The Quran supports the divine inspiration \u00a0of the Torah,\u00a0Psalms, and the Gospel\u00a0accounts\u00a0yet contemporary Muslim belief \u00a0claims that the bible is corrupted and can not be trusted. This of course cannot be proven and this statement is \u00a0merely just\u00a0one of the many opinions being circulated among the practitioners of Islam.<\/p>\n
One of the reasons for this kind of thinking \u00a0is because \u00a0there are many different bibles available and therefore the logic is that they can\u2019t all \u00a0be right.<\/p>\n
The main reason why there are different bibles is simply because of\u00a0the vast amount of manuscript evidence that\u00a0we have available to us. There exists about\u00a0 6,000 Greek manuscript copies alone which is more manuscript evidence\u00a0 than any other piece of ancient literature that has come to us from antiquity.<\/p>\n
Today we have the luxury of printing as well as a better means of producing, sharing and preserving documents. During biblical times manuscripts were few and expensive. So due to the needs of preservation\u00a0 as well as the urgent demand for the scriptures it became absolutely necessary for\u00a0 copies to be made and circulated.<\/p>\n
Copies were made available or produced \u00a0through critical scribal rules and\u00a0techniques that were followed by the Jews so as not to alter the content of the original autograph. These copies are an advantage in \u00a0 doing comparisons to ensure the accuracy of the text as well as validating its authenticity. You must remember that any\u00a0discrepancies among the\u00a0 accepted manuscripts are seen as minimal without alterations to its original content\u00a0or\u00a0text. What is also\u00a0remarkable about the new testament is that if\u00a0 had been destroyed it could of been\u00a0nearly reconstructed\u00a0 just from utilizing the\u00a0quotes from the ancient church fathers\u00a0which helps to serve as corroborating evidence\u00a0to the \u00a0authenticity and reliability\u00a0 of\u00a0the scriptures\u00a0as well\u00a0.<\/p>\n
Also in favor of the new testament is the relatively short period of time between the original autograph\u00a0and the oldest existing\u00a0copies with about 100 to 250 years\u00a0 between them. This is relatively a short period of time\u00a0compared to other ancient pieces of literature such as\u00a0\u00a0Caesars Gallic wars which has a time gap of about a 1000 years.<\/p>\n
Another means in helping to validate the authenticity of the bible comes\u00a0with\u00a0the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls\u00a0which were found at\u00a0Qumran back in the 1940\u2019s. Up to this time the oldest copy of the Old Testament was the Masoretic text\u00a0which dates to\u00a0about\u00a0900 CE . When compared to the Dead Sea Scrolls which predate this manuscript by about a 1000 years we see no significant difference.<\/p>\n
Also among the checks and balances of keeping the bible from corruption there were\u00a0meetings that were conducted to\u00a0establish and protect the scripture from heresy because other forms of pseudo-literature\u00a0 were\u00a0being circulated and the church leadership had to establish the given orthodoxy and canon\u00a0which was \u00a0held to be as\u00a0sacred scripture.\u00a0 The Council of Nicaea took place in 325 CE among the Christians while the Jews had the council of Jamnia in 90CE.<\/p>\n
Another reason why there are different bibles is for the practical purpose of getting the scripture into the common language of the people to whom it was intended. The disciples were commanded to go into all the world and preach the gospel and this is the only way that it could of been done\u00a0in an efficient matter. There\u00a0is no conspiracy to alter or change anything\u00a0through bible translation. I cant imagine somebody handing me a bible written in its original language of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek and\u00a0 expecting \u00a0me to comprehend its meaning. Even if I studied these\u00a0ancient languages I am\u00a0culturally trained to think in English and that would be my bias of interpretation.<\/p>\n
The Quran is faced with the same challenges as\u00a0the Bible when it comes to the rules of\u00a0 literary criticism. After all it didn\u2019t just fall out of the sky nor was it imprinted by the finger of Allah.<\/p>\n
Lastly I would like to say that whatever\u00a0Muhammad received in\u00a0regards to\u00a0biblical ideas he obtained and borrowed them\u00a0through\u00a0the secondary influences of both\u00a0Christians and Jews who were the originators of such texts. If the Bible had been corrupted\u00a0by this time in history in which Muhammad lived\u00a0then how could Muhammad of received\u00a0the truth of the matter since He was dependent\u00a0 upon Christian and Jewish influence. The Bible contains\u00a0good textual copies prior to the advent of Islam so I do not see this as a matter of debate. If the Bible were to be\u00a0mishandled and corrupted by Christians and Jews then why didn\u2019t Allah in his sovereignty initiate this revelation first\u00a0with the Muslims. I know these arguments are ridiculous but I wanted to carry them out to their logical conclusion to allow you to see the inconsistencies in these unfounded arguments.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
How to know God<\/a><\/p>\n