Muslims ONLY: how did the bible change?

Well the spread of the Bible and the spread of the Qur'an are different. The bible was passed on by Monks who copied the transcripts made by the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church changed somethings themselves making slight changes to appeal to the nations around it. Like eating Pork, Germany's favorite food, or like God having a Son to appeal to Pagans. The Monks themselves each wrote the Bible down differently to begin with and were constantly editing errors. It was again revised when it was put into print for the first time and has roughly stayed the same since. The Qur'an however was given in Arabic from God, and remains that way. Uthman ordered to burn every private copy of the Qur'an so the same thing that happened to the Bible wouldn't reoccur. The he released the official Qur'an which was not to be changed from what Muhammad and his Scribe Zaid had written down. There is only one version of the Quran and several versions of the Bible, this is what led to corruption.

Basically this is how it goes

God - Jabreel - Muhammad - Zaid - Uthman - Muslims

God - Jabreel - Jesus - Jesus Apostles - The Church - The Roman Emperor - The Scribes - The Printing Press Editing - Finally Christians

As you can see there is much more room for corruption especially when Rome and the Church were political organizations not Religious ones to Begin with.

Well, you would think so, but here's the difference between the Quran and the Bible...

The Bible underwent many different translations and revisions without keeping the originals in tact. The Quran has also undergone many different translations and revisions, however those who've worked on the translations have never altered the original and most include the original Arabic script along with those translations. Also, although not many people use Classical Arabic these days, it's still a living language. Aramaic, the language of Jesus (saws) died long ago, and we could only guess what languages the prophets before him spoke.

Although mainstream Christians won't admit to it, even many Christians agree that the Bible in use today is no longer the original Word of God, and the Catholic church in Europe has decided not to use it as a true account of historical events. Even if the Quran hadn't said that the Bible had been altered, I'd still find enough evidence today to come to the conclusion that it has.

The Bible did not change and is 100% true.

It is consists of 25 % predictions and has never been wrong.

It predicted for example the creation of Israel.

The Quran is a fake, copy, counterfeit of the Bible.

The Quran replaced the Bible in muslim countries thereby changing it.

Jesus said beware of false prophets.

NOPE.

word

Psalm 12:6

And the words of the LORD are flawless, like silver refined in a furnace of clay, purified seven times.

) 1 Corinthians 2:13 RHEMA FROM GOD

This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words.

1 Thessalonians 2:13

And we also thank God continually because, when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but as it actually is, the word of God, which is at work in you who believe.

Titus 1:2-4 (New International Version)

New International Version (NIV)

Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society

2a faith and knowledge resting on the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time, 3and at his appointed season he brought his word to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior,

Hebrews 6

18God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged.

) 1 Peter 1:25

but the word of the Lord stands forever." And this is the word that was preached to you.

The Bible was changed very very very slowly. First, it was translated from the original language to the next. Next it was translated from that 2nd language to a third language. Any Muslim can tell you that the Qur'anic Arabic has no parallel and even a great scholar translating it into English, some of the meaning will be lost.

Hence, through multiple translations and multiple additions, deletions, many changes came about.

however, the biggest detriment to the Bible occured at Constantine in 325, at the Council of Nicea. Prior to that Council, there were literally hundreds of differnt "Gospels" floating around. Many gospels contradicted one another. here, the council randomly selected Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as the 4 that were to be used. The actual Jamaat of Hazrat Isa (as) was at this council, but they were ignored adn refused. (known as the Nazarenes).

The biggest culprit behind the changes is Paul. He persecuted Christians in the life of Jesus (as). Afterwards, he claimed to have had a vision and converted all on his own to christianity. He began preaching to the Gentiles while Isa (as) specifically said he was only for the Jewish tribes and no one else. There was even a split about 30 years after the event of the crucifixion between Paul and the Sahaba of Isa (as). Unfortunatly, Paul won the battle as history has shown.

Finally, Allah never promises in the Bible that He will protect it and keep it in tact. Why? Because ultimately there was a greater and perfected law coming, i.e. the Qur'an. Allah has made that promise to protect the Qur'an and alhumdolillah, every Muslim alive today is witness that the promise of Allah surely has been fulfilled.

love for all, hatred for none

When we consider the history of the Bible, we find that the story is entirely different. For one thing, the Bible is not one book; no Christian can claim it to be one book, revealed by God to one Prophet. Rather, according to some Christian scholars, it is “a library of books”. This means that the Bible was composed by many authors at different stages in history. This is a major difference between the Qur’an and the Bible.

The whole Bible is divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament. The Old Testament consists of books composed or compiled before Jesus Christ. Then, the New Testament consists of books compiled after Jesus Christ.

According to the Encyclopedia Universalis (Paris, 1974 edition, Vol. A pp. 246- 263: Entry: Bible, written by J.P. Sandroz, Professor at the Dominican Faculties, Saulchoir), the Old Testament appears as a literary monument to the Jewish people, from its origins to the coming of Christianity.

The books it consists of were written, completed and revised between the Tenth and the First centuries B.C. It is a collection of works of greatly differing length and many different genres. They were written in several languages, over a period of more than nine hundred years, based on oral traditions. Many of these works were corrected and completed, in accordance with events or special requirements, often at periods that were very distant from one another.

To understand what the Old Testament represents, it is important to retain this information, correctly established today by highly qualified specialists.

‘A Revelation is mingled in all these writings, but all we possess today is what men have seen fit to leave us. These men manipulated the texts to please themselves, according to the circumstances they were in and the necessities they had to meet.’ (The Bible, Qur’an and Modern Science - by Maurice Bucaille.)

We also read in The Interpreter's Dictionary Of The Bible:

‘The original copies of the New Testament books have, of course, long since disappeared. This fact should not cause surprise. In the first place, they were written on papyrus, a very fragile and perishable material. In the second place, and probably of even more importance, the original copies of the NT [new testament] books were not looked upon as scripture by those of the early Christian communities.’ (George

Arthur Buttrick - Ed.: The Interpreter's Dictionary Of The Bible, Volume 1, p. 599 – under: ‘Text, New Testament').

The New Testament consists of 39 books. The first four are known as the Gospels, which narrate the story of Jesus. The remaining books were written by his supposed disciples. The most prominent among them was St. Paul, who wrote some thirteen books. The irony of the matter is that this St. Paul, though a contemporary of Jesus, has never met him, nor was he among the twelve disciples chosen by Jesus himself! And yet, it is his ideas, rather than those of Jesus or any of his disciples, that have given most shape to modern Christianity!

The four Gospel writers are Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Among the disciples of Jesus, we find all these names except that of Luke. The Church fathers have been teaching their followers that the Gospel writers were “eyewitnesses” to the acts of Jesus. But modern research points out that the Gospel writers and the disciples were different persons. For example, there was a disciple called Matthew, but the Gospel of Matthew was not written by this Matthew! The King James Version of the Gospels points to this fact, see the titles of the Gospels: Gospel according to Matthew, Gospel according to Mark… etc., and not Gospel by Matthew, Gospel by Mark etc.

The Christian teaching is that these Gospels, as well as the rest of the New Testament, were the “word of God”. They contend that the Gospel writers were inspired by God while writing, and so could not go wrong. If this were true, how could they explain the inconsistencies among the various gospels as to many details? For instance Matthew and Luke give two different genealogies for Jesus. (See Matthew: 1:1-17; and Luke 3: 23-38). Only a few names in the two lists agree!

There are many more internal evidences in the Biblical books, which prove that these books were not reliably guarded from corruption. But for our purpose, I hope the foregoing will suffice. It is quite evident, from the above facts, that the Holy Qur’an as we have it now, is an authentic text. This is while the claim about the Bible (both the Old and the New Testaments) as authentic, is a spurious one.

Moving beyond the historical realities of the texts, there is much material on the nature of the Qur'an. One key test of a text by which we may know it as the word of God is that it is consistent internally and consistent with science throughout time. Such claims cannot reasonably be made about the Bible and science but they can be made about the Qur'an and are.

Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than God, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.

Surah 4 Verse 82

For more information on this you will find plenty of material on the internet. For example, see "The Amazing Qur'an".

And… Allah knows best

It's amazing to me how some Muslims darken counsel without knowledge.

Some Muslims even "Use" the Bible to justify the Quran while at the same time saying the Bible is corrupt.

Here are some inconsistencies within the Islamic view regarding the Bible.

The Quran says that the Bible is the "Word of God".

Surah 5.46 Pickthal:

And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil).

Muslims also insist that Gods Word cannot be altered or changed.. But if both these statements are correct then it follows that the Bible has not been changed or corrupted, either before or since Mohammads time. However, Islamic teaching insists that the Bible has been corrupted. Thus the contradiction.

Also, it is unreasonable to suppose that the Jews and Christians would conspire together to change the old testament.

For the Jews feelings towards the Christians had always been hostile. Why would 2 hostile parties(Jews and Christians) who shared a common old testament, conspire to change it to support the views of a common enemy, the Muslims? It does not make any sense.

Furthermore, at the supposed time of the textual changes, Jews and Christians were spread all over the world, making the supposed collaboration to corrupt the text impossible. And the number of copies of the old testament in circulation were too numerous to guarantee that the changes would be uniform.

And, there is no mention of any such changes by former Jews or Christians of the time who became Muslims.....something that they surely would have reported if it were true.

More furthermore, Muslim rejection of the New Testament is contrary to the overwhelming manuscript evidence. All the Gospels are preserved in the Chester Beatty Papyri, dated about AD 250,(before Muhammed's time).

And the vast majority of the New Testament exists in the Vaticanus Manuscript B that dates from about 325-350AD. In addition, there are nearly 5,700 other manuscripts of the New Testament dating from the 2nd century AD to the 15th century(hundreds of which are from before the time of Mohammad), not to mention the "Dead Sea Scrolls", that confirm the same substatial text of the old and whole new testament existing in Mohammads day.

To sum it all up, Islam and the Quran diametrically contradict many parts(and doctrines) of the Bible that the Quran itself says is the Word of God.

Muslims try and explain this away by saying that the Bible has been corrupted. But it is clearly obvious why that can't be true

im not muslim, i hope u dont mind if i answer though. the bible was altered and changed many times, both by way of translation, and also by adding and altering various parts of it, in accordance with the current political policy of the time, people at the top didnt complain, as many times the church of england for example would be working in cohorts with the government /ruler of that time. religion/bible/politics that is the only trinity x

The bible was not written down until long after Jesus Christ's passing (peace be upon Him). It is several books compiled.

Many of His direct sayings were incorporated but it does not have the same validity as if He had written them down Himself.

1,000 years after the Bible was finished...ie, 400 years after Christs death, William Caxton invented the printing press.

This means that no one but the writers and a few similarly manipulative priests had ever seen the Bible.

It was to be a further 450 years (1,850 years after Christs death) before the population at large even began to learn to read.

I am assuming the picture is becoming clearer regarding challenge from the masses?