Prophet Muhammad was a Witness, A Bearer of Glad Tidings and a Warner

Verily, We have sent you (O Muhammad SAW) as a witness, as a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner  [48:8, Interpretation of the Meanings of The Noble Qur'an (Hilali-Khan)]


Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk 

Calamities as the fruit of our tyranny

The Quran demands that we see calamities as the fruit of our own tyranny, and recognize that our suffering is rooted in our attachment to all that is other than God. For calamities compel us to acknowledge our dependence upon our Creator; they force us to see that we need to offer our servitude to none other than God alone. When we recognize this, we are liberated from the oppression of both the self and others, and whatever befalls us reveals itself as a tribulation from the sole source of all that was, is, and ever will be. The Quran states: "Those who when calamities befall them say, 'We belong to God alone, and to God we return' - these are the ones who have grace from their Lord and mercy" (2:156-157).

 [The Prayer of the Oppressed, Hamza Yusuf,Sandala Productions, 2010, Kindle]

What does the Aramaic word name for Jesus tell us?

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk 

'Pluralism in Islam' Arguments Refuted by Bassam Zawadi

 A Brief Response to Arguments Made by 'Radical Muslim Pluralists'

 

My definition of "radical Muslim pluralist" for the sake of this short piece is a Muslim who believes in many paths to God and that Islam isn't the only one. 

A number of years ago, we addressed some of the logical arguments put forth by radical pluralists in general. In this piece, we will address the scriptural arguments radical Muslim pluralists utilize to push forth their deviated views. 

Argument #1: In Surah 2, Ayah 62, Allah says that Christians and Jews could enter heaven if they believe in Allah and the Last Day and do righteous deeds.

What does "belief" in Allah mean though? If we define "belief" to merely entail "acknowledgement of existence", then even Satan "believes in Allah". 

Rather, to have faith in Allah is to submit to and accept Him for who He truly is and how He revealed Himself to us (e.g. not in a Trinity and not as a God of any false religion). If we don't get the "identity" of God correctly, then anyone can just point to anything and call it "God" and "believe in it" and believe in a judgement day and do good works and then go to heaven! This is surely absurd. 

The Prophet (peace be upon him) made it clear that acceptance of him is mandatory for Christians and Jews:

By Him in Whose hand is the life of Muhammad, he who amongst the community of Jews or Christians hears about me, but does not affirm his belief in that with which I have been sent and dies in this state (of disbelief), he shall be but one of the denizens of Hell-Fire. [Saheeh Muslim, Book 1, Hadith 284]

The Prophet (peace be upon him) made it clear that Christians and Jews aren't on the Fitrah:

No baby is born but upon Fitra. It is his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian or a Polytheist. [Saheeh Muslim, Book 33, Hadith 6426]

The Qur'an makes it clear that they have committed shirk and are misguided:

And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion. Say, "Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance." If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper. - Surah 2, Ayah 120

They say, "Be Jews or Christians [so] you will be guided." Say, "Rather, [we follow] the religion of Abraham, inclining toward truth, and he was not of the polytheists." - Surah 2, Ayah 135

They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers. - Surah 5, Ayah 72

They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah , and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him. - Surah 9, Ayah 31

The list of evidences for the kufr of the Jews and Christians are endless. 

So how do we then understand 2:62? The reasonable way to understand this verse is by understanding the verse to be referring to the Jews truly following the way of Prophet Musa 'alayhi assalam and to the Christians truly following the way of Prophet Isa 'alayhi assalam. 

To understand it as referring to Christians and Jews who reject Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is ridiculous and one could only wonder why God bothered to send a prophet to a people when their situation seems to already be fine supposedly. 

For a more in depth look at this verse, one could read pages 239-292 of Ibn Taymiyyah's تفسير آيات أشكلت على كثير من العلماء. 

Argument #2: The Qur'an says in Surah 49, Ayah 13 that we were created in order to "know one another".

This part of the verse is emphasizing that one shouldn't be arrogant and look down on others because of race. 

The verse also continues on to say:

Verily, the most honourable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa.
And at-Taqwa can't be devotion to a false God! Those who are truly devoted to God are the most honourable. So in that sense, not all human beings are equal in the sight of Allah. 

Argument #3: The Qur'an says in Surah 5, Ayah 82: "...and nearest among them in love to the Believers will you find those who say 'We are Christians' "

Let's not quote out of context please. Read the next verse:

And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, "Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.

Are there any Trinitarian Christians today who match such a description?

Also, why did you ignore the first part of the verse which mentioned the Jews...

You will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers [to be] the Jews

You ignore this and try to appeal to 2:62 in order to demonstrate that Jews would enter heaven. This is sheer academic dishonesty. 

Argument #4: The Qur'an in Surah 22:40 says: "Did not God check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure." This shows that God is not only worshiped in mosques.

First of all, the burden of proof is on the claimant who says with a certainty that "name of God is commemorated" applies to monasteries, churches and synagogues in the verse along with mosques. There are scholars who said that it only connects back to mosques. 

Secondly, scholars who said that it does also apply to monasteries and churches, said that this is only applicable when worship was done right. 

Thirdly, mere mention of Allah's name doesn't mean anything. One may claim to believe in Allah, yet still be deluded (see 29:61 & 39:3).

Argument #5: Muslims through time have been accustomed to regarding themselves as constituting “a middle” or “moderate nation/community” (Ar. umma wasat) on the basis of Qur’an 2:143, which applies this designation to them. This designation has been enthusiastically adopted by Muslims both as an indication of divinely conferred distinction upon them and as a divine mandate to avoid extremes in one’s beliefs and conduct. What is less well known, however, is that this verse has its parallel in Qur’an 5:66 in which righteous Jews and Christians are also described as constituting a “balanced” or “moderate” community” (Ar. umma muqtasida). The Qur’an thus clearly suggests in these two verses that moderation inheres in righteous conduct independent of theological doctrine or denominational affiliation. Such a view transcends sectarianism and paves the way for Muslims to retrieve a divine mandate for religious pluralism from the Qur’anic text and its exegeses.

But what is a "righteous" Jew or Christian? Well the verse itself clarifies when it says:

And if only they upheld [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to them from their Lord, they would have consumed [provision] from above them and from beneath their feet. Among them are a moderate community, but many of them - evil is that which they do.

The Torah was revealed to Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) and the Injeel was revealed to Prophet Isa (peace be upon him). Today the Jews follow the Pentateuch (not revealed to Prophet Musa) and the four Gospels (not revealed to Prophet Isa). The verse also says that they should have followed "what has been revealed to them from their Lord" and that is surely the Qur'an. Do the Jews and Christians of today follow the Qur'an? The answer is obviously no. Since they don't, that means that they don't have a leg to stand on as Allah says two verses later in 5:68:

Say, "O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord." And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people.

These people aren't "moderate" until they do. In fact, the Qur'an calls them extreme (see 4:171) and so does the Prophet (peace be upon him) when he said: "Do not praise me excessivelyas Jesus, son of Marry was praised" (Saheeh Bukhari, Vol. 8, Book 82, Hadith 817)

Any mention of righteous people from the People of the Book needs to be understood as entailing that they accepted the Prophet (peace be upon him). Surah 7, Ayah 157 says:

Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel, who enjoins upon them what is right and forbids them what is wrong and makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil and relieves them of their burden and the shackles which were upon them. So they who have believed in him, honored him, supported him and followed the light which was sent down with him - it is those who will be the successful.

Argument #6: In Saheeh Bukhari, we read that the Prophet stood up for the funeral of a Jew. He said "Was he not a living soul?". 

First of all, just because Islam recognizes the sanctity of a person's life that doesn't mean that it also recognizes that he's on the right path. 

Secondly, the Prophet (peace be upon him) didn't stand up in honor of the Jew in order to hold him in high regard.

It was narrated from Anas that:

a funeral passed by the Messenger of Allah and he stood up. It was said: "It is the funeral of a Jew." He said: "We stood up for the angels." [Sunan an-Nasa'i, Vol. 3, Book 21, Hadith 1931]

We read another reason why the Prophet (peace be upon him) stood up:

It was narrated from Ja'far bin Muhammad from his father that: Al-Hasan bin 'Ali was sitting when a funeral passed by. The People stood until the funeral had passed, and Al-Hasan said: "The funeral of Jew passed by when the Messenger of Allah was sitting in its path, and he did not want the funeral of a Jew to pass over his head, so he stood up." [Sunan an-Nasa'i, Vol. 3, Book 21, Hadith 1928]

In another narration, there was once a funeral of a Jewess and the Prophet (peace be upon him) stood up because he was bothered by the strong scent (most likely incense) coming out of her (see Silsilat al-ahaadeeth as-Saheeha, no. 3349 by Sheih Nasr ud-Deen al-Albani).

The Prophet (peace be upon him) also said one should stand up in order to recognize the enormity of death:

It was narrated that Jabir bin 'Abdullah said: "A funeral passed by us and the Messenger of Allah stood up and we stood with him. I said: 'O Messenger of Allah, it is a Jewish funeral.' He said: 'Death is something terrifying, so if you see a funeral, stand up,"' This is the wording of Khalid. [Sunan an-Nasa'i, Vol. 3, Book 21, Hadith 1923]

It was narrated that Abu Hurairah said: “A funeral has passed by the Prophet and he stood up and said: ‘Stand up out of recognition of the enormity of death.’” [Sunan ibn Majah, Vol. 1, Book 6, Hadith 1543]

The point is not be heedless of death and undermine its significance. This is why the Prophet (peace be upon him) emphasized on the soul of the Jew and not in honor of the Jew himself. 

Argument #7: The Qur’an states that Jews and Christians argue against each other, each claiming that the other is wrong, even though they read the same Scripture, which is the Tanakh or the Old Testament. Today, many Muslims also make a similar claim that both Jews and Christians are wrong. Actually, the Qur’an specifically denounces such claims from anybody and calls those who make such claims as people without knowledge. “The Jews say: “The Christians have nothing (to stand) upon; and the Christians say: “The Jews have nothing (to stand) upon.” Yet they (profess to) study the (same) Book. Like unto their word is what those say who know not; but Allah will judge between them in their quarrel on the Day of Judgment.” [Qur’an 2:113] This is yet another proof from the Qur’an showing that anyone who thinks that either Jews or Christians have nothing to stand upon has no knowledge.

This is a very strange and odd inference from the passage. 

In fact, what the passage is pointing out is the irony of the Jews and Christians differing with one another so fundamentally despite them reading the same book. 

It also says "Like unto their word is what those say who know not" and the majority of commentators say that this is referring to the pagans of Mecca, for they also said that Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) had "nothing to stand on" along with the Jews and the Christians. 


Argument #8: The Qur'an says in 5:48 "so race to [all that is] good. " The Qur’an does not take a narrow sectarian view as many theologians tend to do. It possesses a very broad humanitarian view and lays emphasis not on dogma, but on good deeds. And it strongly condemns evil deeds which harms the society and humanity at large. In this respect also it makes no distinction between Muslims and non-Muslims.

Anyone who has read the Qur'an knows that the emphasis is always on "faith and good deeds" and not good deeds alone. Allah makes it clear that without faith, one's good deeds could go to waste:

It is not for the polytheists to maintain the mosques of Allah [while] witnessing against themselves with disbelief. [For] those, their deeds have become worthless, and in the Fire they will abide eternally. - Surah 9, Ayah17

Argument #9: The Qur'an says in 5:48, "For each one of you We have appointed a law and a way". The Qur’an acknowledges that plurality is a fact of life and part of the order of the world. This plurality manifests in, among other things, religious diversity. God had given different revelations which led to the founding of different religions to see who is more obedient to Him

Yes, it's true that different Messengers had different divine laws which they followed. The laws in the Torah differed from those found in the Gospel which differed from those found in the last revelation (i.e. Qur’an and Sunnah). Nevertheless, all these Messengers preached the same message of monotheism and that is something one needs to have corrected in order to be saved. 

Argument #10: Islam in 3:19 and 3:85 could mean submission in the wider sense and not necessarily referring to the institutionalized Islam as we know it today. The Qur’an also calls the sorcerers of Moses, once they were defeated, to have become Muslims [Qur’an 7:126]. The Qur’an portrays that Moses requested the Children of Israel to become Muslims [Qur’an 10:84]. The Qur’an also shows that when Pharaoh was drowning, he too prayed that he has become a Muslim, while the Qur’an then shows that it was only when his drowning was imminent did he realize the true G-d [Qur’an 10:90–92]. Even when Solomon sends a message to the Queen of Sheba, he requests her and her people to become Muslims [Qur’an 27:31, 38, 42, 44]. Lot’s household is even called by the Qur’an as a Muslim household [Qur’an 51:36]. The Qur’an also shows that the religion of G-d is for people to become Muslims, since everyone in the heavens and the earth is a Muslim, willingly or unwillingly [Qur’an 3:83]. The Qur’an also calls all the prophets to the Children of Israel as Muslims [Qur’an 5:44]. When looking at it from an overall perspective, it seems obvious that the term for Muslim that is used in the Qur’an does not necessarily mean to be the follower of the religion known today as Islam. The term for Muslim used in the Qur’an may be understood as anyone who has surrendered his soul to G-d and submitted to the Will of God. 

A Muslim is anyone who submits to God, but what does "submitting to God" mean? It must entail submitting to the true God. Do Jews and Christians today who deny the God who sent Muhammad (peace be upon him) "submit to God"? Surely not. 

Muslims surely existed before Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), since there were prophets before him and they had their followers. So during their time, they were submitting to God. Right now, the only divine message left with us is the final one which Muhammad (peace be upon him) was sent with. That could only be found in the "institutionalized" Islam of today.

Argument #11: ِAllah says in Surah 10:99 "And had your Lord willed, those on earth would have believed - all of them entirely." This shows the pluralism of Islam.

Rather this shows that people have the free will to believe or disbelieve and it's all under Allah's Will. The verse in no way, shape or form is saying that all religions are acceptable to Allah.

__________________

Taken from: http://ahlalhdeeth.com/vbe/showthread.php?t=17510

 

People having dreams and converting to Islam:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/christians-are-having-dreams-and.html

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Pastor Usama Dakdok Is A Proven Liar

Usama Dakdok continues to lie about Islam. It's really sad that somebody who knows Arabic and English would lie like this.

Coptic Pastor Is a Proven Liar About Islam

This vide is also uploaded here

[18:22]
Some will say, “(They were) three, the fourth of them being their dog,” and some will say, “Five, the sixth of them being their dog, just making conjectures.” And others will say, “Seven, the eighth of them is their dog.” Say, “My Lord knows best about their number.” No one knows them except a few, so do not argue about them except an apparent argumentation. And do not ask anyone of these about them.

http://www.altafsir.com/ViewTranslations.asp?Display=yes&SoraNo=18&Ayah=22&toAyah=22&Language=2&LanguageID=2&TranslationBook=9

Usama Dakdok invited to give up lying and come to Islam

Usama, I understand speaking venomously about Islam and Muslims to Christian audiences across America is your way of earning a livelihood. Riding on the wave of Islamophibia after 9/11 to make money is not edifying. I urge you to drop the lies, the hatred and the pride.

I invite you to Islam.

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam:
http://thefactsaboutislam.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/christians-are-having-dreams-and.html

Invitation to Islam for Coptic Christians and others

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim.

Flat Earth Polemic - Yasir Qadhi

Muslim Imam Response to Paris Terrorist Attacks

Similarities Between Catholic Terrorist Group IRA and Muslim Terrorist Group ISIS

Explanation: Zaynab Bint Jahsh's Marriage to Prophet Muhammad p Dr Yasir Qadhi

Dhul Qarnayn and the Exegetes' Speculation of Alexander The Great

Murder Rates in Muslim Countries Compared to Non Muslim Countries.

The Hitler Propaganda on Muslims

Sharia Law against terrorism

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Islam is true, zakir naik, Abdullah kunde, Abdullah al andalusi, pam geller, Robert spencer, deen show, Jeremy paxman, Richard dawkins, hamza tzortzis, peter hitchens, maajid Nawaz, Mehdi Hassan, quilliem, anjem choudhary,

Was there something wrong with Ancient Qur'anic Manuscripts of Sana'a? Bro Adnan Rashid answers

Shk Haitham Al Haddad The Qu'ran A Concise History and the Compilation of the Quran

If you want to learn more about the history of the Quran and its compilation feel free to view the presentations by Sheikh Haitham Al Haddad.

 

History of Compilation of The Qur'an - Sheikh Haitham Al Haddad - Sabeel Study Retreat

Hieroglyphs Affirm the Historicity of the Qur’an

ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD PHARAOH

Advances in our understanding of ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs have shown that the Qur’an’s use of the term ‘Pharaoh’ is historically accurate.

The word ‘Pharaoh’ is a title that originates from the Egyptian term ‘per-aa’, literally “great house”, describing the royal palace. Historically, however, “Pharaoh” only started being used as a title for the king much later in Egyptian history, during the New Kingdom period. 

Read more here:

http://manyprophetsonemessage.com/2013/11/13/hieroglyphs-affirm-the-historicity-of-the-quran/

Foolish Christian Argument 'that Quran Teaches Earth is Flat' Back-fires

Usama Dakdok spreads the false flat earth claim about the Quran. It's turned around on him. Refuted via a clip of Dr Jamal Badawi


This video is also uploaded here


I was in a discussion yesterday with a young Muslim struggling with his faith. He mentioned that he had read from sources critical to Islam that the Quran clearly contradicts known facts and represents the world-view of its time (7th century CE). And of the most blatant examples, according to him, was that the Quran clearly preaches that the world is flat. Now, I have said and firmly believe that the genre of 'scientific miracles in the Quran' that we all grew up reading is in fact a dangerous genre, because it reads in 'facts' where no such facts exist, and because it posits one's faith on a purely scientific basis (so that when 'science', which is ever-evolving, might seem to contradict the Quran, this will lead to a weakness of faith). Nonetheless, to claim that the Quran preaches that the world is flat is an outrageous claim. In fact there is unanimous consensus amongst medieval Muslim scholars to the contrary.

Ibn Hazm (d. 1064 CE), wrote over a thousand years ago in his book al-Fisal, "I do not know of a single scholar worth the title of scholar who claims other than that the earth is round. Indeed the evidences in the Quran and Sunnah are numerous to this effect" [al-Fisal, v. 2 p. 78].

Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328 CE), someone who is typically accused of literalism, wrote that there is unanimous consensus of all the scholars of Islam that the world is round, and that reality and perception also proves this, for, as he writes, it is well known that the Sun sets on different peoples at different times, and does not set on the whole world at the same time. In fact, writes Ibn Taymiyya, it is truly an ignorant person who claims that the earth is not round. [Majmu al-Fatawa, v. 6, p. 586]. And there are many others scholars, such as al-Razi, who wrote on this subject, and I do not know of any medieval scholar who held another view.

All of this shows the necessity of gaining Islamic knowledge from reputable sources, and from verifying anything you read from the people of knowledge.

From Dr Yasir Qadhi's FB

Murder Rates in Muslim Countries Compared to Non Muslim Countries.

Is Limited Atonement Doctrine Taught Clearer than the Trinity Doctrine in the New Testament?

Synoptic Gospels and the Idea of a Pre-Existant Jesus?

Christian Inconsistency Around Arguments for Prophet Muhammad in the Bible

Paula Fredriksen: Paul was NOT a Trinitarian

Tovia Singer: Does the New Testament Teach Jesus is God?

Why Islam

Christians having dreams and converting to Islam

Sharia Law against terrorism

Invitation to IslamJesus taught people to do the Will of God (Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.thedeenshow.com
Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Does the Qur’an Contain Foreign Words? by Hamza Tzortzis

Linguistically the concept of foreign words in languages is described as ‘borrowing’ [1]. The idea of borrowing words is a universal observation that applies to all languages. English is a good example of this; take the word ‘Philosophy’. It comes from the Greek words ‘Philo’ which means love of and ‘Sophia’ which means wisdom. The concept of ‘foreign’ or ‘borrowed’ words comes from the fact that different races, cultures and peoples come in contact with one another [2].

What was specific about the Arabs at the time of revelation was that they came into contact with other cultures due to trade and had subsequently borrowed certain words. [3]These foreign words in the Qur’an had already been naturalised into the Arabic language before the revelation of the Qur’an [4]. These words were already in use in the Arabic language. [5] According to Imam Shafi’i [6] these words had been fully integrated into Arabic and were already a part of the language [7].

These foreign words include:
Mount (Qur’an 95:2) borrowed from Syriac
Heavy (Qur’an 18:31) from Persian
Sinai (Qur’an 95:2) from Nabatean
The Inscription (Qur’an 18:9) from Greek
The Sea (Qur’an 7:136) from Coptic
Brilliant (Qur’an 24:35) from Abyssinian
To turn onto someone (Qur’an 7:156) from Hebrew[8]

With reference to the Qur’anic statement that it is a “Plain Arabic Qur’an” [9] al-Suyuti believes that the presence of a few foreign words does not make it any less Arabic then the presence of foreign words in a Persian Poem would not make it any less Persian [10]. Additionally the reference to “Plain Arabic” is to the Qur’an as a whole, and not the individual words in it [11].

To conclude, claims made by some critics are debased by understanding the nature of languages and how they naturalise foreign words into their vocabulary. This phenomenon happens as a result of different cultures and races integrating and coming together. Furthermore the Qur’an can be described as ‘plain Arabic’ because the foreign words in the Qur’an had already been naturalised and were already part of the Arabic language before revelation.

References
[1] G. Yule. 1985. The Study of Language. Cambridge University Press, p. 52
[2] H. Abul-Raof. 2003. Exploring the Qur’an. Al-Makhtoum Institute Academic Press, p. 38
[3] F. E. Peters. 1994. Muhammad and the Origins of Islam. State University of New York, Chapter 3; and Hasan Dhiya’ al-Din. 1988. al-Ahruf al-Sab’ah wa-Manzilat al-Qira’at Minha. Beirut: Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah, p. 37
[4] Exploring the Qur’an, p. 39
[5] Ibid
[6] Died in 820 CE
[7] Cited in A. Jeffrey. 1938. The Foreign Vocabulary of the Qur’an. Baroda: Oriental Institute, p. 110
[8] Exploring the Qur’an, p. 39-40
[9] Qur’an Chapter 16 Verse 103
[10] al-Suyuti. 1996. al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Qur’an. Vol. 1. Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Ulum, p. 367
[11] Exploring the Qur’an, p. 40

http://www.hamzatzortzis.com/1638/does-the-quran-contain-foreign-words/

False Claim: 'Muhammad learnt from Waraqa - the relative of Khadija'

Some folk continue to make the ignorant claim of Waraqa being the source of the Quran. If these folk were actually aware of the facts their reasoning would not allow them to make such a claim. The fact remains, Prophet Muhammad (p) only ever met him twice, Waraqa was a blind man and he died three years into the revelation of the Quran (the Quran was revealed in a period of roughly 23 years):

Muhammad's contacts with the Jewish and Christian scholars were very limited. The most prominent Christian known to him was an old blind man called Waraqa ibn-Naufal who was a relative of the Prophet's first wife Khadija (ra). Although of Arab descent, he was a convert to Christianity and was very well versed with the New Testament. The Prophet (pbuh) only met him twice, first when Waraqa was worshipping at the Ka'aba (before the Prophetic mission) and he kissed the Prophet's forehead affectionately.

The second occasion was when the Prophet (pbuh) went to meet Waraqa accompanied by his wife Khadija (ra) after receiving the first revelation. Waraqa died three years later and the revelation continued for about 23 years [in total the revelation took about 23 years]. It is therefore ridiculous to assume that Waraqa was the source of the contents of the Quran, as he died at the very beginning of the Prophet-hood [Bracketing mine] - Quotes in red from, Islam: Silencing the Critics, Zia Sheikh, 2nd Edition, 2012

Scientific facts in the Quran:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiLBGHwX_4c

Jesus taught people to do the Will of God (according to Mark 3:35) in order to become his brothers, mothers or sisters. A Muslim means one who submits to the Will of God. Do you want to become a brother of Jesus? If yes, become a Muslim. Now is the time.

Learn about Islam:
http://www.whyislam.org/

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Clarification: Sperm Production and the Quran

Some Christians claim that the Quran has a scientific error in it regarding sperm production
 This is incorrect

The critic focuses on the verses 86:6-7, especially verse 7 as this is where their contention is directed. The critic claims the Quran (86:7) is telling us that semen is produced between the backbone (sulb) and the ribs (tara’ib). The Arabic words mentioned by the Quran are sulb and tara’ib. Tara’ib is thought to mean ribs, though there is some dispute. However, the chief point of interest is the word sulb. Sulb  can be translated as ‘loins’ or ‘backbone’ or ‘lower back’.

The critic favours the translations which use the word ‘backbone’ as they use it to attack the Quran by claiming the Quran teaches that semen is produced between the backbone (sulb) and the ribs (tara’ib).

However, the critic is very selective in deciding which translation to use as he/she avoids the numerous translations which translate ‘sulb’ as ‘loins’. They avoid these translations as they scupper their critical claims straight away as loins. Here, the word loins refers to:

a. The region of the hips, groin, and lower abdomen.
b. The reproductive organs. [1]

So the critic refrains from using this translation for the word sulb as it is clearly scientifically accurate, ie the semen is produced in the are between the loins and ribs. So, if we translate the Quran (86:7) this way there is no contention.

The misleading methodology of the critic is to avoid mention of the numerous translations which translate the word sulb as loins.Not only do they avoid mentioning the numerous translations using the word ‘loins’ they highlight translations which use the word ‘backbone’.

This is rather deceptive, especially considering a number of non-Muslim translators, including a Christian translator, translates it as ‘loins’ ( A.J Arberry, George Sale, J.M Rodwell and Henry E Palmer) as well as a number of Muslim translators who also use the word loins (Hamid S Aziz, Muhammad M Ghali, Muhammad M Pickthall and Mohammad Asad) [4]. It is unscholarly as well as misleading on the part of the critic not to mention this important fact.

However, the critic does use Abdullah Yusuf Ali’s translation which translates it as ‘backbone’, therefore rendering a meaning of between the backbone and ribs. So the critic understands the Quran as teaching us that semen is produced between the backbone and ribs. In the way of intellectual honesty I do not want the reader to believe that only Abdullah Yusuf Ali translates this verse by using the word ‘backbone’, Shakir and Khan/Hilali also do this. The question still remains; which word should be used in the translation?

 Well, the critic does not tell you that Dr Edward William Lane’s Lexicon indicates the word sulb’ to mean ‘loins’ and even refers to the verse in question (86:7) as referring to the ‘loins’. So it does seem that the more accurate translation of this would be “between the loins and the ribs” as opposed to “between the backbone and the ribs” [4]. Hence the critic uses the weaker translation.

However, even if we assume the critic to be correct and take the translation; “between the backbone and the ribs” we still see no scientific error. The critic assumes that the ejaculate (semen) emanates from the testes, this is incorrect.  Sperm is produced in the testes and is then transfered to the seminal vesicles awaiting ejaculation, this accounts for 5 % of the ejaculate, the rest of the ejaculate comes from the seminal vesicles (46-80%),with the prostate gland and the bulbourethral and urethral glands producing the rest of the ejaculate [2]. At the time of ejaculation, all this (semen, which contains the sperm) is released

From the seminal vesicles which are in fact between the backbone (coccyx, lower back) and the ribs! So if we run with the translation of the critics we see something that people would describe as a scientific miracle and not a scientific error.

Osama Abdallah says the same thing but goes into a little more detail (bracketing is mine):
 “If one was to insist upon the literal meaning (the translation favoured by the critics), one would still find that the Quran is 100% correct literally, too.  The seminal vesicles are anterior to the sacrum and coccyx (lower back, loin) and the ribs are anterior to the seminal vesicles. If one was to draw a line from the tip of the coccyx, to the upper portion of the seminal vesicle _ either one of the two_ and extend the line forward it will catch the ribcage.The seminal vesicles from which the semen spurts out during coitus, lies between the ribs and the coccyx (backbone)!” [3]

The irony is that the critics accuse the Quran of making a scientific error yet the error is on their part as they only believe it to be an error as they wrongly believe semen emanates from the testes, while in fact in emanates from the seminal vesicles which are in between the backbone and the ribs! So now we all know the critics are being unfair, unscholarly and misleading when they claim the Quran (86:6-7) tells us that semen is produced in the kidneys etc.

May Allah guide us all to further Truth. Ameen.

 Further reading:

This short article lent very heavily on Fotfoundation’s video presentation on this subject. This two part video presentation (in my view) is the best explanation of this subject and most in depth (all praise is due to Allah) so if the reader wishes to study further then please view:

Part 1 by Fotfoundation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMQPkDKnOCM&feature=video_response
Part 2 by Fotfoundation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eghBcXYddk&feature=response_watch

Other further readings:
http://www.understanding-islam.com/related/text.aspx?type=question&qid=100

http://answering-christianity.com/munir_munshey/semenproduction_rebuttal.htm

References

1. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/loins
2. http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/menshealth/facts/semenandsperm.htm
3. http://answering-christianity.com/munir_munshey/semenproduction_rebuttal.htm

      4. Part 1 by Fotfoundation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMQPkDKnOCM&feature=video_response
          Part 2 by Fotfoundation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eghBcXYddk&feature=response_watch

Email: yahyasnow@yahoo.co.uk

Does the Quran Confirm the Bible?

Refuting the booklet named: ‘The Quran confirms the Word of God’

Article by Yahya Snow

This booklet fell into my possession on the 07th of February (2009-02-08), while I was in Bradford, UK.
A group of Christian missionaries were distributing free literature and I conversed with them and they kindly allowed me to take some of the literature whilst I stated that I had reservations concerning the truthfulness of the Christian missionary literature focussing on Islam, especially after seeing the title of the booklet being examined as I clearly recognised it to be based upon unscholarly and deceptive foundations.
I must clear the missionaries of any charge of mindful deception as they were there handing out the literature in good-faith, believing it to be reliable. I highly doubt they knew of these deceptions and lack intellectual integrity their booklet contained. To further clear them of mindful deception they did ask me to show them any falsehoods within there literature and gave a sincere impression that they would remove the literature if proven to be deceptive whilst also condemning deceptive preaching techniques. However, they should be more vigilant in checking sources, especially literature concerning other faiths; this would at least prevent the spread of corrupted Christian missionary material as it would be intercepted at source after realising it to be unreliable and misrepresenting.

While I write this article on the 08th of February 2009, I have an intention to meet the missionaries I met again and show them this article in the near future, Insha’Allah (God willing), as well as send a copy to the publishers/distributors of the book in question in the hope that they will fear God and desist from spreading falsehoods and deceptions intentionally/unintentionally, whichever the case maybe for the respective parties.
I must state from the outset that the misconceptions/falsehoods that the booklet is based upon have been refuted many times over and I was well aware of the Christian missionary ‘claim’ prior to receiving the booklet. On a scholarly level their arguments have been debunked many times over comprehensively by more learned Muslims all over the world yet many zealous Christians still propagate it, either through ignorance of the truth or in flagrant disregard of the truth in the hope it will deceive and result in a convert to their faith.
A word regarding the author, F.S. Copleston, I believe he has passed on now, may Allah (Arabic name for God) have mercy on him if he passed away in a state that Allah would allow His mercy to befall on such a person. F.S. Copleston received his training in the early 1900s, which is an age where there was a lot of orientalist falsehoods and missionary propaganda regarding Islam being banded about and unfortunately many of those ended up being the basis of literature arguing against and even insulting Islam. An example and one of the most copious examples of the lack of scholarly rigour and deception around is the work of Rev. W. St. Clair Tisdall, of course his material has been fully refuted and the erroneous nature based on a lack of research exposed many times over by Muslims but what interests me more is that many modern anti-Islamic polemics still reference and use it, despite it being openly exposed as erroneous and lacking truth. Coupling all of that with the fact that modern scholarship has even denounced his work as ‘missionary propaganda’ (1). We must really condemn the lack of sincerity, zeal for the truth and honesty these missionaries have.

Before we go into the heart of the claims the author makes, despite these Christian claims being around for a while, I am still of the position that both lay Muslims and lay Christians will find it to be an odd claim. Both parties will have their own reasons for finding the claim to be unbelievable, the Muslims will say that the Quran teaches the opposite to those claims and it is a basic Muslim belief that the Books of the Jews and Christians have been corrupted. The Christians would cite the Muslims’ constant criticism and disbelief in the modern-day Bible as enough evidence to find the missionary claim to be difficult to believe.

As a reference point, it is important to state the relevant Muslim beliefs concerning the Bible before fully refuting the booklet by Copeston.
There are still a few misconceptions out there when it comes to the Muslim belief concerning the Bible and it is important to clear these up in this article, one of these misconceptions is the one which is espoused by Copleston. I would imagine there are two main misconceptions out there, the two being:

1. Muslims believe the Bible to be the Word of God and they receive their beliefs and practices from the Bible (Copleston implicitly spreads and supports this misconception in his booklet)

2. Muslims fully reject the Bible and all the Biblical figures (including Jesus and other Prophets etc)

These misconceptions will be cleared up within this article, God willing. In order to educate people concerning Muslim beliefs and thus clear any mis-perceived ideas people may have this article begins with a summary of Muslim beliefs. Muslims follow a religion called Islam. Islam means submission to the Will of God.

Muslims believe in all the Prophets (peace be upon them), including Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammed (peace be upon them) and we believe all Prophets to be Muslims (a Muslim is someone who submits to the will of God, thus the Prophets fit within this definition). We also believe that God Almighty (Allah) sent Prophet Moses (p) and Prophet Jesus (p) to the Jews of their respective times. The previous Prophets (p) were sent to a particular people limited to their respective times and thus, their message was never meant for people of other locations or other times. The last message sent with Prophet Muhammad (p) is for all people and all times. The essential message of all the Prophets was the same and they all taught monotheism and sincere devotion to the One and only God

As this article is directed towards Christians and less knowledgeable Muslims it would be appropriate to clarify that Muslims believe Jesus (p) as a Prophet of God, just like other Prophets such as Abraham, Moses, David and Muhammed etc. Muslims do not believe in Jesus to be God or the son of God. Muslims only believe in one supreme God (the God of Abraham and all the Prophets and all of creation) and are pure monotheists (monotheists are people who believe in the One God).

Muslims believe that the above mentioned Prophets (p) were sent with Scriptures from Allah (God), this includes the Taurah (sent with Moses, p), al-Injeel (sent with Jesus, p) and the Quran (sent with Muahmmed, p). The Muslim belief is that the Original Torah and Injeel no longer exist their pure and original form (i.e. the Torah and the Gospel have been corrupted and thus the modern day Bible is not accurate or reliable). The Quran is the final revelation from God and this Book has not been corrupted and remains the pure Words of God and mankind must use this Book for guidance now and in the future

Moving onto Copleston’s writings, his booklet comprises of 12 pages. The first page begins with a brief, 2 paragraph, and introduction in the form of a foreword by the author. A summary of the main objectives/claims (explicit or implicit) of Copleston’s book are:

1. To convince Muslims into thinking that the Quran fully supports and agrees with the Bible (page 2 of Copleston’s book)
2. Copleston suggests that the Quran never mentions that past Scriptures were changed by men
3. Copleston suggests the Quran confirms the current Bible as the uncorrupted word of God and thus tries to influence Muslims to subscribe to Christian beliefs, this is the main and most consistent theme in his booklet and the first 7 pages are all devoted in efforts to ‘prove’ his claims
4. He suggests that the Quran instructs Muslims to ask Christians, thus implying that Muslims should learn religious knowledge from Christians (page 2 of Copleston’s book)
5. Page 3 and 5 of his book respectively suggest/imply that the Quran states that the Bible can never be changed as well as suggesting the Quran is not the last Book from God
6. Page 8 of his booklet contains a veiled challenge to Muslims to prove the Bible has been changed
7. Before going on to evangelise Christianity, on page 9, Copleston claims Christians have a personal relationship with God while Muslims do not and he worryingly suggests that Christians know where they will go after death (implying paradise!)

All the above claims will be refuted within this article, God willing.

The first claim/objective:
1. To convince Muslims into thinking that the Quran fully supports and agrees with the Bible (page 2 of Copleston’s book)

This first claim of Copleston is linked to his second claim, so more information will be given when answering his second claim. To prove this is an incorrect belief or claim we must look at the Quran and analyse it in order to see if it agrees with the Bible as well as checking the Quran to ascertain what the Quran says of the Bible and Christian beliefs.

So what does the Quran say? Well Copleston clearly did not read the Quran in its entirety, he either just read excerpts of the Quran without any contextual understanding or he was in the business of deliberately deceiving people, Christians and non-Christians alike! These, of course, are hefty charges and I am reluctant to accuse him of deliberate deception as I do not know what was in his heart and what knowledge he actually possessed. I say this as it is clear the Quran contradicts the Bible and Christian beliefs thus destroying Copleston’s first suggestion! A few examples from the Quran will suffice to show that the Quran does not agree 100% with the modern-day bible.

· The first example is the Christian belief that Jesus (pbuh) is the son of God. The Quran does NOT agree with this Christian belief thus does not agree with the Bible here as the Christians get their beliefs from the Bible . In fact one of the most popular chapters in the Quran (surah 112) states that God has NO son. Now, Copleston has an obvious problem as the Quran disagrees with a major Christian belief, yet he suggests in his booklet that the Quran agrees with the Bible. This either exposes Copleston’s lack of knowledge of the Quran or it exposes him as a deviant and a deceiver as the quote from the Quran (112) is one of the most popular verses by the Quran, memorised by millions, if not billions of Muslims. Therefore, Copleston either did not read the Quran or was dishonest.

· The second example I will give to you is that the Quran clearly opposes the Trinity. Again, showing Copleston’s claims to be inaccurate and completely disregarding honesty. The following verse from the Quran is obviously NOT agreeing with Copleston’s Bible:
O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not Trinity: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. [Quran 4:171]

The above mentioned verse from the Quran shows that the Christian doctrine has been changed and thus the Quran corrects it by rejecting the Trinity and stating that Jesus is an Apostle of God and the Son of Mary (Not God)
Also 10:68-70 shows God has no son and those who make up a ‘lie’ about God are to be punished, here the modern Christian belief of trinity is seen as a lie!

● Also the Quran disagrees with the Bible concerning the crucifixion, in fact the Quran states that it did NOT happen, once again Copleston’s claims look silly as Christians believe Jesus (p) was crucified. The Quran states:
That they said (in boast), We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. [Quran 4:157].

In fact Christians get their beliefs from the modern-day Bible, yet the Quran is telling us that those who believe in the crucifixion follow ‘conjecture’, therefore ‘conjecture’ is within the Bible. This is making Copleston’s booklet look like the missionary propaganda that it is.
So, to summarize, Copleston’s attempt to convince Muslims into thinking that the Quran fully supports and agrees with the Bible (page 2 of Copleston’s book)
Is shown to be unscholarly and a gross deception as I have demonstrated that the Quran clearly disagrees with the Bible by giving three key examples that concern crucial Christian theological beliefs, i.e.
*The Quran REJECTS the trinity
*The Quran teaches us God has NO son
*The Quran teaches us that the crucifixion did NOT happen

Another thing Copleston fails to mention is that the word ‘Bible’ is never mentioned in the Quran. This throws further refutation and humiliation on his claim; ‘It is obvious that the Quran fully confirms all the Scriptures in the Holy Bible’ (Copleston page 3). It must be said in the way of a side-note to further educate the uninitiated, the word ‘Bible’ is not even mentioned within the Bible.
The Quran only mentions the
~Tawrat (Revelation given to Moses, pbuh),
~the Zabur (Revelation given to David, pbuh)
~the Injeel (Revelation given to Jesus, pbuh)

Please note that the Tawrat, Zabur and Injil mentioned in the Quran are NOT the same as the Biblical Torah (first 5 books of Old Testament), the Zabur is not the same as the Psalms of David and the Injeel is not the same as the 4 Gospels of the New Testament. A short explanation outlining a coupe of reasons illustrating why it is clear that they are not the same has been given in the reference section (2), feel free to read this.
I mention the fact that the Quran does not mention the Bible to illustrate the lack of honesty, integrity and scholarly endeavour within those who spread this type of Christian missionary propaganda.The fact that the Quran does not even mention the Bible also helps show the lack of truth in his second claim

2. Copleston suggests that the Quran never mentions that the past Scriptures were changed by men

Copleston shows his lack of Quranic knowledge again when he suggests that God does not say in the Quran that past Scripture was changed. God clearly did and the following Quotes establish this fact.

Before referring the reader to verses of the Quran I would like to divert the Christians attention to the bible as the Bible in Jeremiah appears to be telling the Christians that past Scripture was changed by the scribes (this highlights the lack of Biblical knowledge on the part of the Christian missionaries:

"How can you say, 'We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us'? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie. (From the RSV Bible, Jeremiah 8:8)"

This quote from Jeremiah seems to confirm that the scribes did change the past Scripture, this is exactly what Muslims believe and the Muslim belief is held by Jeremiah in the Bible. This does seem to be an eye-opening statement within the Bible. Also a saying of a companion of the Prophet Muhammed (p) also highlights the fact that the past scripture was changed:
Narrated Ubaidullah: "Ibn 'Abbas said, 'Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Quran) which has been revealed to Allah's Apostle is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Holding Fast to the Qur'an and Sunnah, Volume 9, Book 92, Number 461)"

So without even referring to the Quran we (both Christians and Muslims) realise that past scripture was altered. However, the point of this section is to show that the Quran does teach that past Scripture was changed.

Sura 4:157 from the Quran is showing that the Christians follow conjecture. Conjecture is clearly a form of corruption and we must ask ourselves, what Book do the Christians follow? Of course they follow the New Testament; therefore the New Testament contains conjecture according to the Quran, thus indicating the New Testament to be a corrupt document.

That they said (in boast), We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah.;- but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjecture to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. [Quran 4:157]

The following Quotes will also show Copleston’s claim to be false (please note, the Jews were the people that the original Torah and the original Injeel (Gospel) were sent to by Allah:

Among the Jews are those who distort words from their [proper] usages…. (Quran 4:46)

O Messenger! (Muhammad) Do not be grieved by those who vie with one another in the race to disbelief, of such as say with their mouths: "We believe" but their hearts believe not, and of the Jews: of them are those who listen eagerly to lies -listener to others who have not come to you. They change the words from their places; they say: If you are given this then take it, but if you are not given this then beware! He whom Allah dooms unto sin, you (by your efforts) will avail him naught against Allah. Those are they for whom the will of Allah is that He cleanse not their hearts; for them there is a disgrace in this world, and in the Hereafter a great torment.
(5:41)

And also the Quran in 2:79 as well as 9:30 clearly point to the fact that Scripture was changed and thus the entire Bible is not from God

…So woe to them for what their hands have written, and woe to them for their earnings. (Al-Baqarah 2:79)

9:30 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth

The Quran also mentions this in Surah 5:
But because of their breach of their covenant, We cursed them, and made their hearts grow hard; they change the words from their (right) places and forget a good part of the message that was sent them, nor wilt thou cease to find them- barring a few - ever bent on (new) deceits: but forgive them, and overlook (their misdeeds): for Allah loveth those who are kind. [Quran 5:13]

It is apt that we finish this section with ‘Allah loveth those who are kind’ as I will be kind to Copleston and again suggest he made these mistakes concerning the Quran out of ignorance and a lack of knowledge concerning the Quran and Islam. I also urge other Muslims to be kind to any Christians they meet who are propagating these incorrect views about Islam and kindly advise them that they are propagating deceptions .Therefore, I will not accuse him of wilful deception but Allah knows best! We should also pray that God guides the missionaries to the truth of Islam and pray that they do not deceive people about Islam with missionary propaganda such as the booklet by Copleston

With this prayer we can move on to his next claim:

3.Copleston suggests the Quran ‘confirms’ the current Bible as the pure Word of God and thus missionaries try to influence Muslims to subscribe to Christian beliefs, this is the main and most consistent theme in his booklet and the first 7 pages are all devoted in efforts to ‘prove’ his claims

Of course this belief of Copleston looks silly in the light of what has been said previously in this article. So it is clear that the Muslim position concerning the Bible is that it is a corrupted text and thus cannot be trusted. Now, to be fair, I am not accusing Copleston of outright lying but he has used deceptive quoting by omitting the proper context in order to try and substantiate his claims. Again, to be just, (the Quran teaches us this) it is my opinion that Copleston lacked thorough knowledge of Islam and this deficiency led him to this serious error. It is my sincere hope that he has not led anybody astray through his lack of understanding. The example of Copleton here really does embody the saying “a little knowledge is dangerous”.

His claim again looks silly as the word ‘Bible’ has never been mentioned in the Quran, so, quite, how he came to the conclusion the Bible is confirmed by the Quran I do not know!
However, in the way of academic honesty and thoroughness I must mention that Copleston does cite quotes from the Quran that he uses to try and substantiate his claims. The Christian Missionaries quote the following verses claiming that these verses contain the root word of ‘confirm’ i.e. ‘Saddaqa’ and thus establish that the Bible from cover to cover is uncorrupted.

Copleston cites many references from the Quran that contains a derivative of the word ‘confirm’ when speaking of previous Scripture. He uses these quotes to try and support his suggestion that the Quran 100% endorses his Bible to be the uncorrupted Word of God. His references from the Quran are listed on the page 2 of his booklet and they include, 10:37, 3:3, 35:31, 2:97, 2:285, 4:47, 4:162-164, 5:47-51, 5:69, 5:71-72, 29:46, 32:23, 46:11-12, 3:4, 2:87-89, 4:136

There are a number of reasons why the references he cites from the Quran do NOT confirm his Bible to be the unchanged Word of God

* The word “Bible” is not mentioned in the Quran, therefore, logically, the Quran cannot be confirming the Bible to be the 100% Word of God (This has been stated earlier in the article).

*The Quran disagrees with the Bible on important issues thus it is nonsensical to think the Quran would state that the Bible is 100% correct. (This has been stated earlier in the article).

* The Quran contains verses showing that previous Scripture (including Christian Scripture) has been corrupted (This has been stated earlier in the article). Therefore the Quran does exactly the opposite to what the Christian missionaries are claiming.

* Copleston quotes out of context and is very misleading, the context of his quotes and an explanation of them will be given in order to further show that the Quran does NOT agree with the Christian missionary propaganda.

I would like to refute the crux of his claim by giving the context, as his claim is hinged on taking verses out of context and are really just a deceitful game of semantics and trickery. He misquotes as he fails to understand and more importantly mention the context within the Quran, thus he quotes the Quran out of context and thus renders his booklet as misleading. Allah describes the Quran as the Criterion (al-furqan) in Chapter 25 verse 1 of the Quran. Al-Furqan means criterion which distinguishes from right and wrong as well as between truth and falsehood. The reason why Copleston makes the error he does is due to him missing the key point of the Quran being the criterion of what is correct and incorrect. The Quran in chapter 5 also teaches us that the Quran is a watcher/trustworthy witness over previous Scripture. This “watch” is concerning the fact that if you do use the Quran as a criterion then you realise what is correct and what is incorrect in previous Scripture.
"And unto you have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it and a watch over it ....” The Holy Qur’an, Chapter 5, Verse 48
Therefore the context that Copleston fails to mention is that Muslims use the Quran as a criterion to judge what part of a past Scripture is correct and which part is false. So, in short, the Muslim believes everything that the Quran agrees with in the past Scripture is confirmed as being true and whatever parts of a past Scripture the Quran disagrees with then those parts that differ to the Quran are confirmed to be false, i.e. corrupted.

To further emphasise this important context I will give a few examples:
The Bible states in the New Testament, "And Jesus answered him. The first of all commandments is hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord" (Mark 12:29)

Now, in order to confirm this statement, the Muslim uses the Quran as the Furqan (Criterion to judge what is true or false) and realises that the Quran confirms the above mentioned quote from the Bible as the Quran states in chapter 112:1, Say He is Allah, the One.

And similarly with other passages from the Bible, i.e. when it is stated in the Bible that Jesus (pbuh) is the son of god the Muslim has to use the Quran as the Furqan (criteria to judge what is correct and what is false) and we find in many verses of the Quran that God has no son (Quran 21;25-29, 19:88-95, 25:1-13, 43:81-82, 23:91-92), therefore the Quran shows Muslims that the claim that God has a son is false!

The Holy Quran goes further and shows both Jesus and Mary to be humans and states that Jesus is a messenger (5:75-76). Christians may not accept that Jesus is a Messenger of God as it is written in the Quran but the Bible also states that Jesus (pbuh)is a Prophet, Gospel of Matthew 21:11; “And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee”.
This just further highlights the contradictory nature of the Bible, the Bible (Matthew 21:11, 21:46, Luke 24:19, John 4:19, 6:14, John 7:40) is telling Christians that Jesus is a prophet, obviously, by definition, a Prophet is not God!

Also the Bible claims God had a ‘rest’ on the seventh day of creation, The Quran shows us that the Bible is incorrect on this matter as the Quran (2:255) teaches us that God does not get tired, (Neither slumber, nor sleep overtake Him, 2:255), therefore the Quran confirms the Bible to be incorrect on this matter.

Now the context has been given to the references with the root word of confirm let us examine the references which he tries to use as ‘evidence’ in his misleading attempt to establish his claim
 Chapter 35 Verse 31
 Chapter 10 Verse 37
 Chapter 2 Verse 97
 Chapter 4 Verse 47
 Chapter 5 Verse 46 – 48
 Chapter 46 Verse 12


The word used, in the verses above, comes from saddaqa and it means
To say (tell, speak) the truth; to be true, truthful, sincere. – [Al Mawrid Arabic to English Dictionary, pg 691]

Thus the Quran is “speaking/telling the truth” about previous Scripture. This form of confirmation agrees with the context that we outlined earlier (regarding the Quran being the criteria to confirm what is true or false).
We have already seen the Christian missionary claims to be out of context and lacking accuracy but there is even more humiliation that is to be heaped on their propaganda, Copleston cites the Chapter 5 Verse 46 – 48 from the Quran, the sad thing is, he tries to use it to support his claims but this reference clearly refutes him and teaches us that the Quran is ‘mohaymin’ (watcher /witness/ surety /guardian ) over previous Scripture, i.e. the Quran is to be used to confirm whatever is in past Scripture to be accurate/false by agreeing/ disagreeing with the past Scripture. This clearly shows that the Quran is to be used as a criterion to decide what is right and wrong, similar to the teaching in sura 25:1. Here, Copleston obviously failed to understand this context due to a lack of study as he cites the verse (5:46-48) which teaches Muslims that the Quran is the standard to judge what is true/false in Christian and Jewish scripture!
To further emphasise how Muslims must use the Quran:
Ibn Kathir (commentator) quotes well known Qur'anic commentator Ibn Jarir Al Tabari as saying;
The Qur'an is trustworthy over the Books that preceded it. Therefore, whatever in these previous Books conforms to the Qur'an is true, and whatever disagrees with the Qur'an is false.
Copleston does list other references on page two but the ones I do not mention are irrelevant to his claims and I did not understand why he included them in his booklet.
In his list the missionary cites 5:71-72 (despite not quoting it), it seems to me he did not read this verse as it clearly debunks his claim, this just shows the bizarre nature of Copleston’s work and reflects on the shoddy scholarship of Christian missionary propaganda. As you can see the reference clearly shows Christian beliefs to be false and are described as a blasphemy, yet he still cites it to support his view. He must not have read it!
71. They thought there would be no trial (or punishment); so they became blind and deaf; yet Allah (in mercy) turned to them; yet again many of them became blind and deaf. But Allah sees well all that they do.
72. They do blaspheme who say: "(Allah) is Christ the son of Mary." But said Christ: "O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Whoever joins other gods with Allah, - Allah will forbid him the garden, and the Fire will be his abode. There will for the wrong-doers be no one to help.
He does not mention the next verse (verse 73) but it becomes quite apparent that the next verse pours further refutation on his claims and he ends up looking silly
73. They do blaspheme who say: Allah is one of three in a Trinity: for there is no god except One Allah. If they desist not from their word (of blasphemy), verily a grievous penalty will befall the blasphemers among them.
So as you can see there is absolutely nothing in the Quran that supports Copleston’s claim, all he has succeeded in doing is highlighting his own ignorance of the Quran.

4. Christian missionaries suggest that the Quran instructs Muslims to ask Christians, thus implying that Muslims should learn religious knowledge from Christians (see page 2 of Copleston’s book)

Today this claim is a common deceptive claim by Christian missionaries. They try to trick Muslims into believing what the missionary is preaching; therefore I am glad that I have an opportunity to pull them up on their trickery and deception.
The Christian missionary will quote the following verse (Copleston only half quotes as the second half of the quote opposes Christianity and opposes the Christian missionary trickery); I have underlined the part he does NOT quote:
If thou wert in doubt as to what We have revealed unto thee, then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee: the Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. (10:94)

All Copleston does here is twist things by missing the context of the verse as well as only partially quoting the verse. Both of these render him as misleading.
Before going onto mention the context of this verse let us look at the rest of the verse which modern day missionaries still choose not to quote:
The Truth hath indeed come to thee from thy Lord: so be in no wise of those in doubt. (10:94). God is telling us that this is the Truth from God (the Quran is described as the TRUTH here) and it instructs NOT to doubt it and thus by the way of implication is telling us there is no need to ask anybody else. The last part of the verse (which is not quoted by the missionary) teaches that the Quran is the Truth and it should NOT be doubted and thus the first part of the verse (quoted by the missionary) is shown in a way to be a rhetorical question and does not mean that Muslims must go and ask anybody

Their claim makes even less sense considering that the Quran mentions that previous Scripture has been distorted! It must be said that the Christian missionaries who use this tactic of partial quoting of a verse are not only trying to only deceive Muslims but Christians too. I would ask the missionaries to reconsider their tactics and even ask themselves why they use dishonesty to evangelise their faith to Muslims. Also to pour further refutation on the missionary claims we must ask ourselves; who is the Quran referring to by stating in “then ask those who have been reading the Book from before thee”? Does this actually refer to Christians or does it refer to Scholars of the Scriptures who had converted to Islam (i.e. Abdullah bin Salam)? Where do we get our answers from, well we look at commentary from a companion of the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) concerning this verse in the form of Tafsir ibn Abbas, the commentary states:
“(then question those who read the Scripture) i.e. the Torah ((that was) before you) 'Abdullah Ibn Salam and his followers. The Prophet (pbuh) did not ask nor was he ever in doubt about the Qur'an” (3). To further inform the reader I will tell you that Abdullah ibn Salam was knowledgeable in Scripture and a former Jew who converted to Islam.
So it is quite clear that the commentary is confirming that the verse of the Quran is confirming that the Quran is not telling us to ask Christians! Clearly Copleston and his missionary propaganda have been shown to be incorrect and misleading once again!

At-Tabari (early commentator) also echoes the same view by stating that people such as Abdullah bin Salam (experts in Scripture who had converted to Islam) should be asked. At-Tabari goes further and states “do not ask those who are dishonest or are unbelievers” (4).
Clearly Christians are unbelievers; therefore Muslims should not ask them about Scripture. Thus it is quite apparent that early Muslims did not think that the Quran was teaching them to ask Christians for knowledge concerning Scripture and nor did they ask Christians to gain knowledge from the Scripture. The Christian missionary’s deceptive claims crumbles due to the fact that the Quran is not even referring to Christians as being those who should be asked and nor is the Quran speaking about general Scripture but it is speaking specifically of prophecies about Prophet Muhammed (p) being mentioned in previous Scripture. Therefore it is highly dishonest of the missionary to assert that Muslims must ask Christians to gain knowledge of Scripture as the Quran says NO such thing. The saying “a little knowledge is dangerous” and the other saying, “ignorance is the hand-maid of error” come into mind when pondering upon the claims of the Christian missionaries!
For thoroughness I will mention the context that the missionaries so readily omit. I must also state that my personal English translation of the Quran (Al-Hilali/M.Khan with summarised Quranic commentary by At-Tabari, Al-Qurtabi and Ibn Kathir) contains the context as it has explanation in the way of trustworthy commentary. It is a common ploy by missionaries to omit the commentary as the commentary scuppers their hopes to deceive people. I will briefly explain the context to the verse in the Quran (10:94).
The commentary from At-Tabari clearly shows the missionary slant on the verse is deceptive and misleading and it shows that in no way shape or form must the Muslim ask Christian missionaries to teach them about scripture. These missionaries are people who are following ‘conjecture’ therefore they are NOT people to learn beliefs about God from.

Surah 10:94 is not a general instruction to Muslims to receive religious knowledge from Christians despite the all the Christian missionary trickery, the commentary shows that it is concerning only one particular issue. Surah 10:94 refers to Prophet Muhammad (p) being mentioned in the past Scripture, i.e. prophesies that foretold of his coming. Despite all the corruption within the modern day Bible there are verses within it that many Muslims believe to refer to the last Messenger of God (Mohammed, p). These references include Deuteronomy 18:18 as well as Isaiah 21:7 amongst other verses. As I have not studied the Biblical verses I will not comment and will leave the reader to do further research regarding this. I would recommend writings from Ahmed Deedat concerning these points to further your research; I too, intend to further my research.
I will leave you with some commentary and context to highlight the point that Mohammed (pbuh) is in past Scripture:

"Those who follow the messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures), - in the law and the (7:157)
Ibn Kathir comments on this verse:
This is the description of the Prophet Muhammad in the Books of the Prophets. They delivered the good news of his advent to their nations and commanded them to follow him. His descriptions were still apparent in their Books, as the rabbis and the priests well know. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sakhr Al-`Uqayli said that a bedouin man said to him, "I brought a milk-producing camel to Al-Madinah during the life time of Allah's Messenger. After I sold it, I said to myself, `I will meet that man (Muhammad) and hear from him.' So I passed by him while he was walking between Abu Bakr and `Umar, and I followed them until they went by a Jewish man, who was reading from an open copy of the Tawrah. He was mourning a son of his who was dying and who was one of the most handsome boys. The Messenger of Allah asked him (the father), (I ask you by He Who has sent down the Tawrah, do you not find the description of me and my advent in your Book) He nodded his head in the negative. His son said, `Rather, yes, by He Who has sent down the Tawrah! We find the description of you and your advent in our Book. I bear witness that there is no deity worthy of worship except Allah and that you are the Messenger of Allah. ‘The Prophet said (to the Companions)

Hopefully it will get the Christian missionaries as well as the general Christian public to rethink and review their own understanding of the Bible and act as a stimulus in aiding them to further their search for the truth.

5. Page 3 and5 of his book respectively suggests/implies that the Quran implies that the Bible can never be changed as well as suggesting the Quran is not the last Book from God

First claim
Copleston desperately uses five references (6:34, 6:115, 10:64, 18:27, and 50:29) to try and convince Muslims that the Bible is the uncorrupt Word of God.
Of course his claim is odd because the Quran has clearly taught us that previous Scripture was changed (shown earlier) and we all know that the word “Bible” is never mentioned in the Quran so we already know the Christian missionary is inaccurate.
But his references he cites will still be examined for thoroughness, his claim hinges on him trying to show that the Quran is telling us that the previous Scriptures were guarded against corruption by God. He tries to suggest that the verses in question are telling us that the past Scripture cannot be changed. However the word scripture is NOT even mentioned in any of his references!
Firstly we must realize that the Quran uses the word ‘kitab’ (literally means “book”) for past Scripture or the word ‘Suhuf’ (literally means “pages/papers”), neither the word Scripture (Kitab or Suhuf) nor the word speech (kalam) are mentioned in the Quranic references, therefore it is clear that the Quran is NOT teaching us that nobody could change the past Scripture as the words for ‘Scripture’ were NOT even used in the five cited by the missionary.
The word used in the first 4 references (6:34, 6:115, 10:64, and 18:27) is ‘kalimat’ which refers to decisions/decrees/signs/eternal laws/promises. The missionary tries to use a sly game of semantics in order to convince the Muslim to believe the deception as the word ‘kalimat’ has a literal translation of ‘words’. In fact the English language has a similarity here, the English word, “word” has more than one meaning, it can mean ‘word as in promise’ or ‘word as in a collection of letters arranged in a coherent fashion’. The same is said of the Arabic word in question (Kalimat); it can either mean words, decrees, signs, eternal laws. The meaning always depends on the context of the word. Context is a thing that the Christian missionaries shy away from, as shown earlier in the article.
The references from the Quran; 6:115, 18:27, 10:64, 6:34 (Copleston’s references from the Quran) use the word “kalimat”, which refers to decisions/decrees/signs/eternal laws rather than Scripture.
The word 'Kalimat' has occurred fourteen (14) times in the Quran either independently or prefixed to another word and from the context we realise they do not refer to the Scriptures of the past (Torah, Injeel, Zabur), the Quran uses a separate word for past Scripture and it is either ‘Kitab’ or ‘Suhuf’. The words ‘Kitab’ or ‘Suhuf’ are NOT in any of the references the Christian missionaries cite, therefore the missionaries ignore the CONTEXT of the whole Book (Quran) as well as the context of the individual verses as it is clear from reading the individual verses that there is NO mention of the past Scripture. This just shows the missionary to be corrupt and devoid of any real understanding. Also, in order to gain further understanding concerning the word ‘kalimat’ let us look at another occurrence of the word in the singular form in the Quran (20:129), this occurrence clearly shows that the word is not concerning scripture but refers to decision/decree, this is quite clear! Yet it is not clear to the missionary as they do not research honestly!
Tafsir al-jalalayn (20:129): “And but for a decree that had already preceded from your Lord” (5). It is also quite clear by reading the previous verse coupled with the verse mentioned that it does not refer to Scripture.
All four verses mentioned above use the word ‘kalimat’ which refers to Decrees of God. So the Christian missionary claims fail again and there is no verse in the Quran that says ‘None can alter the Scriptures’.

O People of the Book! Commit no excesses in your religion: Nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in Allah and His apostles. Say not Trinity: desist: it will be better for you: for Allah is one Allah. Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth. And enough is Allah as a Disposer of affairs. [Quran 4:171]
The above mentioned verse uses the word ‘kalimat’ in the singular form; this is clearly not referring to Scripture, so how can anybody of any rational thought still believe the Christian missionary propaganda?

In order to further illustrate the fact that the word kalimat refers to Decisions/Decrees/Promises and not Scripture I will give the explanation of authentic commentators of the Quran concerning some of the verses that contain the word “kalimat”. I give these examples to further the academic credentials of my writings to avoid any doubt and to thoroughly expose the Christian missionary deception and ignorance. I have used commentary from Tafsir Al-Jalalayn, Tanwir-al-Miqbas min ibn-Abbas and my own personal copy of the translation of the Quran that comes with a summarized commentary from At-Tabari, al Qurtabi and Ibn Kathir.

The Quran (6:115) uses the word “Kalimat”- the explanation within Tafsir Al-Jalalayn states that this refers to “none can change His words, either by contravening [His rulings] or evading [His appointed terms]” (6). This clearly indicates that the word (Kalimat) refers to rulings or appointed terms, i.e. decrees.

Now to another verse that uses the same word (6:34); my English translation of the Quran (commentary from At-Tabari, Ibn kathir and Al-Qurtabi) has the word “decisions” in brackets to indicate that the word ‘Kalimat’ does indeed refer to “Decisions”.
Also Tanwir-al-Miqbas min ibn-Abbas sees it as ‘(There is none to alter the decisions of Allah)’ (7). This should be sufficient to further disprove the absurd claims of the Christian missionary but I shall continue with another reference to commentary.
The missionary also cites 10:64. Tafsir, Al-Jalalayn indicates through commentary that it refers to ‘no failing of His promises’ (8).

The last of his references uses a different word, 50:29 uses “qawl”. This does not mean speech (kalam) or past Scripture (‘Kitab’ or ‘Suhuf’); therefore the Christian missionary claim fails once again.
In fact 50:29 further exposes the deception of the missionaries as the previous verse gives the context and accordingly it refers to the Decision/Decree of God; clearly the Christian missionary did not read the verses preceding it or was just interested in trying to deceive. In fact the commentary for the verse in question, 50:29 (Tanwir-al-Miqbas min ibn-Abbas) mentions; “My decree concerning My salves will not be changed this Day” (9).
So it is quite clear that none of the references the missionary cites refer to Scripture as the actual Arabic word in the Quran is different to the word/s meaning past Scripture and due to the fact that the commentaries concerning the relevant verses do not indicate that it refers to Scripture but indicates that it refers to Decrees/Promises Decisions.

In fact NO mufassireen (commentators of the Quran) thought that the Quran ever told them that the Bible (i.e. previous Scriptures with the Jews and Christians) was never corrupted. Yet Christian missionaries insist on this ridiculous claim despite the fact that NO authority on the Quran agrees with them and the Arabic words in the Quran and the context with the Quran do not agree with them. Such is the academically bankrupt and desperate state of their deception!

Second claim
Obviously the Christian missionary will claim that the Quran is not from God as the Quran exposes the Christian beliefs to be incorrect and the Scripture they use to also be incorrect
But his is a weak claim as we have already established that God has shown in the Quran that the past Scriptures are corrupted. So obviously there is a need for clear, pure and uncorrupted Revelation from God. This clear, pure and uncorrupted Revelation is the Quran.

Behold, it is We Ourselves who have bestowed from on high this reminder: and behold, it is We who shall truly guard it [Holy Quran 15: 9]

As Allah mentions that He will guard it we realise this Book cannot be changed and this can be shown in the way of a hypothetical situation; say, if we threw all the copies (including digital copies and the like) of religious Books (i.e. Bible, Quran, Torah) in the sea the only Book that would return unchanged would be the Quran as millions of Muslims have memorised it and it would return to mankind within hours of being thrown into the sea. This is miraculous and illustrates the fact that God is preserving the Holy Quran in a very special way.

6. Page 8 of his booklet contains a veiled challenge to Muslims to prove the Bible has been changed

I will answer his challenge with a few of questions:

Why are there Contradictions within the Bible? Surely if it is an unchanged Book from God then there would be no contradictions within the Book, while the Bible has many contradictions.

Why all the scientific inaccuracies and contradictions within the Bible? Surely these scientific errors and contradictions would not be in an unchanged Book of God but these errors are within the Bible.

Why does the book of Jeremiah (8:8) say that the Torah is corrupt?
Surely Jeremiah was aware that the scribes had changed things in the Torah without authority. The Torah (first five Books of the old Testament) is contained within the Bible according to Christians. Surely the Book of Jeremiah is telling Christians that the Bible is corrupted as the Torah (first five Books of the Old Testament) is contained within the Bible?
Why is the Trinity verse (1 John 5:7) no longer in the Bible? Surely this further proves that the Bible has been tampered with as the verse in question is a proven forgery.
The Christian, upon reading this article may begin to realise the Bible has been changed and may have one final question; “why would God allow the previous Scripture to be corrupted”?
God did not take the responsibility to guard the past Scripture. We must realise that the previous Scripture in question was entrusted to the Rabbis and Priests and thus it only takes one or two corrupt men to start the process of corrupting Scripture by making corrupt copies. The good news is that God is guarding the current Scripture (the Quran) and this Scripture will always be free from corruption.
Verily, We did send down the Taurāt (Torah) [to Mūsa (Moses)]; therein was guidance and light, by which the Prophets, who submitted themselves to Allah’s Will, judged the Jews. And the rabbis and the priests [too judged the Jews by the Taurāt (Torah) after those Prophets] for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah’s Book, and they were witnesses thereto. (Quran 5:44)
7. Before going on to evangelise Christianity, on page 9, Copleston claims Christians have a personal relationship with God while Muslims do not and he worryingly suggests that Christians know where they will go after death (implying paradise!)

Concerning the fact that Copleston was of the belief that he would go to Heaven due to him professing Christianity, the Quran addresses this issue beautifully:
And they say: None entereth Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian. These are their own desires. Say: Bring your proof (of what ye state) if ye are truthful. [Quran 2:111],

Concerning his second claim, Muslims could say the same thing about Christians. His claim is based solely on his own biased views. I, as a Muslim, would state that Christians do not have a personal relationship with God and Hindus and other non-Christians would say the same about Christians. I would say that Christians have no personal relationship with God as the Christians worship Jesus (who is a man and obviously not God, peace be on Jesus).
Of course, I would welcome and pray that Christians who read this article do become Muslims and begin to worship the Creator and not the creation.
May Allah guide us all further, ameen!

References

1. François de Blois, "Review of Ibn Warraq's The Origins Of The Koran: Classic Essays On Islam's Holy Book", Journal Of The Royal Asiatic Society, 2000, Volume 10, Part 11, p. 88

2. The Tawrat mentioned in the Quran can in no way shape or form be said to be the same as Torah of the first 5 books of the bible as it is clear from Deuteronomy (For example, Deut. 1:1-5, and Deut. 34:5-7) mentioning the death and funeral events etc, thus proving that it was not written by Moses and that it has been corrupted, this corruption, from what I can see, is mentioned in Jeremiah 8:8. So clearly Copleston is mistaken in his assertion that the Quran ‘fully confirms’ all the scriptures in the Holy bible’!

The Zabur is not the same as the Psalms of David in the bible. Bible authorities even confirm multiple authors of the Psalms of David ((New International Version Bible Guide page G13, "Psalms"). Coupling this fact with the startling blasphemy (according to Muslim beliefs) within the Psalms (e.g. Ps. 78:65 "God behaved like one drunk with wine") we must conclude that the Zabur is NOT the Psalms. So clearly Copleston is mistaken in his assertion that the Quran ‘fully confirms’ all the scriptures in the Holy bible’!

Similarly, the Injil is not the 4 Gospels in the New Testament, (each authored by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John), the gospels (plural) mentioned in the New Testament were not even written within the lifetime of Jesus, pbuh. It must also be pointed out that the Quran never mentions the gospels (plural) but only mentions gospel (singular). Also, the Bible even mentions that Jesus preached the Gospel (singular, similar to the Quran) and there is no mention of him preaching the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, indirectly their own Bible is telling them that what they have is not what Jesus had, Islam teaches the same thing (plural).Coupling what has already been said about the Injil and the fact the Gospels in the New Testament are contradicted by the Quran we must realise that Copleston is mistaken in his assertion that the Quran ‘fully confirms’ all the scriptures in the Holy bible’!

3. Tafsir ibn Abbas for 10:94:
(And if thou) O Muhammad (art in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto thee) concerning that with which We sent Gabriel, i.e. the Qur'an, (then question those who read the Scripture) i.e. the Torah ((that was) before you) 'Abdullah Ibn Salam and his followers. The Prophet (pbuh) did not ask nor was he ever in doubt about the Qur'an. Rather, Allah was addressing with these words the people of the Prophet. (Verily the Truth from thy Lord) i.e. Gabriel with the Qur'an from your Lord, containing the events of past nations (hath come unto thee) O Muhammad. (So be not thou of the waverers) be not of the doubters.

4. Ibn Jarir at-Tabari (d.311 A.H.-923 A.D.) comments on the verse: "God says to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that if you are in doubt about the truthfulness of what We told you in Revelations - that the children of Israel had not differed concerning your prophet hood before you were sent by God as an Apostle to His people, for they found you prophesied in their scripture, and they knew you from the description of you given in the Torah and Injil - you must confer with those who read the sacred book before you, that is, the people of the Torah and the people of the Gospel, such as Abdullah Ibn Salam and those who, like him, were honest and had faith in you: do not ask those who are dishonest or are unbelievers." (At-Tabari, Jami', vol. II, p. 115)

5. Tafsir al-jalalayn (20:129):
“And but for a decree that had already preceded from your Lord, that their chastisement be deferred to the Hereafter, it, destruction, would have been an inevitability, [their destruction] would have been necessary in this world, and a specified term, fixed for them (ajalun musamman, a supplement to the pronoun concealed in kāna, ‘it would have been’, the separation [of both subjects] by the predicate of both serves as an emphasis).”

6. Perfected is the word of your Lord, in the way of rulings and appointed terms, in truthfulness and justice (sidqan wa-‘adlan is for specification); none can change His words, either by contravening [His rulings] or evading [His appointed terms]. He is the Hearing, of what is said, the Knowing, of what is done. (Tafsir, Al-Jalalayn (6:115))

7. Tanwir-al-Miqbas min ibn-Abbas (6:34):
(Messengers indeed have been denied before thee) their people denied them as your people deny you now, (and they were patient under the denial) of their own people (and the persecution) and they were patient in the face of their people's harm (till Our succour reached them) through the destruction of their people. (There is none to alter the decisions of Allah) in that He helps His friends against His enemies. (Already there hath reached thee) O Muhammad ((somewhat) of the tidings of the messengers (We sent before)) how their people denied them, as your people deny you now, and how they were patient.

8.Tafsir, Al-Jalalayn (10:64):
Theirs are good tidings in the life of this world: in a hadīth verified by al-Hākim this has been explained as [referring to] a propitious vision which an individual might have or [a vision] which another might have of that person; and in the Hereafter: Paradise and reward. There is no changing the Words of God, no failing of His promises; that, mentioned, is the supreme triumph.

9. 50:29 Tanwir-al-Miqbas min ibn-Abbas:
(The sentence that cometh from Me cannot be changed) My words cannot be changed through lying; and it is also said that this means: My decree concerning My salves will not be changed this Day; and it is also said that this means: words cannot be twisted in My presence, (and I am in nowise a tyrant unto the slaves) such that I would punish them without them having committed a crime.