QM Forum
The Bible => Discussions => Topic started by: Student on October 28, 2016, 01:58:19 PM
-
Salaam,
Sir Joseph,
Is this correct translation of the of Genesis Chapter 1, verse 27 from original Hebrew? And if so what is the accurate interpretation:
27 And God created the man in his own image.
In the image of God he created him.
This has been repeated few more times in the first few chapters I've read so far.
-
Hi Student, if you have any questions about the Bible specifically (not Islam), there are many other places on the Internet where you can find answers. As to the particular question you just asked, this is a very famous quote, and you can find much writing devoted to it.
Regards,
wanderer
-
Thanks Wanderer, I'm here and member of this forum just because of Sir Joseph's ardent, long and painstaking research work and also because of his expertise in all previous scriptures.
If you pay close attention to all the (wonderfully consistent) research work on this website you wouldn't have separated Bible and Islam :) I don't, thanks to Sir Joseph and he bring immense experience to connect all the scriptures seamlessly!
That's exactly why this is a question specifically directed to Sir Joseph but anyone else who's familiar with and have read the OT are most welcome to present their opinion (As a bonus and blessing I find many brothers and sisters on this forum beside Sir Joseph).
Hope you understand.
-
My apologies Student I wrote my previous comment without much thought. I already reported it to the moderates even before I saw your new message.
Regards
wanderer
-
No worries, you didn't hurt my feelings no apologies needed absolutely - peace! :D
Hope I get lucky with Sir's attention, inshallah :)
-
Asalamu Alykum
Ive heard somewhere that Genesis 1:27 has also been understood not in a bodily image but one of attributes like compassion, mercy, love, etc.
However if the verse is understood that God created man in His image physically, then it would be hard to accept as it sheds tension on the following verses.
6:103 Vision perceives Him not, but He perceives [all] vision; and He is the Subtle, the Acquainted.
112:4 And there is none like unto Him.
No human can imagine or dream of who the Almighty is other than He is the Most Merciful, Forgiver, Most Compassionate, Most All Powerful etc .
Hope that helps in any way Insha'Allah
Salam
-
Walekas salaam,
Thanks Br. Hamzeh. Like I said this verse is repeated twice at least and there are within first 14 chapters quite a few vivid description of God interacting with Adam, Eve and Ibrahim AS which cannot be understood outside our 5 senses:
Gen 3:8 They heard the sound of Yahweh God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Yahweh God among the trees of the garden
Would wait for Sir Joseph's kind clarification.
-
Salamu alykum
Your welcome brother.
Just a side note. Its not unusal that the Bible contains narratives that the Quran would consider unacceptable and inappropriate.
One must keep in mind that the Quran does support that the Bible has been tampered with. So its not all the time that dubious stories can be sweetened up with explanations. One must also have to admit that the dubious stories that go against the Quran are fabrications otherwise would have to prove them correct by going back to the original languages and see if there is any errors in the translations.
Nevertheless the Quran still does support that guidance is extractable.
Those are some other humble sentiments in the mean time.
Peace :)
-
I would also like to add that the Bible, at time, presents a strangely anthropomorphized view of God that would be considered blasphemous from an Islamic perspective. See the narrative of Jacob wrestling with God for an example.
These are undoubtedly falsifications in His scripture, as Brother Hamzeh has pointed out.
Regards
wanderer
-
Dear Student,
As-salamu alaykum
With all due respect dear brother, I will not be able to dedicate much time at the moment to provide detail responses to Bible specific questions and follow-ups. There are a plethora of Quranic queries / areas of work that I still have to address / pursue and would therefore, not be able to dedicate time on other areas of my work, including the Ahadith corpus.
Also, as I trust that you will appreciate, this is not a Bible study forum per se, but a Quran forum, albeit I appreciate that Biblical related questions will arise worth exploring, particularly from a Quran reconciliation perspective.
However, learned brothers and sisters are free to discuss Biblical related topics (hence the dedicated board), as I know some already have, particularly brother Zack who I know has contributed much valued sentiments hitherto in this area.
Finally, please also kindly appreciate the value of seeking input from the learned of the People of the Book too. The internet is replete with sources of information, discourses and well established academia.
There is also more than an implied hint that is the approach God conferred on the Prophet himself. If he was in doubt, he was asked to reach out to the People of the Book regarding their scriptures to ratify. If this approach was good for the prophet, then it should certainly be good for believers. This one can argue, is indeed a Quranic perspective.
016.043
“And before you also the messengers We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: if you do not know, ask of those who possess the Message”
021.007-8
“Before you, also, the messengers We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: If you do not know, ask of those who possess the Message. Nor did We give them bodies that ate no food, nor were they exempt from death”
Regards,
Joseph
RELATED ARTICLE:
[1] ASK THOSE THAT HAVE KNOWLEDGE
http://quransmessage.com/articles/ask%20one%20with%20knowledge%20FM3.htm
-
Hello Student,
Below is a quote from the Commentary I have mentioned before from http://www.revisedenglishversion.com/ (I don't agree with everything there, but having a "Tauhid" viewpoint makes it very useful). The following explains yours question.....
The immediately preceding context of Genesis 1 is God making the animals, which are not in the image of God. So being in the image of God involves things that are unique to mankind and different from the animals. Furthermore, being in the image of God is not something that we humans “have,” it is something that we humans “are.” We are in the image of God because of the unique way God made us as humans distinct from animals. Thus, our being in the image of God is having many of the same qualities that God has, and this would include things like the desire and self-awareness to love and be loved, the desire to be part of a family, a sense of what is moral or godly, the ability to think abstractly, the desire to create, the ability to communicate at a very advanced and abstract level, and the capacity to worship God.
There are some solid biblical reasons why mankind does not have to have holy spirit to be in the image of God. One is that after the Flood, which was more than 1600 years after Adam and Eve were created and long after the Fall, mankind was still said to be in the image of God (Gen. 9:6). Thus even in our fallen state, mankind is still in the image of God, and that is the reason why God says murder is wrong and why a murderer must be punished. To get the full impact of what God says about mankind in Genesis 9:6, we must note that in the context God had been talking about killing and eating animals. Animals were killed for their meat and for their skin, and this was acceptable, but God says it is not acceptable to kill a human being because, “in the image of God has God made mankind” (NIV). Thus, humans, in their fallen state without holy spirit, still bear the image of God.
Also mentioned the following in another post that is good to remember in approaching the Bible....
a) A lot of misinterpretation happens from not understanding how language is used in another culture. This is how “son of God” (or even man referred to as “god”) evolved from a Hebrew understanding to a Greek understanding of the Trinity. This is a part of the issue in reading such verses.
b) We need to place the verse in context of “the bigger picture.” That is, the constraints of the Torah. The same God of the Qur’an is the God of the Torah. We need to be careful in interpreting individual verses contrary to these constraints.
Anyway I will try to find a good link / resource for this,
Wasalam
Zack
-
Asalamu Alykum brother Zack.
Thank you so much for your response.
I see your point on this The easiest way to get a warped interpretation on the Old Testament is to ask a Muslim what it means! In fact a Christian will often respond with their own theological glasses as well. The same goes for the Christians teaching Christians about Islam....likely in error.
I can see how frustrating it is for some scholars of the People of the Book how other people misinterpret passages they have studied and understood. I sometimes get irritated when I hear Quranic passages get misinterpreted. Thank you for having patients with us.
To be honest I started reading the OT and I was shocked at some narratives, but I was also so emotional and amazed at the rest. I did not know how to view the OT. I tried to keep a positive attitude even when I was disturbed by some passages and said to myself 'its my understand that is at fault.'
I tried my best to view the stories that "seemed" inappropriate to me in a thought that was best. Or I put them on the side and said to myself ' ok there needs to be a explanation to this, because the way I understand it is quite shocking, so ill search for some answers after.'
For example as I'm sure you have heard it before from many the story of Noah and his daughters I also thought about, maybe the laws to him and his people were different than what was given to Moses and the rest of the nations after him. I tried to think about how would one think about Adam and his offspring and their marriages, like the first humans. It seems like they must of had been permitted to marry from each other. This in todays lenses would seen indeed inappropriate and also unlawful from both the Quran and the Bible.
At the same time, it did seem from the daughters perspective that they needed to hide this act from their father by giving him drink to intoxicate him. Therefor it seemed wrong even from the daughters perspective.
As I read to my best of understanding I felt that there was some narratives that differed from a Quranic perspective as well. For example, Harun was the cause of the Children of Israel worshipping the cow. Again I am possibly understand the OT wrong. Where from a Quranic perspective it seems to correct this understanding that Harun was not to blame. There does however seem from a Quranic perspective that Moses at first glance coming back to his people thought that it was Harun by grabbing him by his beard/head but Harun does clarify that he had nothing to do with the wrong doing people 7:150. Again I did not spend to much time in researching.
I've also noticed many other narratives that seems to have minor differences with the Quran, again this could be my shortcoming in understand both scriptures the Quran and the Bible.
My previous comment I may of written to quickly without putting to much thought into it, and I apologize for that.
As I see Masha'Allah you are also quite familiar with the Quran as well brother Zack, do you see that there is narratives in the Bible that differ from the Quran's point of view? If so isn't it safe to say they are fabrications?
I think it would be a great idea that scholars from both the Quran and the Bible should interact more and clarify the issues. As I for one do not like to view parts of the Bible as dubious stories if there is no warrant to , but if they are fabricated then I think it would be helpful to know which are and which are not to all the people of the scriptures, Jews, Christians, and Muslims. This would generally be a positive thing.
Thank you again for your kind comments brother
Salamu alykum :)
-
I don't understand why so many on this forum are trying to reconcile Biblical and Quranic inerrancy. THERE ARE clear differences between the two. I for one view the account of Lot and his daughters as a shameful blasphemy against a noble prophet of God. When reading bible (or Hadith) the Quran MUST remain the ultimate criterion (furqan).
-
Asalamu Alykum brother Wanderer
My comments were directed at brother Zack because I had read many of his posts before and from what I gathered from his sentiments is that the Bible and the Quran do not necessarily contradict each other but should be viewed differently.
It seems like when people had concerns about narratives in the Bible he had defended the interpretation and did not conclusively say that there is differences in stories or that there seems to be fabrications. He had pointed out that the Bible speaks of the weakness and sins of the prophets and the expressions and language seem to not be understood by the people who read the Quran. Does he have a valid point? Maybe to a limit, but some narratives seem a little disturbing so obviously they need to be explained.
Whats more important to me is that if there is differences in clear stories between the Quran and the Bible, then one can for sure admit that there is fabricated verses in the Bible. If this is accomplished then one can also approach the Bible with a caution and a consciousness of what seems to be fabricated. This is my concern. I also would like to be very conscious of not accusing the present day Bible of things I have little knowledge about although at first glance may seem hard to accept. I mean even from the Quran if one reads certain passages without their context there seems to be questions that arise. This is not the Quran's fault but the fault of one who is reading and not understanding the Quran by just reading verses divorced from their context.
So I would like to see from his point of view if he does recall any differences and if so(which to my limited knowledge of the previous scripture I do see there is) does it tantamount to fabrications or not? And if not then we are definitely not reading the previous scriptures correctly or having an interpretation that is not correct. And therefor would like to change my technique on reading the Bible.
I am not dismissing the later because I have seen misinterpretations in the english Quran many times. So i do not doubt that this may also has happened to the Bible. God knows best.
We do know the Quran speaks highly of the previous Scriptures, as of course the truth contained in them is indeed from God also.
If the Quran cannot be used to determine the truth contained in the Bible then one starts to assume or question would it be possible the Bible that was in the hands of the People of the Book in the time of prophet Muhammad could be different than what we have today? This is also a question that should be considered if one was to approach the Bible without using the Quran as a guard(muhayymin). The only reason I may question this is just because of how highly it the Quran speaks about the Bible and at the same time the differences that I see with the Quran otherwise I would have no reason to accuse any tampering.
On the other hand again the Quran does seem to say that there has been falsely attributed sayings in the name of God however God has passed over much of what has been attributed. So therefor accept the differences and approach the Bible with a caution and read them in light of the Quran. Which is the guard over them. This view is most what seems more plausible to me.
Which at times I only feel that brother Zack does not view it this way. I could be wrong in my assumption and forgive me if I have said anything in error brother. Much appreciation to all your efforts brother Zack and always a pleasure to read your comments.
May God bless you all.
Salam :)
-
But the Quran clearly says the Bible was corrupted. And there Are differences between their various narratives-- Some extremely serious. I think when the Quran speaks so highly of the character of Lot, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a follower of the Quran to accept such tales in his name. I agree misreading the text can be a problem, and I agree the Bible contains more of God's words than men's words, but this does not amount to infallibility, or the idea that we have to accept such smears on the impeccable character of God's chosen prophets.
Regards
wanderer
-
I apologize if I seemed abrasive in my previous posts. IT'S just that, as a person who attempts to emulate the noble character of the noble propets in my regular life, a maligning of these characters, whether they be from modern day polemics of corrupted ancient sources, angers me. Please do not take offense.
Regards
wanderer
-
Salam brothet Wanderer
Please realize that my comments were more towards brother Zack as I have been following his comments on other posts. I would like to also know clearly his views as maybe I might be missing something.
What I had gathered from his previous comments on different topics that the Quran is a continuation of God's previous scriptures and do not necessarily have to be viewed through the Quran when topics differ between them. We are just not understanding the verses correctly or not understanding the mind set of a different people. Although that might be true I have also read a while ago that the truth contained in the Bible can be extracted using simple logic.
Like I mentioned I agree with that its a continuation of the previous scripture but it's also a guard and a correction on invented writings in the name of God.
Therefor the Bible if stands in contrast with the Quran then one should know that its fabricated.
As I agree with you with what your saying. There also needs to be given a chance to see how others view this topic expecially those learned brother and sisters who are familiar with other scriptures.
Peace :)
-
Hello Friends,
Thanks for your great responses. The Qur'an context is very interconnected with the Bible, and so this is a very important topic.
I will go through a few of the key questions raised below, however firstly just to say the way I approach the Qur'an, this will helps with the variations in the Previous Books to the Qur'an. That is, the purpose of the Qur'an is for Arabs to memorize stories known to its 7th Century audience, so to bring its audience to repentance, primarily from "A compromised Monotheism," where the audience had departed from the Greatest command of all according to Isa, "The Lord your God is one." The purpose of the Qur'an is NOT to correct the stories in the Book of the Ahli Kitab! With this understanding as the context, everything changes. Differences in the story don't matter.
Why did the audience have stories that took a different to the previous Kitab? Because the audience knew the oral traditions, they didn't have a Book in their language.
Responding to some specific questions / comments.....
If the Quran cannot be used to determine the truth contained in the Bible then one starts to assume or question would it be possible the Bible that was in the hands of the People of the Book in the time of prophet Muhammad could be different than what we have today?
There is absolutely no doubt that the Bible in the hands of the People of the Book is the same as it is today. In fact the Bible that the Prophet Muhammad was exposed to and referred still is world-renowned. You can see images of it here. I am sure brother Joseph can confirm this, and in fact I believe in some of his writings he already has mentioned this.
https://www.google.co.id/search?q=Peshitta&espv=2&biw=1440&bih=782&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj5m4ntsIHQAhVEu48KHVpcADwQ_AUIBygC
When reading bible (or Hadith) the Quran MUST remain the ultimate criterion (furqan).
Placing the Kitab before the Qur'an on the same level as the Hadith creates a mess and is almost blasphemous, as the Qur'an says "If you are in doubt, ask the People of the Book." Therefore this theory elevates the Hadith over the Qur'an. This creates big problems!
But the Quran clearly says the Bible was corrupted.
Can you please explain this statement? This is a tradition even later than most of the Hadith.
This is also a question that should be considered if one was to approach the Bible without using the Quran as a guard (muhayymin).
I would love to hear from Br. Joseph a word study on this.... Surah 3:1 and other such verses. If the Qur'an is a guard, why would it guard something corrupt? Surely it would guard something of value? This whole usage of the word "Guard" is back to front... "guarding" actually affirms the value of what is guarded.
Thanks for the input. A lot of these issues comes from not the text, but our attitude towards the text, which has been affected by religious division over centuries.
Wasalam
Zack
Asalamu Alykum brother Wanderer
It seems like when people had concerns about narratives in the Bible he had defended the interpretation and did not conclusively say that there is differences in stories or that there seems to be fabrications. He had pointed out that the Bible speaks of the weakness and sins of the prophets and the expressions and language seem to not be understood by the people who read the Quran. Does he have a valid point? Maybe to a limit, but some narratives seem a little disturbing so obviously they need to be explained.
Whats more important to me is that if there is differences in clear stories between the Quran and the Bible, then one can for sure admit that there is fabricated verses in the Bible. If this is accomplished then one can also approach the Bible with a caution and a consciousness of what seems to be fabricated.
If the Quran cannot be used to determine the truth contained in the Bible then one starts to assume or question would it be possible the Bible that was in the hands of the People of the Book in the time of prophet Muhammad could be different than what we have today? This is also a question that should be considered if one was to approach the Bible without using the Quran as a guard (muhayymin).
On the other hand again the Quran does seem to say that there has been falsely attributed sayings in the name of God however God has passed over much of what has been attributed.
Salam :)
-
Yes, the Quran says Bible is corrupted, this is apparent.
Examples:
Solomon never fell to polytheism
Samiri, not Aaron started calf-worship
Lot's wife wasn't turned to salt, she was a disbeliever
Adam AND eve, sinned and fell from grace
No original sin
AND MUCH MORE
I simply do not understand how one can ignore all this
You also seemed to have radically misinterpreted the concept of a guard/criterion. The Quran is a guard in that it tells us which of the Bible is true and what isnt. These are my views, which are also shared by Traditional Islam (one of the few areas we agree on). I can see you follow a highly unique brand of theology which I disagree with. Nevertheless, I am not interested in a debate at this moment. Peace be upon you.
Regards
wanderer
-
Hello Wanderer.
Yes, no need to debate, my response to your points are on my last post above this one.
Wasalam
Zack
-
Asalamu Alykum brother Zack.
I for one is not concluding anything as if yet regarding the Bible.
I do believe that the Quran came upon a people that were not guided before therefor it came to them as a mercy and favor from God. But at the same stroke I do believe it came to correct the understandings of the previous people of the book whether it was orally or what was written with them.
I also agree that comparing hadith and the Bible are not the same.
But you have to realize that its God who has revealed the revelations to Moses Jesus and Muhammad. So there should not be differances in stories. Or at least no contradictions.
I can see that if the prophets were to write the books in their own wisdom it would be still inspired to them by God. There may be differances in accuracy but not complete opposite perspectives.
Insha'Allah Ill ask you some questions regarding the Bible so I can get a betelter idea what your saying.
Salam
-
HI Hamzeh,
I think a good starting point is Br. Josephs article in regards to this topic..
http://quransmessage.com/articles/between%20hands%20or%20before%20it%20FM3.htm
I also mention again regarding how to approach variations...
- The purpose of the Qur'an is for Arabs to memorize stories known to its 7th Century audience, so to bring its audience to repentance, primarily from "A compromised Monotheism," where the audience had departed from the Greatest command of all according to Isa, "The Lord your God is one." The purpose of the Qur'an is NOT to correct the stories in the Book of the Ahli Kitab!
Wasalam
Zack
-
Salamu alykum brother Zack
I dont really understand what you mean by what you mentioned The purpose of the Qur'an is for Arabs to memorize stories known to its 7th Century audience, so to bring its audience to repentance, primarily from "A compromised Monotheism," where the audience had departed from the Greatest command of all according to Isa, "The Lord your God is one." The purpose of the Qur'an is NOT to correct the stories in the Book of the Ahli Kitab!
The audience of the Quran primarily were prophet Muhammad's people. The Quraish. These people were polytheists, who possibly ran off the monotheism track long before prophet Jesus, even possibly from the time the first humans have split up when they were one community. It wasn't until prophet Muhammad times that they have received guidance from God. It seems from a Quranic perspective that lots of nations God has favoured before them by sending them prophets and messengers while they still remained pagans unguided. Prophet Jesus did not come to them, neither did Moses or any other messengers.
Also in the area of prophet Muhammad and at the time of the revelations of the Quran there does seem to be Arabic speaking Jews and Christians. This was the perfect time to correct the beliefs of the People of the Book, whether it was contained in writing or that was being spread orally.
These are just a few verses
28:46-47 "And you were not on this side of the mountain when We called, but a mercy from your Lord that you may warn a people to whom no warner came before you, that they may be mindful. And were it not that there should befall them a disaster for what their hands have sent before, then they should say: Our Lord! why did you not send to us a messenger so that we should have followed Thy communications and been of the believers!"
32:3 "Or do they say: He has forged it? Nay! it is the truth from your Lord that you may warn a people to whom no warner has come before you, that they may follow the right direction"
34:44 "And We have not given them any books which they read, nor did We send to them before you a warner"
36.2-6 "I swear by the Quran full of wisdom, Most surely you are one of the messengers, On a right way. A revelation of the Mighty, the Merciful. That you may warn a people whose fathers were not warned, so they are heedless" [1]
Also it was expected that those who heard the Quran from among the People of the Book not to disbelieve in the testimony of the Quran. The ones who did reject the Quran were termed disbelievers. They were actually warned not to be the first of the audience to disbelieve in the Quran. There also seems to be guidance contained in the Quran for the People of the Book. The Quran does refer them back to their books, but with a caution. That they go back and correct there beliefs in areas the Quran differs. Also there is no doubt that the Quran corrects the beliefs that was orally transmitted and possibly never written down but was part of their main stream tradition. Example the belief that Jesus or Ezra is a son.
2:41 And believe in what I reveal, confirming the revelation which is with you, and be not the first to reject Faith therein, nor sell My Signs for a small price; and fear Me, and Me alone.
Going back to what you said earlier I think I might know what your trying to portray to me :)Why did the audience have stories that took a different to the previous Kitab? Because the audience knew the oral traditions, they didn't have a Book in their language.
So from what i'm gathering is that your saying the "Arabs" were the audience (meaning all of them who were Jews, Christians, Pagans) all knew the previous scriptures through here say, or orally transmitted to them but they did not have the Bible in the Arabic language. So this lead them to have differences in stories? Hence the reason the Quran was revealed because its now in Arabic?
Even if this was the case, the stories differ not from the traditions of the audience but from the texts them selves. Bible and Quran. God revealed them both. They cannot go in contrast against each other.
Anyways brother, thank you for your thoughts. It was a pleasure and keep in mind its not a dispute Insha'Allah. It was to only understand other believers perspectives better and that Insha'Allah we get closer to the truth. As you can tell its not the easiest topic to discuss. Hope to learn more on your perspective God Willing.
May God guide us all to a better path and increase us in knowledge Insha'Allah
Peace
[1] ARE THE ARABS AND PROPHET MUHAMMAD (pbuh) REALLY DESCENDANTS OF PROPHET ABRAHAM? (pbuh)
http://quransmessage.com/articles/are%20the%20arabs%20descendants%20of%20abraham%20FM3.htm
-
Salam
I mentioned There also seems to be guidance contained in the Quran for the People of the Book. The Quran does refer them back to their books, but with a caution. That they go back and correct there beliefs in areas the Quran differs.
Instead of saying "but with a caution." It seems to me actually that the Quran does refer the People of the Book to their Scriptures which suggests guidance, judgment and law still remains intact and those parts are not corrupted. However as the Quran is a mercy to all mankind it also serves to correct certain topics that seem to be not of law or judgment.
Allah(swt) knows best
Salam
-
The audience of the Quran primarily were prophet Muhammad's people. The Quraish. These people were polytheists, who possibly ran off the monotheism track long before prophet Jesus, even possibly from the time the first humans have split up when they were one community. It wasn't until prophet Muhammad times that they have received guidance from God.
I say that the audience had a "Compromised Monotheism".... There are so many areas where later Muslim writings influence our thinking. The idea that the audience of the Qur'an were polytheists is an assumption. Muslim tradition / Hadith is virtually our only source of information about the jahiliyya. The following may be helpful.....
The polemic of the Qur’an against the mushrikun reflects disputes among monotheists rather than pagans.Much of the Qur’an material points to a dispute about intermediate beings, angels and others, as sources of power and influence with God. But a developed angelology and exchanges of accusations of angel worship are characteristic of many monotheist groups in the early Christian period. It is against this background that the traditional charge of shirk is usually understood. The essence of their kufr was that they recognized (through prayers, sacrifices, vows and other things) intermediaries between themselves and God: When you have understood this you have understood the meaning of ‘there is no god but God’, and you have understood that whoever calls upon a prophet or an angel, grants him authority or asks him for help, such a one has gone away from Islam.
Wasalam