FAQ-26: Can JESSE prove the BIBLE'S NOT CORRUPT?

Описание: The accusation by Muslims is that our Bible is corrupted, and they begin by saying three things; 1) that in some undefined way the Bible is corrupted, 2) that the real Torah and Injil are not in our Bible, and 3) that Muhammad is not prophesied in the Bible. Yet, by saying these three things they are creating an internal contradiction, because the Qur’an is very clear that the previous scriptures are NOT corrupted, even though Muslims say that it is.

For instance, take Surah 29:46 which states that Muslims are not to argue with Christians and Jews because they are to believe in the book which was given to us (i.e. the Bible), and the book which was given to them (i.e. the Qur’an). Surah 4:136 even says that God gave them the Bible as an authority. So, how could Allah give them a corrupted book to believe in?

Or take Surahs 10:94 and 21:7 which both say to go to the ‘people of the Book’ (the ahl-kitab) if they have any questions, because they (the Jews and Christians), have been given by god the Torah and the Injil for them, the Muslims. Why would their god, Allah tell them to find their answers in a corrupted book?

Or, one could refer to Surah 5:43-48, and especially verse 68, which clearly stipulate that Christians and Jews are to measure everything they believe by their own scriptures (i.e. the Bible). And, would god send Christians and Jews back to a corrupted book?

It is clear from these passages that the Qur'an gives authority to the Bible. In fact, the only reference Muslims might be able to use for corruption could be Surah 2:79, which intimates that the Jews may have written something with their own hands and called it ‘the book’, but once you refer to the previous verse 78 you can see that the Qur’an is referring here to the Jewish apocryphal writings, of which the Qur’an possesses quite a few, and warns them not to trust them; intimating ironically that they shouldn't trust the Qur'an as well.

This claim of corruption of the previous scriptures is counterproductive for Muslims as well, due to the fact that even though it often refers specifically to just the Taurut (the Torah) and the Injil (the Gospels), the Qur’an lists 19 Biblical prophets, all of whom the Qur’an is dependent upon for its authority, and refers to even obscure books in the Bible (i.e. the book of Jonah), suggesting that the Qur’an itself gives credibility to the entire Bible.

So, when Muslims call the previous scriptures corrupt, they undermine not only the very prophetic line on which the Qur’an is dependent on, but much of the content of the Qur’an as well.

Indeed, the Torah and the Injil that the Qur’an is referring to has to be the Biblical Torah and the Injil, because no other Torah and Injil has been found, anywhere.

So then, where did this idea of corruption begin, if it’s not in the Qur’an, or on the lips of Muhammad anywhere? It began in 1056 AD, by a man named Ibn Hazm, who, when reading the Bible and the Qur’an, noticed the numerous contradictions between the two scriptures, and claimed therefore that the Bible was the scripture which was corrupted.

Notice how illogical this argument is. How can something which comes later (in this case 600-700 years later) claim to be greater and more accurate than that which comes earlier, especially since the Qur'an is dependent on those previous scriptures, and admonishes Muslims to go to them, believe in them, and not to even argue against them?

© Pfander Centre for Apologetics - US, 2018
(20,490)