Category: Reliable and Unchanged

Qur’an: No Variations ! What say the hadiths?

“The Qur’an is the original scripture – same language, letters and recitation.  No place for human interpretation or corrupted translation …If you pick up a copy of a Qur’an from any home around the world I doubt you will even find a difference between them.”

A friend sent me this note.  He was  comparing the text of the Holy Qur’an with that of the Injil/Bible.  The Injil does have minor textual variations within the thousands of existing manuscripts.  The claim is often made, as above, that there has been no variation in the Qur’an.  This is seen as an indication of the Qur’an’s superiority over the Bible, and evidence of its miraculous protection.  But what do the hadiths tell us about the formation and compilation of the Qur’an?

Formation of Quran from Prophet to Caliphs

Narrated ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab.. I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat Al-Furqan during the lifetime of Allah’s Apostle and I … noticed that he recited in several different ways which Allah’s Apostle had not taught me. … I … said, “Who taught you this Sura which I heard you reciting?” He replied, “Allah’s Apostle taught it to me.” I said, “You have told a lie, for Allah’s Apostle has taught it to me in a different way from yours.” So I dragged him to Allah’s Apostle and said, “I heard this person reciting Surat Al-Furqan in a way which you haven’t taught me!” On that Allah’s Apostle said, “Release him, (O ‘Umar!) Recite, O Hisham!” Then he recited in the same way as I heard him reciting. Then Allah’s Apostle said, “It was revealed in this way,” and added, “Recite, O ‘Umar!” I recited it as he had taught me. Allah’s Apostle then said, “It was revealed in this way. This Qur’an has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of it whichever (way) is easier for you.”  Bukhari Vol 6, Book 61, No. 514

Narrated Ibn Mas’ud: I heard a person reciting a (Quranic) Verse in a certain way, and I had heard the Prophet reciting the same Verse in a different way. So I took him to the Prophet and informed him of that but I noticed the sign of disapproval on his face, and then he said, “Both of you are correct, ….”  Bukhari Vol 4, Book 56, No 682

These two clearly tell us that during the Prophet Mohamed’s (PBUH) lifetime there were several variant versions of the Qur’an’s recitation that were used and approved by Mohamed (PBUH).  So what happened after his death?

Abu Bakr and Qur’an

Narrated Zaid bin Thabit:  Abu Bakr As-Siddiq sent for me when the people! of Yamama had been killed. (I went to him) and found ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab sitting with him. Abu Bakr then said (to me), “Umar has come to me and said: “Casualties were heavy among the Qurra’ of the! Qur’an (i.e. those who knew the Quran by heart) on the day of the Battle of Yalmama, and I am afraid that … a large part of the Qur’an may be lost. Therefore I suggest, you (Abu Bakr) order that the Qur’an be collected.” I said to ‘Umar, “How can you do something which Allah’s Apostle did not do?” ‘Umar said, “By Allah, that is a good project. “… Then Abu Bakr said (to me). “…. So you should search for (the fragmentary scripts of) the Qur’an and collect it in one book).” …Then I said to Abu Bakr, “How will you do something which Allah’s Apostle did not do?” Abu Bakr replied, “By Allah, it is a good project.” Abu Bakr kept on urging me to accept his idea until Allah opened my chest for what He had opened the chests of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. So I started looking for the Qur’an and collecting it from (what was written on) palmed stalks, thin white stones and also from the men who knew it by heart,. … Then the complete manuscripts (copy) of the Qur’an remained with Abu Bakr  ….  Bukhari Vol 6, Book 61, No 509

This comes from when Abu Bakr was caliph, directly succeeding Mohamed (PBUH).  It tells us that Mohamed (PBUH) had never collected the Qur’an into a standard text or given any indication that such a thing should be done.  With heavy battle casualties amongst those who knew the Qur’an by memory, Abu Bakr and Umar (he became the 2nd Caliph) persuaded Zaid to start to collect a Qur’an from diverse sources.  Zaid was initially reluctant because Mohamed (PBUH) had never indicated a need to standardize the text.  He had trusted several of his companions to teach the Qur’an to their followers as the following hadith tells us.

Narrated Masriq: ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr mentioned ‘Abdullah bin Masud and said, “I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, ‘Take (learn) the Qur’an from four: ‘Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu’adh and Ubai bin Ka’b.’ ” Bukhari Vol 6, Book 61, No 521:

However, after the Prophet’s (PBUH) death disagreements arose between the companions because of these variant recitations.  The hadith below tells of a disagreement over Surah 92:1-3  (Al-Layl)

Narrated Ibrahim: The companions of ‘Abdullah (bin Mas’ud) came to Abu Darda’…. Then he asked them,: ‘Who among you can recite (Qur’an) as ‘Abdullah recites it?” …. “How did you hear ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud reciting Surat Al-Lail (The Night)?” Alqama recited:  ‘By the male and the female.’ Abu Ad-Darda said, “I testify that I heard me Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:– ‘And by Him Who created male and female.’ but by Allah, I will not follow them.” Bukhari Vol 6, Book 60, No 468:

Today’s Qur’an has the 2nd reading for Surah 92:3.  Interestingly Abdullah, who is one of the four in the previous hadith especially singled out by the Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) as an authority on Qur’anic recitation, and Abu Ad-Darda used an alternate reading for this verse and were not willing to follow the others.

The following hadith shows that whole regions of the Islamic empire were following different recitations, to the extent that one could verify where someone came from by what recitation he used.  In the case below, the Iraqis of Kufa were following Abdullah bin Mas’ud’s recitation of Surah 92:1-3.

‘Alqama reported: I met Abu Darda’, and he said to me: To which country do you belong? I said: I am … of Iraq. He again said: To which city? I replied: “Kufa”. He again said: Do you recite according to the recitation of ‘Abdullah b. Mas’ud? I said: Yes. He said: Recite this verse (By the night when it covers) So I recited it: (By the night when it covers, and the day when it shines, and the creating of the male and the female). He laughed and said: I have heard the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) reciting like this.  Muslim Book 004, Number 1801:

 

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas: ‘Umar said, Ubai was the best of us in the recitation (of the Qur’an) yet we leave some of what he recites.’ Ubai says, ‘I have taken it from the mouth of Allah’s Apostle and will not leave for anything whatever.” Volume 6, Book 61, Number 527:

Though Ubai was considered ‘the best’ in reciting the Qur’an (He was one of those noted previously by Mohamed-PBUH), others in the community left out some of what he recited.  There was disagreement over what was to be abrogated and what was not.  Disagreements on variant readings and abrogation were causing tensions.  We see in the hadith below how this problem was solved.

Caliph Uthman and Quran

Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham and the people of Iraq were Waging war …. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the people of Sham and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur’an, so he said to ‘Uthman, “O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before.” So ‘Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, “Send us the manuscripts of the Qur’an so that we may compile the Qur’anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you.” Hafsa sent it to ‘Uthman. ‘Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, ‘Abdullah bin AzZubair, Said bin Al-As and ‘AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. … and when they had written many copies, ‘Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. ‘Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur’anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt.  Volume 6, Book 61, Number 510:

This is why there are no variant readings today.  It was not because the prophet Mohamed (PBUH) only received or used one recitation (he did not, he used seven), nor because he compiled an authoritative Qur’an.  He did not.  In fact, the whole of book 30 of Sunan Abu-Dawud hadiths is about the variant recitations of the Qur’an.  Today’s Qur’an is non-variant because Uthman (3rd caliph) took one of the readings, edited it, and burned all the other recitations.  The following hadiths show how this editing lives on in today’s Qur’an.

Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas  …. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Holy Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajam (the stoning of married person (male & female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. … I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, ‘By Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah’s Book,’  Bukhari: vol. 8,  book 82 No 817

Today there is no verse about stoning (Rajam) for adultery in the Qur’an.  It was thus edited out.

Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair: I said to ‘Uthman, “This Verse which is in Surat-al-Baqara:  “Those of you who die and leave widows behind…without turning them out.” has been abrogated by another Verse. Why then do you write it (in the Qur’an)?” ‘Uthman said. “Leave it (where it is), …, for I will not shift anything of it (i.e. the Quran) from its original position.” Bukhari Vol 6, Book 60, No 60:

Here we see a disagreement between Uthman and Ibn Az-Zubair over whether abrogation of a verse meant it should or should not be kept in the Qur’an.  Uthman had his way and so this verse is in the Qur’an today.  But there was controversy about it.

Uthman and the Heading for Surah 9 (At Tawbah)

Narrated Uthman ibn Affan:: Yazid al-Farisi said: I heard Ibn Abbas say: I asked Uthman ibn Affan: What moved you to put the (Surah) al-Bara’ah which belongs to the mi’in (surahs) … and the (Surah) al-Anfal which belongs to the mathani (Surahs) in the category of as-sab’u at-tiwal (the first long surah or chapters of the Qur’an), and you did not write “In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful” between them?

Uthman replied: When the verses of the Qur’an were revealed to the Prophet (PBUH), he called someone to write them down for him and said to him: Put this verse in the surah in which such and such has been mentioned; and when one or two verses were revealed, he used to say similarly (regarding them). (Surah) al-Anfal [ie surah 8] is the first surah that was revealed at Medina, and (Surah) al-Bara’ah [ie surah 9] was revealed last in the Qur’an, and its contents were similar to those of al-Anfal. I, therefore, thought that it was a part of al-Anfal. Hence I put them in the category of as-sab’u at-tiwal (the seven lengthy surahs), and I did not write “In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful” between them.  Dawud Book 3, Number 0785:

Surah 9 (at Tawbah or Al Barah) is the only Surah in the Qur’an that does not begin with ‘In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful’.  The hadith explains why.  Uthman thought that Surah 9 was part of Surah 8 since the material was similar.  From the questioning we can see that this was controversial within the early Muslim community.  The next hadith shows the reaction of one of the Companions to Uthman’s Qur’an.

‘Abdullah (b. Mas’ud) reported that he (said to his companions to conceal their copies of the Qur’an) and further said: He who conceals anything he shall have to bring that which he had concealed on the Day of judgment, and then said: After whose mode of recitation you command me to recite? I in fact recited before AIlah’s Messenger (PBUH) more than seventy chapters of the Qur’an and the Companions of Allah’s Messenger (PBUH) know it that I have better understanding of the Book of Allah (than they do), …. Shaqiq said: I sat in the company of the Companions of Mubkmmad (PBUH) but I did not hear anyone having rejected that (that is, his recitation) or finding fault with it.  Muslim Book 031, No 6022:

 Several things stand out:

  1. Abdullah b. Masud tells his followers to hide their Qur’ans for some reason.
  2. He seems to have been commanded by someone to use a different recitation. This is best understood as referring to the time when Uthman standardized his version of the Qur’an.
  3. Ibn Mas’ud’s objection to changing the way he recited the Qur’an was that: I (Mas’ud) have better understanding of the Book
  4. Shaqiq said that the Companions of Muhammad did not disagree with Mas’ud.

Textual versions of Qur’an today

Following Uthman’s edition, however, variant readings still existed.  In fact, it seems that in 4th century after the Prophet [PBUH] there was a sanctioned return to different readings.  So though today the major Arab textual reading is the Hafs (or Hofs), there is also the Warsh, used mostly in North Africa, Al-Duri, used mostly in West Africa and still others.  The difference between these readings are mostly in spelling and some slight wording variations, usually without any affect on meaning, but with some differences that do have an affect on meaning only in the immediate context but not in wider thought.

So there is a choice as to what version of the Qur’an to use.

We have learned that there are variant Arabic readings of the Qur’an today, and it went through an editing and selection process after the death of the prophet Mohamed (PBUH).  The reason that there is such little variation in the Qur’anic text today is because all other text variants were burned at that time.  The Quran has no alternate reading footnotes, not because it had no alternate readings, but because they were destroyed.  Uthman probably produced a good recitation of the Qur’an, but it was not the only one, and it was not made without controversy.   Thus the widely accepted idea of the Qur’an being  “original scripture – same language, letters and recitation.  No place for human interpretation” is incorrect.  Though the Bible and Qur’an both have variant readings, they also both have strong manuscript evidence indicating that the text as it is today is close to the original.  Both can give us a trustworthy representation of the original.  Many are distracted from seeking to understand the message of the Books by having an undue veneration for the mode of preservation of the Qur’an and an undue disdain for the mode of preservation of the Bible.  We would be better off focusing on understanding the Books.  That was the reason they were given in the first place.  A good place to start is with Adam.

How was the Bible translated?

The Bible, or al kitab, is not usually read in its original languages Hebrew & Greek). This is not because it is not available in these languages. It is, and scholars study Greek and Hebrew at university for the purpose of being able to read and study the Bible in the original languages. This is often the way that professional teachers of the Bible study it. But regular believers do not generally read or study the Bible in its original languages, and instead read it in a translation of their native language. Therefore, the Bible is not often seen in its original languages, leading some to think that the original languages have been lost, and others think that the translation process has led to corruption. Before jumping to these conclusions, it is better first to understand the process of translation of al kitab, or the Bible. That is what we will do in this article.

Translation vs. Transliteration

We need to first understand some basics of translation. Translators sometimes choose to translate by similar sound rather than by meaning, especially when it comes to names or titles. This is known as transliteration.  The figure below illustrates the difference between translation and transliteration. From Arabic you can choose two ways to bring the word for ‘God’ into English. You can translate by meaning which gives ‘God’ or you can transliterate by sound to get ‘Allah’.

This uses the term ‘God’ to illustrate how we can translate or transliterate from one language to another

With the increased exchange between English and Arabic in recent years, the term ‘Allah’ has become a recognized word in the English language to mean God. There is no absolute ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ in the choice of translation or transliteration for titles and key words. The choice depends on how well the term is accepted or understood in the receiver language.

The Septuagint

The first translation of the Bible was when the Hebrew Old Testament (= Taurat & Zabur) was translated into Greek about 250BC. This translation is known as the Septuagint (or LXX) and it was very influential.  Since the New Testament was written in Greek, the many quotations of the Old Testament were taken from the Greek Septuagint.

Translation & Transliteration in the Septuagint

The figure below shows how all this impacts modern-day Bibles where translation stages are shown in quadrants.

This shows the translation process of the Bible (al kitab) to modern language

 

The original Hebrew Old Testament (Taurat & Zabur) is in quadrant #1 and is accessible today in the Masoretic text and the Dead Sea Scrolls. Because the Septuagint was a Hebrew –> Greek translation it is shown as an arrow going from quadrant #1 to #2.  The New Testament was itself originally written in Greek, so this means #2 contains both Old and New Testaments. In the bottom half (#3) is a modern language translation of the Bible (eg English).  To get there the Old Testament is translated from the original Hebrew (1 -> 3) and the New Testament is translated from the Greek (2 -> 3). The translators must decide on transliteration or translation of names and titles as explained previously. This is illustrated with the green arrows labeled transliterate and translate, showing that the translators can take either approach.

The Septuagint witness on the Question of Corruption of Bible

Since the Septuagint was translated from the Hebrew around 250 BC we can see (if we reverse translate the Greek back to Hebrew) what these translators had in their Hebrew manuscripts that they translated from.  Since these texts are almost identical this shows that the text of the Old Testament has not changed since at least 250 BC.  The Septuagint was read across the Middle East and Mediterranean for hundreds of years, by Jews, Christians, and even pagans – and even today many in the Middle East still use it. If someone (Christians, Jews or someone else) changed the Old Testament and corrupted it, then the Septuagint would be different from the Hebrew text. But they are essentially the same.

Similarly, if for example someone in Alexandria, Egypt, had corrupted the Septuagint itself then the Septuagint manuscript copies in Alexandria would be different from the other Septuagint manuscripts across the Middle East and Mediterranean. But they are the same. So the data tells us without any contradiction that the Old Testament has not been corrupted.

The Septuagint in Translation

The Septuagint is also used to help with modern translation. Translation scholars use the Septuagint to this very day to help them translate some of the more difficult passages of the Old Testament. Greek is very well understood and in some passages where the Hebrew is difficult translators can see how the Septuagint translators understood these obscure passages 2250 years ago.

Understanding translation/transliteration and the Septuagint help us understand where the terms ‘Christ’, ‘Messiah’, and ‘Masih’ come from as these terms relate to Isa (or Jesus – PBUH), which we need to grasp if we are to understand the message of the Injil. We look at this in our next article.

The science of Textual Criticism to see if the Bible is corrupted or not

“Why should I even consider the books of the Bible? It was written so long ago, and has had so many translations and revisions done to it – I have heard that its original message was changed over time.”  I have heard questions and statements like this many times about the books of the Taurat, Zabur and Injil that make up al Kitab or the Bible.

This question is very important and is based on what we have heard about al Kitab/the Bible. After all, it was written two thousand plus years ago. For most of this time there has been no printing press, photocopy machines or publishing companies. So the original manuscripts were copied by hand, generation after generation, as languages died out and new ones arose, as empires crumbled and new ones were born. Since the original manuscripts are no longer in existence how do we know that what we read today in al Kitab (the Bible) is what the original prophets actually wrote long ago? Apart from religion, are there any scientific or rational reasons to know whether what we read today is corrupted or not?

Basic Principles in Textual Criticism

Many who ask this do not realize there is a scientific discipline, known as textual criticism, by which we can answer these questions.  And because it is a scientific discipline it applies to any ancient writing.  This article will give the two main principles used in textual criticism and then apply them to the Bible.  To do so we start with this figure which illustrates the process by which any ancient writing is preserved over time so that we can still read it today.

manuscripts from past to today
A timeline showing how all ancient books come to us today

This diagram shows an example of a  book written 500 BC. This original however does not last indefinitely, so before it decays, is lost, or destroyed, a manuscript (MSS) copy of it is made (1st copy). A professional class of people called scribes did the copying work. As the years advance, copies are made of the copy (2nd copy & 3rd copy). At some point a copy is preserved so that it is in existence (extant) today (3rd copy). In our example diagram this extant copy was made in 500 AD. This means that the earliest that we can know of the state of the book is only from 500 AD onwards. Therefore the period from 500 BC to 500 AD (labeled x in the diagram) is the period where we cannot make any copy checks since all manuscripts from this period have disappeared. For example, if corruptions occurred when the 2nd copy was made from the 1st copy, we would not be able to detect them as neither of these documents are available to compare against each other. This time period before the existing copies (the period x) is thus the interval of textual uncertainty – where corruption could have happened.  Therefore, the first principle of textual criticism is that the shorter this interval x is the more confidence we can place in the correct preservation of the document to our time, since the period of uncertainty is reduced.

Of course, usually more that one manuscript copy of a document exists today. Suppose we have two manuscript copies and in the same section of each of them is the following phrase (Of course it would not be in English, but I use English to explain the principle):

This shows a variant reading (one says ‘Joan’ and the other says ‘John’) but with only a few manuscripts it is difficult to determine which is the one in error.

The original author had either been writing about Joan or about John, and the other of these manuscripts has an error. The question is – Which one has the error? From the available evidence it is very difficult to decide.

Now suppose we found two more manuscript copies of the same work, as shown below:

 

Now we have four manuscripts and it is easier to see which one has the error.

Now it is easier to decide which manuscript has the error. It is more likely that the error occurs once, rather than the same error repeated three times, so it is likely that MSS #2 has the copy error, and the author was writing about Joan, not John. ‘John’ is the corruption.

This simple example illustrates the second principle in textual criticism: The more manuscripts that exist today the easier it is to detect & correct errors and know what the original said.

Textual Criticism of Historical books

So now we have two principles that of scientific textual criticism that are used to decide the textual reliability of any old book: 1) measuring the time between original writing and earliest existing manuscript copies, and 2) counting the number of existing manuscript copies. Since these principles apply to all ancient writing we can apply them to both the Bible as well as other ancient books, as done in the tables below (Taken from McDowell, J. Evidence That Demands a Verdict. 1979. p. 42-48).

Author When Written Earliest Copy Time Span #
Caesar

50 BC

900 AD

950

10
Plato

350 BC

900 AD

1250

7
Aristotle*

300 BC

1100 AD

1400

5
Thucydides

400 BC

900 AD

1300

8
Herodotus

400 BC

900 AD

1300

8
Sophocles

400 BC

1000 AD

1400

100
Tacitus

100 AD

1100 AD

1000

20
Pliny

100 AD

850 AD

750

7

* from any one work

These writers represent the major classical writers of ancient times – the writings that have shaped the development of modern civilization. On average, they are passed down to us by 10-100 manuscripts that are preserved starting only about 1000 years after the original was written.

Textual Criticism of Bible/al Kitab

The following table compares the Biblical (Injil in particular) writings along these same points (Taken from Comfort, P.W. The Origin of  the Bible, 1992. p. 193).

 

MSS

When Written

Date of MSS

Time Span
John Rylan

90 AD

130 AD

40 yrs
Bodmer Papyrus

90 AD

150-200 AD

110 yrs
Chester Beatty

60 AD

200 AD

140 yrs
Codex Vaticanus

60-90 AD

325 AD

265 yrs
Codex Sinaiticus

60-90 AD

350 AD

290 yrs

 Summary of Textual Criticism of Bible/al Kitab

The number of New Testament manuscripts is so vast that it would be impossible to list them all in a table. As one scholar who spent years studying this issue states:

“We have more than 24000 MSS copies of portions of the New Testament in existence today… No other document of antiquity even begins to approach such numbers and attestation. In comparison, the ILIAD by Homer is second with 643 MSS that still survive” (McDowell, J. Evidence That Demands a Verdict. 1979. p. 40)

A leading scholar at the British Museum agrees with this:

“Scholars are satisfied that they possess substantially the true text of the principal Greek and Roman writers … yet our knowledge of their writings depends on a mere handful of MSS whereas the MSS of the New Testament are counted by … thousands”  Kenyon, F.G. (former director of British Museum) Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts. 1941 p.23

I own a book about the earliest New Testament documents. It starts with:

“This book provides transcriptions of 69 of the earliest New Testament manuscripts…dated from early 2nd century to beginning of the 4th (100-300AD) … containing about 2/3 of the new Testament text”  (P. Comfort, “The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts”. Preface p. 17. 2001)

In other words, many of these existing manuscripts are very early, merely a hundred years or so after the original writings of the New Testament.  These manuscripts come earlier than the rise to power of Constantine and the Roman church.  And they are spread across the Mediterranean world.  If some from one region were corrupted we would see the difference by comparing it with manuscripts from other regions.  But they are the same.

So what can we conclude from this? Certainly at least in what we can objectively measure (number of extant MSSs and time spans between original and earliest extant MSS) the New Testament (Injil) is supported much more than any of the other classical writings.  The verdict to which the evidence pushes us is best summed up by the following quote:

“To be skeptical of the resultant text of the New Testament is to allow all of classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no other documents of the ancient period are as well attested bibliographically as the New Testament”  Montgomery, History and Christianity. 1971. p.29

What he is saying is that to be consistent, if we question the reliability of al kitab (the Bible) we may as well discard all that we know about classical history in general – and this no historian has ever done. We know that the Biblical texts have not been altered as eras, languages and empires have come and gone since the earliest existing MSSs come before these events. For example, we know that no pope or the Roman Emperor Constantine changed the Bible since we have manuscripts that are earlier than Constantine and the popes and all these earliest manuscripts contain the same accounts.   The manuscripts used to translate Bibles today come before the time of the Prophet Mohamed PBUH, and the fact that he confirmed the Bible as he found it in his day is significant since we know just from the manuscripts used that it has not changed from his day.

This is shown in the following timeline where the manuscript sources that are used in translating modern Bibles are shown to come very early.

Modern Bibles are translated from the earliest existing manuscripts, many from 100-300 AD. These source manuscripts come long before Constantine or other religious-political powers, and before time of Prophet Mohamed PBUH
Modern Bibles are translated from the earliest existing manuscripts, many from 100-300 AD. These source manuscripts come long before Constantine or other religious-political powers, and before time of Prophet Mohamed PBUH

To summarize, neither time nor Christian leaders have corrupted the original ideas and messages that were first placed into the original writings of al kitab or the Bible. We can know that it today accurately reads what the authors actually wrote from the many thousands of early manuscripts that we have today.  The science of Textual criticism supports the reliability of al Kitab (the Bible).

Textual Criticism in university lecture

I had the privilege to give a public lecture on this topic at the University of Western Ontario in Canada not too long ago.  Below is a 17 minute video of the part of the lecture that covers this question.

Thus far we have really only looked at the textual criticism of the New Testament – the Injil.  But what about the Taurat and Zabur – the books that make up the Old Testament?  In the following 7 minute video I summarize the textual criticism principles of the Old Testament.

 

 

 

Did Paul or other Bible writers corrupt the Injil?

This is a great question. The danger for all of us is that we can either ask it with a superficial answer already in our minds. “Of course Paul or one of the others corrupted it”, we can quickly answer without thinking too much about it, mostly because this is simply what we have heard. Or, we can think, “Of course not! What a silly idea”, again without really knowing why but mostly because we have been taught that way. This is the danger for all people who ask questions of sacred Books.  We either dismiss it out-of-hand (because how we have been taught to think it not sacred) or we dismiss the question out-of-hand (again because of how we have been taught differently).

New Testament Writes other than Paul

With these considerations in mind I want to share my thinking and reasons on this question. Let us start with the writers aside from Paul. These writers were the disciples of Isa (PBUH) – his companions. They were the ones who followed him, listened to him, discussed with him, about the things that he did and said, both privately and in public. Some of them, such as John, Matthew and Peter were part of the inner circle of Isa’s 12 closest followers. They wrote eight of the books in the New Testament. Others, such as Mark, were among his wider circle of followers. The remaining authors (outside of Paul) were his brothers James and Jude. They grew up with Isa (PBUH) and James became the leader of the disciples in Jerusalem after the passing of Isa (PBUH) from this world. James, in fact, is mentioned in the Jewish historical writings of the 1st century AD. In that century there was a great Jewish military historian, Josephus, who wrote several books of history to the Roman Emperors of his day. In one of his books, writing of events in Jerusalem in the year 62 AD (32 years after the passing of Isa) he writes of how James, Isa’s brother, was martyred by his fellow Jews. Here is how he puts it:

“Ananus [the high priest] was rash and followed the Sadducees, who are heartless when they sit in judgment. Ananus thought that with Festus dead and Albinus still on the way, he would have the opportunity. Convening the judges of the Sanhedrin [the Jewish ruling council] he brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others. He accused them of having transgressed the law, and condemned them to be stoned to death” Josephus. 93 AD. Antiquities xx 197

Josephus is explaining that in 62 AD Ananus had just been made high priest in Jerusalem and there was a political confusion. Ananus used the opportunity to condemn James to death. His father (also called Ananus) had sentenced Isa (PBUH) to death about 30 years before and Ananus the son quickly took the opportunity to do the same with James. Thus James was a target for his years of leadership in Jerusalem with the followers of Isa al Masih (PBUH) his brother in Jerusalem.

What does the Qur’an say about these disciples of Isa (PBUH)?

So it is these men who wrote the books in the New Testament other than Paul’s books. To judge whether they corrupted the Injil we can first turn to the perspective given in the Qur’an. When I do that I find the following ayat:

When Jesus found Unbelief on their part He said: “Who will be My helpers to (the work of) God?” Said the disciples: “We are God’s helpers: We believe in God, and do thou bear witness that we are Muslims. Our Lord! we believe in what Thou hast revealed, and we follow the Apostle; then write us down among those who bear witness.” (Surat 3:52-53 – Al-Imran)

And behold I inspired the Disciples to have faith in me and mine messenger (Isa): they said, “We have faith, and you bear witness that we bow to Allah as Muslims (Surat 5:111 – Table Spread)

These ayat tell us quite plainly that the disciples of Isa (Jesus – PBUH) were a) Isa’s helpers, b) Allah’s helpers, c) and inspired by Allah to have faith in Isa. These disciples spoken of here in the Qur’an include none other than Matthew, Peter and John who wrote eight of the books in the New Testament, two of which are gospel books (Gospels of Matthew and John).  And Mark, the disciple in the wider circle, wrote a third gospel. It would seem that if one believes in the Qur’an that one would also then have to accept the writings of these disciples. These writers certainly could not have corrupted the Injil.  When we study the written gospels we are reading the writings of the disciples which are confirmed by the Qur’an.  Paul did not write any Gospel account, rather he wrote sacred letters.

Now where I live in Canada few people readily believe that there are any books by Allah. Just because something is written in Qur’an or Bible (al kitab) does not mean that they would accept it. In fact they prefer secular historical sources because, in their eyes, they are less biased. But even from that point-of-view we have seen, from the writings of the historian Josephus quoted above, that there is a solid basis to accept the writings of James, and by extension, his other brother Jude.

So we find, whether from secular sources or from the Qur’an, logical reasons to accept the books of the New Testament that are not Paul’s.

The Witness of Isa (PBUH): the Taurat and Zabur are the first standards

But what about Isa himself? What did he give as the testimony we should accept?  Notice where he appeals for a correct and uncorrupted witness to himself and his message.

Here we see that Isa PBUH (who is speaking) is using the Taurat (Book of Moses) to correct error among the experts in Jewish Law (Sharia)

“Now about the dead rising—have you not read in the Book of Moses, in the account of the burning bush, how God said to him, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’?  He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!” Mark 12:26-27

And here we see that Isa (PBUH) starts with Taurat and then continues with Zabur (‘Prophets and Psalms’) to teach about his role as the Masih.

He said to them, “How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken!  Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory?”  And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself. (Luke 24:25-27)…

He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms.”  Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures. (Luke 24:44-45)

And here we see that Isa again starts with Taurat (Moses’ writings) as the basis to judge the role of the Masih.

If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.  But since you do not believe what he wrote, how are you going to believe what I say?” (John 5: 46-47)

So we can see that Isa (PBUH) himself first appeals to Moses (which is the Taurat), then the Prophets and Psalms (which is the Zabur) to explain the role and purpose of the Masih. This is the reason I decided, both in my search, and now in this website, to start with the Taurat. If you look at the articles on the Signs of Adam, Cain&Abel, Noah, Lut, Ibrahim 1, 2, and 3 etc. you will see that the passages that support these articles all come from Taurat (and the Qur’an).

We are on safe ground if we start with the Taurat – Isa (PBUH) himself told us to. Here we are learning Signs that will help to unlock the mystery of the Injil. Then we will take what we have learned and compare it with the writings of the brothers and disciples of Isa – again staying on safe ground.

Considering Paul

And what about Paul’s writings? What are we to make of them? Once we have studied the Taurat and Zabur and learned the Signs that Allah has definitely sent us, and then when we have studied the books of the disciples and brothers of Isa (PBUH) we knowledgeable  enough so that if we turn to Paul we will notice if what he writes is different from what we have already studied. Without this background knowledge of the ‘safe books’ to inform us, it is impossible for us to really know if what Paul wrote is corrupted or not. But to keep our search on safe ground we will not start with Paul because his credentials are not unquestionable.

When I lived in Algeria I was surrounded by Arabic speakers and heard Arabic all the time. But because I did not know any Arabic I was not capable of deciding if what I heard was ‘correct’ Arabic or ‘corrupted’ Arabic. The limitation to make this judgment was in me – not the speakers around me.  I did not have enough knowledge to be a good judge. A few years ago I took a course in Arabic. All people from all sorts of positions told me that the person giving this course spoke ‘correct’ Arabic. His reputation told me I could trust him as a ‘correct’ teacher. Starting from this course – that I knew was correct – I began to learn a bit of Arabic. Unfortunately I was not able to continue, but if I had, I could see that one day I could be in a position to decide if other people spoke ‘correct’ Arabic or ‘corrupted’ Arabic – because I would now have an informed basis from which to judge.

We are using exactly the same safe process to develop a solid understanding of the Signs of Allah, starting from which everybody says is ‘correct’ (Taurat), and then the disciples, to develop the basis to better judge if something else (like Paul) is corrupt or not. The danger for all seekers of the Straight Way is that we either accept too easily as revelation that which should be rejected, or that we discard too quickly the books that Allah intends that we learn from. Proceeding in this way, in humility and prayer before Allah, asking for His guidance, will make sure that we fall into neither error and thus stay on the Straight Path.

The Qur'an replaces the Bible! What says the Qur'an?

We have seen that both the Qur’an and the Sunnah confirm that the Bible (Taurat, Zabur and Injil that make up al Kitab) has not been changed or corrupted (see here and here).  But the question still remains whether the Bible/al Kitab is superseded, annulled, cancelled or replaced by the Qur’an. What does the Qur’an itself say about this idea?

To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety… Surah 5:48 Al-Ma’ida (The Table)

And before this (Qur’an) was the Book of Moses as a guide and a mercy; and this book (Qur’an) confirms (it) in the Arabic tongue. Surah (46):12 Al-Ahqaf (The Dunes)

And this is a book (Qur’an) which We have sent down, bringing blessings and confirming (the revelations) which came before it.  Surah (6):92 Al-An’am (The Cattle)

That which We have revealed to thee of the Book is the Truth,- confirming what was (revealed) before it: Surah 35:31 (The Angels)

These ayat speak about the Qur’an confirming (not superseding, overriding or replacing) the earlier message of the Bible (al Kitab).  In other words, these ayat are not saying that believers should set aside the early revelation and only study the later revelation.  Believers should also study and know the earlier revelation.

This is also confirmed by the ayat that tell us that there is ‘no distinction’ between the different revelations.  Here are two such ayat that I have noticed:

The Apostle believeth in what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith. Each one (of them) believeth in God, His angels, His books, and His apostles. “We make no distinction (they say) between one and another of His apostles.” And they say: “We hear, and we obey: (We seek) Thy forgiveness, our Lord, and to Thee is the end of all journeys.”  (Surat 2:285 – The Cow)

Say ye: “We believe in God, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to God (in Islam).” (Surat 2:136 – The Cow)

The first ayah tells us that there is no distinction between the apostles – they all should be listened to and the second says there is no difference between the revelations given by the different prophets – they all should be accepted.  In none of these ayat is there any suggestion that the earlier revelation should be disregarded because the later revelation has superseded it.

And this pattern fits with the example and teaching of Isa al Masih (PBUH).  He himself did not say the earliest revelations of Taurat and then Zabur were cancelled.  In fact he taught the opposite.  Notice the respect and continual and ongoing attention he pays to the Taurat of Musa in his own teaching in the Injil

“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (i.e. Taurat) or the Prophets (i.e. Zabur); I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:17-20)

In fact, to properly understand his teaching he taught that one must first go to the Taurat and then the Zabur.  Here is how he taught his own disciples:

And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself. (Luke 24:27)

He said to them, “This is what I told you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about me in the Law of Moses (i.e. Taurat), the Prophets and the Psalms (i.e. Zabur).” (Luke 24:44)

Isa al Masih (PBUH) did not attempt to bypass earlier revelation.  In fact he started from there in his teaching and guidance.  This is why we also follow his example by starting from the beginning of Taurat to give the foundation to understand the Injil.

The Injil Corrupted! What do the Hadiths say?

We have seen what that the Qur’an says that the Taurat, Zabur & Injil of the Bible (al kitab) are not corrupted.  The Qur’an states clearly that the followers of Injil still possessed the message from Allah at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), around 600 AD – so it was not corrupted before that date. The Qur’an declares that the original message in the Injil were Allah’s Words, and that His Words can never be changed.  If both of these statements are true it means that it is impossible for people to corrupt the Words of al kitab (Taurat, Zabur and Injil = Bible)

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and the Bible

Here we study what the hadiths and sunnah say on this topic.  Notice how the following hadiths affirm the existence and use of the Taurat and Injil in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).

“Khadija [his wife] then accompanied him [The Prophet – PBUH] to her cousin Waraqa …, who, during the PreIslamic Period became a Christian and used to write the writing with Hebrew letters. He would write from the Gospel in Hebrew as much as Allah wished him to write.” Al-Bukhari Vol 1, Book 1, No 3

Narrated Abu Huraira: ..The people of the Scripture used to read the Torah in Hebrew and explain it to the Muslims in Arabic. Then Allah’s Apostle said, “Do not believe the people of the Scripture, and do not disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah and whatever has been revealed…’  Al-Bukhari Vol 9, Book 93, No. 632

The Jews came to Allah’s Apostle and told him that a man and a woman from amongst them had committed illegal sexual intercourse. Allah’s Apostle said to them, “What do you find in the Torah about the legal punishment of Ar-Rajm (stoning)?” They replied, “(But) we announce their crime and lash them.” Abdullah bin Salam said, “You are telling a lie; Torah contains the order of Rajm.” … the Verse of Rajm was written there. They said, “Muhammad has told the truth; the Torah has the Verse of Rajm.  Al-Bukhari Vol. 4, Book 56, No. 829:

Narrated Abdullah Ibn Umar: ..A group of Jews came and invited the Apostle of Allah (PBUH) to Quff. …  They said: ‘AbulQasim, one of our men has committed fornication with a woman; so pronounce judgment upon them’. They placed a cushion for the Apostle of Allah (PBUH) who sat on it and said: “Bring the Torah”. It was then brought. He then withdrew the cushion from beneath him and placed the Torah on it saying: “I believed in thee and in Him Who revealed thee.”  Sunan Abu Dawud Book 38, No. 4434:

Narrated AbuHurayrah: The Apostle of Allah (PBUH) said: The best day on which the sun has risen is Friday; on it Adam was created, …. Ka’b said: That is one day every year. So I said: It is on every Friday. Ka’b read the Torah and said: The Apostle of Allah (PBUH) has spoken the truth.  Sunan Abu Dawud Book 3, No. 1041

These are undisputed hadiths that tell us of the attitude of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to the Bible as it existed in his day. The first hadith informs us that the Injil existed and was available when he first received his call.  The second hadith tells us that the Jews read the Taurat in Hebrew to the early Muslim community.  The Prophet (PBUH) did not dispute their text, but was indifferent (neither confirming nor denying) to their Arabic interpretation of it. The next two hadiths tell us that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) used the Taurat as it existed in his day to arbitrate decisions.  The last hadith shows us that the Taurat, as it existed in that day, was used to verify a statement from Prophet Muhammad about the day of creation of man (it was on a Friday).  In this case, the Taurat was used to check the teaching of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself, so it must have been authentic for such use.  In none of these hadiths, do we see any hint that the text of the Bible is treated as corrupted or changed.

Earliest manuscripts of Injil (New Testament)

I own a book about the earliest New Testament (Injil) documents.  It starts with:

“This book provides transcriptions of 69 of the earliest New Testament manuscripts…dated from early 2nd century to beginning of the 4th (100-300AD) … containing about 2/3 of the new Testament text”(P. Comfort, “The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts”. Preface p. 17. 2001 ).

This is significant since these manuscripts come before Roman Emperor Constantine (ca 325 AD) who some have thought might have altered the text of the Bible.  If Constantine had corrupted it we would know it by comparing the texts before his time (since we have them) with the texts that come after him.  But there are no differences.

Similarly, these and other Bible copies were made long before the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).  These and other thousands of manuscripts all from before 600 AD come from around the world.  Since the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in 600 A.D. used the Bible in his time as authentic, and we have many Bible copies today made hundreds of years before the Prophet lived – and they are the same as today’s Bible, then the Bible certainly has not changed.

Even the idea of Christians changing these texts makes no sense.  It would not have been possible for the scattered people to agree on the changes to be made. Even if those in Arabia had made changes, the difference between their copies and those of their brothers, let us say in Syria and Europe, would become obvious.  But the manuscript copies are the same across the world, and back in time.  Since the Qur’an and hadiths both clearly support the Biblical text as it existed in 600 AD, and since the Bible is based on manuscripts that come long before this time, then the Bible of today is not corrupted.  The timeline below illustrates this, showing how the text base of the Bible pre-dates 600 AD.

The earliest manuscipts copies of the Taurat and Zabur date from even earlier.  Collections of scrolls, known as the Dead Sea Scrolls, were found in 1948 by the Dead Sea.  These scrolls make up the entire Taurat and Zabur and they date from 200-100 BC.  This means that we have copies of the Taurat that date even before both prophets Isa al Masih (PBUH) and Muhammad (PBUH).  Since they both publicly used and approved the Taurat and Zabur that they had we have assurance that these first books of the prophets were also not corrupted.  I explore what all this means about the reliability (or unchangedness) of al kitab from a scientific point-of-view in my article here.

The testimony of the Prophet Mohamed (PBUH) in the hadiths, along with background knowledge of the manuscripts of the Bible, point to the same conclusion as the testimony in the Qur’an – the text of the Bible has not been corrupted or changed.

Manuscripts of Today's Bible (al kitab) - from long ago
Manuscripts of Today’s Bible (al kitab) – from long ago

The Injil Corrupted! What does the Qur’an say?

I have many Muslim friends. And because I am also a believer in Allah (God), and a follower of the Injil (Gospel) I usually have regular conversations with my Muslim friends about beliefs and faith. In a real sense there is so much we have in common. Yet almost without exception in my conversations I hear the claim that the Injil (and zabur and Taurat which make up al kitab = Bible) is corrupted, or has been changed, so that the message we read today is degraded and full of errors from what was first inspired and written by the prophets and disciples of Allah. Now this is an important complaint, since it would mean that we cannot trust the Bible as read today to reveal Allah’s truth. I read and study both the Bible (al kitab) and the English translation of the Holy Qur’an, and have started to study the Sunnah. What I find startling is that this attitude against the Bible, though so common today, I do not find it in al Qur’an. In fact, it startled me how seriously the Holy Qur’an takes the Bible. I want to briefly show what I mean. (In English I use Yusuf Ali’s translation of the Holy Qu’ran)

What the Qur’an says about the Bible (al Kitab)

Say: “O People of the Book! ye have no ground to stand upon unless ye stand fast by the Law, the Gospel, and all the revelation that has come to you from your Lord.” It is the revelation that cometh to thee from thy Lord, that increaseth in most of them their obstinate rebellion and blasphemy. Surah 5:68 Maida (The Table) (See also 4:136)

If thou art 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. Surah 10:94 Yunus (Jonah)

I note that this declares that the revelation given to the ‘People of the Book’ (Christians and Jews) came from Allah. Now my Muslim friends say this applies only to the original revelation given, but since the original has been corrupted it does not apply to the scriptures of today. But the 2nd ayah talks about those who ‘have been reading’ (in the present tense not past tense as in ‘had read’) the Bible. It is not talking about the original revelation, but the scriptures from the time when al Qur’an was revealed. This was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) over a period of years around 600 A.D. So this passage approves the Bible (Taurat, Zabur and Injil) as it existed in 600 A.D. Other passages are similar. Consider:

And before thee also the apostles We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: if ye realise this not, ask of those who possess the Message. Surah 16:43 An-Nahl (the Bee)

Before thee, also, the apostles We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: If ye realise this not, ask of those who possess the Message. Surah 21:7 Al-Anbiya’ (The Prophets)

These speak of the apostles that preceded the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). But, crucially, they affirm that the messages given by God to these apostles/prophets were still in possession (at 600 AD ) by their followers. The revelation as originally given had not been corrupted by the Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) time.

The Holy Quran says that Allah’s Words cannot be changed

But in a stronger sense, even the possibility of al kitab’s corruption/change is not supported by the Holy Quran. Keep in mind Maida 5:68 (The Law …The Gospel … is revelation that has come from the LORD), and consider the following:

Rejected were the apostles before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those apostles. Surah 6:34 Al-An‘am (Cattle)

The word of thy Lord doth find its fulfilment in truth and in justice: None can change His words: for He is the one who heareth and knoweth all. Surah 6:115 Al-An‘am (Cattle)

For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present and in the Hereafter; no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity. Surah 10:64 Yunus (Jonah)

And recite (and teach) what has been revealed to thee of the Book of thy Lord: none can change His Words, Surah 18:27 Al-Kahf (The Cave)

So, if we agree that the prophets preceding Muhammad (PBUH) were given revelation by Allah (as Maida 5:68-69 said), and since these passages, many times over, say very clearly that no one can change Allah’s Words, how then can one believe that the words of Taurat, Zabur and Injil (i.e. al kitab = the Bible) was corrupted or changed by men?  It would require a denial of the Qur’an itself to believe that the Bible has been corrupted or changed.

As a matter of fact, this idea of judging various kinds of revelation from God as better or worse than others, though widely believed, is not supported in the Qur’an.

Say ye: “We believe in Allah, and the revelation given to us, and to Abraham, Isma’il, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) prophets from their Lord: We make no difference between one and another of them: And we bow to Allah (in Islam).” Surah 2:136 Al-Baqara (The Cow)    (See also 2:285).

So there should be no difference in how we treat all the revelations.  This would have to include our study of them.  In other words, we should study all the Books.  In fact I urge Christians to study the Qur’an as I urge Muslims to study the Bible.

To study these books takes time and courage.  Lots of questions will be raised.  Surely though this is a worthwhile use of our time here on earth – to learn from all the books which the prophets have revealed.  I know that for me, though it has taken time and courage for me to study all the Holy Books, and it has raised many questions in my mind, it has been a rewarding experience and I have felt Allah’s blessing on me in it.  I hope you will continue to explore some of the articles and lessons on this website.  Perhaps a good place to start is the article on what the haddiths and the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) thought about and used the Taurat, Zabur and Injil (the books that make up al kitab = the Bible).  The link to this article is here.  If you have a scientific interest in how the reliability of all ancient books are determined, and whether the Bible is considered reliable or corrupted from this scientific point-of-view see the article here.

انقر هنا لقراءة هذا المقال باللغة العربية

Lire cet article en français