Where are the original Torah and Gospel?

Question: Could you please tell me where the original copies of the Taurat [Torah] & Injeel [Gospel] are? I am getting different answers from my Muslim friends. I was of the understanding that the originals were destroyed/corrupted and that is why the Quran was sent to mankind. Does a copy of Taurat & Injeel exist on earth in it’s original form?

Answer: Many thanks for your question. You are right that there is a little bit of confusion about this, and also that some Muslims don’t quite know the facts properly.

The earliest copy of Saint Luke’s Gospel in existence is known as the Bodmer Papyrus XIV-XV. It belongs to the Vatican Library and can be dated from between 175-225 AD, which is roughly one hundred to one hundred and fifty years after scholars believe the original was written. The document consists of fifty-one pages of a manuscript that originally contained seventy-two pages.

The very earliest known fragment of the New Testament is from Saint John’s Gospel and is slightly earlier. It dates from some time in the first half of the second century, which is maybe fifty years after the original was written, according to Biblical scholars.

As for the Old Testament, there are around one thousand manuscript copies in existence. Before the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls the earliest Hebrew copy of the Old Testament was the Masoretic text (named after a group of Hebrew scribes known as the Massoretes), dating from around 800 AD.

The oldest Greek version of the Old Testament known as the Septuagint dates back to around the second century BC. However, with the discovery in 1947 of many ancient manuscripts in earthenware jars found in a cave at Qumran near the Dead Sea, two copies of the Old Testament Book of Isaiah, written in Hebrew, were found, which were one thousand years earlier than any previous manuscripts.

So, what does all this tell us, and how does it fit into what Muslims believe about the original Torah and Injeel (Gospel) being corrupted? In other words, how does it answer your question?

For our purposes, the Torah responds to what is now referred to by Christians and Jews as the Old Testament, and the Injeel refers to what Christians refer to as the Gospels, which form a part of the New Testament.

There are clearly, then, existing copies of both the Jewish and Christian texts, dating back quite a long way. Biblical scholars are agreed that most of these texts agree with one another in about ninety-five per cent of their content. That seems quite a lot and seems to suggest not much change in thousands of years.

However, five per cent of a book is still a considerable number of words, especially when you consider that the Old Testament is made up of 39 different books and a total of 593,493 words, and that the New Testament is made up of 27 books and 181,253 words. That means that nearly thirty thousand words differ in the Old Testament and nearly nine thousand words are different from one another in the New Testament.

Enough of playing with numbers. Muslims believe that the original of both the Torah and the Injeel no longer exist in their original form. We read in the Quran what means:

Some of the Jews pervert words from their meanings.” (An-Nisaa 4:46)

And also:

“So woe to those who wrote the Book with their hands, and then say: ‘This is from Allah,’ that they may sell it for a little price. So woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for their earnings.” (Al-Baqarah 2:79)

Muslims believe that God the Almighty did indeed reveal His message to previous generations through Prophets He sent down to them. Each of these messages was for a particular people at a particular time in history. The message given to Moses, then, was for the Jews of his time. The message given to Jesus, was for the Jesus of his own time.

The Quran, though, which was revealed to the unlettered Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) over a period of twenty-three years, was for all people and for all time.

So you see, there are indeed copies in existence of the books which Christians and Jews believe were the revelation of Allah. Muslims, however, do not believe that these books are a true record of what was originally revealed. They were either written down wrongly in the first place, or were corrupted by translation or by the deliberate actions of men.

It would take an answer much longer than this one to explain, for example, how the Gospels were written. The early Christian Church eventually chose four Gospels from among many, which roughly corresponded to what Christians already believed.

The writers of these particular four differ in their intentions in writing, but none of them write to prove anything about Jesus. They write to portray a different aspect of Jesus for a particular audience.

In some places they actually disagree with one another, because they are not dealing with facts, as we know them, but with artistic creativity. These Gospels are indeed beautifully crafted, but cannot and do not claim to be the literal word of God.

These Gospels were written after the letters of Saint Paul, in which the case is made very strongly for Jesus being divine. Paul claims his knowledge of this came from a personal revelation from Jesus.

You will realize, sister, that trying to sum up the whole breadth of Biblical scholarship and Quranic belief in such a sound-bite answer is like trying to explain nuclear physics in a thousand words.

In a nutshell, the answer is this: yes, there are copies of both the Old and New Testament in existence, which date from  relatively close to the time the original message was revealed.

Muslims, however, do not believe that these scriptures are indeed the Torah and the Injeel (Gospel) originally revealed to men by Allah Almighty. They believe this because the Quran tells them that they are not. The originals no longer exist.

We should be very careful, then, in quoting from them to prove a point, since we are quoting from something which we believe to be corrupted.

This does not, however, prevent us from respecting what Christians and Jews believe, because their own books are sacred to them and we do, after all, worship the One God.

Idris Tawfiq


Is it Justifiable to Lie in Order to Tell the Truth?

Apart from the most rabid fundamentalists among us, nearly everyone admits that the Bible might contain errors — a faulty creation story here, a historical mistake there, a contradiction or two in some other place. But is it possible that the problem is worse than that — that the Bible actually contains lies?

Most people wouldn’t put it that way, since the Bible is, after all, sacred Scripture for millions on our planet. But good Christian scholars of the Bible, including the top Protestant and Catholic scholars of America, will tell you that the Bible is full of lies, even if they refuse to use the term. And here is the truth: Many of the books of the New Testament were written by people who lied about their identity, claiming to be a famous apostle — Peter, Paul or James — knowing full well they were someone else. In modern parlance, that is a lie, and a book written by someone who lies about his identity is a forgery.

Most modern scholars of the Bible shy away from these terms, and for understandable reasons, some having to do with their clientele. Teaching in Christian seminaries, or to largely Christian undergraduate populations, who wants to denigrate the cherished texts of Scripture by calling them forgeries built on lies? And so scholars use a different term for this phenomenon and call such books “pseudepigrapha.”

You will find this antiseptic term throughout the writings of modern scholars of the Bible. It’s the term used in university classes on the New Testament, and in seminary courses, and in Ph.D. seminars. What the people who use the term do not tell you is that it literally means “writing that is inscribed with a lie.”

And that’s what such writings are. Whoever wrote the New Testament book of 2 Peter claimed to be Peter. But scholars everywhere — except for our friends among the fundamentalists — will tell you that there is no way on God’s green earth that Peter wrote the book. Someone else wrote it claiming to be Peter. Scholars may also tell you that it was an acceptable practice in the ancient world for someone to write a book in the name of someone else. But that is where they are wrong. If you look at what ancient people actually said about the practice, you’ll see that they invariably called it lying and condemned it as a deceitful practice, even in Christian circles. 2 Peter was finally accepted into the New Testament because the church fathers, centuries later, were convinced that Peter wrote it. But he didn’t. Someone else did. And that someone else lied about his identity.

The same is true of many of the letters allegedly written by Paul. Most scholars will tell you that whereas seven of the 13 letters that go under Paul’s name are his, the other six are not. Their authors merely claimed to be Paul. In the ancient world, books like that were labeled as pseudoi — lies.

This may all seem like a bit of antiquarian curiosity, especially for people whose lives don’t depend on the Bible or even people of faith for whom biblical matters are a peripheral interest at best. But in fact, it matters sometimes. Whoever wrote the book of 1 Timothy claimed to be Paul. But he was lying about that — he was someone else living after Paul had died. In his book, the author of 1 Timothy used Paul’s name and authority to address a problem that he saw in the church. Women were speaking out, exercising authority and teaching men. That had to stop. The author told women to be silent and submissive, and reminded his readers about what happened the first time a woman was allowed to exercise authority over a man, in that little incident in the garden of Eden. No, the author argued, if women wanted to be saved, they were to have babies (1 Tim. 2:11-15).

Largely on the basis of this passage, the apostle Paul has been branded, by more liberation minded people of recent generations, as one of history’s great misogynists. The problem, of course, is that Paul never said any such thing. And why does it matter? Because the passage is still used by church leaders today to oppress and silence women. Why are there no women priests in the Catholic Church? Why are women not allowed to preach in conservative evangelical churches? Why are there churches today that do not allow women even to speak? In no small measure it is because Paul allegedly taught that women had to be silent, submissive and pregnant. Except that the person who taught this was not Paul, but someone lying about his identity so that his readers would think he was Paul.

It may be one of the greatest ironies of the Christian scriptures that some of them insist on truth, while telling a lie. For no author is truth more important than for the “Paul” of Ephesians. He refers to the gospel as “the word of truth” (1:13); he indicates that the “truth is in Jesus”; he tells his readers to “speak the truth” to their neighbors (4:24-25); and he instructs his readers to “fasten the belt of truth around your waist” (6:14). And yet he himself lied about who he was. He was not really Paul.

It appears that some of the New Testament writers, such as the authors of 2 Peter, 1 Timothy and Ephesians, felt they were perfectly justified to lie in order to tell the truth. But we today can at least evaluate their claims and realize just how human, and fallible, they were. They were creatures of their time and place. And so too were their teachings, lies and all.

Bart D. Ehrman is the James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, and the New York Times bestselling author of ‘Misquoting Jesus’ and ‘Jesus, Interrupted’. His latest book, ‘Forged: Writing in the Name of God — Why the Bible’s Authors Are Not Who We Think They Are’, is now available from HarperOne.

 


Muslamic Ray Guns – The EDL Anthem


Press TV interviews English Defence League theoretician

This gentleman’s compelling arguments are sure to win over many people to EDL’s cause


Christians and Islam


Missionary Tactics Against Islam

An excellent introductory presentation on how to handle common Christian questions/objections to Islam by MDI speaker Sadat from Canada
.

Is Islam a Threat to the West? The Cambridge Debate

Subject: The Big Cambridge Debate: This house Believes Islam is a Threat to the West?
Here is it, the one you’ve all been waiting for, the controversial, funny and shocking, ‘Is Islam a Threat to the West? – The Cambridge Debate.

TRAILER: Is Islam a threat to the West? The Big Cambridge Debate

On the 4th November 2010, the Cambridge Union held a debate entitled “This House believes Islam is a Threat to the West

This is a trailer for the exciting and controversial debate video, which shall be posted on the 16th March 2011.


Debate: Jesus or Muhammed – which one is the better role model for society today?

Topic: Jesus or Muhammed – which one is the better role model for society today?

Venue: Kingston University, London, UK

Date: 3rd  March 2011