Replies

Muslims do claim that the text of the Tanakh and the New Testament have been distorted or corrupted but I have never read a convincing display of evidence to back it up. Considering the historical evidence we have at our disposal, it actually defies logic, if you think about it.

Did Mohammed say the Bible was altered, and if so, on what did he base his claim? Is there any proof? If one is to believe that a text has been altered, it stands to reason that the one making the claim should have seen an original on which to base his claim. Why are there no originals or remnants of originals? How do we know what was omitted/altered? Islam should have some idea of the original content. Could we be pointed to any links or sources to more specifically define the claim?

Also, who did the omitting/altering? What party was served by omitting/altering parts of the Bible? For example, if omissions/alterations were done by the Jews, you'd think that they would paint themselves in a more favorable historical light. But as it stands today, Israel was a mostly foolish, bumbling, stubborn, disobedient nation, most often more interested in doing their own thing rather than what Jehovah asked of them, and were often punished harshly and humiliatingly for their behavior. Not a pretty picture of God's chosen. And if it were, say, the early Christians who altered the Bible, one would think they maybe would have added some more specific references to Christ as Messiah in the OT to further validate their claim, rather than have to struggle so strenuously with what the world considers to be obscure prophecies.

Which brings up another problem. If the text was altered or omissions made, WHEN was it done? You'd think that if it was done at any point in recorded history, there would be some general outcry about it, or copies or at least fragments of originals would still be around somewhere. How would it be possible to alter every single copy of scripture without leaving any original behind and without causing some recordable issue surrounding it? And if it were done before widespread copies were available, like in ancient Hebrew times when it was first written down, why would God wait so long to bring someone (Mohammed/Islam) to expose the truth - thousands of years after?

For example - the Qumran scrolls. The copies found there are remarkably accurate to those books of the OT we have today. Take for instance the Isaiah scroll - it is said to be virtually identical, save a couple miscellaneous characters. These scrolls were copied, at the latest, 2000 years ago. And they are the same as what we have today. Mohammed and the birth of Islam came between. So how is it possible that they have been altered?

And one more question - if both the OT and the NT are altered, that calls for a much wider conspiracy. Either there were two separate events - first, the early altering of the OT, with no trace of original left for us, and a later altering of the NT, with again no trace of original or historical outcry, a much harder feat since recorded history was relatively sophisticated by then. Or there was one altering event, which is impossible, considering the Qumran scrolls.

My conclusion is that belief in their alteration is much harder than belief in their continual accuracy, considering the historical basis and documented proof we have to use as evidence.