such a Book could end concluding that his prophet is a fraud!”

      THERE IS NO AL KITAAB there you FOOL. THE one with Him , is free from textual and oral CORRUPTION. why are you so dumb that you can’t understand this?

      JUST read the verses again

      al kitaab in 78 IS THE AL KITAAB in 79

      not 2 BOOKS , 1 book.

      Reply

34. RE: Quran 2:78. And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

    The whole point of this verse is that the Ummiyyin need to know and understand this Book!!!

    Reply

35. You said: a muslim can point out to an illiterate christian, who likes to read his desire/jesus, into the psalsms ,but the muslim says that the hebrew does not support his interpretation.
    that does not mean that the muslim believes that the text is “pristine”.

    That is correct but whereas the Muslims do not believe that the seventh century Psalms/Torah were/was authentic, Allah does.

    So because Allah never claims that the Torah has been corrupted the Ummiyyin would have understood Q2;78 to mean that they were in error only because they were ignorant of the AUTHENTIC Torah. There is absolutely no evidence anywhere in the Islamic Sources that the Jews were ever aware at any time during the 23 years of Muhammad’s mission that the reliability of their Torah was ever in question.

    Reply

36. RE: Q2:78. And there are among them illiterates, who know not the Book, but (see therein their own) desires, and they do nothing but conjecture.

    You said: “so the jews can orally alter scripture and make people think it is from al kitaab. the ILLITERATES would think that al kitaab in 2:79 is from ALLAH .if qur’aan KNEW that the WRITTEN torah did not CONTAIN corruption, why wouldn’t it use terms like ” it is not from al kitaab” it is ADDRESSING al kitaab WHICH is written and INVENTION/CHANGES must be PART of it.”

    Whether the Ummiyyin ever heard the al Kitab of 2;79 recited Allah does not say. All he tells us is that they did not know or understand the Torah. It is unlikely that Jews were tongue twisting the Torah to fool other Jews.

    But Q2:78 is not saying that the Ummiyyin “know not” only the “AUTHENTIC PARTS” of the Torah. They are being condemned for being ignorant of the whole book.

    You need to understand that nowhere does the Quran allege that the Torah has been textually corrupted. But it does in countless places affirm the textual integrity of this Book. It appears that you and I read a different book when we read the Quran.

    My understanding of Q2:79 is not at all refuted by the absence of the phrase “but it is not from Allah”. It is very obvious what this verse is stating i.e. the Jews are falsely claiming that the book they have fabricated is from Allah. So it goes without saying that “it is not from Allah”.

    It is like saying “you are lying because you are not telling the truth”. Just saying “you are lying” would have been sufficient . To add “because you are not telling the truth” is superfluous because it was already implied in the first part of the statement.

    Notice what this verse does NOT say. It does not say “they write the TORAH with their own hands and then say this is from Allah” or “they write the book with their own hands and then say this is the TORAH”. This WOULD have been a charge of corruption. But HAD Allah said such a thing then he would have contradicted the rest of his Quran. In addition in 2:79 there is no mention of the word “alter’ as there is in 3:78 “…there is among them a party who ALTER the Scripture…”

    We should also keep in mind that this verse is only accusing a section of Jews probably in Medina. It is not accusing the other Jews in this town or the rest of Arabia and all the other countries where they existed. Neither is it accusing the various Christians communities spread in many parts of the world who from well before the time of Muhammad had independently from the Jews, transmitted their own Torah.

    You said: verses AFTER MARK 16 ARE from the book of mark. until textual criticism proved that they are NOT from mark. textual CRITICISM proved they are not from god. BUT THEY ARE STILL PART OF MARK’S BOOK do you see ? end of quote

    Verses AFTER Mark 16 and BEFORE Mark 16 are all part of the same book i.e. the Gospel of Mark. Those who accept that these verses were added later then must recognize them to be additions to the text. However al kitab in verse 78 and al Kitab in verse 79 are not both part of the same Book i.e. a book called the Torah. In other words there never existed a book called the Torah which consisted of al Kitab of verse 78 and al Kitab of verse 79 combined. These are two separate Books. The situation in Mark is different.

    I know that what we are trying to determine here is whether or not the Quran charges the Jews with corruption. But I should also point out that there is absolutely no historical, archaeological or literary evidence for the Muslim charge of corruption. This charge I understand to be that later Jews corrupted the Torah given to Moses by Allah in approximately 1440 BC.

    You said: if the quraan can call invented book al kitaab, then surely, following the reg’s logic, it can call CORRUPTED book al kitaab, right?

    Well the Quran probably could call a corrupted Book al Kitab but that is irrelevant here because neither 2:79 nor any other verse of the Quran accuses the Jews of corrupting the Torah.

    You said: so the jews can orally alter scripture and make people think it is from al kitaab. the ILLITERATES would think that al kitaab in 2:79 is from ALLAH .if qur’aan KNEW that the WRITTEN torah did not CONTAIN corruption, why wouldn’t it use terms like ” it is not from al kitaab

    Let me ask you a question: If the Quran knew that the Torah DID contain corruption why then did Muhammad never in his 23 year ministry ever present this as an argument to the Jews in any exchange or debate between them? Why did he never go to the Jews and say “Your Torah is corrupt” or “You have corrupted the Torah”?

    Allah in 3:78 is addressing a particular group of people who he says could be fooled by these tongue twisting Jews. There is no indication that EVERYONE can be fooled by these Jews. Nowhere does Allah say that these dishonest oral recitations were capable of fooling the Ummiyyin into believing that they were hearing “the book they knew not”. But the Ummiyyin did not need any more fooling anyway as they were already up to their necks in grave error.

    You said: ” it is ADDRESSING al kitaab WHICH is written and INVENTION/CHANGES must be PART of it.

    That would be the case as in the Gospel of Mark where the additional verses became a part of this book. But there is no evidence that al Kitab of Q2:79 was being presented as part of the Torah.

    You said: why would the quraan use ” al kitaab” for invented books , why would it give RESPECT to invented books by calling them “al kitaab” ?

    If calling a book al Kitab gives it respect then Allah has contradicted this in 2:79. It is truly astonishing that you think Allah in 2:79 is giving respect to a book which Allah is clearly condemning. Yet you do not believe that Allah is giving respect to al Kitab in 2:78 a book whose ignorance, according to Allah, has led the Ummiyyin into false conjecture, lies and evil ideas.

    You said: could this be a sign that what they are PASSING of as the kitab of ALLAH has ALLAHS words in it with ALONG with thier INVENTIONS?

    According to 2:79 it is these Jews and not Allah who is the author of this book. There is no indication that the Jews are trying to pass this book off as the Torah.

    Yousaid: SO DID ALLAH DOMINATE OVER YOUR GOD yhwh and father yhwh?

    I know Allah fathered al-Uzzā, Manāt and al-Lāt and he was a pretty harmless deity until Muhammad re-created him and used him to threaten and frighten the excrement out of those who rejected his fraud.

    In Muhammad’s hands Allah became the most vindictive, fiendish, ghoulish, psychopathic, monstrous and insane deity ever presented to mankind.

    Reply

37. mrquestioner2013

    A debate took place just a few days ago between Shadid Lewis and C L Edwards entitled “Does the Bible point to Muhammad?” It can be found on MDI. Lewis right at the beginning of the debate quoted much of Isaiah 42 to support his position that the Bible does contain prophecies of Muhammad. Here are some of the verses he quoted:

    5 Thus says God YHWH, Who created the heavens and stretched them out, Who spread forth the earth and that which comes from it, Who gives breath to the people on it, And spirit to those who walk on it:.

    8 I am YHWH, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.

    10 Sing to YHWH a new song, And His praise from the ends of the earth, You who go down to the sea, and all that is in it, You coastlands and you inhabitants of them!

    11 Let the wilderness and its cities lift up their voice, The villages that Kedar inhabits. Let the inhabitants of Sela sing, Let them shout from the top of the mountains.

    12 Let them give glory to YHWH, And declare His praise in the coastlands.

    Notice the name by which this god identifies himself and particularly in verse 8.

    Reply

38. @ mrquestioner2013

    In March 2013 a debate took place between Zakir Hussein and Samuel Green entitled “Was Muhammed foretold in the Bible?”. This debate can be found on MDI. Zakir Hussein quoted Deuteronomy 18:15-18 to support his contention that the Bible does contain prophecies of Muhammad.

    Deuteronomy 18 15-18

    15 YHWH your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him. 16 For this is what you asked of YHWH your God at Horeb on the day of the assembly when you said, “Let us not hear the voice of YHWH our God nor see this great fire anymore, or we will die.”

    17 YHWH said to me: “What they say is good. 18 I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their fellow Israelites, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him.

    Notice the name of the deity who is making this prophecy. Other Muslim apologists who also claim these verses to be a prophecy of Muhammad include:

    Dr. Zakir Naik, Jamal Badawi, Shabir Ally, Yusuf Ali and Ahmad Deedat.

    Reply

39. Correction: Yusuf Ali is better described as a scholar than an apologist.

    Reply

40. Recently (27/09/2014) a debate took place between Shabir Ally and Jay Smith entitled “Which is the Word of God? The Bible or the Qur’an?”

    In this debate Ally gave 5 criteria for determining the divine inspiration of a book. One of the criteria he gives in the 15th minute was that ”if a book calls us to worship a God other than YHWH, the God of the Israelite forefathers, then that book or the person who is doing that is not under inspiration from God”

    Ally again 2hrs and 25 minutes into the debate repeats this point by saying that “one of the criteria for determining whether or not a book qualifies as being the Word of God is that it should not preach another god other than YHWH”!!!

    Shabir Ally is one of the leading Muslim apologists in the the world.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Δ