English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It is fine to look at how some one else did their study, but best to do you own and search for the way that helps you remember what you have studied.

But if this is best, how many people are interested?

2007-09-02 00:02:59 · 10 answers · asked by jeni 7 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

deazone,
I should have put:
O.T. 1110 years, 39 books, many write, done 443 BCE
N.T. 50 to 100 uears, 29 books.
KJV Bible 1611 published to world
in 303 years, did not prevent WW1,
in 327 years it did not prevent next 7 years of WW2, but the world was meant to have it in the last days 2Tim.3:1-7; Matt.24:3,7,14,15;

2007-09-02 22:58:34 · update #1

cosmic eye candy,
you see that it [ the bible ], leave out nothing, but if we find our selves in that area we also might collect all available to make fire for cooking,
but otherwise, I much rather be a welcomed guest on planet earth than a trespasser. For sure I do not own the planet.
Abraham, Moses, the priest and Judges and any that can be named were interested in being a help rather than a hinderance in any way also, unholding the law is not easy for any law officer any where, it is a great responsibility and not a safe position to be in.

2007-09-02 23:19:52 · update #2

10 answers

I do studies on my own. I'm not currently in any Bible studies.

2007-09-02 00:25:32 · answer #1 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0 0

How can you Know God and his Son if you do not study his word ( this does not mean read, any one can read and walk away with nothing) I have many study aids that help me understand the Bible. I also have five meetings a week that I faithfully attend and prepare for, so that I can be involved. Knowing the Bible and what Jehovah requires of me has made life in this wicked system so much better. I would not change one thing :)

2007-09-02 00:39:51 · answer #2 · answered by Vivimos en los Ultimos Dias 5 · 0 0

i'm always interested yes i have researched the book three times and while i find new things each time it always reads the same. could be a form of christian meditation as it it takes a great deal of concentration to do on the Internet. there is a vast amount of information now available. what amazes me is how easily certain groups are able to have information they don't agree with "protected" or removed from availability. but then that is a different topic.

2007-09-02 07:52:20 · answer #3 · answered by TfourL 3 · 1 0

Apparently not much, or we wouldn't have all these crazy questions. Although It seems as though a lot of the questions are being asked by people that don't even believe in the Bible. Why Is that? Do you suppose they are curious to know what we know?

2007-09-02 00:19:08 · answer #4 · answered by Allan C 6 · 0 0

Unless you can read the languages of the first translations found, you are reading other people's interpretations. Even the NT was interpretations of Christ, not directly written by Christ himself. I use shortcuts, the Bible is far to complicated for the amount of time I have to devout towards reading it. I do read from many different interpretations that people have of it.

2007-09-02 00:09:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

That's what I came here looking for, but the brats and the feeble minded make it impossible.
I even like a good debate with an atheist if I could do it with a grown person with reasoning in their repertoire

2007-09-07 05:20:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I did read it , and it is revolting.
Just read these verses, ( there are plenty in the bible even worse), and ask yourself ,can this be the word of God?
Ezekiel 23:20
There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezek. 4:12 says, "Eat the food as you would a barley cake; bake it in the sight of the people, using human excrement as fuel."

2 Kings 18:27 (King James Version) 27But Rabshakeh said unto them, Hath my master sent me to thy master, and to thee, to speak these words? hath he not sent me to the men which sit on the wall, that they may eat their own dung, and drink their own piss with you?

2007-09-02 00:19:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

studying the bible can be simple if you know how to be stable in what you believe in,the bible was written by messengers,explaining what god needs ,if you really what to know what god needs then go for it until you start getting something from it.

2007-09-02 00:31:34 · answer #8 · answered by rabson p 1 · 0 0

Read , study , compare scripture with scripture .

2007-09-02 00:32:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

BUT Where are the originals?

If you mean to refer to the Injeel (the book revealed to Jesus /Eesaa, may Allaah exalt his mention) by the term (original bible), then we do not know the location of the copy you are asking about. But what we can say surely and without any doubt is that the Injeel has been altered and changed by human beings throughout history and the original copy no longer exists.

Therefore, a Muslim has no need to search for its original copy after Allaah has sent the great Quran. Allaah Says (which means): {And is it not sufficient for them that We revealed to you the Book [i.e. the Quran] which is recited to them? Indeed in that is a mercy and reminder for a people who believe.}[Quran 29:51].

He also Says (which means): {And We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam], the Book [i.e. the Quran] in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it.}[Quran 5:48].

On the other hand, if by the term (original bible) you are referring to the book used by the Christians, then we say the following:

In the Quran Allaah informs us that He revealed a number of books, including the pages of Prophet Abraham, the Psalms of Prophet David, the Torah of Prophet Moses, the Injeel (Gospel) of Prophet Jesus, and finally, the Quran of Prophet Muhammad. Of these revealed texts only the Quran remains intact in its original form. All of the others (as complete books) have been lost, their remains have survived only as fragments or tampered with in some way so as to make their authenticity doubtful. No where in the Quran is the Bible even mentioned, to say nothing of its being among the revealed texts of Allaah, or as Christian claim "The Word of God." Further, we know from respected scholars that although some fragments of the Psalms, the Torah, and the Injeel (the teachings of Prophet Jesus) may be found in the Bible, comprised of the Old and New Testaments, the Bible can not rightfully be called "The Word of God." Why is this so?

As one publisher (Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., Wheaton, Illinois) stated: 'The Bible may look like one book, but it is actually sixty-six books in one. Thirty-nine books make up what we call the Old Testament, and twenty-seven make up the New Testament. It is possible that more than forty writers were used by God to write all sixty-six books.' (Quoted from the "Holy Bible" – New Living Translation, Gift & Award Edition, l997, p. vii)

So if the Bible is neither narrated by God nor written by Him, and, as such, is not ‘the word of God,' then what is it? By any objective criteria, the Bible is a book containing a compilation of stories, legends, folk tales, folk lore, myths, sagas, narratives, poetry, fragments of scriptures (fragments from the Psalms, the Torah, and the Injeel as already mentioned), letters (esp. in New Testament), visions, dreams, accounts of events from doubtful sources (not eye witnesses), editors’ or scribes’ notes, as well as human errors.

For those who believe in it, it is a book that has historical, cultural, moral and ethical values, and a source of spiritual teaching and guidance. It is a book held in high esteem, primarily by Christians who see it as a divine book and the source of their religious beliefs. But, in the final analysis it is only a book with many limitations and imperfections which disqualify it from being called "The Word of God." Whoever makes such a claim then the burden of proof rests with him. On the contrary, the Glorious Quran is the Speech of Allaah and, through the Angel Gabriel, was revealed to Prophet Muhammad, sallallaahu alayhi wa sallam; later compiled into a book more than 14 centuries ago it remains in its original form until today.

Some common misunderstandings about the Bible include the following:

* The Bible is one book, the Old Testament. The Bible contains sixty-six books (or more depending upon the denomination one belongs to).

* The Old Testament (OT) is the Torah followed by the Jews. The OT contains some fragments of the Torah which was lost and the Psalms, but the Talmud is the book followed by the Jews and is totally unrelated to the Bible.

* The New Testament (NT) is the Gospel of Prophet Jesus, or the Injeel. It is neither. It is made up of twenty-seven books, none of which was narrated or written by Prophet Jesus although the NT may contain fragments of the Injeel (sayings and teachings of Prophet Jesus). The Injeel as revealed through Prophet Jesus has been lost. The fragments which may be cited in the NT may not be authentic or in their proper context. So it is erroneous to equate the NT with the Injeel mentioned in the Quran.

* The Bible is a holy book, narrated, dictated by God and is infallible. While this is a claim, this misconception has already been addressed. Since the Bible is 'only' a book, there is no need to call it a forgery, a corrupted text, etc. The Quran is the only authentic "Word of God," His Speech, and Allaah has promised to protect it from distortion of any kind until the Day of Judgment and He has kept His promise. Not one letter or syllable has been changed over the past l4 centuries.



What are the difference between Torah and Qur'an?

The common ground between the Noble Qur'an and the Torah is that both are Books revealed by Allah the Exalted through the Archangel Jibreel (Gabriel), peace be upon him. Yet, the essential differences between these two Books are the following: 1) The Holy Qur'an is preserved by Allah Almighty against interpolation and adulteration, as Allah Says (interpretation of meaning): Verily We: It is We Who have sent down the Dhikr (i.e. the Qur'ân) and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)[15:9]. As for the Torah, it did not escape such interpolation and adulteration. 2) The Holy Qur'an was sent down on Allah's Messenger, Muhammad, sporadically (in steps) according to separate occasions and events, while the Torah was revealed all at once. 3) The Qur'an constitutes a commanding law whose validity is continuous till Doomsday, whereas the Torah was abrogated by the Qur'an being the last revealed Book and being supremely predominant over all of the previous Scriptures. Allah Almighty Says: And We have sent down to you (O Muhammad SAW) the Book (this Qur'ân) in truth, confirming the Scripture that came before it and Mohayminan (trustworthy in highness and a witness) over it (old Scriptures)[5:48]


Do the Words 'Torat' and 'Injeel' in the Qur'an refer to the Original Uncorrupted Scriptures?

Question:

In the recent article "If the Bible is corrupted... I feel it is also worth mentioning that the verses in question, (10,64) and (5,68) and other related verses obviously do not, and cannot refer to the "mainstream" scriptures that were/are corrupted in possession at the time of the Prophet (pbuh) and those that we have now.

I think, from my general understanding of these verses, the Qur'an obviously refers to the true, original, uncorrupted scriptures that were given to the people aforetime (i.e. Jews and Christians). This is especially apparent in Surah 5, verse 68.

So the Torah and the Injil mentioned in the Qur'an most certainly cannot be the "Old Testament", the "Pentateuch" or the "New Testament" as we have today, but the original Torah and Gospel as was revealed to both Moses (pbuh) and Jesus (pbuh).

Therefore is it not better understood logically that these verses in fact refer to the scriptures that were revealed in a pure state and not the corrupted versions?

Answer:

The Qur'an, by the names 'Torah' and 'Injeel' refers to what was called 'Torah' and 'Injeel' in the environment in which the Qur'an was revealed. It is obvious that had the Qur'an implied something else by these words, it was then necessary to clarify that the words were being used to imply something different from what they were commonly used in the environment. It should be kept in mind that the implication of words in a good piece of literature cannot be against the common usage of such words. If such is the case, it can only be considered a flaw of that piece of literature. For example, in the contemporary English language, the phrase "the prophet" (in singular form) is used only for Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)[1]. If any contemporary English writer uses the phrase to imply any other person, it would only be considered a serious mistake and flaw in his writing, unless he/she explicitly or implicitly[2] clarifies in his writing that the phrase has been used in a meaning different from its generally understood connotation.

It may, however, be noted that the 'Torah' and the 'Injeel' (especially the Injeel) that we have in our hands today are not necessarily the ones which were referred to as the Torah and the Injeel by the first addressees of the Qur'an. This is substantiated by a few references of the Qur'an to the Jews and Christians living in the environment of the revelation of the Qur'an. For instance, the Qur'an has referred to a particular sect of Jews, who hold "`uzair" to be the son of God. This obviously is a reference to a particular sect of Jews, who held `uzair to be the Son of God (as the mainstream Jews do not, generally, ascribe to this belief). Furthermore, it should be interesting to note that the Qur'an has referred to the Christians in its environment, by the name of "Nasaara", while, it is known that the general (mainstream) Christians had come to be known as "Christians" or "Maseehee" from a very early period of Christianity (as is mentioned in the Biblical book "Acts of the Prophets"). In view of this fact, it seems quite plausible that the Christians living in the Arabian Peninsula at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an were generally those who ascribed to the Nazarene creed. The Nazarenes were a Syrian Judeo-Christian sect that came to be recognized in the fourth century AD. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

Although they [the Nazarenes] accepted the divinity of Christ and his supernatural birth, the Nazarenes also maintained strict observance of Jewish laws and customs, a practice that had been dropped by the majority of Jewish Christians. They used a version of the Gospel in Aramaic called the Gospel According to the Hebrews, or the Gospel of the Nazarenes.

However, it is extremely unfortunate that the Injeel according to the Hebrews or the Gospel of the Nazarenes (which was probably the book referred to as 'Injeel' in the environment in which the Qur'an was revealed) is nowhere to be found anymore, as has been mentioned in the quote of the Encyclopedia.

This is my opinion regarding the references of the Qur'an to the two books. However, do let me know if I have failed to fully clarify my point of view.


[1] Refer to the word 'Prophet' in the Oxford Advanced Learner's Encyclopedic Dictionary, third impression, 1995.

[2] Implicit clarification may be through the context in which the word is being used.


The Qur'ân came to humanity after all the previous revealed scriptures had either been lost or, like the Torah and the Gospel , corrupted. Allah speaks about how people had corrupted the scriptures, saying: “Woe to those who write the Book with their own hands and then say: ‘This is from Allah' to gain from it a paltry price. So woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they gain from it.” [ Sûrah al-Baqarah : 79]

http://understanding-islam.org/related/t...

2007-09-02 00:14:27 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

fedest.com, questions and answers