Explaining Islam in Light of the Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ‎)

Does The Qur’an Endorse the Bible?

Question

The following is quoted from a missionary:

Mishkat al-Masabih cites several traditions (Book XXVI, Ch. XVIII, pp. 1232, 1233 and ch. XIX, p. 1244), which indicate that the Torah prophesies the coming of Muhammad:

Ata b. Yasar told that he met `Abdallah b. `Amr b. al-As and asked him to inform him of the description of God’s messenger given in the Torah. He agreed, swearing by God that he was certainly described in the Torah by part of the description of him given in the Qur’an  when it says, “O prophet, We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of good tidings, and a warner, and a guard for the common people.” (From Al-Ahzab 33:45 up to here. The following is from the Torah- Old Testament, Isaiah 42:1-3,6-7.) “You are my servant and my messenger; I have called you the one who trusts, not harsh or rough, nor loud-voiced in the streets. He will not repulse evil with evil, but will pardon and forgive, and God will not take him till He uses him to straighten the crooked creed so that people may say there is no god but God, and he opens thereby blind eyes, deaf ears and hardened hearts. Bukhari transmitted it, and Darimi also gives something to the same effect on the authority of `Ata who gave as his authority Ibn Salam.

The citation from the Torah is actually found in Isaiah 42:1-3, 6 -7. You will not find a single reference in the Torah of Moses matching the above citation. This proves that at least in this Hadith the word “Torah” referred to more than the first five books of Moses.

The term, al-Furqan, is used also for the revelation given to Moses:

Sura 2:53:

And remember We gave Moses the Scripture and the Criterion (between right and wrong): there was a chance for you to be guided aright. – Y. Ali

Sura 21:48:

In the past We granted to Moses and Aaron the Criterion (for judgement) and a light and a Message for those who would do right… – Y. Ali

This is a strong indication that the term Criterion does not suggest that a scripture called by this term corrects and exposes corruption to previous revelation, since there were no scriptures prior to the one given to Moses.

The term Furqan also appears in Suras 2:185; 8:29,41 and 25:1:

The month of Ramadan is that in which the Quran was revealed a guidance to men and clear proofs of the guidance and the Criterion Furqan)… [2:185 – Maulana Muhammad Ali; F.E. Peters trans.]

The Quran is stated to be the clear proof of the guidance and of the Furqan, implying that the Furqan is something other than the Quran; at least in this reference.

O you who believe, if you keep your duty to Allah, He will grant you a distinction (Furqan) and do away with your evils and protect you. And Allah is the Lord of mighty grace. [8:29 – M. Muhammad Ali]

The revelation that Muhammad received is the Furqan that is to be used to warn the nations. Yet, in Sura 3:3 all the books of God were sent as a Furqan:

He has revealed to thee the Book with truth, confirming that which is before it, and He revealed the Torah and the Gospel aforetime, a guidance for the people, and He sent the Criterion (al-Furqan)…

This passage makes it clear that the Furqan cannot be referring to the Qur’an alone, since the two are seen as being distinct. It is precisely this distinction, which has led Muslims scholars to differ on the identity of the Furqan itself, whether it is the Quran or all the revealed books of God. Muslim scholar Mahmoud M. Ayoub writes:

The issue that has concerned commentators in connection with this verse is the mention of the Furqan (criterion) after that of the Qur`an and the Torah and the Gospel. The word Furqan is generally used as one of the names of the Qur`an… Since the Qur`an is mentioned in the previous verse as a revelation preceded by the Torah and the Gospel, what is the wisdom in mentioning it again? Commentators have offered various answers to this problem. [Ayoub, The Quran and Its Interpreters, vol. II – The House of Imran; Albany, N.Y.; State University of New York Press, 1992, p.15]

Some commentators like al-Zamakhshari, believe it to be the entire collection of revealed books, or quite possibly the Psalms of David or the Quran itself:

If you ask what is here intended by the word Furqan, I answer, It is the entire genre of heavenly books because they are all a Criterion Furqan) distinguishing truth from falsehood. It may also mean all the Scriptures mentioned here. It is as though God said after mentioning the three Scriptures, `and He sent down that by means of which truth may be distinguished from error,’ meaning either all His Scriptures, or these three Books in particular. It may also be that God here intended a Fourth Scripture, which is the Psalms (Zabur), as He says, `and We gave David the Psalms’ (Q. 17:55). It may also be that God here repeated mention of the Quran, denoting its special characteristic of being a criterion distinguishing between truth and error. This He did after mentioning it by its generic name, by way of emphasizing its greatness and manifesting its special excellence. [Ibid., p.16]

The view that Furqan refers to all three Scriptures is, according to Razi, “the view of most tafsir masters,” since they “are not only a source of divine guidance, they are also divine criteria distinguishing between lawful and unlawful acts and precepts in addition to other sacred laws.” [Ibid., p.17]

Ar-Razi, believes differently, arguing:

As for identifying the Psalms as the Furqan, it is unlikely because the Psalms contain no laws or precepts, but only exhortations. Thus to characterize the Torah and Gospel as Furqan is more probable than the Psalms because they do contain clear evidence of this in their precepts and laws. As for the second view which identifies the Qur`an as the Furqan in this instance, it is also unlikely because  God saying `and He sent down the Criterion’ is conjoined to what is before it [that is `He sent down the Book to you’]. Moreover, that which is conjoined to a thing must be different from the thing which it is conjoined, which is in this case the Qur`an, but which was already mentioned. This means, therefore, that the Furqan must be other  than the Qur`an…” [Ibid., p.17]

Razi believes that Furqan refers to “the miracles which God linked to the revelation of these Scriptures.” [Op. cit.]

Ayoub goes on to list the different ways the verse has been interpreted such as the fact that some say Furqan refers to both the Quran and Muhammad (Nisaburi), to the faith in the divine oneness in relation to the universal mind (Ibn Arabi), to every clear and unambiguous verse (Imam Ja`far al-Sadiq), or even to “all the fundamental and ancillary [religious] sciences which God sent down to His prophets through revelation” (Tabataba`i). (Ibid., pp. 17-20)

Thus, due to the text’s ambiguity Muslim apologists cannot convincingly demonstrate that Furqan is used for the Qur’an as a criteria over previous Scriptures. In fact, a case can and has already been made by Muslims themselves to prove that all Scripture is al-Furqan.

The other term used in relation to the Quran is found in Sura 5:48:

To you (Muhammad) We revealed the book in truth, attesting to the truth of) that which IS between his (its) hands from the scripture (the Torah and Gospel), and guarding it (wa muhaiminan `alaihi).”

It is presumed that the Arabic phrase, “guarding it in safety”, refers to the Quran’s role as a quality control agent, affirming that which remains intact and exposing any tampering to the biblical text. Muslims often accuse Christians of misquoting the Quran, reading verses out of their intended context. Amazingly, Muslims are guilty of the very same thing and against their own scripture!

When the verse is read in conjunction with the previous passages and within the verse itself, the Quran is seen as protecting and guarding uncorrupted scriptures; it says absolutely nothing about exposing textual corruption whatsoever. (cf. Sura 5:43-47,68 – Ali)

In fact, the Quran came as an Arabic verification of the Bible to the Arabs who were ignorant of the contents of the Judeo-Christian Scripture:

Sura 35:31:

That which We have revealed to you of the Book is the truth, attesting to (the truth of) that which IS between his (its) hands (the Torah and Gospel)…”

Sura 10:37:

This Quran is not such as can be produced by other than God; but it is a verification of that (the Torah and Gospel) which IS between his (its) hands, and the explanation of the Book, WHEREIN THERE IS NO DOUBT, from the Lord of the worlds.

Sura 6:154-157:

Then We gave Moses the Book, complete as to whatever is excellent, and explaining all things in detail, and a guide and a mercy, that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord. And this (the Quran) is a Book which We have revealed, blessed: so follow it and be righteous, that you may receive mercy: lest you should say, ‘The Book was sent down to two peoples before us, and for our part, we remained unacquainted with all that they learned by assiduous study; or lest you should say: `If the Book (the Torah and Gospel) had only been sent down to us, we should have followed its guidance better than they.’

Sura 46:12:

And before this was the Book of Moses as a guide and a mercy: and this Book is a verification (of it) in the Arabic tongue to warn those who transgress and as glad tidings to the righteous.”

Sura 26:192-197:

And lo! It is a revelation of the Lord of the Worlds, which the True Spirit hath brought down upon thy heart, that thou mayest be (one) of the warners, In Plain Arabic Speech. And lo! It is in the Scriptures of the men of old. Is it not a token for them that the doctors of the children of Israel know it?

In the preceding passages the Quran is sent as a confirmation of the Book “in which there is no doubt.” Not once do these verses state that the Book at the time of Muhammad had been corrupted and needed to be corrected in any way. Furthermore, it is the Qur’an, not the Bible, that needs to be viewed in light of previous Scripture for verification purposes:

And if thou (Muhammad) art in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto thee, then question those who read the Scripture (that was) before thee. Verily the Truth from thy Lord hath come unto thee. So be not thou of the waverers. [S. 10: 94]

Furthermore, this commits an etymological fallacy. The meaning of the word is not derived from its root but in the manner and the context in which it is used within a sentence. For instance, one of the 99 names of God in the Quran is al-muhaimin:

He is Allah, besides Whom there is no God; the King, the Holy, the Author of Peace, the Grantor of Security, Guardian (muhaimin) over all, the Mighty, the Supreme, the Possessor of greatness. Glory be to Allah from that which they set up (with Him)! [S. 59:23]

Are we to presume that Allah confirms that which remains intact in creation and exposes corruption to it since he is called muhaimin? Obviously not, which indicates that the word does not have just one meaning as some modern Muslim apologists seem to suggest. It simply implies that the Qur’an guards, not corrects, the Holy Bible. In fact, this is precisely how one Muslim commentator, al-Baidawi, understood the term:

A keeper over the whole sacred books, such as shall preserve them from change, and witness to their truth and authority. (Abdiyah Akbar Abdul-Haqq, Sharing Your Faith With a Muslim [Bethany House Publishers, 6820 Auto Road Minneapolis MN, 55438 1980], p. 39 citing W. Muir, CORAN, p. 205)

Muslim commentator Ahmad b. Mahmud al-Nasafi concurs:

[The phrase] ‘confirming the Book that was before it’ means that the Quran confirms what the Torah says and offers. ‘Assuring it’ means bearing witness to it. The Quran did not say, ‘Believe what I have believed and disbelieve what I have disbelieved and what I keep silent on, neither believe it nor disbelieve it,’ but it says, ‘who so judges not according to what Allah has sent down.’ Muhammad also said: ‘I am the first who fulfills Allah’s command and his Book (i.e., The Torah and the Gospel).’ (See al-Nasafi’s commentary on Sura al-Maida 5:43-48).” (True Guidance [Light of Life, PO Box 13, A-9503 Villach, Austria 1994], pp. 96-97 citing Tafsir al-Nasafi vol. 1-4, Cairo, Egypt, 1961)

Finally, the Quran itself states that God would make sure that the Bible would be protected from corruption:

We have, without doubt sent down THE MESSAGE (Zhikra); And We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). [S. 15:9 – Y. Ali]

That this includes the Holy Bible is made clear in the following citations:

And before thee We sent none but men, to whom We granted inspiration: If ye realise this not, ask of those who possess THE  MESSAGE (Zhikri). [S. 16:43 – Y. Ali]

Before thee, also, the messengers We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: if ye know this not, ask of those who possess THE MESSAGE (Zhikri). [S. 21:7 – Y. Ali]

In the past We granted to Moses and Aaron the Criterion (al-Furqana) (for judgment), And a Light and a Message (Zikra) for those who would do right. [S. 21:48]

Before this, We wrote in the Psalms, after THE REMINDER (Zhikri): `My servants, the righteous, shall inherit the earth.’ [S. 21:105]

We did aforetime give Moses the Guidance, and We gave the Book in inheritance to the Children of Israel – A Guide and A REMINDER (Zhikraa) to men of understanding. [S. 40:53-54 – Y. Ali]

These passages establish that the revelation given to Moses, David and the Book which Jews and Christians possessed at the time of Muhammad is also part of that Reminder which God sent down and promised to preserve. Hence, for Muslims to state that the Bible is corrupt, basically, means that God failed to guard his message from corruption, breaking his promise of insuring its preservation.

Wassalam

Answer

Before giving my point of view regarding the opinion given in the cited article, I would first like to briefly state my understanding of the arguments presented in the article as well as the conclusions drawn from these arguments. The author of the article has presented his arguments to establish that:

  1. The usage of the word “Torah” in a narrative ascribed to one of the companions of the Prophet (pbuh) shows that it can imply more books of the Old Testament than just the Pentateuch;

  2. The usage of the word “Al-Furqan“ in the Qur’an clearly shows that it does not imply a scripture, which corrects and exposes corruption of previous revelations or scriptures;

  3. The usage of the term “Al-Muhaimin“ in the Qur’an clearly shows that it does not imply something, which exposes the corruptions of or the fallacies in other things, but actually means something, which protects and guards other things;

  4. The Qur’an is actually an Arabic verification of the Bible;

  5. According to the Qur’an itself, it should be viewed in the light of the previous scriptures, rather than the other way round;

  6. The Qur’an has emphatically declared that God will Himself make sure that the Bible would be protected from all corruption.

The author of the referred article, on the basis of the above points has correctly implied the conclusion that the Qur’an endorses the correctness of the previous scriptures.

A close look at the above arguments shall show that it is primarily the latter three arguments, which provide the basis for the conclusions that the author has drawn. The former three arguments only remove hindrances, rather than provide positive support1 for the author’s contention. Thus, if the author’s opinion regarding the implication and usage of “Al-Furqan“ and “Al-Muhaimin“ is incorrect, then it would serve as an evidence that the Qur’an holds the previous scriptures to be altered and corrupted. However, on the other hand, if the author’s opinion is accepted to be correct, then it would only imply that the Qur’an has not declared the scriptures to be altered or corrupted, but this would not, by itself, be an evidence that the Qur’an testifies of the correctness and the lack of corruption in the previous scriptures.

In view of the above stipulation, to avoid unnecessary discussions, I would restrict my analysis to the latter three points.

Is the Qur’an an Arabic Verification of the Bible?

The author of the referred article has contended that the Qur’an is an Arabic verification of the Bible, on the basis of the following verses of the Qur’an:

  • Fatir 35:31

  • Yunus 10:37

  • Al-Ahqaf 46:12

  • Al-Shu’ara 26:192 – 197

  • Al-An’am 6:154 – 157

In the first three sets of verses, the author’s argument is based on the Arabic phrase “مصدق لما بين يديه” (Muaddiqun limaa baeyna yadaihi2. This Arabic phrase has generally been interpreted to imply that the Qur’an verifies that the previous scriptures were from God. In my opinion, however, this is not the correct implication of the referred phrase.

While explaining the correct meaning and implication of the referred phrase, as it is used in the Qur’an, in one of my earlier articles3, I have written:

… for a better understanding of the contents and the style of the Qur’an, it may be of interest to note that the phrase ‘confirming the previous scriptures’ (Arabic: “Musaddiqan limaa bayna yadaihe“) has generally been used in the Qur’an as an evidence for the prophethood of Mohammed (pbuh), presented to the people of the book. It is obvious that merely the fact that the Qur’an confirms the divine origin of the previous scriptures is not a sufficient evidence of the prophethood of Mohammed (pbuh). In view of this fact, we are faced with the question that what exactly is the nature of the evidence for the prophethood of Mohammed (pbuh), given in the words: “confirming the previous scriptures”? Some of the commentators of the Qur’an have given an answer to this question. However, to fully understand the answer given by these commentators, it is important to note that the Qur’an has given three different kinds of evidences to prove the prophethood of Mohammad (pbuh) to its three different categories of addressees:

  1. The quality of the language and the content of the Qur’an are presented as an evidence for the Quraish and the other local Arab groups of the time of the Prophet (pbuh);

  2. The Qur’an being void of all human deficiencies – like development and evolution in thought as well as in the presentation of that thought – is presented as a general evidence of the Divine origin of the Qur’an; and

  3. Finally, for the Jews and the Christians of the time of the Prophet (pbuh) the Qur’an has evidenced the prophethood and the Divine origin of the Qur’an on the basis of the fact that the Prophet (pbuh) is a clear manifestation of the prophecies and predictions of the Bible regarding the final prophet.

Thus, the Qur’an has admonished the Jews and the Christians, of the time of the Prophet (pbuh), of the fact that because the Prophet (pbuh) has come according to the prophecies and predictions of their own books therefore, rejecting the Prophet (pbuh), under these circumstances, would imply rejecting their own books.

It is in this background that these commentators have interpreted the verses entailing the referred phrase. For instance, Al-Raazi, in his commentary “Al-Tafseer al-Kabeer“, while explaining the referred phrase in Al-Baqarah 2: 41, writes:

There are prophecies regarding Mohammed (pbuh) as well as the Qur’an in the Torah and the Gospel. Thus, belief in [the prophethood of] Mohammed (pbuh) and in the Qur’an, in effect, confirms belief in the Torah and the Gospel….

Ibn Katheer, in his commentary “Tafseer Ibn Katheer“, explaining the referred phrase, in Al-Baqarah 2: 41 writes:

Abu Al-`aaliyah has said that in the phrase “believe in that4 which I have revealed, which confirms that which lies with you”, God says: ‘O People of the Book, believe in that which I have revealed now, which confirms that which existed with you’5, [the Qur’an confirms the Torah and the Gospel] because of the prophecies regarding Mohammed (pbuh), which they [i.e. the people of the book] found written in the Torah and the Gospel. The same opinion is also ascribed to Mujahid, Al-Rabiy` and Qatadah.

Thus, if seen in the correct perspective, the phrase actually implies that because the Torah and the Gospel entailed prophecies of the coming of the Prophet (pbuh) and the revelation of the Qur’an, the Prophet (pbuh) and the Qur’an have, in effect, “confirmed” these prophecies of the Torah and the Gospel.

Hamiduddin Al-Farahi, while explaining the connotation of the phrase “مصدقا لما بين يديه” (Musaddiqan Limaa baeyna Yadaihi) writes:

فاعلم أن صدقه له معنيان: شهد بصدق رجل أو كلام، والمعنى الثاني: أن جعله صادقا فيما توقع. قال الحماسي:

فدت نفسي وما ملكت يميني
فوارس صدقت فيهم ظنـوني

في القرآن: ﴿وَلَقَدْ صَدَّقَ عَلَيْهِمْ إِبْلِيسُ ظَنَّهُ فَاتَّبَعُوهُ)

ثم إذا تأملت في مواقع هذا القول علمت أن المراد هو المعنى الثاني. فإن النبي والقرآن جاء كما أخبرت به التوارة فجعلها صادقة، فإن كذبوا القرآن والنبي يكن ذلك تكذيبا لكتبهم. وهذا أيضا يظهر إذا تأملت أن محمدا وعيسى -عليهما الصلوات- يأتون بهذا القول مستدلا بصحة نبوتهما، فأي استدلال في أنهم يشهدون بصدق ما عند اليهود؟
أن تنباء أحد اليوم وقال إني آمنت بالأنبياء، وإنا نبي مثلهم فهل يكون هذا حجة على دعواه. أما موقع الآية فقال تعالى: ﴿وَلَمَّا جَاءهُمْ رَسُولٌ مِّنْ عِندِ اللّهِ مُصَدِّقٌ لِّمَا مَعَهُمْ نَبَذَ فَرِيقٌ مِّنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ كِتَابَ اللّهِ وَرَاء ظُهُورِهِمْ كَأَنَّهُمْ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ﴾  أي لما جاءهم محمد -صلى الله عليه وسلم- حسب ما وجدوا في كتبهم أعرضوا عن كتبهم وأنكروه كأنهم لا يعلمون. وقبل هذه الآية: ﴿أَوَكُلَّمَا عَاهَدُواْ عَهْداً نَّبَذَهُ فَرِيقٌ مِّنْهُم بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ﴾  فاستدل بأن فريقا منكم عاهدوا بالإيمان بهذا النبي، فكيف تنبذون ذلك العهد، ولكنكم غير مؤمنين. وقد ذكر في سورة آل عمران عهدهم بإيمان نبي يأتيهم بصفات محمد عليه الصلوات… (كتاب مفردات القران، مطلب “مصدقا لما بين يديه”، مطبعة إصلاح، سرائيمير، أعظم كده، الهند، ١٣٥٨بعد الهجره)

It should be known that the word: “saddaqahu“ (He confirmed it/him) has two meanings: Firstly, ‘to testify or to witness the truthfulness of a person or a saying’; and secondly, ‘to make him/it truthful in its/his expectations or trust’. A Hamaasiy poet says:

I lay down my life and all my possessions for the horsemen who proved all my expectations about them to be true.

The Qur’an says: “And indeed Iblis proved his expectations about them to be true”.

Keeping this explanation in mind, when you consider the context of the verses of the Qur’an in which this phrase has been used, you shall note that the phrase has been used in the second of the two stated implications. Because the Torah had informed about the Prophet (pbuh) and the Qur’an, therefore their (the Prophet’s and the Qur’an’s) appearance proved the information given by the Torah to be true. Thus, now if the People of the Book reject the Prophet (pbuh) and the Qur’an, it would actually be a rejection of their own books. This implication [of the referred phrase] is also obvious from the fact that Mohammed and Jesus (pbut) presented it as evidence of their prophethood. Had the phrase implied mere testimony of the truthfulness of the Torah, what sort of evidence would it then have entailed for their prophethood?

If someone says to you today: “I believe in the prophets of old and I am a prophet like them”, would you hold his belief in the previous prophets as evidence of his prophethood? As far as the context of the occurrence of this phrase is concerned, consider [for example, Al-Baqarah 2: 101] where God says: “And when there came to them a messenger of God, confirming [the prophesies of] what they already had to be true, a group from among those who were given the book, threw their books behind their backs [by not believing in the Prophet, who had come as a manifestation of the prophesies of their books], as if [it was something] they did not know.” It implies that when Mohammed (pbuh) came according to what was written in their books, they turned their backs upon their books and rejected him, as if they knew him not. And immediately before this verse, the Qur’an had said: “Would it be that whenever they make a covenant, a group among them would cast it aside. In fact most of them are devoid of all faith.” Thus, the Qur’an has said that after one of your groups had promised to believe in the Prophet (pbuh), how can you cast this promise aside and reject him. You are but faithless people. The Qur’an has mentioned this promise of the People of the Book in Surah Aal Imraan, which relates to believing in a prophet, which has been described with the qualities of Mohammed (pbuh)…

Suppose I was to say: “Usman shall become a renowned doctor in five years.” Now, when Usman does become a well known physician within the stipulated period, I would be correct in saying that “Usman has proved me correct” or that “Usman has verified my prediction to be true”. This is precisely the implication of the referred phrase of the Qur’an.

As should be clear from the foregoing explanation, the Arabic phrase, on the basis of which, the author of the referred article has implied that the Qur’an is an Arabic verification of the Bible (in Faatir 35: 31, Yunus 10: 37 and Al-Ahqaaf 46: 12) is used in a completely different connotation as compared to that which is construed by the author.

The next verse, which the author has cited to evidence his point that the Qur’an is an Arabic verification of the Bible, is Al-Shu`araa 26: 192 – 197. The verse reads as follows:

And indeed it is a revelation of the Lord of the worlds – brought down by the trustworthy spirit – upon your heart, so that you be one of the warners – [revealed] in a clear Arabic dialect – and indeed it is [also] in the scriptures of old. Is it no evidence for them that the scholars of the Israelites know him [to be a true prophet]?

Although, the author of the article has not stated the particular aspect of the verse, which, in his opinion, supports his contention, yet it seems that he is trying to draw support from the words “and indeed it is [also] in the scriptures of old.”

In one of my earlier articles6, I have explained the meaning and implication of this verse [especially the selected sentence] in detail. After presenting my arguments, in detail I have presented my conclusions in the following words:

… Based on the same principles, when the Qur’an says: “It [i.e. the Qur’an] is in the scriptures of old”, it simply means ‘it is ‘referred to’ (or ‘mentioned in’, or ‘foretold in’) the scriptures of old.

It may be mentioned here that this interpretation of the verse is not something new. Most of the interpreters of the Qur’an (including Al-Zamakhshuriy, Al-Raaziy, Al-Qurtabiy, Ibn Katheer, Abu Hayyaan, Al-Qummiy, Al-Buroosuwiy, Al-Maraaghiy and Al-Tabrasiy) have explained the referred verse to imply the same meaning as is given in the foregoing paragraph. It is quite strange that Mr. Katz has not only ignored this explanation of the verse, without giving any reason for doing so, but has also interpreted the verse to imply something absolutely unknown to the interpreters of the Qur’an. In this case, what actually entails a logical fallacy is, obviously, not the Qur’an, but in Mr. Katz’s interpretation of the cited verses.

The last set of verses that the author has cited to evidence his contention that the Qur’an is an Arabic verification of the Bible is Al-An`aam 6: 154 – 157. The author has translated this verse as follows:

Then We gave Moses the Book, complete as to whatever is excellent, and explaining all things in detail, and a guide and a mercy, that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord. And this (the Quran) is a Book which We have revealed, blessed: so follow it and be righteous, that you may receive mercy: lest you should say, ‘The Book was sent down to two peoples before us, and for our part, we remained unacquainted with all that they learned by assiduous study; or lest you should say: `If the Book (the Torah and Gospel) had only been sent down to us, we should have followed its guidance better than they.’

The definite article in the phrase “The Book”, according to the Arabic principle signifies the suppression of the governed noun of the genitive construction. The phrase, in my opinion, implies: the “Book of God’s guidance”. Thus, the related part of the referred verse should be translated as:

Lest you should say [on the Day of Judgment, as an excuse for your ignorance,]: “Indeed the Book of God was revealed upon two groups before us, but we remained ignorant of what they learned [from their book]”. Or that you should say: “Had it been we, upon whom the Book of God were revealed, we would surely have been better guided than they.”

There seems to be absolutely no support in this verse for what the author is trying to establish. I really do not know how this verse could possibly be taken to imply that the Qur’an is an Arabic verification of the Bible. It is not even related to the subject that the author is trying to establish.

Should the Qur’an be viewed in the Light of the Bible?

The author contends that the Qur’an itself has stated that it should be viewed in the light of the Bible. This contention is based on Yunus 10: 94.  The author of the referred article has translated this verse as follows:

And if thou (Muhammad) art in doubt concerning that which We reveal unto thee, then question those who read the Scripture (that was) before thee. Verily the Truth from thy Lord hath come unto thee. So be not thou of the waverers. [S. 10:94]

While explaining this verse in a response to a question related to this verse7 I had written:

To understand the referred verse, it is necessary that its context be fully appreciated.

The basic theme of Surah Yunus is that when the Almighty sends his Messenger (Rasu’l) in a people, the fate of these people depends on their acceptance or rejection of that Messenger. If they – as a nation – reject the messenger, they are punished, not only in the hereafter but also in this world. On the contrary, if they – in their collective capacity – accept the message of God and believe in the messenger, they are blessed with success as individuals in the hereafter, and as a nation in this world. The Surah primarily addresses the Quraish and the Arab polytheists and informs them of the fact that with the advent of Mohammad (pbuh) they too are now subjected to the law of the Almighty concerning His messengers. If they reject His messenger, they shall meet the same fate as was met by those who rejected God’s messengers in the past. While, if they accept Mohammad (pbuh) and follow his teachings, they shall then be blessed with God’s bounties, as were those who accepted and followed the messengers of God in the past.

From the beginning to verse 70 the basic message of the Qur’an – belief in the One God, belief in His messenger and belief in the Day of Judgment – has been presented and the addressees are told that if they do not accept these elements of faith and reform their deeds accordingly, they shall face a painful punishment in this world as well as the hereafter.

From verse 71 to the end, the fact that the rejecters of a messenger of God face severe consequences of their rejection and those who accept his message are blessed with the bounties of the Creator is historically evidenced. In this respect, reference is made to the people of Noah (pbuh) and the addressees of Moses (pbuh). In both the cases, the separate ends of those who rejected and those who accepted God’s message is stressed. The Quraish and the Arab polytheists are informed that in both the cases the rejecters were annihilated and those who believed in the messenger of God inherited the rule of the land.

The verse under consideration (Yunus 10: 94) is placed at the end of this reference to the two nations.

If seen in the correct context, it should be quite clear that the verse under consideration is not general but quite specific in its implication. The correct contextual translation of the verse, in my opinion, should be:

If you are in doubt regarding what we have revealed to you [concerning these nations], ask those who read the scriptures before you.

It is as if to say that these references are a part of the established history of the world and so well known that if anyone has any doubts regarding their authenticity, he may even ask the people of the book (the Jews and the Christians) about them. Even they shall accept them as facts.

Thus, if seen in the correct perspective, it shall be known that the verse has nothing to do with the authenticity or corruption of the old scriptures.

Does the Qur’an Declare that God will Protect the Bible?

The author contends that the Qur’an has declared that God shall Himself protect the Bible. The following verse of the Qur’an is given as evidence of this claim:

We have, without doubt sent down THE MESSAGE (Zhikra); And We will assuredly guard it (from corruption). (Al-Hijr 15: 9)

The fallacy of this contention shall be absolutely clear, when this verse is interpreted in its proper context. A simple translation of the first nine verses of Surah Al-Hijr (15) follow:

This is Alif Lam Ra. These are the verses of the Book – a clear Qur’an. (1)

Those who disbelieve will wish, time and again that they had but submitted (to God). Leave them in their eating and their merriment and let their false hopes keep them blinded [to the truth]; soon shall they know [the gravity of their rejection]. Whenever We destroyed a people [in the past], they were always assigned a term [and so is one appointed for these rejecters]. No nation is allowed to accelerate its punishment before the appointed term or to delay it. Yet, they say: “O you, upon whom this Admonition is being revealed, You are, indeed, out of your mind.” “If you are truthful, then why do you not bring to us angels [to evidence your claim]?” We send not Our angels for anything less than [the implementation of] justice. And no respite is then granted [to the rejecters]. It is, indeed, We, Who have sent down this Admonition; and it is We, Who will guard it. (2 – 9)

As is quite clear that the word “Al-Zikr“ in the above context implies only that which was being revealed at the time – that is the Qur’an.

I hope this helps.

October 9, 2000

  1. That is, even if they are taken to imply what the author has tried to establish, it would only prove that the Qur’an does not say that the previous scriptures are corrupted. It does not prove that the Qur’an evidences and declares the authenticity of the previous scriptures. [↩]
  2. “Which confirms that, which is at hand”. [↩]
  3. Reference is to one of my response to a criticism on the Qur’an by Mr. Jochen Katz, titled “The Three Contradictions in Al-Baqarah 2:97 & Al-Nahl 101 – 103“. [↩]
  4. i.e. the Qur’an. [↩]
  5. i.e. the Torah. [↩]
  6. Reference is to one of my responses to a criticism on the Qur’an titled “The Infinite Loop Problem“. [↩]
  7. Reference is to the question titled: “Why is the Prophet (pbuh) Directed to Refer to the People of the Book, When in Doubt?“. [↩]