Posted by: mystic444 | August 3, 2012

Correlations Between the Bible and the Qur’an

The teaching of Islam is that God has given revelation to many prophets before Muhammad (peace be with him and all the prophets); and in particular the Torah (basically, Mosaic Law) of the Jews and the Gospel given to Jesus are singled out for approbation. Jesus is said to have come to confirm the truth in the Torah, and Muhammad came to confirm the truth in both the Torah and the Gospel.

At the same time, though, the Qur’an teaches that previous revelation had been corrupted by the hands of men, so that what presently goes by the name of the Torah and the Gospel is not necessarily the revelation given by God. The role of Muhammad as the “seal of the prophets” involved exposing and correcting the errors which had crept in. In addition, the “seal of the prophets” ‘abrogated’ some of the former revelation, replacing the abrogated portions with things which are better or at least equivalent.

It seems to me, unfortunately, that many Muslims overemphasize the corruptions in the Bible. They ‘bend over backwards’ to find things wrong with the Bible, and leave one with the impression that not only are there corruptions in the Bible; in fact there’s nothing good in the Bible.

Therefore, as those of you who have read previous articles I have written will have observed, I like to point out and emphasize ways in which the Bible and the Qur’an are consistent with each other; ways in which the Qur’an does indeed confirm the truth which is in the Bible (whether ‘Old’ or ‘New’ Testaments). This correspondence can sometimes be rather surprising. It may be shown that the Bible teaches the same truth as the Qur’an contrary to the accepted teachings of ‘orthodox’ Christianity; and it may also be shown that the Qur’an teaches the same thing as the Bible contrary to what many Muslims seem to think.

In this article, I want to show that the Qur’an confirms certain Biblical teachings contrary to the apparent beliefs of many Muslims. It is frequently asserted that the apostle Paul was a ‘false apostle’, more ‘antichrist’ than Christian. A lot of this aversion to Paul stems from his treatment of the Law of Moses. It is certainly well known that he taught that “we are not under law, but under grace”. Paul taught that believing Gentiles must not be required to keep the Law of Moses; keeping the law has nothing to do with being righteous before God.

Many people (including many Muslims) exclaim that this is contrary to what Jesus himself taught in “the Sermon on the Mount” in Matthew 5:17-19. Jesus taught there that he had not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it; and that until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. (The quotation is from the New Revised Standard Version). I believe that this statement of Jesus has been widely misunderstood; but I don’t intend to examine it today as I have written a previous article about this passage. What I want to point out in this article is that if Paul contradicted Jesus, so did Muhammad inasmuch as the revelation of God given to him actually confirmed the teaching of Paul on this matter.

Consider this passage from Paul’s letter to the Galatian Christians (the following Bible quotations are from the English Standard Version): Gal 3:15 To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratified. Gal 3:16 Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, “And to offsprings,” referring to many, but referring to one, “And to your offspring,” who is Christ. Gal 3:17 This is what I mean: the law, which came 430 years afterward, does not annul a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to make the promise void. Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance comes by the law, it no longer comes by promise; but God gave it to Abraham by a promise. Gal 3:19 Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring should come to whom the promise had been made, and it was put in place through angels by an intermediary.

Notice that Paul goes back to the “Abrahamic Covenant”, given as a promise to Abraham through the obedience of faith. 430 years before God gave the law to Moses, God had made and confirmed a promise to Abraham that all the nations would be blessed in Abraham and his ‘seed’ or ‘offspring’. The later given law could not nullify the previous promise. But the law was added to the Abrahamic covenant because of the transgressions of the Israelite people. Principally, this “transgression” involved their proclivity to engage in idolatry. Moses himself is said to have complained that they were a ‘stiffnecked’ and disobedient people. So the rather stringent restrictions of the Mosaic Law were added to restrain the disobedience of the Jewish people.

With the coming of the Christ, Jesus, the covenant with Abraham began to see its fulfillment as the blessing of God reached out to “all the nations”; and consequently the temporarily intervening Law given to the Jewish people was rescinded. Certainly, the Gentiles were not required to obey all of those laws given to the Jews.

Now notice how the prophet Muhammad confirmed this conclusion of the apostle Paul in Sura 16 (Qur’an quotations are from the Abdel Haleem English version):

(120) Abraham was truly an example: devoutly obedient to God and true in faith. He was not an idolater; (121) he was thankful for the blessings of God who chose him and guided him to a straight path. (122) We gave him blessings in this world, and he is among the righteous in the Hereafter. (123) Then we revealed to you [Muhammad], ‘Follow the creed of Abraham, a man of pure faith who was not an idolater’. (124) The Sabbath was made obligatory only for those who differed about it [the creed of Abraham, who was not an idolater]. On the Day of Resurrection your Lord will judge between them as to their differences.

“Differing about” the creed of Abraham (pure monotheism and pure faith) is most certainly the same as the ‘transgressions’ of which Paul spoke. And the Sabbath was one of those restrictions in the Law of Moses which Paul said was “added because of transgressions”. According to the revelation given to Muhammad, those who now follow the creed of Abraham are not obliged to keep the Sabbath – and to the best of my knowledge, Sabbath keeping has never been a part of the religion of Islam since the time of Muhammad.

So God, through His messenger Muhammad, confirmed what Paul said about the Law – at least as regards the Sabbath (which of course was a major part of the Mosaic legislation): it was given only to the Jews, and is not binding now on anyone who follows the religion of Abraham, whether “Jew” or “Gentile”.

But is the Sabbath the only part of the Law which has been rescinded for those who believe? Not at all. Just prior to the statement about the Sabbath in Sura 16 of the Qur’an, we read this concerning food regulations:

(114) So eat of the good and lawful things God has provided for you and be thankful for His blessings, if it is Him that you worship. (115) He has forbidden you only these things: carrion, blood, pig’s meat, and animals over which any name other than God’s has been invoked. But if anyone is forced by hunger, not desiring it nor exceeding their immediate need, God is forgiving and merciful. (116) Do not say falsely, ‘This is lawful and that is forbidden,’ inventing a lie about God: those who invent lies about God will not prosper – (117) they may have a little enjoyment, but painful torment awaits them. (118) [Prophet], We forbade the Jews what We told you about. We did not wrong them; they wronged themselves.

So all of those food regulations given through Moses were only intended for the Jews; and they brought it on themselves (“wronged themselves”). Muhammad was reminded that God had already informed him about the Jewish food restrictions. This previous revelation is found in Sura 6:

(145) [Prophet], say, ‘In all that has been revealed to me, I find nothing forbidden for people to eat, except for carrion, flowing blood, pig’s meat – it is loathsome – or a sinful offering over which any name other than God’s has been invoked.’ But if someone is forced by hunger, rather than desire or excess, then your Lord is most forgiving and most merciful. (146) We forbade for the Jews every animal with claws, and the fat of cattle and sheep, except what is on their backs and in their intestines, or that which sticks to their bones. This is how we penalized them for their disobedience: We are true to our word.

Here again, it is quite clear that God and His messengers (the ‘spirit’ messenger Gabriel and the human messenger Muhammad) have explicitly confirmed what the apostle Paul said about the Law: it was added to the “creed” of Abraham because of the disobedience of the Jews, and was intended only for the Jews. “Gentiles” who embrace the “religion of Abraham” (particularly as it has been confirmed through Muhammad) are not bound by that Law; their righteousness before God has nothing to do with the “works of the Law”. The same is true for Jews who embrace the Gospel of Jesus and the revelation given to Muhammad: they are “free from the Law” – although they are most certainly not free from obligation to do ethical, moral, and spiritual “works of righteousness”. Those who believe and do good deeds will have their reward with God; but those good deeds are not “the works of the Law (of Moses)”.

This may anger “the Jews” – and they may label it “anti-Semitism” – and it may also anger some Muslims; but it is the truth of God, in keeping with the wisdom God gave to the apostle Paul and the revelation He gave to His prophet Muhammad. Or so it seems to me.



  1. Bible Compared to Quran

    Based on transcripts of various lectures given by Yusuf Estes & Dr. Gary Miller


    It should be stated at the outset of this work, that Muslims do not seek to put down or desecrate the Holy Bible. It is a critical matter of faith for Muslims to believe in the original revelations that came down to Moses, David, Solomon and Jesus, just as it is important for Muslims to believe in the revelation of the Quran that came to Muhammad (peace be upon him). The key word here however, is “original.” As we all know the origin of the Bible is clouded with centuries of copying, translating and passing down information, now long lost with only copies of manuscripts remaining to remind us of what once was the Bible.

    Additionally, it should be noted that Muslims do not seek to destroy the Christians or Jews belief in the Word of God, rather it is an obligation for Muslims to call to what is right and to halt that which is evil. Certainly, causing the “People of the Book” (as the Quran refers to Christians and Jews) to fall into disbelief and leave off any faith in God at all, is the very opposite of the direction Muslims should take in presenting any comparison between Islam and what has come down in the past from the Almighty God. We only seek to bring about more light to the people seeking guidance and pray for all of us to be successful with our Lord in this life and in the Next life and we ask His Guidance and Support in doing so, ameen.

    The Bible

    Old Testament

    There exists today a number of different versions in the ancient Hebrew language of the Jewish Book called the Torah [Law] and this is usually referred to in Christianity as The Old Testament. Naturally, there have been many different translations to a great number of languages over the centuries and one could not expect them to be identical in text or meaning. What we have in English today still remains somewhat similar to large amounts of these older documents.

    New Testament

    There are also different versions of the Gospel or what is commonly called The New Testament in the Koine Greek language and Latin and these also have many translations to even other languages. Even amongst the English translations there are great differences. To mention two very clear differences for example; the Catholic Bible [c. 325 A.D] contains 73 books in total, while the Protestant Bible contains only 66 books, and although the newer (Protestant version) was taken from the Catholic Bible even then these books do not match completely with each other. There is no common denominator for any of the many different versions of the Bible.

    Dead Sea Scrolls

    There have been a number of scrolls and parchments found in places surrounding what we call the “Holy Land” over the centuries, not the least of which are those often referred to as the “Dead Sea Scrolls” or as they are known to the scholars “Wadi Qumran Scrolls.” These were discovered in the last century around 1930 and have been proven to be very ancient and could well be older than any other extant manuscripts. Much of what has been translated from these scrolls is similar to some of the oldest manuscripts, but there are still very important differences worthy of note. We would like to recommend some important reading on this topic at the end of this paper.

    The Quran

    Quran Means “Recitation”

    The word “Quran” means “that which is recited; or that which is dictated in memory form.” As such, it is not a book, nor is it something that reaches us only in written form. The documentation in writing about the Quran has been preserved in museums throughout the world, including the Topekopi Palace in Istanbul, Turkey, the museum in Tashkent, Uzbekistan and also in England. Keep in mind also, the Quran is only considered “Quran” while it is in the recitation form, not in the written or the book form. The word for what is written and held in the hand to be read by the eye is called “mus-haf” (meaning script or that which is written down).

    Only One Version – Arabic

    There are no different versions of the Quran in the Arabic language, only different translations and of course, none of these would be considered to hold the value and authenticity of the original Arabic Recitation. The Quran is divided up into 30 equal parts, called “Juz'” (parts) in the Arabic language. These are learned by Muslims from their very early beginnings as children.

    Memorized by Millions – Entirely

    The important thing to keep in mind about the Quran is the memorization and transmission of the actual “Recitation” just as it came to Muhammad (peace be upon him) from the Angel Gabriel and was learned and memorized by his companions and they in turn, passed it down to their followers and continued in this way until we see today, over 10,000,000 (ten million) Muslims who have committed the entire Quran to memory. This is not a small feat. After all, how many other works of literary value have been memorized and passed down through so many generations, in the original language, without a single change in even one sentence?

    Each Muslim Has “Quran” Memorized

    All Muslims have memorized a portion of the Quran in the Arabic language, as this is an important part of their daily prayers. Many Muslims have memorized large portions of the Quran from one tenth to one half to all of the entire Quran, and all in the original Arabic language. It should be noted, there are over one and a half billion (1,500,000,000) Muslims worldwide and only about 10% are Arab, all the rest are learning the Quran in Arabic as a second language.

    God Speaks in First Person to Mankind in Quran

    The Quran contains clear statements from Almighty God (Allah) and it is Him speaking to all of us in the first person. He tells of us our own creation, the creation of all that is the universe and what has happened to those before us and what is to become of us if we do not take heed of the warnings clearly spelled out in His Revelation. He speaks also to Muhammad (peace be upon him) to show that Muhammad (peace be upon him) is not making this up himself and even chastises Muhammad (peace be upon him) for making human assumptions rather than waiting for revelation in matters (i.e.; surah At-Tahrim and surah Abasa).

    Quran Mentions Itself

    The Quran refers to itself as “The Quran” (The Recitation) and mentions that it is to all mankind and jinn (another creation of Allah, similar to humans in that they could make choices as to whether or not they would obey God’s Commandments, and they existed before humans).

    Quran Describes God’s Nature Exactly

    The Quran is clear on who God is and who He is not. There is no room left for doubt after reading the Quran in the Arabic language: God is One. He is the only Creator, Sustainer and Owner of the Universe. He has no partners. He has no relatives; wives, children or offspring. He is not like His creation and He does not need it for His existence, while all the time the creation is totally dependent on Him. His attributes are clearly spelled out as the epitome of each and every one. He is for instance, the All-Knowing; the All-Hearing; the All-Seeing; the All-Forgiving; the All- Loving; the All-Merciful; the Only One God. There is never a contradiction to this found anywhere in the Quran.

    Quran Challenges Readers

    The Quran makes the clear challenge, that if you are in doubt about it – then bring a book like it. Also, to bring ten chapters like it and then finally, to bring one single chapter like it. 1,400 years – and no one has been able to duplicate its beauty, recitation, miracles and ease of memorization. Another challenge for the unbelievers to consider;

    “If this (Quran) were from other than Allah, you would find within it many contradictions.”

    And yet, another challenge offered by Allah in the Quran is for the unbelievers to look around for evidences. Allah says He will show them His signs within themselves and on the farthest horizons.

    Scientific Miracles in Quran

    The scientific miracles of the Quran could not have been understood at that time, yet today we take for granted the many things included in the revelation of the Quran. Some include mentioning: The formation of embryo in the womb of the mother (surah 98); deep seas partitions; waters that do not mix; clouds and how they make rain and how lightning is caused by ice crystals; formation of the earth’s mountains deep underground; orbits of planets and stars and moons – and even the mention of space travel (surah 55:33).

    [Watch videos of world’s top scientists commenting on the “Miracle of Science in Quran”]

    Comparison of Bible And Quran

    [Dr. Gary Miller- with Commentary by Yusuf Estes]

    Bible is Collection of Writings
    Quran is Recitation From God to Muhammad (peace be upon him)

    Whereas, The Bible is a collection of writings by many different authors, the Quran is a dictation (or recitation). The speaker in the Quran – in the first person – is God Almighty (Allah) talking directly to man. In the Bible you have many men writing about God and you have in some places the word of God speaking to men and still in other places you have some men simply writing about history or personal exchanges of information to one another (ex: Epistle of John 3). The Bible in the English King James Version consists of 66 small books. About 18 of them begin by saying: This is the revelation God gave to so and so… The rest make no claim as to their origin. You have for example the beginning of the book of Jonah which begins by saying: The word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Elmitaeh saying… quote and then it continues for two or three pages.

    Compare this to the beginning of the Book of “Luke” begins by saying: “In as much as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us, (2) Just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us, (3) It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write to you an orderly account, most excellent Theophilus, (4) That you may know the certainty of those things in which you were instructed.
    We see the author of the Book of “Luke” saying essentially, “Many people have written about things, it seems fitting for me to do so too.” “Luke” says it seems to him that as long as others are taking in hand to write something about it, even though they were eye witnesses to the whole thing, he feels that even though he was not, he still has “perfect understanding of all things from the very first.”
    Therefore this is only a letter from one person to another, neither of whom knew Jesus (peace be upon him) nor were eyewitnesses to any of what had taken place.
    [Y. Estes]

    If you compare that to one of the four accounts of the life of Jesus, Luke begins by saying: “many people have written about this man, it seems fitting for me to do so too”. That is all… no claim of saying “ these words were given to me by God here they are for you it is a revelation”, there is no mention of this.

    “Bible” is NOT in the Bible

    The Bible does not contain self-reference, that is, the word ‘Bible’ is not in the Bible. Nowhere does the Bible talk about itself. Some scriptures are sometimes pointed to in the Bible, say: Here where it talks about itself, but we have to look closely. 2nd Timothy 3:16 is the favorite which reads: “All scripture is inspired of God” and there are those who would say, here is where the Bible it talks about itself, it says it is inspired of God, all of it. But if you read the whole sentence, you read that this was a letter wrote by Paul to Timothy and the entire sentence says to Timothy: “Since you were a young man you have studied the holy scriptures, all scriptures inspired by God” and so on… When Timothy was a young man the New Testament did not exist, the only thing that stems he was talking about are scriptures – which are only a portion of the Bible – from before that time. It could not have meant the whole Bible.

    Bible Curses Church Fathers Who REMOVED Book of Revelations

    There is at the end of the Bible a verse which says:

    “For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book (Revelations): if anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book:
    And if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, god shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
    [Y. Estes]

    “Let anyone who takes away from this book or adds to this book be cursed”. This too is sometimes pointed to me saying: Here is where it sums itself as a whole. But look again and you will see that when it says: Let no one change this book, it is talking about that last book, #66 (or is it #73 in the Catholic Bible?), the Book of Revelation. It has too, because any reference will tell you that the Book of Revelation was written before certain other parts of the Bible were written. It happens today to be stacked at the end, but there are other parts that came after, so it can not be referring to the entire book.

    (Incidentally, according to different manuscripts much older than the King James Version, there are different words at the end of the Book of Revelation, so how would we resolve that matter? – Y.E.)

    Note: The Book of Revelation was taken out of the Bible several times and then replaced and then taken out and replaced according to various Church Councils throughout Church history. Guess the Church Fathers didn’t read the curse at the end of the book?

    Whose Word Is It?

    It is an extreme position held only by some Christian groups that the Bible – in its entirety – cover to cover is the revealed word of God in every word, but they do a clever thing when they mention this, or make this claim. They will say that the Bible in its entirety is the word of God; inerrant (no mistakes) in the original writings.

    So if you go to the Bible and point out some mistakes that are in it you are going to be told: Those mistakes were not there in the original manuscript, they have crept in so that we see them there today.

    They are going on problem in that position. There is a verse in the Bible Isaiah 40:8 which in fact is so well known that some Bibles printed it on the inside front cover as an introduction and it says : “ The grass weathers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever”. Here is a claim in the Bible that the word of God will stand forever, it will not be corrupted, it won’t be lost. So if today you find a mistake in the Bible you have two choices. Either that promise was false that when God said my word wont fade away, he was mistaken, or the portion which has the mistake in it was not a part of the word of God in the first place, because the promise was that it would be safeguarded, it would not be corrupted.

    Are There Mistakes?

    I have suggested many times that there are mistakes in the Bible and the accusation comes back very quickly: Show me one. Well there are hundreds. If you want to be specific I can mention few. You have for example at 2nd Samuel 10:18 a description of a war fought by David saying that he killed 7000 men and that he also killed 40000 men on horsebacks. In 1st Chronicles 19 it mentions the same episode saying that he killed 70000 men and the 40000 men were not on horsebacks, they were on foot. The point is what is the difference between the pedestrian and not is very fundamental.

    How Did Judas Die?

    Matthew 27:5 says that Judas Iscariot when he died he hung himself. Acts 1 says that, no he jumped off a cliff head first. If you study Logic very soon you will come in your course to what they call an “undecidable propositions” or “meaningless sentences” or statements that can not be decided because there is no contextual false. One of the classic examples sited is something called the Effeminates paradox. This man was Cretan and he said “Cretans always lie”, now was that statement true or false? If he was a Cretan and he says that they always lie is he lying? If he is not lying then he is telling the truth then the Cretans don’t always lie ! You see it can not be true and it can not be false, the statement turns back on itself. It is like saying “What I am telling you right now is a lie” would you believe that or not? You see the statement has no true content. It can not be true and it can not be false. If it is true it is always false. If it is false it is also true.

    Well in the Bible at Titus 1:12 the writer is Paul and he is talking about the Cretans. He says that one of their own men – a prophet – said “Cretans always lie” and he says that what this man says is true. It is a small mistake, but the point is that it is a human mistake, you don’t find that if you carefully examine the true content of that statement. It can not be a true statement.

    Who is the Author?

    Now I come back to the Quran, and as I mentioned the speaker in the Quran is – in the first person – is God. The book claims throughout that it is the word of God. It names itself 70 times as the Quran. It talks about its own contents. It has self-reference. The Quran states in the first Surah after Fatiha that “This is the book, there is no doubt in it, it is a guidance for those who are conscious of God” and so on and so on… It begins that way and continues that way stressing that. And there is one very amazing statement in the Quran when you come to the fourth Surah 82nd Ayah which says to those who say Quran is something else than the word of God. It challenges them saying: “Have they not considered the Quran, if it came from someone other than God they will find in it many mistakes”. Some of you are students, would you dare to hand in a paper after you completed a research work or something at the bottom you put down there “You won’t find mistakes in this”. Would you dare to challenge your professor that way? Well the Quran does that. It is telling: If you really think you know where this came from then starts looking for mistakes because you won’t find any. Another interesting thing the Quran does is that it quotes all its critics. There has never – in hundreds of years – ever been some suggestion as to where that book came from but that the Quran does not already mention that objection and reply to it. Many times you will find the Ayah saying something like: Do they say such and such and so, say to them such and such and so. In every case there is a reply. More than that the Quran claims that the evidence of its origin is in itself, and that if you look at this book you will be convinced.

    Difference of Authority

    So the difference in Christianity and Islam comes down to a difference of authority and appeal to authority. The Christian wants to appeal to the Bible and the Muslim wants to appeal to the Quran. You can not stop by saying: This is true because me book say it is, and somebody else would say something else is true because my book says differently, you can not stop at that point, and the Quran does not. The Christians may point to some words that it is recorded Jesus said and say this proves my point. But the Muslim does not simply open his book and say: No, no the Quran says this, because the Quran does not simply deny something the Bible says and say something else instead. The Quran takes the form of a rebuttal, it is a guidance as the opening says (Huda lil mutakeen). So that for every suggestion that the Christian may say: My Bible say such and such, the Quran will not simply say: No that is not true, it will say: Do they say such and such then ask them such and such. You have for example the Ayah that compares Jesus and Adam. There are those who may say that Jesus must have been God (Son of God) because he had no father. He had a woman who was his mother, but there was no human father. It was God that gave him life, so he must have been God’s son. The Quran reminds the Christian in one short sentence to remember Adam – who was his father ? – and in fact, who was his mother ? He did not have a father either and in fact he did not have a mother, but what does that make him? So that the likeness of Adam is the likeness of Jesus, they were nothing and then they became something; that they worship God.

    Quran Invites – Not Demands

    So that the Quran does not demand belief – the Quran invites belief, and here is the fundamental difference. It is not simply delivered as: Here is what you are to believe, but throughout the Quran the statements are always: Have you O man thought of such and such, have you considered so and so. It is always an invitation for you to look at the evidence; now what do you believe?

    Special Pleading of the Bible

    The citation of the Bible very often takes the form of what is called in Argumentation: Special Pleading. Special Pleading is when implications are not consistent. When you take something and you say: Well that must mean this, but you don’t use the same argument to apply it to something else. To give an example, I have seen it in publications many times, stating that Jesus must have been God because he worked miracles. In other hand we know very well that there is no miracle ever worked by Jesus that is not also recorded in the Old Testament as worked by one of the prophets. You had amongst others, Elijah, who is reported to have cured the leper, raise the dead boy to life and to have multiplied bread for the people to eat – three of the most favorite miracles cited by Jesus. If the miracles worked by Jesus proved he was God, why don’t they prove Elijah was God ? This is Special Pleading, if you see what I mean. The implications are not consistent. If this implies that then in that case it must also imply the same thing. We have those who would say Jesus was God because he was taken up in the heaven. But the Bible also says a certain Einah did not die he was taken up into the heaven by God. Whether it is true or not, who knows, but the point is if Jesus being taken up proves he is God, why does not it prove Einah was God? The same thing happened to him.

    Clear Parts & Difficult Parts of Bible

    I wrote to a man one time, who wrote a book about Christianity and I had some of the objections I mentioned to you now. And his reply to me was that I am making matters difficult to myself, that there are portions in the Bible that are crystal clear and that there are portions that are difficult, and that my problem was that I am looking at the difficult part instead of the clear parts. The problem is that this is an exercise in self deception – why are some parts clear and some parts difficult? It is because somebody decided what this clearly means, now that makes this very difficult. To give you an example, John Chapter 14 a certain man said to Jesus: Show us God, and Jesus said: If you have seen me you have seen God. Now without reading on the Christian will say: See Jesus claimed to be God, he said if you have seen me you have seen God. If that is crystal clear then you have a difficult portion when you go back just a few pages to Chapter 5 when another man came to Jesus and said show us God and he said you have never seen God you have never heard his voice. Now what did he mean there if on the other occasion he meant that he was God? Obviously you have made matters difficult by deciding what the first one meant. If you read on in Chapter 14 you will see what he went on to say. He was saying the closest you are going to seeing God are the works you see me doing.

    Bible Does Not Claim Jesus Claimed to Be Son of God

    It is a fact that the words “son of God” are not found on the lips of Jesus anywhere in the first three Gospel accounts, he was always calling himself the Son of Man. And it is a curious form of reasoning that I have seen so often that it is established from Bible that he claimed to be God because – look how the Jews reacted. They will say for example he said such and such and the Jews said he is blaspheming, he claimed to be God and they tried to stone him. So they argue that he must have been claiming to be God because look ! – the Jews tried to kill him. They said that’s what he was claiming. But the interesting thing is that all the evidence is then built on the fact that a person is saying: I believed that Jesus was the son of God because the Jews who killed him said that’s what he used to say ! His enemies used to say that, so he must have said it, this is what it amounts to. In other hand we have the words of Jesus saying he would keep the law, the law of Moses and we have the statement in the Bible, why did the Jews kill him ? Because he broke the law of Moses. Obviously the Jews misunderstood him, if he promised he would keep the law, but they killed him because he broke the law, they must have misunderstood him, or lied about him.

    Writers of Bible – Out of Context

    When I talk about the Bible and quote various verses here and there I am often accused of putting things out of context, to say you have lifted something out of what it was talking about and given it a meaning. I don’t want to respond to the accusation as such, but it doesn’t seem to occur to many people that perhaps those who wrote portions of the Bible in the first place were guilty of the same thing. Maybe they – some of those writers – believed a certain thing and in order to prove it quoted from their scriptures – the Old Testament, the Hebrew writings – quoted out of context to prove their point. There are examples of that kind of thing. In Matthew 2 it said that a king wanted to kill the young child Jesus so he with his family went to Egypt, and they stayed there until that king died, and then they came back.

    When the writer of Matthew, whoever he was, because the name Matthew won’t be found in the book of Matthew; when he described this event saying that he came back out of Egypt, he said: “ This was to fulfill a prophecy which is written” and then he quotes Hosea Chapter 11 “Out of Egypt I called my Son”. So he said because Jesus went to Egypt and then came back out of Egypt and we have this passage in the Hebrew scriptures “out of Egypt I called my son” Jesus must have been the son of God. If you look and see what he was quoting, Hosea 11:1 he quotes the second half of a complete sentence, the complete sentence reads: “When Israel was young I loved him and out of Egypt I called my son”. Israel the nation was considered as the son of God. Moses was told to go to Pharaoh and say to him: If you touch that nation of people, you touch my son; warning him, warning Pharaoh: don’t touch that nation, calling the nation “the son of God”. So that this is the only thing talked about in Hosea 11:1. “Out of Egypt I called my son” can only refer to the nation of Israel. I mentioned this point some months ago here in another talk, to which a young lady with us objected that Israel is a symbolic name for Jesus. You will have a hard time finding that anywhere in the Bible because it isn’t there. You can take an index of the Bible and lookup the word “Israel” everywhere the word occurs and you will find no where in any place that you can connect the word Israel with Jesus. But never mind – suppose it is true, read on, the second verse says “and after that he kept on worshipping Bal”, because this is what the Israelites were guilty of, very often they kept falling back into Idol worshipping. So if that “Israel” really meant Jesus and it means that Jesus is the son of God that came out of Egypt they must also mean that Jesus from time to time used to bow down to that idol Bal. You have to be consistent, and follow through on what it says. So the point is whoever wrote Matthew and Chapter 2 was trying to prove a point by quoting something out of context, and he undid himself, because if you follow through on it, it can not be so.

    Quran Has Internal Evidences

    Now I can come back to the claim the Quran makes that it has internal evidence of its origin. There are many ways that you can look at this. As one example, if I single out somebody here and say: You know, I know your father – he is going to doubt that, he has never seen me with his father. He would say, how does he look like, is he tall short does he wear glasses? And so on, and if I give him the right answers pretty soon he will get convinced, “Oh yes, you did meet him”. If you apply the same kind of thinking when you look at the Quran, here is a book that says it came from the one who was there when the universe began. So you should be asking that one: So tell me something that proves it. Tell me something that shows me you must have been there when the universe was beginning. You will find in two different Ayahs the statement that all the creation began from a single point, and from this point it is expanding. In 1978 they gave the Noble prize to two people who proved that that’s the case. It is the big bang origin of the universe. It was determined by the large radio receivers that they have for the telephone companies which were sensitive enough to pick up the transmissions from satellites and it kept finding background noise that they could not account for. Until the only explanation came to be, it is the left over energy from that original explosion which fits in exactly as would be predicted by the mathematical calculation of what would be this thing if the universe began from a single point and exploded outwards. So they confirmed that, but in 1978. Centuries before that here is the Quran saying the heavens and the earth in the beginning they were one piece and split and says in another Ayah : “of the heavens we are expanding it”.

    Quran Has Exact Accuracy

    Let me tell you about a personal investigation, it occurred to me that there are a number of things you can find in the Quran that give evidence to its origin – internal evidence. If the Quran is dictated from a perfect individual; it originates with God, then there should not be any wasted space, it should be very meaningful. There should be nothing that we don’t need that you can cut off, and it should not be missing anything. And so that everything in there should really be there for a specific purpose. And I got to thinking about the Ayah which I mentioned before, it says, the likeness of Jesus is the likeness of Adam. It is an equation, it uses the Arabic word (mithel), it says Jesus, Adam, equal. You go to the index of the Quran, you look up the name ISA it is in the Quran 25 times, you lookup the name Adam it is there 25 times. They are equal, through scattered references but 25 of each. Follow that through and you will find that in the Quran there are 8 places were an Ayah says something is like something else, using this (Mithel), you will find in every case and take both sides of it whatever that word is look it up in the index and it will be lets say 110 times and lookup the other word and it will be said to be equal to the same 110. That is quite a project of co-ordination if you try to write a book that way yourself. So that everywhere you happened to mention that such and such is like such and such that then you check your index, filing system, or your IBM punch cards or whatever, to make sure that in this whole book you mentioned them both the same number of times. But that’s what you will find in the Quran.

    Quran Provides Reason

    What I am talking about is built on a thing that is called in Logic: Use and Mention of a Word. When you use a word, you are using its meaning. When you mention a word, you are talking about the symbol without the meaning. For example, if I say Toronto is a big city – I used the word Toronto as I meant this place Toronto is a big city. But if I say to you Toronto has 7 letters, I am not talking about this place Toronto, I am talking about this word – Toronto. So, the revelation is above reasoning, but it is not above reason. That is to say we are more apt not to find in the Quran something that is unreasonable, but we may find something that we would have never figured out for ourselves.

    Unique Word Refers to Itself in Quran

    The author of this sentence said if this book came from someone besides God then you will find in it many Ikhtalafan (inconsistencies). The word Ikhtilaf is found many times in the Quran. But the word Ikhtalafan is only found once in the Quran. So there are not many Ikhtilafan in the Quran, there is only one – where the sentence is mentioned. So you see how things are put together perfectly. It has been suggested to mankind: Find a mistake. Man could not get hold of a mistake, and he is very clever, because this sentence could also mean: Find many Iktilafan and so he quickly goes to the index to see if he can find many of them and there is only one… Sorry clever person.

    [end of Dr. Gary Miller and Yusuf Estes]

    Bible And Quran – Originally Both From Allah

    Conclusion: Both the Bible and the Quran have come to us by way of Almighty God, then through His angel Gabriel and then to the prophets (peace be upon them). However, when the next step comes into play (that of the human beings faithfully transmitting it on to others and future generations) we find out that Allah has only preserved His Last and Final Revelation for all times. And He certainly did not need the humans to do that.

    Respect For Holy Books

    Muslims should respect the Bible because it does still contain some of the original teachings of Allah. But there is no need to go to Bible classes or purchase one to read to try to learn about what our purpose is here in this life. The Quran makes it clear that Allah has indeed, perfected our “way of life” for us and has conferred on us His favor and has chosen for us to submit to Him in Islam.

    We would like to suggest to the non-Muslims to consider obtaining a Quran (order one free through our site if you like) and then investigate for themselves what the Quran is really all about and what it might mean to them in their lives.

    [Free Quran available at:]

    Final comment from Yusuf Estes:

    I would like to state that after years of studying the Bible and then learning the Arabic language to read the Quran as it was originally recited to Muhammad (peace be upon him) by the angel Gabriel, I have come to an amazing conclusion. It seems to me that the Bible and the Quran are most definitely from the exact same source and they compliment each other very nicely. In fact, it appears that the Bible does not contradict the Quran, except in the very same places where the Bible contradicts itself.

    • Muslimah123 – Thank you for your comments; but I have to say both that they’re way off topic, and that you are not presenting points about which I disagree.I have made it clear since I first started writing this blog that I do not believe in the infallibility of the Bible; and neither do I believe that the Bible teaches the Trinitarian doctrine and the Deity of Jesus Christ (peace be with him). Nor do I believe that the Bible, when read carefully, teaches the idea of ‘substitutionary atonement’ by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

      Any disagreements I might have with anything you have said in your two long comments today are very minor. For instance, I believe modern ‘textual critics’ of the New Testament make a serious mistake by equating ‘oldest’ with ‘best’ (when referring to existing Greek manuscripts). From what I can tell, the ‘oldest’ available Greek manuscripts are in fact the most corrupted examples available. They not only disagree greatly with the ‘later’ Greek manuscripts; they disagree with themselves just as much. It has been said that among those ‘oldest’ available manuscripts, it is far easier to find two consecutive verses that disagree with each other than to find two consecutive verses that completely agree with each other (when the various ‘old’ manuscripts are compared with each other). The modern translations based on those so-called ‘oldest and best’ manuscripts don’t even come close to incorporating all of the ‘various readings’ available. Most of the ‘various readings’ are considered to be obvious corruptions, even in those so-called ‘oldest and best’ manuscripts. In fact, it is no doubt true that the only reason that we still have those ‘old’ manuscripts available to us today is because they were recognized as spurious and simply not used or copied. The copies that were used did not survive; usage caused them to be worn out, and copies were made before the manuscript became completely destroyed.

      Nevertheless, although those ‘later’ manuscripts agree with each other to a very high degree, there are still discrepancies within them. Even if one goes by the principle of ‘majority rule’ – any individual reading found in the majority of available Greek manuscripts is likely to be the best – there are still instances where it’s hard to tell which of two conflicting readings has the majority of evidence in its favor. So no, we simply don’t have access with certainty to a completely accurate copy of what the authors originally wrote. I do believe we can get pretty close, though, if we discard the erroneous idea that the ‘oldest’ manuscripts are also the ‘best’.

      I agree completely that the errors and contradictions in the Bible are not simply due to ‘scribal error’ in copying, or deliberate distortions by copyists. Nevertheless, one needs to be a bit more careful when citing ‘errors in the Bible’ than some ‘scholars’ tend to be. Yes there are many legitimate errors; but sometimes people try too hard to find errors, and make obvious errors themselves. Just as one example, take the very first ‘error’ you listed: “Genesis 6:3 and Genesis 11:11 – Life limited to 120 years?” When one reads Genesis 6:3, I would think that it’s very clear that the meaning is that God was allowing humanity another 120 years before His judgment (in the form of ‘the Flood’) would destroy them. He was giving mankind another 120 years to listen to His message through Noah and come to repentance. It is not saying that God was setting a limit of 120 years to the length of life of any individual or humanity in general. Some of those people destroyed in the flood were themselves well over 120 years old when the flood came (Noah himself is said to have lived over 900 years). And obviously the Bible tells us that many people after the flood also lived much longer lives than 120 years.

      The Biblical statements about Jesus’ death and resurrection, however, simply don’t fall into the category of internal discrepancies, or an isolated error of one author. Although there are discrepancies concerning the details of the events surrounding the crucifixion and resurrection, there is no difference among the authors about the ‘main event’. There is unanimous agreement among all of the New Testament writers that Jesus died and rose again. It’s a ‘fundamental’ of their teaching. So it does become an important question as to what exactly the Qur’an means when it says that Jesus was neither killed nor crucified.

      A point I would make is that if the position of Ahmad Deedat and Imran Hossein is correct (which appears to be your position also), then there is really no difference between the meaning of what Christians maintain (Jesus died and rose again) and what the Qur’an teaches (Jesus did not die, but God took him to Himself). What the Qur’an means by God taking Jesus’ soul and then returning it to him is precisely what the Bible means by Jesus dying and rising again. It’s just an argument over words.

      When the Jews maintain that they killed Jesus, though, they’re not allowing for his resurrection (or the returning of Jesus’ soul after the appearance of death). They mean that they completely ended Jesus’ life; they put the finishing touch to his life. In fact, they maintain that Jesus and his mother are cursed by God, and are in hell boiling in excrement! To this idea – that they managed to completely destroy Jesus’ life and God has cursed him to hell – the Qur’an says “absolutely not”! They did not kill him (in that sense of complete finality), and God has exalted Jesus to His presence – and he is among the greatest of those in God’s presence.

      If however, as many Muslims believe, Jesus himself was not crucified and killed, but someone else (Judas?) was made to look like Jesus and was killed, then we do have a major disagreement. I simply can’t accept that second viewpoint.

      • MUslimah123 – I was apparently a bit careless when making the previous comment. Without checking to see which article you were commenting on, I just assumed you were making another comment on The Death of Jesus in the Qur’an. It doesn’t change anything I said in the comment, except the accusation that you were off topic in your comment on this article. I apologize for my carelessness which led me to make that accusation.

        It still remains true that any disagreement I have with what you said is very minor. But the point of my article is also true: God sent Muhammad to confirm that which is true in the Torah and the Gospel – and he confirms as true some of the things that some Muslim writers I’ve read (as well as some who call themselves ‘Christians’ as opposed to ‘Paulians’) tend to view as untrue.

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: