Tag: islam

INJIL, IBN ABBAS & Al-BUKHARI

This post is intended to supplement the following material: MATERIAL FOR THE ANDANI DISCUSSION.

Tawrat as the Hebrew Bible and the Injil as a written text

Tawrat occurs eighteen times in the Qur’an, and seems to be derived, perhaps indirectly, from the Hebrew term Torah.7 It describe a scripture given to Moses, which was “sent down” from God (Q5:44). The Qur’anic term Tawrat is often taken to denote the Pentateuch, or the first five books, associated with Moses, though it is later used by Muslims to signify the whole of the Hebrew Bible. Jewish tradition refers to the Written Torah (the Pentateuch) and the Oral Torah (the midrash and Talmud) and Islamic tradition does not necessarily distinguish these. In subsequent chapters, particularly Chapter 3 on Muslim tradition literature, an invocation that “it says in the Tawrat” may refer to either.   

… The Qur’an also assumes that a text which it calls the Injil was available to the Christians contemporary to Muhammad, and this text could serve as a reliable source for their judgments (Q5:47, 7:157). Whether, and to what extent, these verses refer to what Christians understand to be the four gospels is an important question, to which Muslim answers have varied.13 (Martin Whittingham, A History of Muslim Views of the Bible: The First Four Centuries [De Gruyter, 2021], Volume 7, pp. 22-23; bold emphasis mine)  

Al-Bukhari on Corruption

Sunni Islam’s greated hadith compiler Al-Bukhari denied textual corruption of the Bible, and even cited Ibn Abbas as agreeing with this position:

LV. The words of Allah Almighty, “It is indeed a Glorious Qur’an preserved on a Tablet.” (85:21-22)

“By the Mount and an Inscribed Book” (52:1-2): Qatada said that “mastur” means “written”. “Yasturun” (68:1) means “they inscribe”, and the Umm al-Kitab (43:4) is the whole of the Qur’an and its source. [He said that] “ma talfizu” (50:18) means: “He does not say anything but that it is written against him.” Ibn ‘Abbas said, “Both good and evil are recorded,” and “yuharrufuna” (4:46) means “they remove”. No one removes the works [sic] of one of the Books of Allah Almighty, but they twist them, interpreting them improperly. “Dirasatihim: (6:156) means “their recitation” “Wa’iyya” (69:12) is preserving, “ta’iha” (69:12) means to “preserve it”. “This Qur’an has been revealed to me by inspiration that I may warn you,” meaning the people of Makka, “and all whom it reaches”(6:19) meaning this Qur’an, so he is its warner. (Aisha Bewley, Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari, 100. Book of Tawhid (the belief that Allah is One in His Essence, Attributes and Actions); emphasis mine)

And:

Chapter 69. Book of the Virtues of the Qur’an

I. Chapter. How the Revelation descended and the first of it to be revealed.

Ibn ‘Abbas said that “muhaymin” (5:48) means “TRUSTWORTHY.” The Qur’an is the gurantor of every Book before it. (Bewley, The Sahih Collection of al-Bukhari; emphasis mine)

Martin Whittingham provides his own rendering of al-Bukhari’s comments from Ibn Abbas:

Just as tradition literature contains few references to textual corruption of the Bible, it likewise provides few references to the issue of corrupt Biblical interpretation (tahrif al-ma’na or tahrif ma’nawi). Al-Bukhari adds a note between hadiths in the section of his hadith collection entitled “The Book of Divine Unity” (Kitab al-Tawhid). Here he quotes Ibn ‘Abbas, Muhammad’s cousin and one of the Companions, as commenting on the term “yuhairifuna” (here best translated as “they alter”). Referring to Q4:46, which uses this term, Ibn ‘Abbas is reported as explaining yuharrifuna by saying, “but no one removes an utterance from one of the books of God. But they altered it: they interpreted it according to the wrong interpretation”.63 This concerns Q4:46, which specifically accuses some Jews of taking words out of their context. The statement appears to conflict with Ibn ‘Abbas’ other statement in the hadith quoted above and involving Q2:79, which states that at least some Jews corrupted the text. The two statements could be reconciled if the accusation related to Q2:79 was regarded as only describing a specific group of Jews, rather than as a general statement.

Another hadith making the accusation of corrupt interpretation is recorded by al-Darimi (d. 255/869) in his Sunan, one of the collections not included in the canonical six collections but included in the most prominent nine. “They have corrupted (harrafu) the scripture through their interpretation (tafsir).”64  

63 Al-Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 9, Kitab al-Tawhid (The Book of Divine Unity), comment before hadith no. 7553, my translation. The translators of the Darussalam edition leave this comment untranslated.

64 Al-Darimi, Sunan al-Darimi, vol. 1 (Beirut: Dar al-Kitab al-‘Arabi, 1987), 169. These reports are not numbered, but the report cited here is the last in the section of assorted introductory topics before the commencement of the first “Book,” on “Purity” (Tahara). (A History of Muslim Views of the Bible, pp. 60-61; emphasis mine)

This explains why scholars of the past, including two of Ibn Taymiyya’s premiere students, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah and Ibn Kathir, included al-Bukhari among those who believed that the previous scriptures were not corrupted:

On the other side, another party of hadith and fiqh scholars said: these changes took place during its interpretation and not during the process of its revelation. This is the view of Abi Abdullah Muhammad bin Ishmael Al-Bukhari who said in his hadith collection:

“No one can corrupt the text by removing any of Allah’s words from his Books, but they corrupted it by misinterpreting it.” (Al-Jawziyyah, Ighathat Al Lahfan, Volume 2, p. 351)

And:

Mujahid, Ash-Sha’bi, Al-Hassan, Qatadah and Ar-Rabi’ bin Anas said that,

<who distort the Book with their tongues.>

means, “They alter (Allah’s Words).”

Al-Bukhari reported that Ibn ‘Abbas said that the Ayah means they alter and add although none among Allah’s creation can remove the words of Allah from His books, they alter and distort their apparent meanings. Wahb bin Munabbih said, “The Tawrah and Injil remain as Allah revealed them, and no letter in them was removed. However, the people misguide others by addition and false interpretation, relying on books that they wrote themselves.” Then,

<they say: “This is from Allah,” but it is not from Allah;>

As for Allah’s books, they are still preserved and cannot be changed.” Ibn Abi Hatim recorded this statement… (Tafsir Ibn Kathir – Abridged, Volume 2, Parts 3, 4 & 5, Surat Al-Baqarah, Verse 253, to Surat An-Nisa, verse 147 [Darussalam Publishers & Distributors, Riyadh, Houston, New York, Lahore; First Edition: March 2000], p. 196; emphasis mine)

Al-Bukhari wasn’t alone in listing Ibn Abbas:

“… The Andalusian interpreter Ibn ‘Atiyya stated that Tahrif means “to change or transfer something from its original character to another” and that Ibn ‘Abbas held that the Jewish (and possibly the Christian, by implication) corruption and change was to be found in exegesis, the letter of the Torah surviving intact, although a second school of scholars maintained that the letters themselves had been changed on the basis that although the Jews had been asked to safeguard the Torah, unlike the Qur’an it was not safeguarded by God Himself.” (Dr. Muhammad Abu Laylah, The Qur’an and the Gospels – A Comparative Study [Al-Falah Foundation for Translation, Publication & Distribution, Third edition, 2005], pp. 145-146; emphasis ours)

Ibn Hisham and John’s Gospel

Ibn Hisham was the Muslim editor who purged material from Ibn Ishaq’s biography which he didn’t like, and yet he kept the latter’s reference to John’s Gospel intact. This means that Ibn Hisham affirmed this tradition, otherwise he would have omitted it:

Ibn Ishaq’s Sira originally began with a section, known as the Book of the Beginning (Kitab al-Mubtada’) which drew partially on Biblical tradition, and even more on Jewish and Christian extra-Biblical tradition. This was cut by his subsequent editor, Ibn Hisham. Ibn Ishaq’s omitted text can be partially recovered only from other versions, such as the recension of Ibn Bukayr and the many reports from Ibn Ishaq preserved in the history of al-Tabari.  Ibn Hisham comments that “I shall begin this book with Isma’il son of Ibrahim and mention those of his offspring who were the ancestors of God’s apostle … omitting some of the things which Ibn Ishaq has recorded in this book in which there is no mention of the apostle and about which the Quran says nothing.” Ibn Hisham also omits “things which it is disgraceful to discuss; matters which would distress certain people.69 It is not surprising that in this broad-ranging cull, aimed at training the gaze on Muhammad himself, Biblical material has largely fallen by the wayside. Yet Ibn Hisham preserves the famous identification of the Paraclete, referred to in John’s Gospel (John 14:16, 26; 15:26; 16:7) with Muhammad. This is explicable because although this is a Biblical reference, it is taken by Ibn Ishaq to be a reference to Muhammad, the person at the heart of Ibn Hisham’s concerns. Ibn Ishaq in his Sira preserves a Christian Palestinian Aramaic translation of “parakletos” (Paraclete) as “mnhmn”, a unique rendering compared to later Arabic translations drawn from Greek or Syriac. Of four different recensions of Ibn Ishaq’s work, mostly incomplete, it is only the version used by Ibn Hisham which preserves the reference to the Paraclete.70

An example of the biblical material cut out by Ibn Hisham is a report found in Ibn Bukayr’s version of Ibn ishaq stating that Muhammad’s description is found in the Tawrat: “His name is al-Mutawakkil (“the one who trusts,” [in God]). He is not harsh or rough; nor does he walk proudly in the streets. He is given the keys that by him God may make blind yes see, and deaf ears hear, and set straight crooked tongues so that they bear witness that there is no god but Allah alone with associated. He will help and defend the oppressed.”71 this passage contains various resemblances to Isaiah 42:2-7. The application to Muhammad parallels the application of Isaiah 42 to Jesus (Matt 12:15-21). (Whittingham, A History of Muslim Views of the Bible, pp. 62-63)

The fact that Ibn Hisham removed the supposed prophecy of Muhammad in the Hebrew Bible, but kept the one on John’s Gospel is quite significant.

Ibn Taymiyyah on Q. 5:47

The following quotes are taken from Martin Whittingham, “What is the ‘Gospel’ Mentioned in the Qur’an?”, pp. 4-6, which can be accessed online: https://www.academia.edu/25583711/What_is_the_Gospel_mentioned_in_the_Quran_Research_Briefing_from_the_Centre_for_Muslim_Christian_Studies_Oxford_Spring_2016. All emphasis mine.

The parable in Q 48:29, likening believers to a strong plant, has some parallels to the parable of the sower (see, for example, The Gospel of Matthew 13:1-23). However, there are of course many differences between the Qur’an and the New Testament. Wherever Christians deny certain components of the Muslim view of the Injīl this has prompted charges of alteration of the text (taḥrīf lafẓī), or of alteration of its interpretation (taḥrīf ma‘nawī). An example of the second, that is corrupt interpretation of the text, would be failing to discern references to Muhammad in the Bible, or misunderstanding metaphorical statements about Jesus and the Father as literal. It is worth noting in passing that a number of significant writers give considerable scope to the view of biblical corruption as mainly relating to its wrong interpretation rather than focusing on a corrupt text. These include Ibn Khaldūn (d.809/1406) and Ibn Taymiyya, but in practice this does not lead them to accept the text overall. Where New Testament teachings diverge from the Qur’an or Muslim interpretation of the Qur’an, for example on whether the crucifixion of Jesus occurred, the New Testament is to be rejected.13 To summarise, the content of the Injīl as understood in Qur’anic terms is significantly different from how Christians understand it.

However, there are verses where the Qur’an seems to affirm the Injīl, for example in Q 5:46, where it is described as guidance (hudā’), and light (nūr). So an obvious historical question presents itself. If the Qur’anic Injīl diverges from the New Testament gospels, to what text of the Injīl is the Qur’an referring when it makes positive comments? This question is not only textual, but of course historical…

There is a question over the correct reading of the verse. As Ibn Taymiyya and other exegetes explain, ‘Let the followers of the Gospel judge’ (wa’l-yaḥkum) is a command, using the jussive mood. An alternative reading uses the subjunctive, ‘waliyaḥkuma’ or ‘so that the followers of the Gospel judge’. This expresses the reason why Jesus was given the Injīl, namely so that the People of the Gospel could judge by it. But this difference in readings does not affect the heart of the verse’s meaning, as al-Ṭabarī states.14 The verse has been interpreted in various ways, linked to the question of whether Q 5:47 is exhorting Christians in some sense to follow the Injīl available at the time of the rise of Islam, which would indicate that the Injīl in circulation in the C1st/C7th was a valid criterion for judgment. This raises the question of what form of the Injīl was invoked…

But despite this dismissal by Ibn Ḥazm, Q 5:47 would appear to be appealing to the gospel as it existed in the C1st/C7th as a standard of judgment. If so, were there two versions circulating at the time of Muhammad, one pure and one corrupted? Ibn Taymiyya identifies this as a plausible position. He states that a proper Muslim view of the Tawrāt and Injīl is:

That in the world there are true (ṣaḥīḥ) copies [versions], and these remained until the time of the Prophet, and many copies [versions] which are corrupted… The Qur’an commands them to judge with what Allah revealed in the Tawrat and Injil. [Allah] informs that in both there is wisdom [ḥikmah]. There is nothing in the Qur’an to indicate that they altered all copies [versions].20

Ibn Taymiyya’s solution is thus to assume that the Qur’an gives grounds for believing that there must have been some reliable versions of the Injīl in circulation at the time of Muhammad, as well as some unreliable ones. He does not state whether these reliable versions had disappeared by the time he was writing, though this seems to be the implication. To accept his argument as conclusive, however, it would be necessary to find evidence of uncorrupted and different gospels which had previously been accepted as authentic by Christians. (This excludes apocryphal or non-canonical gospels, which are in general very different from the New Testament gospels, and were never regarded as authoritative by large numbers of Christians). Abdullah Saeed, writing in 2002, notes that by the time of Muhammad’s preaching, the Christian scriptures were documented, and were the same as those used today. He argues that, ‘Since the Qur’an refers to those same scriptures, its references to them should equally apply in the modern era. This is perhaps the main challenge to Ibn Taymiyya’s position’.21

It is interesting that despite his statements in his Tafsīr, Ibn Taymiyya himself puts forward a different, more traditional view in al-Jawāb alṣaḥīḥ. 23 Here he interprets the reference in Q 5:47 to ‘what God sent down’ in the Injīl as a command about following Muhammad: ‘God handed down in the Gospel the command to follow Muhammad, just as He commanded it in the Torah’.24

Can Ibn Taymiyya’s two different statements be reconciled? Perhaps it can be stated that they are not in direct conflict, since a command to follow Muhammad – or at least a prediction of him – can be found, according to some Muslim exegesis, in the extant New Testament gospels. This would be consistent with the view Ibn Taymiyya expresses in his Tafsīr that some sound version of the Injīl was in existence in the C1st/C7th. However, this would still leave Ibn Taymiyya with the problem that those gospels contain plenty of information about Jesus, such as his crucifixion, which no Muslim usually accepts.

13 On Ibn Khaldūn see Martin Whittingham ‘The Value of Taḥrīf Ma‘nawī (Corrupt Interpretation) as a Category for Analysing Muslim Views of the Bible: Evidence from al-Radd aljamīl and Ibn Khaldūn’, Islam and Christian-Muslim Relations 22:2 (2011), pp. 209-222. On Ibn Taymiyya and the cruciixion, see Ibn Taymiyya, al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr (Beirut: Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1988), I: 210.

14 Al-Ṭabarī, Jāmi‘ al-bayān i’l-ta’wīl al-Qur’ān (Beirut: Dār al-kutub al-‘ilmiyya, 1999), IV: 605.

20 Ibn Taymiyya, al-Tafsīr al-Kabīr, I: 209; English translation from Abdullah Saeed, ‘The Charge of Distortion of Jewish and Christian Scriptures’ Muslim World 92 (2002), p. 430.

21 Saeed, ’Distortion’, p. 434.

23 Ibn Taymiyya, al-Jawāb al-ṣaḥīḥ.

24 Ibn Taymiyya, al-Jawāb al-ṣaḥīḥ, I: 382; English translation in Michel, Response, p. 227.

FURTHER READING

MUHAMMAD’S CONFUSION ABOUT THE SCRIPTURES

DOES NISA NEVER REFER TO MINOR GIRLS?

The Quran in a disgusting fashion permits marital relations and divorce with premature, prepubescent minors:

And those of your women (nisa-ikum) as have passed the age of monthly courses, for them the ‘Iddah (prescribed period), if you have doubts (about their periods), is three months, and for those who have no courses [(i.e. they are still immature) their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is three months likewise, except in case of death]. And for those who are pregnant (whether they are divorced or their husbands are dead), their ‘Iddah (prescribed period) is until they deliver (their burdens), and whosoever fears Allah and keeps his duty to Him, He will make his matter easy for him. S. 65:4 Hilali-Khan

Pay attent to how some of sunni Islam’s greatest expositors interpret this verse:

And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months — both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]… (Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Source; bold emphasis mine)

(And for such of your women as despair of menstruation) because of old age, (if ye doubt) about their waiting period, (their period (of waiting) shall be three months) upon which another man asked: “O Messenger of Allah! What about the waiting period of those who do not have menstruation because they are too young?” (along with those who have it not) because of young age, their waiting period is three months. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, Source; bold emphasis mine)

Here, one should bear in mind the fact that according to the explanations given in the Qur’an the question of the waiting period arises in respect of the women with whom marriage may have been consummated, for there is no waiting-period in case divorce is pronounced before the consummation of marriage. (Al-Ahzab: 49). Therefore, making mention of the waiting-period for the girls who have not yet menstruated, clearly proves that it is not only permissible to give away the girl in marriage at this age but it is also permissible for the husband to consummate marriage with her. Now, obviously no Muslim has the right to forbid a thing which the Qur’an has held as permissible. (Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, Tafhim al-Qur’an, fn. 13, Source; bold emphasis mine)

In order to get around this shameful and harmful permissibility and practice of what is essentially pedophilia, specific Muslim polemicists argue that Q. 65:4 is not referring to minors. They base this on the term for women used in the verse, which in Arabic is nisa. These polemicists argue that this word does not refer to premature girls but to mature women.

Contrary to this assertion, the Quran itself shows that the Arabic term does and can refer to prepubescent minors. For instance, the Islamic scripture recounts the story of Moses where Pharaoh ordered the slaughter of male babies:

And (remember) when We delivered you from Fir’aun’s (Pharaoh) people, who were afflicting you with a horrible torment, killing your sons and sparing your women (nisaakum), and therein was a mighty trial from your Lord. And (remember) when We separated the sea for you and saved you and drowned Fir’aun‘s (Pharaoh) people while you were looking (at them, when the sea-water covered them). S. 2:49-50 Hilali-Khan

And (remember) when We rescued you from Fir’aun‘s (Pharaoh) people, who were afflicting you with the worst torment, killing your sons and letting your women live (nisaakum). And in that was a great trial from your Lord. And We appointed for Musa (Moses) thirty nights and added (to the period) ten (more), and he completed the term, appointed by his Lord, of forty nights. And Musa (Moses) said to his brother Harun (Aaron): “Replace me among my people, act in the Right Way (by ordering the people to obey Allah and to worship Him Alone) and follow not the way of the Mufsidun (mischief-makers).” S. 7:141-142 Hilali-Khan

And (remember) when Musa (Moses) said to his people: “Call to mind Allah’s Favour to you, when He delivered you from Fir’aun‘s (Pharaoh) people who were afflicting you with horrible torment, and were slaughtering your sons and letting your women (nisaakum) alive, and in it was a tremendous trial from your Lord.” S. 14:6 Hilali-Khan

We recite to you some of the news of Musa (Moses) and Fir’aun (Pharaoh) in truth, for a people who believe (those who believe in this Qur’an, and in the Oneness of Allah). Verily, Fir’aun (Pharaoh) exalted himself in the land and made its people sects, weakening (oppressing) a group (i.e. Children of Israel) among them, killing their sons, and letting their females (nisaahum) live. Verily, he was of the Mufsidun (i.e. those who commit great sins and crimes, oppressors, tyrants, etc.). And We wished to do a favour to those who were weak (and oppressed) in the land, and to make them rulers and to make them the inheritors, And to establish them in the land, and We let Fir’aun (Pharaoh) and Haman and their hosts receive from them that which they feared. And We inspired the mother of Musa (Moses), (saying): “Suckle him [Musa (Moses)], but when you fear for him, then cast him into the river and fear not, nor grieve. Verily! We shall bring him back to you, and shall make him one of (Our) Messengers.” Then the household of Fir’aun (Pharaoh) picked him up, that he might become for them an enemy and a (cause of) grief. Verily! Fir’aun (Pharaoh), Haman and their hosts were sinners. And the wife of Fir’aun (Pharaoh) said: “A comfort of the eye for me and for you. Kill him not, perhaps he may be of benefit to us, or we may adopt him as a son.” And they perceive not (the result of that). And the heart of the mother of Musa (Moses) became empty [from every thought, except the thought of Musa (Moses)]. She was very near to disclose his (case, i.e. the child is her son), had We not strengthened her heart (with Faith), so that she might remain as one of the believers. And she said to his [Musa’s (Moses)] sister: “Follow him.” So she (his sister) watched him from a far place secretly, while they perceived not. And We had already forbidden (other) foster suckling mothers for him, until she (his sister came up and) said: “Shall I direct you to a household who will rear him for you, and sincerely they will look after him in a good manner?” So did We restore him to his mother, that she might be delighted, and that she might not grieve, and that she might know that the Promise of Allah is true. But most of them know not. S. 28:3-13 Hilali-Khan

I cite another surah in respect to the baby Moses being delivered just in case the readers doubt that the aforementioned texts are referring to the Pharoah’s decree to have male infants killed:

Allah said: “You are granted your request, O Musa (Moses)! “And indeed We conferred a favour on you another time (before). “When We inspired your mother with that which We inspired. Saying: ‘Put him (the child) into the Tabut (a box or a case or a chest) and put it into the river (Nile), then the river shall cast it up on the bank, and there, an enemy of Mine and an enemy of his shall take him.’ And I endued you with love from Me, in order that you may be brought up under My Eye, When your sister went and said: ‘Shall I show you one who will nurse him?’ So We restored you to your mother, that she might cool her eyes and she should not grieve. Then you did kill a man, but We saved you from great distress and tried you with a heavy trial. Then you stayed a number of years with the people of Madyan (Midian). Then you came here according to the fixed term which I ordained (for you), O Musa (Moses)! ‘And I have Istana’tuka, for Myself.’” S. 20:36-41 Hilali-Khan

With the foregoing in view, it is clear that by the term nisa the Quran means female infants, not grown, mature women, since Pharaoh did not order the murder of mature males. Pharoah’s decree was to have male babies slaughtered, which means that the nisa in the aforementioned texts can only refer to female babies. I.e., Pharaoh did not command the murder of young baby girls, only baby boys.

This, therefore, proves that this Arabic word can and does refer to young premature girls since it simply means female, irrespective of age or maturity.

There’s a further reason why the Muslim scripture applies the phrase nisa to prepubescent minors who are married and have had sex with their husbands. It is because the Quran allows marrying such young children, and permits men to engage in sexual intimacy with them.

As such, from the Muslim point of view these young, and at times immature, children are to be seen and labeled as nisa since they fall within the category of those women whom Islamic law permits having sex with.    

In other words, the Arabic term is not being applied to these young girls because they are psychologically and/or physiologically fully developed and mature enough to engage in sexual intercourse. Rather, such underdeveloped children are called nisa because Allah and his messenger allow men to have sex with them, irrespective of their not being psychologically and/or physiologically fit for it.

FURTHER READING

Marriage to Minors

Islam – The Religion of Pedophilia

MORE ON ISLAMIC PEDOPHILIA

MATERIAL FOR THE ANDANI DISCUSSION

In this post I will show how the Quran attests that the Christianity delineated within the New Testament is the true religion of Jesus Christ, revealed and preserved by God.  

1. JESUS’ FOLLOWERS WERE TO BE VICTORIOUS TILL THE RESURRECTION DAY.

Behold! Allah said: “O Jesus! I will take thee and raise thee to Myself and clear thee (of the falsehoods) of those who blaspheme; I will make those who follow thee SUPERIOR to those who reject faith, TO THE DAY OF RESURRECTION: Then shall ye all return unto Me, and I will judge between you of the matters wherein ye dispute.” S. 3:55 Y. Ali

O ye who believe! Be ye helpers of Allah: as said Jesus the son of Mary to the Disciples, “Who will be my helpers to (the work of) Allah?” Said the Disciples, “We are Allah’s helpers!” then a portion of the Children of Israel believed, and a portion disbelieved: But We gave power to those who believed against their enemies, AND THEY BECAME THE ONES THAT PREVAILED. S. 61:14 Y. Ali

The Muslim exegetes list Paul as among those whom Allah empowered to spread the true message of Jesus, which is why he prevailed:

“God has sent me (Muhammad) to all men, so take a message from me, God have mercy on you. Do not hang back from me as the disciples hung back from Jesus son of Mary. They asked how they hung back and he said, ‘He called them to a task similar to that which I have called you. Those who had to go a short journey were pleased and accepted. Those who had a long journey before them were displeased and refused to go, and Jesus complained of them to God. (T. From that very night) every one of them was able to speak the language of the people to whom he was sent.’ (T. Jesus said, ‘This is a thing that God has determined that you should do, so go.’)

“Those whom Jesus son of Mary sent, both disciples and those who came after them, in the land were: Peter the disciple AND PAUL WITH HIM, (PAUL BELONGED TO THE FOLLOWERS AND WAS NOT A DISCIPLE) to Rome. Andrew and Matthew to the land of the cannibals; Thomas to the land of Babel, which is in the land of the east; Philip to Carthage which is Africa; John to Ephesus the city of the young men of the cave; James to Jerusalem which is Aelia the city of the sanctuary; Bartholomew to Arabia which is the land of Hijaz; Simon to the land of the Berbers; Judah who was not one of the disciples was put in place of Judas.” (The Life of Muhammad, A Translation of Ibn Ishaq’s Sirat Rasul Allah, with introduction and notes by Alfred Guillaume [Karachi Oxford University Press, Karachi, Tenth Impression 1995], p. 653; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Now it makes sense to include Paul among those sent out to proclaim the true religion of Jesus. This is because Paul could not have hijacked and/or perverted the teachings of Christ without this implying that the Apostle prevailed against Allah by managing to defeat the true followers of Jesus, something which the aforementioned Quranic ayat emphatically affirm did not, and could never, happen.   

Interestingly, this is the same sirah which identifies John’s Gospel as the inscripturation of the Gospel that God had given to Jesus for his followers:

“Among the things which have reached me about what Jesus the Son of Mary stated in the Gospel which he received from God for the followers of the Gospel, in applying a term to describe the apostle of God, is the following. It is extracted FROM WHAT JOHN THE APOSTLE SET DOWN FOR THEM WHEN HE WROTE THE GOSPEL FOR THEM FROM THE TESTAMENT OF JESUS SON OF MARY: ‘He that hateth me hateth the Lord. And if I had not done in their presence works which none other before me did, they had not sin: but from now they are puffed up with pride and think that they will overcome me and also the Lord. But the word that is in the law must be fulfilled, “They hated me without a cause” (i.e. without reason). But when the Comforter has come whom God will send to you from the Lord’s presence, and the spirit of truth which will have gone forth from the Lord’s presence he (shall bear) witness of me and ye also, because ye have been with me from the beginning. I have spoken unto you about this that ye should not be in doubt.’

“The Munahhemana (God bless and preserve him!) in Syriac is Muhammad; in Greek he is the paraclete. (Ibid., pp. 103-104; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Ibn Ishaq references John 15:23-16:1 as the Gospel which Christ Jesus passed on to his disciples.

Again, this makes perfect sense in light of the claims of Q. 3:55 and 61:14 since John’s Gospel could not have been spread and been widely embraced if it didn’t come from one of Jesus’ true followers whom Allah swore would and did overcome the disbelievers, a dominance that would be theirs and those who follow their message till the day of resurrection. If John’s Gospel isn’t authentic then this means that the message of Christ’s followers was lost and/or perverted, and therefore Allah either failed or lied to Jesus since he failed to preserve what he had sent the disciples to preach throughout the world.   

2. MUHAMMAD CONFIRMS WHAT WAS WITH THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS.

Children of Israel, remember My blessing wherewith I blessed you, and fulfil My covenant and I shall fulfil your covenant; and have awe of Me. And believe in that I have sent down, confirming that which is with you, and be not the first to disbelieve in it. And sell not My signs for a little price; and fear you Me. And do not confound the truth with vanity, and do not conceal the truth wittingly. And perform the prayer, and pay the alms, and bow with those that bow. Will you bid others to piety, and forget yourselves while you recite the Book? Do you not understand? S. 2:40-44 Arberry  

When there came to them a Book from God, confirming what was with them — and they aforetimes prayed for victory over the unbelievers — when there came to them that they recognized, they disbelieved in it; and the curse of God is on the unbelievers. S. 2:89 Arberry   

The medieval Muslim exegete al-Qurtubi states that the above verse refers to the Torah and the Gospel being with them at Muhammad’s time:

‘Them’ means the Jews, and the ‘Book’ here is the Qur’an, while ‘what is with them’ refers to the Torah and Gospel. The word for ‘praying for victory’ here (yastaftiḥūn) comes from the root fataḥa and implies the opening of something which is locked, and is used, for instance, for the opening of a door. An-Nasā’ī reports that Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī said that the Prophet said, ‘Allah gave victory to the community because of its weak members by means of their supplication, prayer and sincerity.’ An-Nasā’ī also reports from Abud-Dardā’ that the Messenger of Allah said, ‘Help me in seeking out the weak. They are supported. You are provided for on account of the weak among you.’ Ibn ‘Abbās reported that the Jews of Khaybar fought the tribe of Ghaṭafān and were defeated and so the Jews used this supplication, saying, ‘We ask You by the right of the unlettered Prophet whom You promised to send us at the end of time to make us victorious against them.’ They then defeated the tribe of Ghaṭafān. But when the Prophet was indeed sent, they rejected him and so Allah revealed this. (Tafsir al-Qurtubi: Juz’ 1: Al-Fātiḥah & Sūrat al-Baqarah 1-141, translated by Aisha Abdurrahman Bewley [Diwan Press, 2019], Volume 1, pp. 338-339; bold emphasis mine)

Elsewhere al-Qurtubi cites a sound narration where Muhammad admitted that the Jews and Christians had the Torah and the Gospel in their possessions:

and pay heed to what is in it,

This means ‘reflect and observe Allah’s commands and warnings in it and do not neglect that and waste it’. It is the same with all the Divine Books: you must act according to them and not just recite them on the tongue. To do otherwise is to waste them. This is what is stated by ash-Sha‘bī and Ibn ‘Uyaynah as will be discussed later. (2:101) An-Nasā’ī related from Abū Sa‘īd al-Khudrī that the Messenger of Allah g said, ‘The worst of people is an impious man who recites the Qur’an and pays no heed to any of it.’ So he explained that the goal is to put it into action. Mālik said, ‘The Qur’an can be recited by someone who has no good in him. This was an obligation for those before us just as it is obliged for us.’ Allah says: ‘Follow the best that has been sent down to you from your Lord.’ (39:55) So He commanded us to follow His Book and act by it, but we have abandoned it just as the Jews and Christians did. There remain people with many books and copies of the Qur’an who do not benefit from that at all because they are dominated by ignorance, desire for power, and the following of appetites. We find in at-Tirmidhī that Abu-d-Dardā’ said, ‘We were with the Prophet and he looked towards heaven and said, “This is a time in which knowledge will be snatched away from its people until they have none left.” Ziyād ibn Labīd al-Anṣārī asked, “How can it be snatched away from us when we recite the Qur’an! By Allah, we recite it and our women and children recite it.” He replied, “May your mother be bereft, Ziyād! I consider you to be like those in who know the Torah and Gospel WHICH the Jews and Christians HAVE. What help was it to them?”’ An-Nasā’ī transmitted it from Jubayr ibn Nufayr from ‘Awf ibn Mālik al-Ashja‘ī by a sound path. (Ibid., pp. 295-296; bold emphasis mine)

Here’s another version of the aforementioned hadith:

41 Chapters on Knowledge

(5) Chapter: What Has Been Related About Knowledge Leaving

Narrated Jubair bin Nufair:

from Abu Ad-Darda who said: “We were with the Prophet when he raised his sight to the sky, then he said: ‘This is the time when knowledge is to be taken from the people, until what remains of it shall not amount to anything.” So Ziyad bin Labid Al-Ansari said: ‘How will it be taken from us while we recite the Qur’an. By Allah we recite it, and our women and children recite it?’ He said: ‘May you be bereaved of your mother O Ziyad! I used to consider you among the Fuqaha of the people of Al-Madinah. The Tawrah and Injil ARE WITH THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS, but what do they avail of them?‘” Jubair said: “So I met ‘Ubadah bin As-Samit and said to him: ‘Have you not heard what your brother Abu Ad-Darda said?’ Then I informed him of what Abu Ad-Darda said. He said: ‘Abu Ad-Darda spoke the truth. If you wish, we shall narrated to you about the first knowledge to be removed from the people: It is Khushu’, soon you will enter the congregational Masjid, but not see any man in it with Khushu’.’”

Grade: SAHIH (Darussalam)

Reference: Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2653

In Book Reference: Book 41, Hadith 9

English translation: Vol. 5, Book 39, Hadith 2653 (sunnah.com https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi/41/9; capital emphasis mine)

More on the Gospel’s availability a little later.

We’re not done with the Quran’s witness just yet:

And when they were told, ‘Believe in that God has sent down,’ they said, ‘We believe in what was sent down on us’; and they disbelieve in what is beyond that, yet it is the truth confirming what is with them. Say: ‘Why then were you slaying the Prophets of God in former time, if you were believers?’ S. 2:91 Arberry

Say: “Who was an enemy to Gabriel, so that he descended it on your heart/mind with God’s permission, confirming to what (is) between his hands (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi), and (a) guidance and a good news to the believers.” S. 2:97 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/2/st19.htm)

When there has come to them a Messenger from God confirming what was with them, a party of them that were given the Book reject the Book of God behind their backs, as though they knew not, S. 2:101 Arberry

You who have been given the Book, believe in what We have sent down, confirming what is with you, before We obliterate faces, and turn them upon their backs, or curse them as We cursed the Sabbath-men, and God’s command is done. S. 4:47 Arberry

And this the Koran was/is not that it be fabricated from (by) other than God, and but confirmation (of) what (is) between his (Prophet Mohammad’s) hands (tasdeeqa allathee bayna yadayhi), and detailing/explaining The Book, no doubt/suspicion in it, (it is) from the creations all together’s/(universes’) Lord. S. 10:37 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/10/st19.htm)

In their narration/information (stories there) had been an example/warning to those of the pure minds/hearts (it) was not an information/speech to be fabricated and but confirmation (to) which (is) between his hands (tasdeeqa allathee bayna yadayhi) and detailing/explaining/clarifying every thing, and guidance, and mercy to (a) nation believing. S. 12:111 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/12/st19.htm)

And those who disbelieved said: “We will never/not believe with this the Koran, and nor with what (is) between its hands (bayna yadayhi).” And if you see/understand if the unjust/oppressive (were) made to stand/suspended at their Lord, some of them return to some the saying/words/opinion and belief, those who were weakened say to those who became arrogant: “Where it not for you, we would be believers/believing.” S. 34:31 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/34/st19.htm)

And what We inspired/transmitted to you from The Book, it is the truth confirming to what (is) between his hands (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi), that truly God (is) with His worshippers/slaves expert/experienced (E), seeing/knowing. S. 35:31 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/35/st19.htm)

3. THE PROPHETIC SCRIPTURES WERE IN EXISTENCE AT MUHAMMAD’S TIME.

The Quran instructs folks inquire of the messengers who came before Muhammad:

Ask those of Our Messengers We sent before thee: Have We appointed, apart from the All-merciful, gods to be served? S. 43:45 Arberry

Now the only way anyone could possibly ask these messengers who were no longer on earth is by consulting their scriptures which they left behind. This is precisely how the Muslim exegetes interpreted this text:

And ask those of Our messengers whom We sent before you Did We ever appoint besides the Compassionate One that is to say any other than Him gods to be worshipped? It is said that this is to be understood literally in other words that God gathered for him all the messengers on the Night of the Journey; but it is also said that this meant that he should ask any communities belonging to either of the two Peoples of the Scripture. According to one of the two opinions he never asked anyone since the point of this command to ask is to affirm to the idolaters of Quraysh that no messenger or scripture ever came from God with the command to worship any other than God. (Tafsir al-Jalalayn https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=74&tSoraNo=43&tAyahNo=45&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis mine)  

(And ask those of Our messengers) such as Jesus, Moses and Abraham; this was on the night when he was taken up to heaven and he led in prayer 70 prophets, among whom were Abraham, Moses and Jesus. Allah commanded His Prophet, saying: ask them (whom We sent before thee) O Muhammad: (Did We ever appoint gods to be worshipped beside the Beneficent) did We command that any other deity beside the Beneficent be worshipped? It is also said that this means: ask those unto whom We sent the messengers before you, i.e. the people of Book, did We appoint any other deities beside the Beneficent to be worshipped? And it is also said that this means: ask them, did the messengers bring anything other than the profession of Allah’s divine Oneness; the Prophet did not have to ask because he was certain that Allah did not appoint any other deities to be worshipped beside Him. (Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas  https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=43&tAyahNo=45&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; bold emphasis mine)

45 This verse is understood to mean that when the Prophet met all of the other prophets on the Night Journey (see 17:1c; introduction to Sūrah 53), he was to ask them this question (JJ), or that he was to ask it of the People of the Book (JJ, Ṭ), in which case some say there is an implied “unto whom” (ilayhim) in the verse so that it could be rendered, “Ask those before you [unto whom] We sent from among Our messengers” (Ṭ). The verse can also be understood as a purely rhetorical question, reaffirming that all of the messengers called their people to the same truths to which the Prophet Muhammad calls his people, as in 16:36: We indeed sent a messenger unto every community, “Worship God, and shun false deities!” (IK). (The Study Quran: A New Translation and Commentary , editor-in-chief Seyyed Hossein Nasr, HarperOne, 2015; bold emphasis mine)

I.e.. “look into the earlier revelations and ask thyself”. (Muhammad Asad Footnote: 38 https://www.alim.org/translation/asad/43/)

That is, by examining their Message, and asking the learned among their real followers. It will be found that no Religion really teaches the worship of other than Allah. (Abdullah Yusuf Ali, Footnote: 4648 https://www.alim.org/translation/yusuf-ali/43/; bold emphasis mine)

3B. CHRISTIANS OF MUHAMMAD’S TIME HAD THE GOSPEL.

And We sent after (following) on their tracks with Jesus, Mary’s son confirming for what (is) between his hands from the Torah/Old Testament (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi mina al-tawrati), and We gave him the New Testament/Bible in it (is) guidance and light, and confirming to what (is) between his hands from the Torah/Old Testament (wa’musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi mina al-tawrati), and guidance and a sermon/advice/warning to the fearing and obeying. And the New Testament’s/Bible’s people should judge/rule with what God descended in it, and who does not judge/rule with what God descended, so those, they are the debauchers. S. 5:46-47 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/st19.htm)

Al-Qurtubi noted a variant reading, which a minority accepted as genuine:

Al-A’mash and Hamzah read ‘judge’ as ‘yahkumu’ with a lam attached to the beginning, meaning ‘in order to’, and the others read it in the apocopate form: yahkum, as a command. In the first reading, the words are connected to ‘We gave him’ and it is not permitted to stop, implying ‘We gave him the Gospel so that his people would judge by what Allah revealed in it.’ If it is read as a command, then it is like the words: ‘Judge between them.’ (5:49), starting a new sentence meaning: ‘Let the people of the Gospel judge at that time.’ Now it is abrogated. It is said that it is a command to the Christians to now believe in Muhammad. The obligation to believe in him is found in the Gospel. Abrogation is conceivable in secondary rulings, not in basic principles. Makki said, ‘The command IS PREFERRED because THE MAJORITY have it and because of what comes after it is a threat which indicates that it is an obligation from Allah Almighty for the people of the Gospel.’ An-Nahhas said, ‘What I believe to be correct is that they are both good readings because Allah only revealed a Scripture in order for it to be acted on and He commanded that people should act by what is in it. So both are sound.’ (Tafsir al-Qurtubi: Sūrat al-Mā’idah, translated by Aisha Bewley [Diwan Press, 2021], Volume 6, pp. 173-174; bold and capital emphasis mine)

3C. THE QURAN IS SUPPOSED CONFIRMATION THESE SCRIPTURES IN ARABIC.

Then, We gave Musa (Moses) the Book [the Taurat (Torah)], to complete (Our Favour) upon those who would do right, and explaining all things in detail and a guidance and a mercy that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord. And this is a blessed Book (the Qur’an) which We have sent down, so follow it and fear Allah (i.e. do not disobey His Orders), that you may receive mercy (i.e. saved from the torment of Hell). Lest you (pagan Arabs) should say: “The Book was only sent down to two sects before us (the Jews and the Christians), and for our part, we were in fact unaware of what they studied.” Or lest you (pagan Arabs) should say: “If only the Book had been sent down to us, we would surely have been better guided than they (Jews and Christians).” So now has come unto you a clear proof (the Qur’an) from your Lord, and a guidance and a mercy. Who then does more wrong than one who rejects the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) of Allah and turns away therefrom? We shall requite those who turn away from Our Ayat with an evil torment, because of their turning away (from them). [Tafsir At-Tabari, Vol. 8, Page 95]S. 6:154-157 Hilali-Khan

And from before it (is) Moses’ Book, a leader/example, and mercy, and that (is a) confirming Book (in an) Arabic tongue/speech, to warn/give notice (to) those who caused injustice/ oppression, and good news to the good doers… They said: “You our nation that we heard/listened to a Book (that) was descended from after Moses, confirming to what (is) between his hands (musaddiqan lima bayna yadayhi), it guides to the truth and to (a) straight/direct road/path.” S. 46:12, 30 (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/46/st19.htm)

4. JEWS AND CHRISTIAN WERE TO ACT UPON ALL THE REVELATIONS GIVEN TO THEM.

Had they followed the Laws of the Old and New Testaments and what was revealed to them from their Lord, they would have received Our bounties from above and below in abundance. Some of them are modest people, but many of them commit the worst sins… (Muhammad), tell the People of the Book, “You have nothing unless you follow the Old and New Testaments and that which (the Quran) God has revealed to you.” Whatever has been revealed to you (Muhammad) from your Lord will only increase their disbelief and rebellion (against you). Do not grieve for the unbelieving people. 5:66, 68 (Muhammad Sarwar https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/st23.htm)

Here’s another translation:

And if that they took care of the Torah/Old Testament, and the Bible/New Testament and what was descended to them from their Lord, they would have eaten from above them and from below their feet; from them (is) a nation economizing/moderate , and many from them what they were making/doing became bad/evil/harmful… Say: “You The Book’s people, you are not on a thing, until you keep up the Torah/Old Testament and the Bible/New Testament , and what was descended to you from your (P) Lord.” And what was descended to you (S/M) from your Lord increases (E) many of them tyranny/arrogance, and disbelief, so do not grieve/sadden on the nation, the disbelieving. (Muhammad Ahmed–Samira https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/5/st19.htm)

To the Christians, this would mean that they were to act upon the writings of the New Testament, and not just the Gospel. As the following Muslim expositors acknowledge:

(If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel) if they had accepted what is in the Torah and the Gospel and demonstrated the traits and description of Muhammad contained therein (and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord) and had they elucidated that which their Lord had explained to them in the Torah and the Gospel; it is also said that this means: if they had believed that ALL the scriptures and messengers are from their Lord, (they would surely have been nourished from above them) through rain (and from beneath their feet) through vegetation and fruit. (Among them) among the people of the Book (there are people who are moderate) a group of just and upright people, i.e. ‘Abdullah Ibn Salam and his followers, the monk Bahirah, the Negus and his followers, and Salman al-Farisi and his fellows, (but many of them are of evil conduct) evil is what they do in terms of concealing the traits and description of Muhammad. Among such people are Ka’b Ibn al-Ashraf, Ka’b Ibn Asad, Malik Ibn al-Sayf, Sa’id Ibn ‘Amr, Abu Yasir, and Judayy Ibn Akhtab. (Tanwîr al-Miqbâs min Tafsîr Ibn ‘Abbâs, Q. 5:66 https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=5&tAyahNo=66&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; emphasis mine)

(Say) O Muhammad: (O People of the Scripture!) i.e. the Jews and Christians. (You have naught) of the religion of Allah (till ye observe the Torah and the Gospel) until you truly believe in what is in the Torah and the Gospel (and that which was revealed unto thee (Muhammad) from your Lord) in ALL Scriptures given to all messengers. (That which is revealed unto you (Muhammad) from your Lord) the Qur’an (is certain to increase the contumacy) constancy in disbelief (and disbelief) and firmness in disbelief (of many of them) of their disbelievers. (But grieve not for the disbelieving folk) do not be saddened for their destruction in their state of disbelief, if they do not believe. (Ibid., Q. 5:68 https://www.altafsir.com/Tafasir.asp?tMadhNo=0&tTafsirNo=73&tSoraNo=5&tAyahNo=68&tDisplay=yes&UserProfile=0&LanguageId=2; emphasis mine)

For a Christian to uphold all the scriptures s/he would have to implement and act upon the canonical books of the New Testament, since these are all a part of what was revealed to them. There’s simply no way around it.

4B. MUSLIMS ARE TO BELIEVE IN THE REVELATION GIVEN TO THE JEWS AND CHRISTIANS.

Muhammad and his followers are commanded to believe in all the revelation given to the Jews and Christians:

The Messenger believes in what was sent down to him from his Lord, and the believers; each one believes in God and His angels, and in His Books (wa’kutubihi) and His Messengers; we make no division between any one of His Messengers. They say, ‘We hear, and obey. Our Lord, grant us Thy forgiveness; unto Thee is the homecoming.’ S. 2:285

O believers, believe in God and His Messenger and the Book He has sent down on His Messenger and the Book which He sent down before. Whoso disbelieves in God and His angels and His Books (wa’kutubihi), and His Messengers, and the Last Day, has surely gone astray into far error. S. 4:136  

Dispute not with the People of the Book save in the fairer manner, except for those of them that do wrong; and say, ‘We believe in what has been sent down to us, and what has been sent down to you; our God and your God is One, and to Him we have surrendered.’ S. 29:46

Note that Muhammad and his followers were to have the same attitude and belief in the previous scriptures that they have towards the Quran. What this entails is that Muslims must believe that the books in the possession of the Jews and Christians have been preserved, just as they believe about the Quran.

After all, it is an act of kufr (disbelief) to deny that the Quran has been corrupted. Therefore, since Muhammad’s followers are adopt this same view of the previous scriptures this means that it is an act of rebellion and disbelief to argue that the previous revelations have been corrupted.  

Moreover, this attitude towards the scriptures includes believing in all the revelations not mentioned in the Quran by name. That is because the latter expressly teaches that there are messengers whose names are not to be found in the Muslim scripture:

Say you: ‘We believe in God, and in that which has been sent down on us and sent down on Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac and Jacob, and the Tribes, and that which was given to Moses and Jesus and the Prophets, of their Lord; we make no division between any of them, and to Him we surrender.’ S. 2:136 Arberry

We have revealed to thee as We revealed to Noah, and the Prophets after him, and We revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, Jesus and Job, Jonah and Aaron and Solomon, and We gave to David Psalms, and Messengers We have already told thee of before, and Messengers We have not told thee of; and unto Moses God spoke directly – S. 4:163-164 Arberry

Therefore, the Muslims are to consult the Jews and Christians in order to know who these other messengers were, and what revelations were given to them.

In other words, the Quran is indeed confirming the books of the Old and New Testament canons since these would have been the revelations which they had in their possession at Muhammad’s time.

Again, there’s simply no way around this for the Muslim who desires to honest and faithful to what his/her scripture actually teaches.

FURTHER READING

INJIL, IBN ABBAS & Al-BUKHARI

THE QURAN’S GOSPEL

THE QURAN ON INSCRIPTURATION

THE GOSPEL THAT IS WITH THEM

THE UNCLEAR QURAN: WHAT IS THE INJIL?

MUHAMMAD’S CONFUSION ABOUT THE SCRIPTURES

THE APOSTLE PAUL IN EARLY ISLAMIC EXEGESIS

PAUL IN THE EARLY ISLAMIC SOURCES REVISITED

THE UNCLEAR QURAN: WHAT IS THE INJIL?

The Quran repeatedly asserts that it is a book that fully explains everything contained therein:

Say: “Shall I seek for judge other than God? – when He it is Who hath sent unto you the Book, explained in detail.” They know full well, to whom We have given the Book, that it hath been sent down from thy Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt. S. 6:114 Y. Ali

This Qur’an is not such as can be produced by other than God; on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book – wherein there is no doubt – from the Lord of the worlds. S. 10:37 Y. Ali

There is, in their stories, instruction for men endued with understanding. It is not a tale invented, but a confirmation of what went before it, – a detailed exposition of all things, and a guide and a mercy to any such as believe. S. 12:111 Y. Ali

One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring thee as a witness against these (thy people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims. S. 16:89 Y. Ali

A Book, whereof the verses are explained in detail; – a Qur’an in Arabic, for people who understand; – S. 41:3 Y. Ali

The Muslim scripture further attests that Jesus was given the Gospel:

“And He will teach him the Book, the Wisdom, the Torah, the Gospel,” S. 3:48 Arberry

When God said, ‘Jesus Son of Mary, remember My blessing upon thee and upon thy mother, when I confirmed thee with the Holy Spirit, to speak to men in the cradle, and of age; and when I taught thee the Book, the Wisdom, the Torah, the Gospel; and when thou createst out of clay, by My leave, as the likeness of a bird, and thou breathest into it, and it is a bird, by My leave; and thou healest the blind and the leper by My leave, and thou bringest the dead forth by My leave; and when restrained from thee the Children of Israel when thou camest unto them with the clear signs, and the unbelievers among them said, “This is nothing but sorcery manifest.” S. 5:110 Arberry

Then We sent, following in their footsteps, Our Messengers; and We sent, following, Jesus son of Mary, and gave unto him the Gospel. And We set in the hearts of those who followed him tenderness and mercy. And monasticism they invented — We did not prescribe it for them — only seeking the good pleasure of God; but they observed it not as it should be observed. So We gave those of them who believed their wage; and many of them are ungodly. S. 57:27 Arberry

The Islamic text states that the Gospel was in existence at Muhammad’s time, and that Christians were expected to live and judge by it:   

And We sent, following in their footsteps, Jesus son of Mary, confirming the Torah before him and We gave to him the Gospel, wherein is guidance and light, and confirming the Torah before it, as a guidance and an admonition unto the godfearing. So let the People of the Gospel judge according to what God has sent down therein. Whosoever judges not according to what God has sent down — they are the ungodly. S. 5:46-47 Arberry

Had they performed the Torah and the Gospel, and what was sent down to them from their Lord, they would have. eaten both what was above them, and what was beneath their feet. Some of them are a just nation; but many of them — evil are the things they do. S. 5:66 Arberry

The Quran is also aware of certain teachings found in the Gospel:

Say: ‘People of the Book, you do not stand on anything, until you perform the Torah and the Gospel, and what was sent down to you from your Lord.’ And what has been sent down to thee from thy Lord will surely increase many of them in insolence and unbelief; so grieve not for the people of the unbelievers. S. 5:68 Arberry

God has bought from the believers their selves and their possessions against the gift of Paradise; they fight in the way of God; they kill, and are killed; that IS a promise binding upon God IN the Torah, and the Gospel, and the Koran; and who fulfils his covenant truer than God? So rejoice in the bargain you have made with Him; that is the mighty triumph. S. 9:111 Arberry    

Muhammad is the Messenger of God, and those who are with him are hard against the unbelievers, merciful one to another. Thou seest them bowing, prostrating, seeking bounty from God and good pleasure. Their mark is on their faces, the trace of prostration. That is their likeness in the Torah, and their likeness IN the Gospel: as a seed that puts forth its shoot, and strengthens it, and it grows stout and rises straight upon its stalk, pleasing the sowers, that through them He may enrage the unbelievers. God has promised those of them who believe and do deeds of righteousness forgiveness and a mighty wage. S. 48:29 Arberry

The Muslim scripture is even aware that the Gospel was sent down after the time of Abraham:

People of the Book! Why do you dispute concerning Abraham? The Torah was not sent down, neither the Gospel, but after him. What, have you no reason? S. 3:65 Arberry

The word Injil is always used for the Christian revelation, and particularly associated with Jesus. This word also occurs only in Medinan passages, with the exception of 7,156/157 which is traditionally regarded as late Meccan though it seems to have some Medinan references. The origins of Injil are clearly the Greek euangelion, Evangel, Good News, Gospel (Old English god-spel). Whether it entered Arabic from Syriac or Ethiopic has been debated, but the Ethiopic wangel has a long vowel like Injil and this suggests that the word was brought over by Abyssinian Christians and it was probably in widespread use in Arabia before Muhammad’s time.1

Herein lies the problem.

Despite claiming that it is a scripture which explains all things in detail, the Quran fails to identify what the Gospel given to Jesus happens to be.

For instance, is the Gospel the revelation which Jesus proclaimed orally? Or does it also encompass the deeds of Christ, and not just to what he preached?

Does the Gospel mentioned in the Quran also refer to its eventual inscripturation, which became the means by which Jesus’ proclamation was preserved? After all, how could the Christians of Muhammad’s day live and judge by the Gospel if the term does not encompass the written component of the revelation given to and through Christ?

And since the only Gospel that the Christians of Muhammad’s day possessed are the four Gospels of the New Testament canon, wouldn’t this, therefore, prove that the Muslim scripture confirms the canonical Gospels as the preserved words of God?

Or does the Quran have in mind the diatessaron, which was a harmonization of the four Gospels into Syriac, composed by the Assyrian pupil of Justin Martyr named Tatian around 170 AD?

This Gospel harmony was what the Syriac speaking Christians went by until the fifth century AD when the Peshitta was produced, which contained a translation of all four of the Gospels separately.

How does any Muslim actually know?       

The Islamic scholar George Parrinder’s statements exemplify the confusion that academics in the field face in trying to figure out the Gospel that the Quran has in view:  

Whether Injil must be understood narrowly of the Gospel that Jesus preached, or more widely of the New Testament, the Christian scriptures, is a difficult question. Jesus brought the Gospel, but Christians later had the ‘Injil in their possession’. (7,156/157). This is a complex matter, and discussion must be deferred till later when consideration is given to the relationship between the words of Jesus and the four Gospels written by the evangelists, and the interdependence of the teaching and the life of Jesus.

The word Gospel (Injil) occurs twelve times in the Qur’an, as follows:

3,2/3: ‘He sent down the Torah and the Gospel aforetime as guidance for the people.’

3,43/48: ‘He will teach him the Book and the Wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel.’

3,58/65: ‘Why do ye dispute about Abraham, seeing that the Torah and the Gospel were not sent down till after his time?’

5,50/46: ‘We gave (Jesus) the Gospel, containing guidance and light, confirming the Torah which was before it, and as guidance and admonition to those who show piety.’

5,51/47: ‘Let the people of the Gospel judge by what God hath sent down therein; if any do not judge by what God hath sent down, they are the reprobate.’

5,70/66: ‘If they had established the Torah and the Gospel, and what has been sent down to them from their Lord, they would have eaten from above and from beneath their feet.’

5,72/68: ‘O People of the Book, ye have nothing to stand upon until ye establish the Torah and the Gospel and what has been sent down to you from your Lord.’

5,109/110: ‘I have taught thee the Book and the Wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel.’

7,156/157: ‘The Gospel in their possession, urging them to what is reputable, and restraining them from what is disreputable, making good things allowable for them and foul things forbidden, relieving them of their burden and the shackles which have been upon them.’

9,112/111: ‘A promise binding upon him in the Torah, the Gospel, and the Qur’an.’

48,29: ‘What they are compared to in the Gospel is a seed which puts forth its shoot.’

57,7: ‘We gave (Jesus) the Gospel.’

In the Meccan sura 19,31/30 comes the word attributed to Jesus: ‘He hath bestowed on me the Book’. The above verses show that Jesus was given all the truths enshrined in the sacred books, the Torah and the Wisdom. Ibn Ishaq said that ‘in the Gospel is what Jesus brought in confirmation of Moses and the Torah he brought from God.’1

The holy books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are seen as belonging to a sacred succession; they are not outdated, but all bring divine truth to give guidance to men. Sura 3,2/3, addressed to Muhammad, says: ‘He hath sent down to thee the Book with the truth, confirming what was before it, and he sent down the Torah and the Gospel aforetime as guidance for the people, and he sent down the Furqan’. The Furqan is ‘discrimination’ or ‘revelation’. According to Zamakhshari it is used of the whole class of heavenly books, as in 21,49/48: ‘We gave to Moses and Aaron the Furqan and illumination.’ But in 3,2/3 and 25,’ and elsewhere it seems to be used of the Qur’an: ‘Blessed be he who hath sent down the Furqan upon his servant. ‘ In this sense the Qur’an is the Furqan as discrimination or criterion of truth, to make clear what went before. It is not an abrogation of previous scriptures, but a confirmation and a touchstone of truth, making clear what they meant: ‘This Qur’an is not such as to have been invented apart from God; but it is a confirmation of what is before it, and a distinct setting forth of the Book in which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.’ So also 2,98/97: ‘ Gabriel – verily he hath brought it down upon thy heart with the permission of God confirming what was before it.’ (Geoffrey Parrinder, Jesus in the Qur’ān [OneWorld Publishers, Oxford England, Reprinted 1996], 15. Gospel (Injil), pp. 142-144; bold emphasis mine)

Parrinder believes that the Muslim book does not differentiate between the Gospel of Jesus and the Gospels which the Christians possessed:

Behind the written books is the heavenly original or archetype, the ‘Mother of the Book’ (umm al-kitab). ‘Lo it is in the Mother of the Book in our presence, exalted, wise.’ (43,3/4; 3,5/7; 13,39) And again: ‘A messenger from God reciting sheets kept pure, in which are Books true.’ (98,2) Messengers may be thought of as receiving books from God, copies of the heavenly original, as some of the apocryphal epistles said that Jesus had a book which he revealed to his disciples.1

There is no suggestion in the Qur’an that the Gospel given to Jesus was different from the canonical Gospels held by Christians. This is a matter of importance, in view of later Muslim polemic. Indeed the Qur’an enjoins the ‘people of the Gospel’ to ‘judge by what God hath sent down therein‘. (5,51/47) It speaks of ‘ the Gospel in their possession’ (7,156/157) and urges them to follow the messenger spoken of in it. The Qur’an itself is sent down to confirm the Book which was before it, and to act as a ‘protector over it’. (5,52/48) (Ibid., p. 145; bold emphasis mine)

Parrinder also mentions Muslims who reject the idea of the Quran proclaiming that the text of the previous Scriptures has been corrupted:

Later Muslim writers spoke of the ‘corruption’ (tahrif) of the scriptures by Jews and Christians. The Ebionites, JudeoChristians, had already accused the Jews of corrupting their scriptures. Muslim writers differed in their opinions about what had been done. Some scholars (e.g. Biruni) declared that Jews and Christians had actually altered the text of the Bible. But others (Tabari, Ibn Khaldun, etc.) said that they had interpreted the words incorrectly. It was argued that tahrif meant to change a thing from its original nature, but no man could possibly corrupt words that came from God. So at the most Christians could only corrupt by misrepresenting the meaning of the word of God. Muslims could do the same with the Qur’an and Jews with the Torah. The Gospel was in its original purity, but it was possible to distort its meaning by unsound arguments. This was the teaching of Bukhari, and sura 3,72/78 was quoted to show that the Jews might misinterpret the scriptures yet these remained intact: ‘A part of them twist their tongues in the Book, that ye may think it to be a bit of the Book, though it is not a bit of the Book Be ye rabbis in virtue of your teaching the Book, and in virtue of your having studied it. ‘

In modern times some popular polemic may blame Christians for corrupting the Gospel, yet there are Muslim commentators who prefer the view that exposition has been at fault rather than any tampering with the text. Sayyid Ahmad Khan, who wrote the first commentary on the Bible by a Muslim, followed this viewpoint and he tried to bring Christian and Muslim exegesis into agreement. Another writer says: ‘In the Koran tahrif means either false interpretation of the passages bearing upon Mohammed or non-enforcement of the explicit laws of the Pentateuch. As for the text of the Bible, it had not been altered… No rival text is assumed.’1

There remains the difficult problem of the relationship between the Gospel, the Good News that Jesus taught, and the record of his words in the four Gospels. There is no evidence that Jesus ever wrote a line of his teaching. Muslims also believe that Muhammad was illiterate and hence the written Qur’an was recorded by his followers; secretaries like Zaid ibn Thabit collected the written and oral fragments from ‘scraps of parchment and leather, tablets of stone, ribs of palm branches, camels’ shoulder-blades and ribs, pieces of board, and the breasts of men’. A similar process took place with the Gospel, though it had long been written down by the time of Muhammad. The canonical Gospels had been separated by the church from apocryphal legends. The first evangelists collected their material, as Luke says, from eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, and they tried to trace ‘the course of all things accurately from the first’. (Lk. 1,2f.)  (Ibid., pp. 146-147; bold emphasis mine)

What the foregoing highlights is that the only thing clear about the Quran is that it is far from being a perspicuous scripture. Rather, it is a confused, incoherent, unintelligible mishmash of fables and instructions that make absolutely no sense without the aid of sources external to itself.

As the Iranian scholar of Islam Ali Dashti put it:

“Unfortunately the Qor’an was badly edited and its content are very obtusely arranged. All students of the Qor’an wonder why the editors did not use the natural and logical method of ordering by date of revelation, as in ‘Ali b. Abi Taleb’s copy of the text.” (Dashti, Twenty-Three Years: A study of the Prophetic Career of Mohammad (Allen and Unwin, London, 1985), p. 28; bold emphasis mine)

And:

“Among the Moslem scholars of the early period, before bigotry and hyperbole prevailed, were some such as Ebrahim on-Nazzam who openly acknowledged that the arrangement and syntax of the Qor’an are not miraculous and that work of equal or greater value could be produced by other God-fearing persons.

“Pupils and later admirers of on-Nazzam, such as Ebn Hazm and ol-Khayyat, wrote in his defence, and several other leading exponents of the Mo’tazelite school shared his opinion. They saw no conflict between the theses of on-Nazzam and the statements in the Qor’an. One of their arguments is that the Qor’an is miraculous because God deprived the Prophet Mohammad’s contemporaries of the ability to produce the like of it; in other times and places the production of phrases resembling Qor’anic verses IS POSSIBLE AND INDEED EASY.

“It is widely held that the blind Syrian poet Abu’l-‘Ala ol-Ma’arri (368/979-450/1058) wrote his Ketab ol-fosul wa’ l-ghayat, of which a part survives, in imitation of the Qor’an.

“The Qor’an contains sentences which are incomplete and not fully intelligible without the aid of commentaries; foreign words, unfamiliar Arabic words, and words used with other than the normal meaning; adjectives and verbs inflected without observance of the concords of gender and number; illogically and ungrammatically applied pronouns which sometimes have no referent; and predicates which in rhymed passages are often remote from the subjects. These and other such aberrations in the language have given scope to critics who deny the Qor’an’s eloquence. The problem also occupied the minds of devout Moslems. It forced the commentators to search for explanations and was probably one of the causes of disagreement over readings.” (Pp. 48-49)

“To sum up, more than one hundred Qor’anic aberrations from the normal rules and structure of Arabic have been noted. Needless to say, THE COMMENTATORS STROVE TO FIND EXPLANATIONS AND JUSTIFICATIONS FOR THESE IRREGULARITIES. Among them was the great commentator and philologist MAHMUD OZ-ZAMAKHSHARI (467/1075-538/1144), of whom a Moorish author wrote: ‘This grammar-obsessed pedant has committed a shocking error. Our task IS NOT TO MAKE THE READINGS CONFORM TO ARABIC GRAMMAR, but to take the whole of the Qor’an as it is AND MAKE THE ARABIC GRAMMAR CONFORM TO THE QOR’AN.’

“Up to a point this argument is justifiable. A nation’s great speakers and writers respect the rules of its language in so far as they avoid modes of expression which are not generally understood and popularly accepted, though they may occasionally find themselves obliged to take liberties. Among the pre-Islamic Arabs, rhetoric and poetry WERE WELL DEVELOPED and grammatical conventions WERE ALREADY ESTABLISHED. The Qor’an, being in the belief of Moslems superior to all previous products of the rhetorical genius, must contain the fewest irregularities.

“Yet the Moorish author’s censure of Zamakhshari is open to criticism on the ground that it reverses the usual argument. This is that the Qor’an is God’s word because it has a sublime eloquence which no human being can match, and that the man who uttered it was therefore a prophet. The Moorish author maintained that the Qor’an is faultless because it is God’s word and that the problem of the grammatical errors in it MUST BE SOLVED BY CHANGING THE RULES OF ARABIC GRAMMAR. In other words, while most Moslems answer deniers by citing the Qor’an’s eloquence as proof of Mohammad’s prophethood, the Moorish author, having taken the Qor’an’s divine origin and Mohammad’s prophethood for granted, held all discussion of the Qor’an’s wording and contents to be inadmissible.” (Pp. 50-51)

“Neither the Qor’an’s eloquence nor its moral and legal precepts are miraculous. The Qor’an is miraculous because it enabled Mohammad, single-handedly and despite poverty and illiteracy, to overcome his people’s resistance and found a lasting religion because it moved wild men to obedience and imposed its bringer’s will on them.” (Ibid., p. 57; bold and capital emphasis mine)

Dashti further stated that,

“The Qor’an contains many instances of confusion between the two speakers, God and Mohammad, in the same verse… Among these many passages are some, like the above, which can be easily explained, but also others which present great difficulty… The presence of confusions between God and the Prophet in the Qor’an cannot objectively be disputed. Sometimes God speaks, giving to the Prophet the command ‘say’ (i.e. to the people). Sometimes the sentence structure proves that it is the Prophet who speaks, expressing devotion to God. The impression conveyed by the Qor’an is that a hidden voice in Mohammad’s soul or subconscious mind was continually impelling him to guide the people, restraining him from lapses, and providing him with solutions to problems.” (Ibid., pp. 150-151)

Finally:

“Confusion between God’s and Mohammad’s words is again apparent in two verses of sura 10 (Yunos). ‘And if your Lord so wished, all the dwellers on the earth would believe together. Are you going to compel the people to be believers?’ (verse 99). ‘It is only (possible) for a soul to believe with God’s permission. And He inflicts vileness on those who are intelligent’ (verse 100). In verse 99 the words are from God and addressed to the Prophet, but in verse 100 the words appear to be Mohammad’s, a sort of self-consolation followed by an explanation of the obduracy of the polytheists who would not heed his teaching.” (Ibid., p. 152)

FURTHER READING

What kind of book is the Injil?

Did Allah give a Greek Injil to the Jews?

Incompleteness and Incoherence of the Qur’an

Analysis of the White versus Zawadi Debate [Part 1]

THE QURAN’S GOSPEL

THE GOSPEL THAT IS WITH THEM

THE QURAN ON INSCRIPTURATION

MATERIAL FOR THE ANDANI DISCUSSION