Why Muslims use the Corrupted Bible as Evidence to Disprove Christianity

Through out debates among Christians and Muslims, Muslims are regularly asked: why they quote from the Bible as evidence if they believe the Bible has been corrupted? By using this question as an excuse, most of the time Christians reject the arguments put forward by Muslims. When I was debating online with some Christians called ‘The Confessors’[1], I was posed the same excuse/question. They even demanded that I prove the authenticity of the verses I quoted from the Bible just because I believed the book to be corrupted. This article is in answer to Christians who ask such questions to Muslims in debates regarding the Bible.

Asking for proof

Basically, The Confessors have been asking me to prove their own Bible to themselves, the same Bible which they believe to be the word of God. I am sure that such a demand entitles me to question their faith in the Bible. Do The Confessors believe the Bible to be 100% authentic? If yes, then why do I need to prove that to them?

Although it is generally logical for anyone to ask for evidence of authenticity, it is very illogical for one to ask for evidence of authenticity regarding something that he/she already believes to be authentic. For example: if person A knows that two plus two equals to four, then it would be really foolish of person A to demand proof for this from person B. Evenly, it is absurd for a Christian to insist evidence of authenticity concerning his/her Bible.

Produce your proof if ye are truthful

The reason why Muslims use the Bible to disprove Christianity (even though they believe the Bible to be corrupted) can be simply answered with a verse from the Holy Qur’an:

“And they say: “None shall enter Paradise unless he be a Jew or a Christian.” Those are their (vain) desires. Say: “Produce your proof if ye are truthful.””[2]

The Muslim is told in this verse that Christians and Jews (will always) declare that no one can enter paradise without being a Jew or a Christian (or that Islam is wrong, etc.), to such a claim the Muslim is to demand proof. And the Christian has made the effort to meet this insistence of the Qur’an. Ultimately, the Christian will say that the Bible is his/her proof. According to the Christian, Islam is a false religion because they get this from the Bible, that Muslims are sinners and that they will never enter paradise. So because the Christian uses the Bible as evidence and proof for such claims, the Muslim is forced to examine the Bible (regardless of whether he/she believes it to be true or not).

Conclusion

Everyone agrees that the topic ‘Is the Bible corrupted?’ is a whole debate by itself and an interesting subject to discuss. But when a Muslim uses the Bible to prove something to the Christian (even to disprove Christianity itself), it is because the Christian believes the Bible to be 100% true, the Muslim will use this against him/her. And regardless of whatever a Muslim believes, any valid evidence from the Bible should be enough to convince a Christian right? Understanding that it is logical to ask for proof of authenticity regarding the Bible, but if this question is coming from a Christian then it shows that he/she is having doubts about the Bible.

References 

[1] http://theconfessors.wordpress.com/2009/12/31/is-john-167-14-referencing-the-holy-spirit-or-muhammad/

[2] Qur’an 2:111

Advertisements

18 thoughts on “Why Muslims use the Corrupted Bible as Evidence to Disprove Christianity

  1. Is John 16:7-14 Referencing the Holy Spirit or Muhammad Part Two? « The Confessors

  2. As Salaam Alaykum wa Rahmatullah,

    I agree it is stupid for a Christian to ask you to prove the authenticity of a Bible verse. It has happened to me in debates as well and it is always an act of desperation.

    Like

  3. This is where the logic fails;

    If you are approaching it from a position that the Bible is not a corrupt document position, and the Bible contradicts your claim as blatantly as it does. Then from the start your conclusion is false, as you have made errors somewhere in your premises or understanding. If you wish to contend this, then you must move to a position that the Bible is corrupted, as that is what you now have to accept. If your position switches, then you cannot make the claim that you have until you prove that the reader can even take your position in the first place. As you now have declared the Bible corrupt, thus anything from the Bible is suspect until proven innocent.

    So it has nothing to do with desperation, it is simple logic.

    We’re still interested in trying to explain this further in person Shajahan if you are interested.

    Like

  4. It is a fact that the Bible is corrupt, Christian scholars have been saying so for hundreds of years and yet they have no problem to use verses of the Bible to justify their theology.

    Imagine a Christian using the Quran to make a point and then the Muslim says, ‘prove its authenticity first!’.

    Pathetic.

    Like

  5. No what Christian scholars have been saying for years is that the copies of manuscripts contain variants.

    “Imagine a Christian using the Quran to make a point and then the Muslim says, ‘prove its authenticity first!’.”

    You miss the point. What we’re talking about is if one makes a claim from the Bible, i.e. “The Bible clearly teaches Muhammad is The Comforter,” yet, from the start presumes “the Bible is corrupt.” The person making that argument needs to provide good reasons to take the verses he’s quoting; if not, he’s just using cafeteria criticism which is fallacious. If the person grants for the sake of argument that the Bible is not corrupt, as Shajahan has, he can freely make any claim he wants from the Bible, without “proving” the authenticity. However, if the Bible clearly states otherwise, as it does, his conclusion fails, leaving him to chose from 1 of 3 options: 1) Accept that his position fails 2) Toss in the Bible is too corrupt to determine any theological position and acknowledge his position is fails or 3) Accept the Bible is corrupt, but doesn’t throw away the initial claim; but now has to prove that the reader should take his position by providing good reasons to accept the verses he’s quoting as being some of the uncorrupted Scripture that is found within the now determined “corrupted” Bible.

    Like

  6. No, Christian scholars have been saying that the text contains errors, contradictions, alterations and unintelligible verses. Moreover, we know this to be true because we read the Bible. Only the blind cannot see.

    The rest of your comment is stupid.

    He doesn’t have to prove that the Bible is authentic (no one could do that) because you believe its authentic. In the same vain, if you make a statement regarding the Quran we only need to refute your understanding and not ask for proof of authenticity, because we believe the Quran is authentic, despite you believing the Quran is corrupt and false.

    What he must do is prove that his interpretation is the correct one irrespective of the fact that the book is corrupt.

    This is one of the most pathetic examples of Christian debating I have witnessed.

    Like

    • haha @abdullah…….we Christians do not depend on any of the confessors or scholars which you are mentioning. they are saying that the word get corrupted by means of translations to many languages but if u read in Hebrews it is a holy one and also read a verse Revelation 22:18(NOTE:in the verse “anyone” no mind it is a scholars,you, confessors etc….). if u thought that the bible is corrupted go and read in Hebrews 🙂

      Like

      • Erm @mathew the New Testament’s original language is Greek not Hebrew. Same goes for Revelations which is part of the NT. Also tell people to read Hebrew doesn’t change the fact that there is ample evidence/proof that the New Testament has been tampered with. To say you do not depend on any scholars is nonsense. It is clear from your comment, you are not qualified to interpret the bible on your own.

        Here’s a challenge. See if you can find a single Christian that can prove with verifiable evidence that 1 John 5:7 can be found in the original Greek manuscripts. Because there is enough evidence to say that 1 john 5:7 is a later addition in the bible ie. A forged verse.

        Like

  7. No, what Christian scholars have been saying is the various COPIES of manuscripts contain various types of errors.

    We don’t expect you to understand this for numerous reasons. The point is, no one period, Christian, Muslim, or anyone else, should quote each others Scripture to pull out believed truth claims and then play the document is corrupted card when someone says “no your wrong and this Scripture piece clearly shows your wrong.” If that corruption game is played and the original claim kept, the person making the claim has to prove their claim can still be taken despite corruption.

    Like

  8. @Shajahanahmed, no problem akhi. This person is a bad example of Christian apologetics. If he was the big shot that he projects himself as he wouldn’t waste his time with stupid arguments. Clearly, he has so much to learn.

    @theconfessors, Only the blind cannot see.

    Like

  9. Well no, this is an example of an argument where the conclusion doesn’t follow the premises. One cannot just assume that they can grab verses out of a source (any source) they presume to be corrupt, formulate a truth claim out of the quoted material, and not establish the credibility of the verses they are quoting to establish the truth claim. That is simple logic. As stated before, you can assume the source is uncorrupted for the sake of the argument, but if the Scripture clearly disagrees, you have to accept that or declare the source corrupted and then you’re back at step one,that is proving why the Scripture you have quoted is uncorrupted for you, but the Scriptures countering what you have stated is corrupted…

    Like

  10. The Quran is The Criterion for judging what remains true in the present day corrupted Bible…And if any muslim quotes from the Bible he will only quote to try to make a Christian understand some fact but not to prove his own belief…For a Muslim the Quran is the Last and Only sufficient proof of his convictions…Peace be onto you!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s