31 March 2012
It is likely Muhammad never saw a full Bible, and that he hardly even saw the Jewish full scriptures until after he fled to Medina, where there were many Jews, in 622 AD. All his Biblical tales are from apocryphal stories, legends, and even fairy tales (similar goes for his non-Biblical stories in the Quran). These often were from not very accurate to pretty fanciful. When this little by little was discovered, there only was one way for Muhammad to save his new religion and platform of power; to claim - never with a single proof - that the Bible was falsified, and that his stories were the correct ones.
This also today this is the "explanation", even though today it is thoroughly proved both by science and even more so (because they tried stronger to find falsified points) by Islam, by being unable to find even one proved falsification among some 120,000 scriptures and fragments from the Bible + some 32ooo with quotes or references from that book, older than 610 AD (when Muhammad started his mission - and by the way; there exist exactly no scripture or fragment from the Quran older than 610 AD, even if Islam claims Islam is thousands of years old, and that there have existed far more than 100ooo full copies similar to the Quran - 124,000 or more). In addition Islam has never been able to give a believable explanation for f.x.:
01. How it was possible to falsify OT (Muslims often blame this on the prophet Ezra and claim he had to rewrite the papers because they were destroyed when Jerusalem was taken by Babylon in 587 BC. But all the papers other places than Jerusalem - and likely also many there - survived. There also were scrolls even in Babylon (Ezra studied them there). Thus for one thing it was not possible for him to falsify the old papers, as far too many copies survived, and anybody would quickly discover the false points - very easy as the Quran (which Islam claims were the Jews' original scriptures - or at least very similar) is totally different from those scriptures. And for another thing the Bible writes quite much about Ezra, but do not mention one word about such a rewriting.
02. How it was possible to falsify NT. Here Islam tends to blame the council in Nicaea in 325 AD, but for one thing the agenda for that council is well known, and nothing like falsification of the Bible was discussed. In addition at that time there existed even many more copies if the holy scrolls or parts of them, which made it even more impossible than for Ezra to falsify anything without being discovered.
03. How to make the different sects agree on what to falsify and on the new texts?
04. How to make Jews and Christians agree on what to falsify f.x. regarding Jesus, and new texts?
05. How to find each and every of tens of thousands of scriptures spread over 3 continents? If even a few old ones survived, the game was up.
06. How to make Christian bishops (at the council) agree to falsify the Bible? It is exactly as easy as making ayatollahs agree to falsifying the Quran - and for the same reasons.
07. How to run such a big operation - it would take a few thousand representatives - over 3 continents, without anybody discovered what was happening? - there is not one word about such an operation in any of the many old papers.
08. How to arrange the operation in practice over 3 continents?
09. How to make the tens of thousands of owners all agree to having their cherished holy manuscripts falsified - and all of them agree to not to tell anybody?
10. How to make some millions of Jews and Christians forget what they knew of Biblical texts and silently accept the new ones without ever mentioning one word about it to anybody.
11. How to make millions of Jews and Christians all drop their religion and accept the new and very different one without ever uttering a word about it?
12. How to completely falsify the Bible without making contradictions "wholesale" - like in the Quran?
13. How to falsify the old handwritings so that one could not see that parts were not written by another person?
14. How to remove the old texts in such a careful way, that not even modern science can trace what is done?
15. How to find old ink, so that even modern science is unable to see the difference?
16. How explain that the Bible was possible to write on scrolls which had held the Quran - the Bible has about 4 times as much texts, and if they had added new writing material, modern C-14 technology had seen the difference of age.
17. How come that old scriptures are identical (except minor discrepancies normal for scriptures copied by hand) with what we have today? Who did f.x. falsify the Qumran scrolls shortly after 325 AD - they are identical to modern ones (those scrolls containing 972 texts were hidden in a cave late in the 1st century (likely hidden during the 1. Jewish revolt (66-73 AD), and only rediscovered in 1946-56).
:Like normal for Muhammad and for Islam not one proof for the claimed falsification was ever given. Without really strong proofs for the claim, there only is one conclusion possible t make from the points above: The claimed falsification is not even nonsense.
01 5/59da: "Do ye ("People of the Book"*) disapprove of us (Muslims*) for no other reason than that we believe in Allah, and (in*) the revelation (the Quran*) that hath come to us and (in*) that (the Bible and the Jewish scriptures*) which came before us - - -?" Indirectly here is said that the Bible and the Jewish scriptures are the same as the Quran (but that they are falsified to become very different from the Quran). Both claims you meet several places in the Quran - and in Hadiths - but both are strongly proved wrong by both science and Islam (who has searched intensively for 1400 years for provable falsifications) by the fact that even the oldest scriptures and fragments and quotes science and Islam have found, are identical to modern time texts, except for scattered minor mistakes normal when texts are copied by hand, and by the fact that neither science nor Islam has found one single proved case of such falsification.
But unproved claims are easy and cheap. Some time ago we f.x. run across a claim on Internet that one could prove that - if we remember correctly, at least 37 points in the Bible was falsified at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD) - Nicaea is a pet claim for Islam when it comes to falsification of especially NT (and Ezra for OT) - but typically the claim was strong, but not one proof given. These claims also are:
Historical nonsense as the agenda for that council is well known, and changes of texts in the Bible/falsifications were not a topic.
Religious nonsense as neither sects nor the Jews were present and could agree to falsifying their copies.
Psychological nonsense - how do you make strongly believing bishops change their holy scriptures? - it is exactly as easy as making ayatollahs change the Quran, and for exactly the same reasons.
More psychological nonsense: How to make tens of thousands of owners of scrolls and scriptures agree to having their cherished and expensive - handwritten books are very expensive - holy books, the basis for their beliefs and religion - falsified?
Even more psychological nonsense: How to do all this without starting tongues wagging? - in/after 325 AD we are 1000 years into the times of written history, and there does not exist even a rumor about such an enormous and fundamental operation anywhere in history.
Practical nonsense - how to afterwards falsify all the tens of thousands and more copies and references/quotes spread over 3 continents in exactly identical ways, how to be sure ALL existing copies/quotes were falsified, how to falsify the old manuscript so perfectly that no traces - scratching, different handwriting, different ink - can be found even by modern science? Etc.
More practical nonsense: The Bible has 4 - 5 as much text as the Quran. How to falsify 4 - 5 times as much text into the old scrolls? (Remember that today it is easy to find the age of the material texts are written on - and mostly also the age of the ink - they had to reuse the old scrolls to have the necessary age of them.)
Even more practical nonsense: In the entire two books there just is one short sentence - 8 words - (from a verse in the psalms) which is the same. ALL THE OTHER TEXT IS DIFFERENT. Our copy of the Quran is 560 pages. How could the Council of Nicaea agree on and produce 4 times that much text in some weeks, on top of a program tightly packed with other topics to discuss? - committees are notorious for working slowly.
Islam and its Muslims are very efficient - though often not clever - at making up claims. They - and Muhammad the same - are very strong at demanding proofs from opponents, proving that they reckon proofs to be valuable and of essence. But they are hopeless at producing real and valid proofs themselves - as was Muhammad.
"A CLAIM WITHOUT A PROOF MAY BE DISMISSED WITHOUT A PROOF". "CLAIMS ARE CHEAP, BUT ONLY PROOFS ARE PROOFS". "STRONG CLAIMS NEED STRONG PROOFS". THE NEVER PROVED CLAIM THAT THE BIBLE IS FALSIFIED, IS ONE OF THE MANY WHICH CAN BE DISMISSED UNLESS ISLAM PRESENTS SOME REAL PROOF. AND ON TOP OF THIS FACT THERE AS YOU SEE ARE MANY AND STRONG CIRCUMSTANTIAL PROOFS FOR THAT THE CLAIM THAT THE BIBLE IS FALSIFIED IS WRONG. COMBINE THEN AND YOU HAVE A PROOF OF MATHEMATICAL STRENGTH - ONE OF THE POINTS MUHAMMAD KNEW HE LIED ABOUT IN THE QURAN, BECAUSE THIS LATE (632 AD) HE HAD KNOWLEDGE AT LEAST TO THE JEWISH SCRIPTURES - THEY EXISTED F.X. IN MEDINA.
02 21/2a: "- - - a renewed Message - - -". The differences between the Bible (and especially NT with its New Covenant) are so deep and fundamental, that the Quran is no renewal of the Bible. This is even more sure as it is clear that the Muslim standard "explanation" - falsification of the Bible - is wrong (science has long since proved there may be mistakes in the Bible, but no falsifications, and Islam has proved it even better; If there anywhere had existed any clear indication, not to mention a proof for the smallest falsification, they had screamed about it. But there has never in 1400 years been one single such scream). But also see 21/2b just below.
03 32/2i: (YA3629): "By the time of the Prophet (Muhammad*) the earlier Book of Revelation (the Bible*) had been corrupted by human ignorance or selfishness or fraud, or misinterpreted or lost all together". The interesting point here is that the main statement behind this sentence is not true (a fact thoroughly proved by both science and by Islam), and all the same top Muslim writers treat it like a proved fact. There were fringe sects - some of them quite big - who disagreed and debated and even made up apocryphal scriptures - just like in Islam later (f.x. made up Hadiths). But the old scriptures lived on, and neither science nor Islam has ever found these proved corrupted or falsified. The oldest copies we know are just like today's ones, except for minor varieties which normally happens when books are copied by hand. These are well known facts. All the same Muslim scholars write things like this - and with a straight face. It tells something about Muslim scholars and about honesty within Islam.
This content was posted with assistance from M. A. Khan, the editor of islam-watch.org and the author of "Islam Jihad: A Legacy of Forced Conversion, Imperialism and Slavery" (available online)