To Muslims: Proof from the Quran that Mohammad/Islam is wrong

Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
1,607
So, now I ask you, do you Muslims have proof that there are ANY surviving manuscripts with a Muslim version of the teachings of Jesus? This includes apocrypha. So much for Allah's words being preserved.
Screen Shot 2020-05-22 at 11.07.19.pngScreen Shot 2020-05-22 at 11.08.12.png

From the above page: 'The Arabic Islamic literary tradition of the premodern period contains several hundred sayings and stories ascribed to Jesus... As a whole, they form the largest body of texts relating to Jesus in any non-Christian literature.'

Jesus (pbuh), the son of Mary said, “God has given me the power to give life to the dead, sight to the blind, sound to the deaf; but He did not give me the power to heal the fool of his foolishness.”
 

Resistor

Established
Joined
May 22, 2020
Messages
340
First off, there isnt anything in the Quran stating this, that a direct Revelation attributed to someone is better than a secondary writer recording stuff.
Hey, I know what he's referring to. There's 5:46, 5:110 and 57:27 - about the Gospel. Make note of the "we gave HIM".
 

Axl888

Established
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Messages
413
you're useless
seriously
here look, a muslim is educating you on your religion.

in this text, there are TWO SHEPHERDS!!
the one who is rejected...ie Jesus
the one who the nation appoints

15 Then the Lord said to me, “Take again the equipment of a foolish shepherd. 16 For I am going to raise up a shepherd over the land who will not care for the lost, or seek the young, or heal the injured, or feed the healthy, but will eat the meat of the choice sheep, tearing off their hooves.

17 “Woe to the worthless shepherd,
who deserts the flock!
May the sword strike his arm and his right eye!
May his arm be completely withered,
his right eye totally blinded!”


this isnt some random figure..this is the antichrist, the 'foolish/worthless shepherd'
this figure, hasnt come yet. The jews havent selected their 'messiah' yet.
OK, so there are two shepherds, one is Jesus and the other is the antichrist... but then, which shepherd muslims are following? Certainly not Jesus...
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,908
OK, so there are two shepherds, one is Jesus and the other is the antichrist... but then, which shepherd muslims are following? Certainly not Jesus...
1) Islam most def believes in the second coming of Jesus Christ. We just don't believe in a mangod like the roman pagans.

2) Remember in the NT it tells us the antichrist is the man of lawlessness who will stand in the temple and declare himself GOD.
So certainly islam cant be following a man who calls himself God, but we know Xtianity is designed to accept exactly that.

3) Zech 11 says
May the sword strike his arm and his right eye!
May his arm be completely withered,
his right eye totally blinded!”


prophet Mohammad said
(5) Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet mentioned the Massiah Ad-dajjal in front of the people saying, Allah is not one eyed while Messsiah, Ad-dajjal is blind in the right eye and his eye looks like a bulging out grape. While sleeping near the Ka'ba last night, I saw in my dream a man of brown color the best one can see amongst brown color and his hair was long that it fell between his shoulders. His hair was lank and water was dribbling from his head and he was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men while circumambulating the Kaba. I asked, 'Who is this?' They replied, 'This is Jesus, son of Mary.' Behind him I saw a man who had very curly hair and was blind in the right eye, resembling Ibn Qatan (i.e. an infidel) in appearance. He was placing his hands on the shoulders of a person while performing Tawaf around the Ka'ba. I asked, 'Who is this? 'They replied, 'The Masih, Ad-dajjal.' " (Book #55, Hadith #649)

actually there's something ive not noticed before
in the dream (which is not literal but symbolic), Jesus was placing his hands on the shoulders of two men while circumambulating the Kaba
whilst dajjal had his hands on the shoulders of a person

@Kung Fu i know it's a small detail but it once again fits with the theme in Surah 18. Remember what i said that dajjal being externally blind in his right eye is symbolic of being 'left brain impaired'. The left brain pertains to the LOGICAL TRUTH and is the passive aspect of spirituality (yin/passive). Tawheed is from this side. The right brain pertains to the MYSTICAL TRUTH and is the active aspect eg our upwards movement, seeking God as opposed to accepting God.
Hence it makes sense that the religions lacking in the logical truth of Tawheed, become panthiest. Whilst judaism is logical and lacks the mystical, it became similar to wahabism in rejecting all things spirituality related to the point where, they lost the connection with God internally.
Islam is about balance. However XTIANITY IS NOT.

the perfect example is in the statement
The Word WAS WITH God....and The Word IS GOD.
these are 2 contradicting statements...one is logical truth/monothiestic and the other is mystical truth/panthiestic. Yet the christians only chose to use the second statement...yet they're so lost in anything logical that they dont even grasp the error or see that by accepting the WORD as GOD, they simultaneously need to believe 'all things are God' (eg become panthiest) since the LOGOS is the origin of ALL things in existence/creation.

16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist


Yet in the end they choose to just believe in the mangod rather than understand 'him' as the Logos/Word with a much larger understanding.
these are just further proofs that xtianity is THE antichrist religion.
 

Lefort3000

Rookie
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
48
View attachment 36658View attachment 36659

From the above page: 'The Arabic Islamic literary tradition of the premodern period contains several hundred sayings and stories ascribed to Jesus... As a whole, they form the largest body of texts relating to Jesus in any non-Christian literature.'

Jesus (pbuh), the son of Mary said, “God has given me the power to give life to the dead, sight to the blind, sound to the deaf; but He did not give me the power to heal the fool of his foolishness.”
This proves literally nothing. I need proof of stuff pre Islamic, not Islamic writings on Jesus lol.
 

Lefort3000

Rookie
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
48
I didn't write the article dude, you're mixing my words up with someone else's.
You dodged the question. You posting an articles still doesnt absolve you of YOUR stance that you and other Muslims regurgitate. Its a simple question, WHEN DID THE ORIGINAL GOSPELS GET:
1) Corrupted
2) Removed
3) Replaced
4) Or even recorded (written down)

The FACT remains, that you have ZERO proof to answer any of these questions. There is ZERO proof of that what you say about the original Injeels, no apocrypha or Ill even ask if there is proof in the Quran that says anything about these specifically, anything about an original Gospel thats not the Gospel Mohammad had at his time. I want something specifically about this.

You are conflating things. Revelation (which is Oral not written on paper) is one thing, the recording and preservation of a Revelation is another thing, a biographical book that talks about somebody receiving a revelation within it's narrative is another thing.

Here's a way to make it easier to understand:
"I like to make cake"
"I heard Jim say: 'I like to make cake' "
"I heard from Tom that Jim said: 'I like to make cake"

Then we've got the other narrative side of:

"In the year of 1500, Jim moved house to a small farm with his new wife, for the summer he made cake"
"In the year of 1500, Jim moved house to a large farm with his new wife, for the summer he made cake"



It doesn't matter how much you crossdress it, your books are still not the direct literal word of God, so they can't be what the Qur'an is actually referring to.

Same as the prior reply I just gave, where is your PROOF to back this up? Quranic verses, anything? All this first, second, and third party stuff as evidence that Mohammad couldnt be referencing the Bible, wheres the proof.

Which brings me to my next point, you keep IGNORING these:

Sura 7:156-157: "And I will write down (my mercy) for those who are righteous and give alms and who believe in our signs; who follow the apostle, the unlettered prophet, whom they find written in the Torah and the Gospel THAT IS WITH THEM.


Sura 3:93-94: "All food was lawful to the children of Israel except what Israel made unlawful for itself before the Torah was revealed. Say, `BRING the TORAH and READ it, if you are men of truth.' If any, after this, invent a lie and attribute it to God, they are indeed transgressors."

Sura 2:113: "The Jews say, `The Christians are not (founded) upon anything.' And the Christians say, `The Jews are not (founded) upon anything.' And yet THEY READ THE BOOK."


THESE DIRECTLY CONTRADICT YOUR ASSERTION JUST NOW.


I am very certain that Prophet Muhammad (A.S.) interacted not with Catholics, but with Ebionites. I believe that Ebionites are the closest relic there is to the legitimate Nazarene Messianic Jesus movement of the 1st century prior to Paul.
Ebionites being branded as heretics by the Catholic Church and heavily persecuted helps my case.
They did not believe in your new testament.
This is supported by both the fact that the Qur'an nowhere mentions Christians/Christianity and instead mentions Nazarenes (Nasara), and furthermore by how the Qur'an contradicts what the writers of the NT state, just like the Ebionites did.

Logic makes it clear that if it says that Jesus was revealed a book of God speaking and the Qur'an is in dialogue with such a group, then very obviously it's not in dialogue with your Catholic (and derivative) Christianity.
If the Qur'an referenced a group known as al-Masihiyya ("Followers of the Messiah/Christ"), then I would have FAR MORE reason to equate what the Qur'an (word of God) speaks of with your religion but I don't. The Qur'an speaks of al-Nasara (Nazarenes) not al-Masihiyya.

Nonetheless a great portion of the Qur'an's polemics and criticisms against the Nazarenes of Arabia still strongly apply to you "Christians".
Here are two of my own links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazarene_(sect)#The_Nazarenes_(4th_century)

4th century part.


Y
ou can read the difference between it and the Gospel of Matthew we have now. Not much changed.

Ebionites:

The wiki link on ebionites says its possible that ebionites survived to the 11th century, so they very easily couldve been around at Mohammad's time.


This is from a website that is anti Paul but Christian. The section about the Homilies I dont agree with entirely, but theres plenty of useful info and links that are cited in here. Evidence is presented here that Ebionites followed the Gospel of the Hebrews (lost to time, only quotes remain from other writings), the Hebrew Gospel of Matthews (there may be a Hebrew Gospel of Matthew from the 1300 from a rabbi that is more similiar to the original), and the Gospel of Luke.


The smoking gun though, is that from multiple sources, the Ebionites are quoted as believing that Jesus WASNT born from a virgin, which conflicts with the Quran. The article also adds how this could've been inserted into the Christian Gospels.


 

Lefort3000

Rookie
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
48
Reading this, I had this quote pop into my head again.

View attachment 36541

Anyway, I shall not linger here in a religious thread.....I get dizzy spells.
Not sure about Christian missionaries in Africa during colonization periods (1800's and after), but you can look at the history of the slave trade from Islamic Arabs and compare that to Christianity. The Christian slave trade started over 1500 years after the founding of Christianity and did not last long. The Arab slave trade started becoming rampant shortly after Mohammad died. The slave trade happened alongside the Islamic conquests, as thats what Islam encourages.
 

Awoken2

Superstar
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
6,207
The slave trade happened alongside the Islamic conquests, as thats what Islam encourages
Sorry but I just can't somebody seriously who makes statements like this. It's an extremely racist statement which makes you, despite your fantastic historical knowledge, a racist.
 

Lefort3000

Rookie
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
48
Sorry but I just can't somebody seriously who makes statements like this. It's an extremely racist statement which makes you, despite your fantastic historical knowledge, a racist.
I guess the Hadiths that repeatedly talk about Mohammad being white, and that saying he was black gets you killed, aren't racist then? Because you're a Muslim?

This isnt racism. Lmao. Its a FACT that the Islamic slave trade brutalized many Africans, Indians, and some Christian Europeans, as well as some Arabs.
 

Awoken2

Superstar
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
6,207
I guess the Hadiths that repeatedly talk about Mohammad being white, and that saying he was black gets you killed, aren't racist then? Because you're a Muslim?

This isnt racism. Lmao. Its a FACT that the Islamic slave trade brutalized many Africans, Indians, and some Christian Europeans, as well as some Arabs.
I don't care what the Hadiths say, or bible says, at all. I'm not religious at all. I don 't care about what your history book tells you either because our history is written by the winners not the losers so it's highly likely it's all a bunch of shite anyway.

The fact that you're throwing up historical "facts" to justify a scornful attitude towards Muslims only shows me that you are indeed a racist, using history in your protestations counts for jack to me.

I deal with the here and now, not history.

I'm caucasian btw.
 

Lefort3000

Rookie
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
48
I don't care what the Hadiths say, or bible says, at all. I'm not religious at all. I don 't care about what your history book tells you either because our history is written by the winners not the losers so it's highly likely it's all a bunch of shite anyway.

The fact that you're throwing up historical "facts" to justify a scornful attitude towards Muslims only shows me that you are indeed a racist, using history in your protestations counts for jack to me.

I deal with the here and now, not history.

I'm caucasian btw.
Talk about a strawman, where did I justify shitty actions towards Muslims.

Your lack of religion blinds you, you're reaching very hard.

Islamic enslavement doesnt matter to you I guess,
 

Awoken2

Superstar
Joined
Jan 22, 2018
Messages
6,207

Lefort3000

Rookie
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
48
You will....right here....



What I said was....



How can a scornful attitude equate to being a shitty action?

Don't even talk to me about strawmen when you start with all that.
Criticism is not a scornful attitude. This is criticism in defense of a claim made that Christian missionaries did bad things.

I do not wish to make people on here feel complacent in their viewpoints if they are wrong.

"Shitty action" was me misreading what you had written.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
Not sure about Christian missionaries in Africa during colonization periods (1800's and after), but you can look at the history of the slave trade from Islamic Arabs and compare that to Christianity. The Christian slave trade started over 1500 years after the founding of Christianity and did not last long. The Arab slave trade started becoming rampant shortly after Mohammad died. The slave trade happened alongside the Islamic conquests, as thats what Islam encourages.
Lol. Yes, Arabs enslaved people but it was nowhere close to the brutality which was the Transatlantic Slave Trade. And let's not forget it being the largest procurement of slaves with millions of death according to historians and academics. It was such a large and brutal slave trade that the effects of it can still be felt today.

Also, slavery existed prior to Islam and was being done by all people's around the world. It was more done for economic reasons and slavery wasn't specific to a certain race. When Christians got tired of enslaving their own people they decided to enslave black people because they literally thought they were better than them. With Bibles within their hands they set off and participated in the most brutal and largest slave trade the world would ever know.

Also, you talk about conquests but you forget to mention that the Persians and Christian Roman empire started the game first but then when they started losing you cry foul now. Keep quiet hypocrite.
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
Don't even get me started on Christian missionaries. Christian Missionaries pretended to go into Africa to help people but instead we're bribing poor Africans with food, houses, and other goods if they converted. First you guys went in and did it by the sword, then through slavery, and now try to do it by crookery. And to make it worse they're still doing it to this day. Do you ever stop?
 
Last edited:

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
Your Bible is corrupted. Academic historians like Bart Ehrman completely shredded your illogical beliefs in regards to your Bible being preserved.

Funny thing is the Quran was already telling us your kind loved changing and associating scripture to Him long before academics brought that knowledge to us.

Do you covet [the hope, O believers], that they would believe for you while a party of them used to hear the words of Allah and then distort the Torah after they had understood it while they were knowing? Surah 2:75

So woe to those who write the "scripture" with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. Surah 2:79
 

Kung Fu

Superstar
Joined
Mar 24, 2017
Messages
5,087
Again OP your comparing your Bibles of today with the ones 1400 years ago but this is a whole other topic.

When Muhammad was told to go check with the people of the book it was in reference to monotheism. Every Muslim knows there are still remnants of truth within the Bible like with the OT and it's adherence to the worship of One God. It's funny how you're trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Do me a favour and yourself. Go read and study which revelations came down at which time and why and then you'll have your answer instead of going to AnsweringIslam.com and regurgitating their nonsense.
 

Lefort3000

Rookie
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
48
Lol. Yes, Arabs enslaved people but it was nowhere close to the brutality which was the Transatlantic Slave Trade. And let's not forget it being the largest procurement of slaves with millions of death according to historians and academics. It was such a large and brutal slave trade that the effects of it can still be felt today.

Also, slavery existed prior to Islam and was being done by all people's around the world. It was more done for economic reasons and slavery wasn't specific to a certain race. When Christians got tired of enslaving their own people they decided to enslave black people because they literally thought they were better than them. With Bibles within their hands they set off and participated in the most brutal and largest slave trade the world would ever know.

Also, you talk about conquests but you forget to mention that the Persians and Christian Roman empire started the game first but then when they started losing you cry foul now. Keep quiet hypocrite.
Hopefully everyone reading this can pick up on the fact that you've provided no links and PROOF for your claims. I will though.

First, lets see what your scriptures say about this:

From: https://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/slavery.htm

33:50 - "Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty."

23:5 - "... except with their wives and slave girls, for these are lawful to them:..."

The Quran also instructs Muslims NOT to force their female slaves into prostitution (24:34), and even allows Muslims to marry slaves if they so desire (4:24), and to free them at times as a penalty for crime or sin (4:92, 5:89, 58:3) and even allows slaves to buy their liberty, if they meet certain of their master's conditions (24:33). [90:10 'freeing of a bondsman' refers to Muslims ransoming other Muslims who were slaves of non-Muslims.]

Hadiths:

Sahih Bukhari:


Vol. 5-#459 [This Hadith is similar to the above. However, additional details are added]. Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: "I entered the mosque and saw Abu Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu said, "We went out with Allah's messenger for the Ghazwa (attack upon) Banu Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus we said "How can we do coitus interruptus without asking Allah's messenger while he is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said "It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.""

Vol. 3-#765

Narrated Kuraib: the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles."

- Mohammad discourages her freeing slave

Vol. 5-#637 Narrated Buraida: The prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus ([one fifth] of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)?" When we reached the prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes" He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus."

The note for this Hadith says "Buraida hated Ali because he had taken a slave girl form the booty and considered that as something not good."

Vol. 7-#734 "....At the door of the [Muhammad's] room there was a slave to whom I went and said, "Ask the permission for me to enter".....
- Mohammad owned slaves


Abu Dawud, vol. 2, chapter 597 - "On a Man who Beats His Slave While he is in the Sacred State (wearing Ihram)."

#1814- "(Abu Bakr) began to beat him (Bakr's slave) while the apostle of Allah was smiling and saying: "Look at this man who is in the sacred state, what is he doing?" [The note for this Hadith says "Abu Bakr beat his slave to teach him sense of responsibility."]


Islamic scriptures clearly endorsed enslavement, r*pe of slave girls, and even discouraged freeing slaves (going off that one Hadith).

The Old Testament also endorsed slavery, in a relatively similar way to the Quran/Hadiths.

There were some minor differences:

Exodus 21:26-27

“When a man strikes the eye of his slave, male or female, and destroys it, he shall let the slave go free because of his eye. If he knocks out the tooth of his slave, male or female, he shall let the slave go free because of his tooth.


Deuteronomy 21:10-14

“When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God gives them into your hand and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you desire to take her to be your wife, and you bring her home to your house, she shall shave her head and pare her nails. And she shall take off the clothes in which she was captured and shall remain in your house and lament her father and her mother a full month. After that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you no longer delight in her, you shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you treat her as a slave, since you have humiliated her.

Leviticus 19:33-34

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.


Deuteronomy 23:15 Do not return a slave to his master if he has taken refuge with you. 16Let him live among you wherever he chooses, in the town of his pleasing. Do not oppress him



However, the New Testament, in the Gospels, abrogated some of the Mosaic law, ie: love your enemy (as opposed to hate them), more emphasis on forgiveness. The Golden rule, and some more emphasis on charity. Putting this together, we have concrete evidence that Christianity is more anti-Slavery and pro humane treatment compared to Islam.





Historical evidence:


" while other estimates indicate a number between 12 and 15 million slaves prior to the 20th century.[7]"


Current estimates are that about 12 million to 12.8 million Africans were shipped across the Atlantic over a span of 400 years,[6][7]:194 although the number purchased by the traders was considerably higher, as the passage had a high death rate with approximately 1.2–2.4 million dying during the voyage and millions more died in seasoning camps in the Caribbean after arrival to the New World.

So it seems like they had similar amounts of slaves, perhaps the Transatlantic had more.


As for the treatment of slaves, that would take a lot of research, not gonna bother.

Either way, Im gonna reemphasize the fact that the increase of slavery happened well after the advent of Christianity. Slavery was already institionalized with the Roman Empire but the adoption of Christianity (albeit a paganized one) led to reforms occurring that slowed down slavery. This was the exact opposite with the Muslim slave trade.
 

A Freeman

Superstar
Joined
Nov 11, 2019
Messages
6,736
Your Bible is corrupted. Academic historians like Bart Ehrman completely shredded your illogical beliefs in regards to your Bible being preserved.

Funny thing is the Quran was already telling us your kind loved changing and associating scripture to Him long before academics brought that knowledge to us.

Do you covet [the hope, O believers], that they would believe for you while a party of them used to hear the words of Allah and then distort the Torah after they had understood it while they were knowing? Surah 2:75

So woe to those who write the "scripture" with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. Surah 2:79
Is God (Allah) then a liar? God forbid!

Sura 15:6-11
15:6. They say: "O thou to whom the Message is being revealed! Truly thou art mad (or possessed)!
15:7. Why bringest thou not angels to us if it be that thou hast the Truth?"
15:8. We do not send the angels down except for a good reason: if they came (to the unGodly), behold! no respite would they have!
15:9. We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption).
15:10. We did send Apostles before thee amongst the religious sects (John 17:21; Sura 6:159) of old:
15:11. But never came an Apostle to them but they mocked him.

Sura 32:23. We did indeed aforetime give The Book (The Torah) to Moses: be then NOT IN DOUBT of its (The Torah) reaching (THEE): and We made it a Guide to the Children of Israel.

Why would the Quran instruct its readers in no less than 30 places that they MUST read The Law (found only in the Old Covenant) and the Gospel/Injeel) found only in the New Covenant?

See: Suras 2:53, 2:89-93, 3:1-3, 3:48-50, 4:54, 5:46-50, 6:91-92, 6:154-157, 7:157, 9:111, 11:17, 17:2-4, 21:48, 23:20, 23:49, 25:35, 28:1-3, 32:23, 35:25-32, 37:117, 40:53, 40:70, 41:45, 42:14-17, 45:16, 46:12, 46:30, 48:29, 53:36-47, 57:25-29, 61:6, 78:2

Sura 3:1-3
3:1. A. L. M. (Almighty. Loving. Merciful.)
3:2. Allah (God). There is no God but He,- the Living, the Self-Existing (YHWH - "I AM"), Eternal.
3:3. It is He Who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the Book, confirming what went before it and He sent down The Law (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) before this, as a guide to mankind, and He sent down the Criterion (of Judgment between right and wrong).

Sura 6:154-157
6:154. Moreover, We gave Moses the Book (Torah), COMPLETING (Our favour) to those who would do right, and explaining ALL things IN DETAIL,- and a GUIDE and a MERCY, that they might believe in the meeting with their Lord.
6:155. And this (Torah) is a Book which We have revealed as a BLESSING (Deut. 28): so follow it and be righteous, that YE may receive mercy (Sura 32:23):
6:156. Lest YE should say: "The Book (Torah) was sent down to two Peoples before us, and for our part, we remained unacquainted with all that they learned by careful study:"
6:157. Or lest YE should say: "If the Book (Torah) had only been sent down to US, we should have FOLLOWED its guidance BETTER than they (Sura 32:23)." Now then hath come unto YOU a clear (Sign) from your Lord,- and a GUIDE and a MERCY: then who could do MORE WRONG than one who rejecteth "I AM"'s Signs (and Torah - Bible), and turneth away therefrom? In good time shall We requite those who turn away from Our Signs, with a dreadful penalty, for their turning away.
 
Top