This accusation of the Bible being corrupted came out kind of late in Islamic history, first in 1064 by Ibn Khazem in Spain (on his dying bed). This was to be refuted by such Islamic scholars as Abu Husain bin Sina (Avicenna, d.1037), al-Ghazali (d.1111), ibn khaldum (d.1406). Later accusations designated the emperor Constantine and Paul as the chief falsifiers, yet they were living way before Muhammad and the Arabic koran, not after!http://www.answering-islam.org/Bible/Te ... aards.html
http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-bible-n ... uslims.htm
Many of the great Muslim thinkers have, indeed, accepted the authenticity of the New Testament text. Listing the names of these men seems a fitting conclusion to this essay. Their testimony proves that Christian-Muslim dialogue need not for ever be stymied by the allegation introduced by Ibn-Khazem. Two great historians, Al-Mas'udi (died 956) and Ibn-Khaldun (died 1406), held the authenticity of the Gospel text. Four well-known theologians agreed with this: Ali at-Tabari (died 855), Qasim al-Khasani (died 860), 'Amr al-Ghakhiz (died 869) and, last but not least, the famous Al-Ghazzali (died 1111).
Their view is shared by Abu Ali Husain Ibn Sina, who is known in the West as Avicenna (died 1037). Bukhari (died 870), who acquired a great name by his collection of early traditions, quoted the Qur'an itself (Sura 3:72,78) to prove that the text of the Bible was not falsified. Finally, Muhammad Abduh Sayyid Ahmad Khan, a religious and social reformer of modem times (died 1905), accepted the findings of modern science. He said: ''As far as the text of the Bible is concerned. it has not been altered ... No attempt was made to present a diverging text as the authentic one''.
In 1064, Ibn-Khazem, FIRST charged that the Bible had been corrupted and the Bible falsified. This charge was to defend Islam against Christianity because Ibn-Khazem come upon differences and contradiction between the Bible and the Quran. Believing, by faith that the Quran was true, the Bible must then be false. He said, "Since the Quran must be true it must be the conflicting Gospel texts that are false. But Muhammad tells us to respect the Gospel. Therefore, the present text must have been falsified by the Christians after the time of Muhammad." His argument was not based on any evidence or historical facts but only on his personal faith, reasoning and desire to safeguard the Quran. This led him to teach that, "The Christians lost the revealed Gospel except for a few traces which God has left intact as argument against them."
Let's look at 5.48:
5:48 And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it.
So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires away from the truth which hath come unto thee.
For each We have appointed a divine law and a traced-out way.
The verse states that the Qur'an was sent to confirm the previous scriptures, to be guarded by the prophet. To claim that the Book has
been corrupted is like saying that the Qur'an did not do what it was sent to achieve and/or that the prophet failed to guard them http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/138007
The Qur'an repeatedly says that it confirms the previous Scriptures, and typical of every mention of the Torah and Gospels, there is no word about textual corruption. Surah's 2:97, 2:285; 3:3,7,23,48,65,84,93,184,199; 4:44,47,51,136,162-164 5:15,46,68-69; 6:91&92,154; 10:37; 11:17; 16:43; 17:2; 20:133; 21:7; 23:49; 26:196; 32:23; 35:31; 41:45; 46:10-12; 54:43; 57:25&27; and 87:18-19 all confirm, rather than repudiate or "complete" the Torah and Gospels, with the texts often being referred to as "inspired."
So it's not the previous scriptures that the Koran condemns, but falsifiers... as per 4.46:Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say: "We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not" and
"Listen to us!" distorting with their tongues and slandering religion. If they had said: "We hear and we obey: hear thou, and look at us"
it had been better for them, and more upright. But Allah hath cursed them for their disbelief, so they believe not, save a few.
That the Torah and Gospel has been preserved is quite underlined in sura 5:
5:44 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. (...)
Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are disbelievers.
5:46 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).
5:47 Let the People of the Gospel judge by that which Allah hath revealed therein.
Whoso judgeth not by that which Allah hath revealed: such are evil-livers.
5:66 If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord, they would surely have been
nourished from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them there are people who are moderate, but many of them are of evil conduct.
5:68 Say O People of the Scripture! Ye have naught (of guidance) till ye observe the Torah and the Gospel and that
which was revealed unto you from your Lord. That which is revealed unto thee (Muhammad) from thy Lord is
certain to increase the contumacy and disbelief of many of them. But grieve not for the disbelieving folk.
5:69 Lo! those who believe, and those who are Jews, and Sabaeans, and Christians - Whosoever believeth in Allah and the Last Day
and doeth right - there shall no fear come upon them neither shall they grieve.
More on Ibn Khazemhttp://egwpisteuw-refutingislam.blogspot.com/
This question must be seen in the light that Islam was influenced by the Samaritan teachings that ONLY the Torah is genuine,
in accordance with the Koran which never mentioned the 'Bible', only the Torah. Thus, it's not only the Jewish Midrash, Mishna
or Gemarra that is condemned but everything between the Torah and the Prophets (including David, Salomon, and the Psalms)!
What is the main point of divergence? Jerusalem as the rightful capital of Judaism which, for the Samaritans, is rather Sechem/Bethel.
It's noteworthy that the Koran never mentions Jerusalem (Ilya/al-Quds) but bayt-allah, a natural connection with Bethel (House of God)!
2:75 Have ye any hope that they will be true to you when a party of them used to listen to the word of Allah, then used to change it,
after they had understood it, knowingly ?
3:71 O People of the Scripture! Why confound ye truth with falsehood and knowingly conceal the truth ?
4:46 Some of those who are Jews change words from their context and say: "We hear and disobey; hear thou as one who heareth not"
and "Listen to us!" distorting with their tongues and slandering religion.....
5:13 And because of their breaking their covenant, We have cursed them and made hard their hearts. They change words from their
context and forget a part of that whereof they were admonished. Thou wilt not cease to discover treachery from all save a few of them.
But bear with them and pardon them. Lo! Allah loveth the kindly.
5:43 How come they unto thee for judgment when they have the Torah, wherein Allah hath delivered judgment (for them) ?
Yet even after that they turn away. Such (folk) are not believers.
In Gen.14 it is plainly the place of Melkisedek (Salem or Shalem as the name Rušalimum or Urušalimum appears in old Egypt) and his god,
El Elyon, to whom Abraham paid tithes (Gen.14.20).http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shalim
Even in the Book of Joshua, Jerusalem is just another city utterly destroyed (10.12). But this is contradicted by 15.63 (the Jebusites weren't
driven out). That Jerusalem was the former capital of Judaism is plainly an Ezra/Nehemiah corruption, via Persia. The Samaritans are right!
Jerusalem can't be the capital of Judaism, as it is now, no more than nowadays Mecca could be!
Now, between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic version, there's also one major blunt found in Dt.32.8 wherein the later reads:
When the Most High (Elyōn) divided to the nations their inheritance, he separated the sons of man; he set the bounds of the people
according to the number of the sons of Israel, while however, ''many Septuagint manuscripts have in place of "sons of Israel", angelōn
theou 'angels of God' and a few have huiōn theou 'sons of God'. The Dead Sea Scrolls fragment 4QDeutj reads bny ’lwhm 'sons of God',
'sons of the gods'.''http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elyon
The NRSV translates this as "he fixed the boundaries according to the number of the gods" Interestingly, the following verse speaks of God
using the tetragrammaton: For God's (yhwh) portion is his people; Jacob is the lot of his inheritance. This passage appears to identify ʿElyōn
with Elohim, but not necessarily with Yahweh. It can be read to mean that ʿElyōn separated mankind into 70 nations according to his 70 sons.
In turn, this Melchisedek thing, over Salem, rather leads to Christianity, through Hebrews 5.5-6; 5.10 and chapter 7!
Yet in Gen.14.18, the king received the patriarch with ''bread and wine'', which is a Christian symbol if any!
So, this lead of El-Elyon I called the Golden Link...viewtopic.php?p=99122#p99122
http://sites.google.com/site/sunmosthig ... /parallels
The Koranic Al-A'la and Al-Ali(yy)
I've been searching for Al-A'la, the titled god of surah 87.1 and 87.7 (chr.8th) and I stand somehow confused since its meaning
of 'The Most High' is also shared by Al-Aliyy (i.e. either meaning the Sublime or the Highest), found in 4.34; 2.255; 31.30; 42.4
and 42.51. I'm not sure at this time if they must be understood as one and the same, or different. In wikipedia, Al-Aliyy is at #36
but surah 87 (where Al-A'la is found) isn't mentioned, so is Al-A'la! Below, both of them are mentioned separately, al-Aliyy at #5,
and Al-A'la at #11 right before Al-Allam. At #37, we also find Al-Ilah! This is a well known phenomenon of syncretic incorporation.http://dawnoftheummah.webs.com/99namesofallahswt.htmhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_G ... e_Qur%27an
The root of this name is even found in Q.83.18 as 'Illiyin' the keeper of the good deeds. It reflects the Samaritan wording for El-Elyon:
Illiyon. Bukhari has Ilya as a name for Jerusalem. El-Elyon being the god of Melchizedek in Gen.14 related to Jesus in Hebrews 5.5-6!
In the Ugaritic account, Aliyin is the one who killed Mot, the principle of death. As such he became the One victorious over Death...
"My God, My God, Why Hast Thou Forsaken Me?" is not of christian origin. Part of pagan mythos pre-dating Jesus, such as the sacrifice
of Aleyin by his Virgin Mother Anath, twin of the Goddess Mari as Lad of Birth and Death, worshipped by Canaanites, Amorites, Syrians,
Egyptians, and Hebrews. Like Jesus, Aleyin was the Lamb of God and said "I am Aleyin, son of Baal (Lord/God). Make ready then, the
sacrifice. I am the Lamb which is made ready with pure wheat to be sacrificed in expiation." After Aleyin's death and resurrection by Anath,
she told him that he was forsaken by his heavenly father El. "My El, My El, why hast thou forsaken me?" was apparently copied...
Well the sentence, also found in the Psalm 22.1, really comes from the Ugaritic pantheon about Aleyin, the El-Elyon of Melchisedek!
1. The Islamic propensity to state that the 'Bible' is corrupted has really a Samaritan origin, recognizing only the Torah as genuine.
The main difference being the most holy place of Abraham, not Jerusalem but Bethel, the Koranic bayt-allah (House of God)!
This leave Jerusalem as the center of Christianity, preceded by the Tammuz worshipers mentioned in Ez. 8.14-16...
2. The golden link of Aleyin with El-Elyon is also found in many places in the Koran: Al-A'la, Al-Aliyy (the highest) and Illiyin.
Among the other links would be the name of Ilya for Jerusalem, up to the Homeric Iliad!
Authority has the same etymological root as authenticity.