Claim #1: The text of the Bible has been changed
Muslims often point to the fact that multiple Bible translations exist and claim that this is evidence that the Bible has been corrupted. However, anyone who is bilingual knows that there is more than one way of translating any given word or phrase from one language to another. Even the Quran has numerous translations into English (Yusuf Ali, Pickthall, Hilali-Khan, etc.), yet the integrity of the Quranic text is judged according to the original Arabic rather than the English translation. Thus, common sense dictates that we should judge the integrity of the Bible according to the Hebrew and Greek originals rather than the various English translations. That being said, many Christians today ought to be aware that variations exist in the Biblical text because this appears in the footnotes of almost every English Bible that is printed today. This is another fact that is pointed out as evidence of corruption. However, the mere existence of textual variants does not prove corruption. If this was the case, then variations in the Quran would prove that the Quran has been corrupted as well. Even though textual variants in the Quran are not as well known, they do exist, as pointed out in books such as Textual Criticism and Qur'an Manuscripts by Keith E. Small and Materials for the History of the Text if the Qur'an by Arthur Jeffery, where Quranic variants are amply documented. Muslims would argue at this point that even if variants exist in some Quran manuscripts, this does not mean the text is lost, since they can know the original text of the Quran. Leaving aside the question of whether the Quran has in fact been preserved, this is exactly the case with the Bible. Though there are variants in both Old and New Testaments, we have a wealth of information that enables us to know the original text. For the Old Testament, we have the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Septuagint and the Masoretic Text. For the New Testament, we have over 5,000 Greek manuscripts and over 20,000 manuscripts in other languages. Though these do have variants, through the science of textual criticism, we are able to use the information collected from these texts to know what is original, which is why the presence of variations do not at all detract from the textual integrity of the Bible. Further Information: Is the Bible Corrupted? by Luis Dizon, The New Testament Documents: Are they Reliable? by F.F. Bruce and The Textual History of the Qur'an by Arthur Jeffery
Claim #2: The Quran teaches Biblical corruption
Muslims claim that the teaching that the Bible has been corrupted is based on certain Quranic texts that teach Tahrif (alteration). One such text is the following verse from Surah 2:79: Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands, and then say: This is from Allah, to traffic it for miserable price! Woe to them for what their hands do write, and for the gain they make thereby. There are two problems with interpreting this passage in such a manner. First, the verse is describing an isolated incident. Surah 2:75 states that only small party of Jews is being described, and that this is not universal. We know from history that the Jews were generally very careful in preserving their text (eg. the Masoretes), so this incident must be regarded as an exception rather than the rule. More importantly, the verse in question says nothing about Christians being involved. Second, there is the fact that in Islamic theology, there are two types of Tahrif: Tahrif i lafzi (corruption of the actual text), and Tahrif i manawi (corruption of the meaning only). All Quran verses that teach tahrif only teach the latter (ie. the interpretation is wrong but the actual text is still intact), and the earliest generations of Muslim commentators such as Ibn Abbas and Ibn Munabbih confirm this. Even with the possible exception of Surah 2:79, this verse is ambiguous as it could just as easily be referring to secondary Jewish writings such as the Talmud (which Orthodox Jews regard as being as authoritative as the Bible) as it could be to the Bible. Besides, the Quran states that it has come to confirm what is between its hands (Surahs 3:3 and 5:48). This would not make sense if the text at that time had been altered, since then the Quran would be confirming a corrupted text! The Quran also states that God made Jesus disciples superior to the unbelievers until the day of Resurrection (Surahs 3:52-55 and 61:14). It would not make sense, then, if their writings were corrupted or if unbelievers have successfully passed on their own writings as coming from Jesus disciples, since that would mean the unbelievers have triumphed over them. Finally, the ahadith state that Muhammad treated the Torah reverently, which only make sense if they were still intact.
Claim #3: The Trinity is not taught in the Bible
The problem with discussing the Trinity is that it is often not properly defined. Thus, a definition of the Trinity must first be given. A good definition is one given by James White in The Forgotten Trinity which is this: Within the one Being that is God, there exist eternally three co-equal and co-eternal persons, namely, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. At this point, the question arises whether belief in the Trinity is compatible with monotheism. The answer is yes, as long as one does not assume a priori that the only form of Monotheism is Unitarianism (the belief that God is one Being and person). As shown in the description, the first pillar of the Trinity is monotheism, as affirmed by in the Shema: Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one (Deut. 6:4). However, the word used in this verse for one (ekhad) allows for a complex unity to exist within the Being of God, as shown in other instances of its usage (cf. Gen. 2:24 and Num. 23:13). This is also seen in places where God refers to Himself as Us (Gen. 1:26, Isa. 6:8). Contary to popular belief, this is not a mere expression of a plural of majesty. Biblical scholar Gleason Archer notes, This first person plural can hardly be a mere editorial or royal plural that refers to the speaker alone, for no such usage is demonstrable anywhere else in biblical Hebrew. Muslims also take issue with the idea of Jesus being both God and man, even though both Old and New Testaments point to this concept. For example, in Isa. 9:6, the coming Messiah is said to be Mighty God, a title that is applied directly to Yahweh in Isa. 10:21. The Messiah is also given the divine title Yahweh our Righteousness in Jer. 23:6. He is also called the Word, which existed from the beginning and became flesh (Jn. 1:1-18), and has divine prerogatives such as forgiving sins (Mk. 2:1-12). He also claims to be the great, eternal I Am (Jn. 8:24, 58) Taken as a whole and in context, the Gospels clearly show He is divine. Finally, there is the deity of the Holy Spirit, which, although not as explicit, is nonetheless there. He is identified as God in Acts 5:34. It is also said that the Lord is the (not a) Spirit in 2 Cor. 3:1718, and that the Spirit alone knows the thoughts of God in 1 Cor. 2:11, which only makes sense if He is qualitatively divine.
Further Information: The Integrity of the Bible According to the Qur'an and the Hadith by Ernest Hahn
Further Information: A Brief Definition of the Trinity by James White and The Christian Doctrine of God by Luis Dizon
Claim #4: The Bible predicts Muhammads coming
The belief that the coming of Muhammad is in the Bible is based on two verses of the Quran: Surah 7:157, where it states that the People of the Book will find him described in their books, and Surah 61:6, where Jesus is said to predict a messenger after Him named Ahmad. Because of these two verses, Muslims have attempted to find something in the Bible that may be construed as referring to Muhammad. The problem is that most of the verses used are divorced from their historical and grammatical contexts. An examination of two primary proof texts will show this: The first proof text is Deut. 18:18, where God says to Moses: I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers. And I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak to them all that I command him. There are numerous problems with interpreting this as referring to Muhammad, however. First of all, Jesus disciples already made explicit that this passage referring to Him (Jn. 6:14, Acts 3:22, 7:37). Jesus Himself said that the Law testifies to His coming (Jn. 5:39, 46). Also, brothers in this context refers to the Israelites, as shown in other usages of the word in the immediate context (Deut. 17:14, 20, 18:2). Deut. 18:15 even states that the prophet will come from among you. That should already show beyond doubt that the prophet being referred to would be a Jew, which disqualifies Muhammad. The second proof text is Jn. 14, where Jesus talks about how God would send the Spirit of Truth to His disciples. The problems with taking this passage as a reference to Muhammad should be obvious: First, this Spirit will abide with the disciples forever, so He cannot be a mortal man. Second, this Spirit will dwell in Jesus disciples (Jn. 14:17). This cannot be a reference to a human being, as one cannot dwell inside another person. Finally, this Spirit is sent in Jesus name (Jn. 14:25), whereas Muhammad is sent in Allahs name, which means that Muslims cannot use this verse without inadvertently affirming Jesus deity. There are many other proof texts, but these are the main ones, and they and other such texts are shown not to be references to Muhammad at all. This should cause problems with believing the Quran, since that means Surah 7:157 is false since Muhammad is not, in fact, being described in the Bible.
Claim #5: Blood atonement is not taught in the Bible
Aside from the nature of God, the other main difference between Christians and Muslims concerns salvation. Muslims deny the Christian view of atonement since the Quran states that no soul can bear the burden of another (Surah 35:18). In fact, Surah 4:157 is often cited as a denial that the crucifixion ever happened. While this verse is unclear and has spawned many interpretations, the most common one is that another man who looked like Jesus was crucified in His place. But if it was made to appear that Jesus died, then what about Jesus disciples? Were they fooled into thinking He died as well? If so, then we cannot fault them for writing in the New Testament that Jesus died. In other words, according to this view, Allah inadvertently started Christianity by an act of deception. That aside, nobody can deny that the Bible teaches atonement without rejecting the entire Biblical narrative. For example, the Torah states that a yearly sacrifice is necessary so that Gods wrath would not fall upon Israel. This is the festival of Yom Kippur, which is described in Lev. 16. The chapter after this explicitly states: The life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you on the altar to make atonement for your souls, for it is the blood that makes atonement by the life (Lev. 17:12). In addition, one must reckon with the Prophets and Psalms, which explicitly talk about the Crucifixion. Psa. 22:16, for example, talks about how the Messiahs hands and feet will be pierced. Isa. 53 talks about the Suffering Servant who bears the sins of His people through His suffering and who makes intercession for sinners. These were written hundreds of years before Jesus, which shows that Christians didnt invent them. Finally, one must reckon with Jesus Himself, who predicted His death and resurrection numerous times (Mk. 8:31, 9:31, 10:33, etc.). Muslims say that He did not want to go to the cross, yet one cannot make this claim without chopping the Gospel narratives into pieces. Taken as a whole, the Gospels show that He went to the cross purposefully. When the soldiers captured Him in the garden, He states that if He wanted to escape, He could have summoned the angels to rescue Him (Mat. 26:53), yet He didnt, because He said He would offer His life as a ransom for many (Mk. 10:45).
Christian Answers to Islamic Dawah
In the world today, there are two primary missionaryminded religions: Christianity and Islam. Both faiths seek to proclaim its message to the entire world. We see this command given in the Bible when Jesus commands His followers to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit (Mat. 28:19). Likewise, the idea of calling non-believers into the Islamic faith is taught in the Quran:
Invite all to the Way of your Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for your Lord knows best, who have strayed from His Path, and who receive guidance (Surah 16:125). In accordance with this verse, Muslims have devised numerous arguments to convince Christians to revert to Islam. With less-informed Christians, it has seen varying degrees of success, but better informed Christians are able to see the flaws in logic, history and interpretation behind these. In this tract, five common claims are presented and the problems behind them discussed. While this tract does not address every issue exhaustively, it is hoped that the information presented will provide enough of a response to show some of these basic flaws. At the end of each claim is a link to an article or book that the reader (if he is open minded enough) may look up on Google for more detailed information on the issues in question. For people who want to learn more, please check out the following websites:
Alpha and Omega Ministries: http://www.aomin.org Creed 2:6: http://blog.creed26.com Dr. Tony Costa: http://www.freewebs.com/tonycosta/articles.htm
Further Information: Does the Bible Predict the Coming of Muhammad? by Tony Costa
Further Information: Sacrifice: Jesus Christ Made Atonement for Sin by J.I. Packer and The Death of Deaths by Bob Deffinbaugh
The Aristophrenium: http://aristophrenium.com/tags/islam
